> Nobody cares about all this baby shit. I don't know why people bother submitting such nonsense.
Uh, yeah, because the continuation of humanity beyond the next 80 years is like, such a niche issue. Estrogen mimics (like BPA) fuck with human reproductive systems as they form in the womb. So there's a ~20 year time lag between exposure (now, assuming you eat from cans) and measurable impacts (when our kids try out those reproductive parts). So maybe, as a society, we should try to be on the leading edge of this?
And there certainly aren't any/. people interested in how science and (in this case, terrible) technology impact the world.
>Vietnam's government is a very hands-off government. If anything the main problem for Vietnamese people is their government's failure to > lead and protect them from people with private power.
Not quite. They are the same people. State and money are merged.
"Vietnam unfortunately boasts some of the world's most explicit restrictions on freedom of speech and freedom of expression, and the arrests of bloggers have provided a chilling reminder to those who choose to speak out against the government that they put themselves at personal risk. Independent media is virtually non-existent, with all media outlets being state-run. To even register a new media outlet requires purchasing the right to obtain a license from an existing state-run organ, a dubious gray market few in Vietnam discuss. "
I shopped this recently, and the answer I came up with was... almost. The form factor, outputs and prices are good, the hardware was a little underpowered to stream HD. I decided to wait 6 months or so till there was a rock solid option in the $300 range.
Obama is getting a pass because the other side uses "Drill, Baby, Drill" to taunt him for his lack of enthusiasm for domestic oil production. His position on offshore drilling was pretty moderate: allow it after some environmental impact studies. But that wasn't enough for the right. This makes it a little awkward for them now, and I think they'd rather pretend the whole thing has gone away.
And, yes, Fox News was pushing the "this is Obama's Katrina" meme for a while.
Last time I checked, the Google search page was pretty straightforward. For more complicated systems, get set up on Google Voice. I'm so used to phone-tree hell that I was pretty stunned with how quick and painless that was. They are happy to put user experience as a primary concern when they're trying to acquire users. For a storage API, frankly having granddad want to try it out might not be in their interests.
1) Spear-phishing. When I threw my browser (Chrome) at it, it spit back a list of specific pages at online vendors. From there, you can make some pretty good guesses about things I've bought lately: in this case, a Dell laptop. I wouldn't click on a recall notice from Dell (register for a replacement kit!), but a lot of people would go down that rabbit hole.
2) Same-password attack. Site A requires login, scrapes list of your recently used sites, then tries the same user/password at B, C, D from your history.
> To be fair, the Diaspora guys are now fully experienced and demonstrably successful at their core competency: marketing vapourware.
Given that their future success will be determined more by marketing than programming, I'm pretty OK with that. This is business model problem, not a technical one. No one has a problem with Facebook's engineers.
Most of the data value you provide to Facebook (for free! how kind of you!) is in the actual social graph. You can delete all your personal content and it won't matter because, in aggregate, people are very similar to their friends. So Facebook knows who "you" are (because you only matter there in your patterns of consumption) and can now monetize that knowledge with or without your cooperation. Just FYI.
Actually, I help run a small but scrappy nonprofit dedicated to providing democracies with good information, and part of that is looking after the tools that make that possible.
If you think it's OK that the Internet is turning into what the TV and Radio broadcasting industry has given us for the last 80 years, then yeah, it's all good. I, however, will fight this with everything I've got. It's worth it.
We use Salesforce.com (since rebranded as Common Ground), and I can answer most of these queries -- on tech backbone, it's the best you're going to get. It's all done in the cloud, and it's fairly robust commercial grade stuff. Exporting 50,000 records is just a question of downloading the CSV. If it's a really big job, they schedule it and ship it in an hour or so. Given that most NPOs can't or don't want to invest in their own hardware, putting it in the cloud is a really good idea. Likewise with data security concerns -- Salesforce.com is much better than leaving it to the typical NPO tech guy.
> I wonder what it would take to tweak a FOSS solution to fit this need.
Uh, yeah. Done. The FOSS answer to this is called CiviCRM. Works pretty well, but it's always a question of meeting organization needs to the tech solution -- YMMV. http://civicrm.org/aboutcivicrm
My org (nonprofit, ~1.5M annual budget, data creators) uses Salesforce.com, which is donated to us gratis by the Salesforce Foundation. Saelsforce.com is the shit. Common Ground is just a rebranded version of Salesforce.com, presumably because people in the social sector are opposed to both sales and force.
If you need any expectation at all of ACTUAL privacy (the kind that'll keep you out of prison), don't use Hushmail.
As noted in the prior/. thread on this, Hushmail uses two mode: stupid and secure. They explain as much when you sign on.
In stupid, they do all the work for you, webmail style, which means they have a copy of your key. You are now screwed.
In secure, encryption is done in a Java applet, which is open source. That means (barring any man in the middle weirdness with the Java download) they do not have access to your keys, because they are never sent. While they would certainly "rat you out" if they don't have the goods, they can cheerfully comply with the law (or the NSA pseudo legal equivalent) without providing much of value: just encrypted emails. This appears the be the basis of the government's evidence: the alleged leaker sent a lot of encrypted email. Their indictment, however, did not mention the specific contents of that email, probably because they can't read it.
Alternatively, FireGPG seems like a good option for webmail. More secure systems exist, but as always, in the real world security balances against user experience and people sure seem to like this webmail thing.
Already happening. It is relatively common for professional baseball players to get "corrective" eye surgery despite having perfectly good vision. A little pop with the laser and in most cases, you're seeing better than 20/20.
There's a degree of pragmatism here. The ratio [spam sent] to [court cases won] will be lower than 1000:1, making the per-email judgement, in most cases considerably lower than $1 a message. Of course, a class action could destroy somebody, but then, that's kind of the idea. Deterrent.
Thus any leakers (and the Wikileaks personnel) are to be prosecuted
The risk of "unauthorized" public scrutiny of government actions is a powerful deterrent. The system you suggest we punish -- where individuals can make a moral decision which benefits the public regardless of orders or rank -- is a primary factor in the difference in conduct between the conduct of armies in democracies and armies of autocratic states. The moral responsibility that comes with military service is taught from day one, and these whistleblowers are in its best tradition. It is a transfer of some powers from the military machine back to the people who make it function, and by publishing that information (negating it's value for private gain), giving that power wholly over to the public. Democracy is more than elections.
But if you want to throw those people in jail, sure, whatever.
Canada's anti-corruption laws are a mess. I'm sorry, but there's a halo effect around their largely progressive social policy and largely sane foreign policy, that makes people think they are a model state. Empirical findings disagree: http://report.globalintegrity.org/Canada/2008
Just to be clear: we're giving one set of institutions which do not have a mandate to respond to individuals (corporations) control over another set of institutions (government) which, uh, used to. And we're doing this in the name of... more liberty for people? Let me know how that works out for you...
Slashdot Mirror
> Nobody cares about all this baby shit. I don't know why people bother submitting such nonsense.
Uh, yeah, because the continuation of humanity beyond the next 80 years is like, such a niche issue. Estrogen mimics (like BPA) fuck with human reproductive systems as they form in the womb. So there's a ~20 year time lag between exposure (now, assuming you eat from cans) and measurable impacts (when our kids try out those reproductive parts). So maybe, as a society, we should try to be on the leading edge of this?
And there certainly aren't any /. people interested in how science and (in this case, terrible) technology impact the world.
>Vietnam's government is a very hands-off government. If anything the main problem for Vietnamese people is their government's failure to > lead and protect them from people with private power.
Not quite. They are the same people. State and money are merged.
http://report.globalintegrity.org/Vietnam
http://report.globalintegrity.org/Vietnam/2009/scorecard/7/
Context matters.
"Vietnam unfortunately boasts some of the world's most explicit restrictions on freedom of speech and freedom of expression, and the arrests of bloggers have provided a chilling reminder to those who choose to speak out against the government that they put themselves at personal risk. Independent media is virtually non-existent, with all media outlets being state-run. To even register a new media outlet requires purchasing the right to obtain a license from an existing state-run organ, a dubious gray market few in Vietnam discuss. "
Source: http://report.globalintegrity.org/Vietnam
I shopped this recently, and the answer I came up with was... almost. The form factor, outputs and prices are good, the hardware was a little underpowered to stream HD. I decided to wait 6 months or so till there was a rock solid option in the $300 range.
Obama is getting a pass because the other side uses "Drill, Baby, Drill" to taunt him for his lack of enthusiasm for domestic oil production. His position on offshore drilling was pretty moderate: allow it after some environmental impact studies. But that wasn't enough for the right. This makes it a little awkward for them now, and I think they'd rather pretend the whole thing has gone away.
And, yes, Fox News was pushing the "this is Obama's Katrina" meme for a while.
I'm assuming this is some sort of really meta Rand Paul parody. Rand = troll, that sort of thing?
Last time I checked, the Google search page was pretty straightforward. For more complicated systems, get set up on Google Voice. I'm so used to phone-tree hell that I was pretty stunned with how quick and painless that was. They are happy to put user experience as a primary concern when they're trying to acquire users. For a storage API, frankly having granddad want to try it out might not be in their interests.
If the carbon tax [slashdot.org] passes, do we tax it based on the amount of carbon in the glucose, or what???
This is why we need cap and trade, not a carbon tax. If I can produce energy that's carbon neutral, I'll get paid to be fat.
1) Spear-phishing. When I threw my browser (Chrome) at it, it spit back a list of specific pages at online vendors. From there, you can make some pretty good guesses about things I've bought lately: in this case, a Dell laptop. I wouldn't click on a recall notice from Dell (register for a replacement kit!), but a lot of people would go down that rabbit hole.
2) Same-password attack. Site A requires login, scrapes list of your recently used sites, then tries the same user/password at B, C, D from your history.
> To be fair, the Diaspora guys are now fully experienced and demonstrably successful at their core competency: marketing vapourware.
Given that their future success will be determined more by marketing than programming, I'm pretty OK with that. This is business model problem, not a technical one. No one has a problem with Facebook's engineers.
Most of the data value you provide to Facebook (for free! how kind of you!) is in the actual social graph. You can delete all your personal content and it won't matter because, in aggregate, people are very similar to their friends. So Facebook knows who "you" are (because you only matter there in your patterns of consumption) and can now monetize that knowledge with or without your cooperation. Just FYI.
Actually, I help run a small but scrappy nonprofit dedicated to providing democracies with good information, and part of that is looking after the tools that make that possible.
http://www.omidyar.com/portfolio/global-integrity
I know it's Slashdot, but some of us actually do mean what we say.
If you think it's OK that the Internet is turning into what the TV and Radio broadcasting industry has given us for the last 80 years, then yeah, it's all good. I, however, will fight this with everything I've got. It's worth it.
We use Salesforce.com (since rebranded as Common Ground), and I can answer most of these queries -- on tech backbone, it's the best you're going to get. It's all done in the cloud, and it's fairly robust commercial grade stuff. Exporting 50,000 records is just a question of downloading the CSV. If it's a really big job, they schedule it and ship it in an hour or so. Given that most NPOs can't or don't want to invest in their own hardware, putting it in the cloud is a really good idea. Likewise with data security concerns -- Salesforce.com is much better than leaving it to the typical NPO tech guy.
J
> I wonder what it would take to tweak a FOSS solution to fit this need.
Uh, yeah. Done. The FOSS answer to this is called CiviCRM. Works pretty well, but it's always a question of meeting organization needs to the tech solution -- YMMV. http://civicrm.org/aboutcivicrm
My org (nonprofit, ~1.5M annual budget, data creators) uses Salesforce.com, which is donated to us gratis by the Salesforce Foundation. Saelsforce.com is the shit. Common Ground is just a rebranded version of Salesforce.com, presumably because people in the social sector are opposed to both sales and force.
If you need any expectation at all of ACTUAL privacy (the kind that'll keep you out of prison), don't use Hushmail.
As noted in the prior /. thread on this, Hushmail uses two mode: stupid and secure. They explain as much when you sign on.
In stupid, they do all the work for you, webmail style, which means they have a copy of your key. You are now screwed.
In secure, encryption is done in a Java applet, which is open source. That means (barring any man in the middle weirdness with the Java download) they do not have access to your keys, because they are never sent. While they would certainly "rat you out" if they don't have the goods, they can cheerfully comply with the law (or the NSA pseudo legal equivalent) without providing much of value: just encrypted emails. This appears the be the basis of the government's evidence: the alleged leaker sent a lot of encrypted email. Their indictment, however, did not mention the specific contents of that email, probably because they can't read it.
Alternatively, FireGPG seems like a good option for webmail. More secure systems exist, but as always, in the real world security balances against user experience and people sure seem to like this webmail thing.
Can you post a citation to that? Sadly "some dood on Slashdot" is not as authoritative as we'd like.
Already happening. It is relatively common for professional baseball players to get "corrective" eye surgery despite having perfectly good vision. A little pop with the laser and in most cases, you're seeing better than 20/20.
There's a degree of pragmatism here. The ratio [spam sent] to [court cases won] will be lower than 1000:1, making the per-email judgement, in most cases considerably lower than $1 a message. Of course, a class action could destroy somebody, but then, that's kind of the idea. Deterrent.
Thus any leakers (and the Wikileaks personnel) are to be prosecuted
The risk of "unauthorized" public scrutiny of government actions is a powerful deterrent. The system you suggest we punish -- where individuals can make a moral decision which benefits the public regardless of orders or rank -- is a primary factor in the difference in conduct between the conduct of armies in democracies and armies of autocratic states. The moral responsibility that comes with military service is taught from day one, and these whistleblowers are in its best tradition. It is a transfer of some powers from the military machine back to the people who make it function, and by publishing that information (negating it's value for private gain), giving that power wholly over to the public. Democracy is more than elections.
But if you want to throw those people in jail, sure, whatever.
Also, if you're going to cite "whistleblowing laws" as a panacea, at least be specific, because they don't work in the way you describe. Reference: http://report.globalintegrity.org/United%20States/2009/scorecard/59
Canada's anti-corruption laws are a mess. I'm sorry, but there's a halo effect around their largely progressive social policy and largely sane foreign policy, that makes people think they are a model state. Empirical findings disagree: http://report.globalintegrity.org/Canada/2008
They're not terrible. Just not all that good.
Just to be clear: we're giving one set of institutions which do not have a mandate to respond to individuals (corporations) control over another set of institutions (government) which, uh, used to. And we're doing this in the name of... more liberty for people? Let me know how that works out for you...
1) http://www.taprootfoundation.org/
2) ???
3) profit!
I have a habit of repeatedly selecting and deselecting text as I read it
Poor man's eyetracking. Which blurb are you reading? Oh, that one.
>> Is anyone else half-tempted to write a script to post back random text from Pride and Prejudice, or something to that effect?
> Do it with something that is in the public domain. Perhaps random snippets from a random Project Gutenberg article.
Like, perhaps, Pride and Prejudice?
Copyright awareness win. Literature awareness fail.