I wish software developers would stop playing politics with software and just deliver products that work
what part of the word 'politics' didn't you understand?
::sigh:: I write free software, for free. While I try to "just deliver products that work" by ensuring cross platform compilations work, and adding features users request, I am not always CAPABLE of complying due to patents.
I was going to add support for H.264 encoding and decoding to one of my projects, but I simply can't afford the license fees or to charge the users for each copy.
So, I'm faced with -- use external libs which is not exactly "just works" if you don't have the lib installed, eh?
For the video conference feature I chose to write my own codec to avoid all these "politics", sure, it's re-inventing the wheel, but screw it, I want my product to just work...
As it turns out, H.264 and other codecs have patented such obvious solutions that my "clean room, from scratch, never have looked at any other codec source" code infringes upon H.264 patents...
It would be great to just say, "Hey, I wrote all this code myself, it just works, everyone can use it for free", unfortunately, patents prevent me from doing so.
Don't blame the developers. The users aren't willing to foot the legal bills and chance getting sued by Apple, MPEG-LA, etc, neither am I. Software Patent's Suck!
Lives have been put at risk because this guy gambled (correctly) that new parents are easy to freak out and take advantage of.
"Wizard's First Rule: people are stupid.
People are stupid; given proper motivation, almost anyone will believe almost anything. Because people are stupid, they will believe a lie because they want to believe it's true, or because they are afraid it might be true. People's heads are full of knowledge, facts, and beliefs, and most of it is false, yet they think it all true. People are stupid; they can only rarely tell the difference between a lie and the truth, and yet they are confident they can, and so are all the easier to fool." -- Zeddicus Zu'l Zorander
Anyone who is a serious enough PC gamer to look down on consoles should be experienced enough to know that the "aim-assist" console gamers get and an "aim-bot" are two incredibly different animals.
So... "Aim-assist" locks on to targets for you, so you don't have to aim, and an "aim-bot" does the same thing...
I don't think they are different animals at all. An aim-bot doesn't require any aiming at all, and aim assist requires you to point your weapon in the general direction of the enemy.
It's the difference between having a machine aim for you, and having a machine aim for you after you aim in the enemy's general direction... Not so much a difference at all considering that any console playing noob can aim in your general direction to enable their "aim-bot". So, basically, it's the same thing.
Once you reach a certain level of skill the aim-assisting aim-bot will actually hinder your aim. It's hard to compensate for lag or projectile travel time when a game changes my aim for me. Additionally, most console games do not let you disable the auto-aim.
Case and point: I'm trying to shoot the strategic target -- an enemy that is carrying a more lethal weapon than the enemy that just charged past him brandishing a knife. The auto-aim decides that I would rather shoot the closer yet harmless moron that is almost in my sights than the enemy sniper that actually is in my sights, thus throwing off my aim by locking onto the less lethal target, and I'm killed by the sniper. The knifer continues to charge towards my dead body exclaiming, "Tea Bag Time, Biach!" and is killed by the trip mine that was protecting my position... WTF is the purpose of securing my position or keeping my cool and choosing the strategic target if the Auto-Aim-Bot won't let me aim where I want?
Auto-aim is why I don't enjoy console FPS games -- that, and the inability to configure my controls the way I want them.
How about Kwik-E-Mart? Sounds like an App Store to me . ..
Nah, the "Let's stick an E in front" phase is out -- Instead of e-mail, e-sign, e-tcetera, we're i-prefix happy.
Perhaps iMart, iStore, iTcetera.
The problem is that MS has already tried to combine both prefixes, much to the chagrin of the entire web developer community -- I dare not speak its name aloud.
Before iPhone, the term 'app' was not really known or used by commonfolk. Now that it is a widely known term, I'd be willing to bet that a large portion of the population thinks it stands for 'Apple'.
Say what? Depends on what you mean by "common" and "folk". The folk I associate with commonly use "app" to mean "application". Eg: "This web app seems slow", and have done so long before Apple began selling phones.
Is Apple just trademarking common words like "podcast" and "app" to make up for some type of insecurity? Is it tacked on like Kongie's Dong?
I'm no Apple fan, but to be fair, when I hear "app store", I think of Apple. When I hear of another company's service being referred to as an "app store", I think of Apple. Apple has made the term "app store" what it is. I don't think Microsoft would be too pleased about Apple beinging out their new Windows interface for iDevices.
That's funny... When I hear "app store" i think: $_ =~ s/app(lication)? store/repository/;
I've been using software repositories with Unix and Linux long before Apple decided to put a repo on a phone.
Point being: I guess association depends on what name it was introduced to you as, and on what device/platform when you first encountered the idea of software repositories.
'cmon, we all know Apple is trademark happy -- snapping up all i*, and *pod names, including established names like podcast -- No, I don't think trademarking generic terms, or terms that are already established is acceptable. Let them have "Apple App Store", doesn't roll off the tongue, but in commercials they can just say, "our app store".
Making a joke of the Trademark system? Apple's got crap for that.
..in this case, as in: "All Your Apps are Approved By Steve",
Nope, the "App" in Apple's "App Store" doesn't stand for approval -- I can't purchase approval from Apple, fortunately Google's repository gives me the benefit of the doubt...
You are required to purchase approval from MS to distribute a 64 bit driver for their new OSs, so if "app" stands for approval, of course they're pissed off -- MS practically builds their entire product line around charging for approval.
(Know why you can't run a decent sever on MS Windows Home? You have to "upgrade" because MS added limits to the number of concurrent connections... Pro = permission to run servers.)
just thought you should know, as well as relevant plugins and extensions for chrome, which does now have an ad-blocker
Chrome != Chromium; Just thought you should know, Google's proprietary executable that is based on Chromium has extra unreleased source code added, and only Google knows what it does.
If I sold you a car with a lock on the hood, would that be okay with you? Come on, when I was developing the prototype I let you peek under the hood! I promise that I didn't install any secret remote kill switches, tracking or recording devices. Trust me!
What? No, you can still not look under the hood of this car, but you should buy it because I'm Google! You can trust me to "not be evil" because that used to be our company motto (well, more of a recommendation...) -- Besides, If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear!
Chrome == Chromium + proprietary Google juice == DO NOT WANT.
Chromium is OK I guess, but as a developer I contribute to Firefox because they don't just adopt and/or drop support for things that they are committed to without at least consulting the (dev) community...::cough:: H.264::cough::
There is no hexadecimal digit 'X'. The '0x' is a prefix in some languages to differentiate a hex number from octal which, in C/C++, also starts with 0 (zero) and has so fractional part.
So, '0x' would be a syntax error, unless the next rev of C++ allows us to use arbitrary bases for our numbers, then '0x' would be at least 33 (in Base36 (0-9 & a-z) ), but more practically 211 in Base64 (for URL applications (A-Z, a-z, 0-9, _ & - ) ).
So, we're looking at 2033, 2211, or never -- since '0x' is a syntax error and will never compile.
For those that would argue that the x stands for an unknown digit -- Wow, just wow, use a variable, (practice what you preach Bjarne! How about "C++ giCompletionYear" ?) or a newly supported regular expression ( "C++/[01]\d/"), sheesh.
IMHO, Bjarne isn't showing the full source code -- it's actually a two liner and the diffs show that he edits the first line frequently:
#define 0x 2012 C++ 0x
He's just too proud to admit it because he thinks macros are evil -- Ha!
Is there a modem app? I could set up a modem at home and dial into it and route data from my home broadband. Although my ISP doesn't want to supply the service they sold me either. Maybe I should introduce a 'payment cap' ?
That's 34,000 man-years. 34,000 men for a year, or one man for 34,000 years (i.e. about 500 lifetimes). The pyramids didn't need that.
I'm sorry, you're flat-out wrong. The pyramids took more than 34 thousand man-years to build.
According to Herodotus, the Great Pyramid took 20 years to build and required the labor of 100,000 men. At just 8 hours a day that's 58,440 man-years, but the "builders" probably worked much longer days...
Note: That's just ONE pyramid, not "the pyramids," which would imply all of them.
Members of an organization need to be informed to make good decisions, and, in the case of a democratic government, the members are the citizens. Secrets and misinformation make an organization/constituency less informed, and more prone to making bad decisions. It's not a matter of privacy, since organizations aren't individuals.
One of the many problems with this is the demand for 100% governmental transparency unless that involved exposing individual privacy. The extreme views clash.
::Sigh:: Were I to run for a government office I would accept that, as part of my chosen job, I would be required to be more transparent than a normal citizen that is without the powers I would wield.
IMHO, Politicians and government officials don't take their job seriously enough, and try to have "private lives" as well as have a "public office". It's one or the other; Don't like transparecy? Don't run for PUBLIC office!
Your argument that it's the free software mentality that is killing off books is quite ridiculous considering that Free & Open Source OS users are actually in the minority.
From what I can tell, proprietary information sales (ebooks, movies, music, & esp. games) are at an all time high in an era where it's increasingly difficult (if not illegal) to consume these products on FOSS operating systems.
I use Linux and I don't use what doesn't work with my OS, and as much as I'd love to think that FOSS is having a severe impact on commercial shite, it's not.
"first-level" generalizations which are directly, perceptually obvious, such as the toddler's grasp of the fact that "pushed balls roll."
Why is this a fundamental level? Isn't the observed situation a special case (particular ball, surface, pusher and so on) from which the toddler might use induction to conclude that all pushed balls roll?
I've yet to find a toddler that hasn't pushed many balls, thereby expanding the special case to "all ball's I've encountered".
However, You are correct, this is still a special case. Point being: Upon discovering, and applying sufficient force to their own balls they will conclude some pushed balls roll, while other pushed balls hurt.
Of course this is all dependent upon frame of reference. For example: One might conclude that pushing on one's balls makes them sway to and fro, not roll; However, one who is suspended by their balls might conclude that their surroundings are moving to and fro instead.
Personally I find the use of toddlers in these types of experiments offensive -- I'm as capable, if not more so, than a toddler at ball play.
So when is wikileaks going to publish the identities, phone numbers, and home addresses of all the members of anonymous? There's no reason that any organization should keep anything secret after all. Right?
Well, you see, it's kind of hard to publish information that is not known -- even more difficult when the "organization" isn't one at all, and as such doesn't keep those types of records (let alone in a centrally accessible location).
You'd have as easier time expecting Wikileaks to release the personal information of everyone who has visited an arbitrary IRC chatroom (one that doesn't require authentication, you know, because the users are "Anonymous"), considering that "members" of Anonymous congregate in many different unrelated places.
(Not everything needs to be transparent to the average citizen people - you CAN DO something by voting for the candidate whom, after researching thoroughly and not because he or she is the right color (blue/red/black/white), you think is the most fit for the position. Go away anonymous, we don't nee you.)
And I suppose you expect me to make an informed decision to vote for a candidate "after researching thoroughly" without actually being able to perform the thorough research because it is bogously classified as vital to national security? Did you even attempt to think that through?
Absolutely. However, don't ask a public or private ER to treat you at their or taxpayer's expense when you snort crystal drain cleaner. Don't expect food stamps or welfare from taxpayers when you make stupid choices that make you un/underemployed. Don't expect even medicare to take care of ailments that are likely traceable to such stupid decisions.
OK, wait... four words: Lung Cancer and Alcoholics.
In addition: Don't try learning to ice skate! Everyone falls a few times while doing so -- It's stupid to think you'll be the only one not to fall down! Insurance & Medicare should be denied to people who are stupid enough to strap blades to their feet and travel unnaturally fast on slippery surfaces. (IMHO, Hockey is safer than Figure Skating -- The latter should wear protective gear.)
I agree completely with you, but there are two sides to the coin.
Likewise!
On one there is personal freedom, on the other is personal responsibility and accountability. Pick both or neither.
This is a false dichotomy! One can be both personally responsible, and a fool. One can be both free and restricted by laws.
Not all drugs are created equal. I would place marijuana somewhere between Tobacco and Alcohol -- Both of which are already legal.
Let us not forget that prohibition allowed the mobsters to use illegal alcohol profits to fuel their wars. Remember this when you consider the drug cartel wars that Mexico is experiencing.
The answer is simple -- Tax it and regulate recreational drugs, prohibition only funds the terrorists while draining our resources via a futile fight to preserve the ban.
Computer security 101: When you run untrusted code on your computer, it is no longer your computer.
Esp. When the "untrusted" JavaScript code is compiled by IE's, Chrome's, and Firefox's engine into machine code on the fly... It's supposed to be run in a VM or interpreted, yet for the sake of speed we run it as machine code right on the metal -- Goodbye Sandbox!
The order said they must produce the information, but did not specify that the info must not be anonymized, or mixed in with thousands of other accounts.
Wardriving is one thing. Industrial strength wardriving is another.
Or do you think going fishing with your buddies on the weekend is the same thing as trawling nets across the Florida Keys?
Whispering is one thing. Shouting is another.
Or do you think that shouting at your buddies loud enough to be heard in the next house over has the same expectation of privacy as whispering behind closed doors?
Wifi is shouting. Ethernet is not.
Shouting in a made up language that only you and your buddies understand gives you a degree of secrecy, but when doing so you must realize that everyone within earshot can still hear you. Additionally, if you begin the made up language sentences with a common addressing protocol such as "Hey, Tim! Honk, honk, blarg, honk!", or "SSID, MAC, [encrypted data]" you shouldn't expect the non secret "Hey, Tim" or "SSID/MAC" part to be secret.
Slashdot Mirror
I wish software developers would stop playing politics with software and just deliver products that work
what part of the word 'politics' didn't you understand?
::sigh:: I write free software, for free. While I try to "just deliver products that work" by ensuring cross platform compilations work, and adding features users request, I am not always CAPABLE of complying due to patents.
I was going to add support for H.264 encoding and decoding to one of my projects, but I simply can't afford the license fees or to charge the users for each copy.
So, I'm faced with -- use external libs which is not exactly "just works" if you don't have the lib installed, eh?
For the video conference feature I chose to write my own codec to avoid all these "politics", sure, it's re-inventing the wheel, but screw it, I want my product to just work...
As it turns out, H.264 and other codecs have patented such obvious solutions that my "clean room, from scratch, never have looked at any other codec source" code infringes upon H.264 patents...
It would be great to just say, "Hey, I wrote all this code myself, it just works, everyone can use it for free", unfortunately, patents prevent me from doing so.
Don't blame the developers. The users aren't willing to foot the legal bills and chance getting sued by Apple, MPEG-LA, etc, neither am I. Software Patent's Suck!
Lives have been put at risk because this guy gambled (correctly) that new parents are easy to freak out and take advantage of.
"Wizard's First Rule: people are stupid.
People are stupid; given proper motivation, almost anyone will believe almost anything. Because people are stupid, they will believe a lie because they want to believe it's true, or because they are afraid it might be true. People's heads are full of knowledge, facts, and beliefs, and most of it is false, yet they think it all true. People are stupid; they can only rarely tell the difference between a lie and the truth, and yet they are confident they can, and so are all the easier to fool."
-- Zeddicus Zu'l Zorander
Anyone who is a serious enough PC gamer to look down on consoles should be experienced enough to know that the "aim-assist" console gamers get and an "aim-bot" are two incredibly different animals.
So... "Aim-assist" locks on to targets for you, so you don't have to aim, and an "aim-bot" does the same thing...
I don't think they are different animals at all. An aim-bot doesn't require any aiming at all, and aim assist requires you to point your weapon in the general direction of the enemy.
It's the difference between having a machine aim for you, and having a machine aim for you after you aim in the enemy's general direction... Not so much a difference at all considering that any console playing noob can aim in your general direction to enable their "aim-bot". So, basically, it's the same thing.
Once you reach a certain level of skill the aim-assisting aim-bot will actually hinder your aim. It's hard to compensate for lag or projectile travel time when a game changes my aim for me. Additionally, most console games do not let you disable the auto-aim.
Case and point: I'm trying to shoot the strategic target -- an enemy that is carrying a more lethal weapon than the enemy that just charged past him brandishing a knife. The auto-aim decides that I would rather shoot the closer yet harmless moron that is almost in my sights than the enemy sniper that actually is in my sights, thus throwing off my aim by locking onto the less lethal target, and I'm killed by the sniper. The knifer continues to charge towards my dead body exclaiming, "Tea Bag Time, Biach!" and is killed by the trip mine that was protecting my position... WTF is the purpose of securing my position or keeping my cool and choosing the strategic target if the Auto-Aim-Bot won't let me aim where I want?
Auto-aim is why I don't enjoy console FPS games -- that, and the inability to configure my controls the way I want them.
How about Kwik-E-Mart? Sounds like an App Store to me . . .
Nah, the "Let's stick an E in front" phase is out -- Instead of e-mail, e-sign, e-tcetera, we're i-prefix happy.
Perhaps iMart, iStore, iTcetera.
The problem is that MS has already tried to combine both prefixes, much to the chagrin of the entire web developer community -- I dare not speak its name aloud.
Before iPhone, the term 'app' was not really known or used by commonfolk. Now that it is a widely known term, I'd be willing to bet that a large portion of the population thinks it stands for 'Apple'.
Say what? Depends on what you mean by "common" and "folk". The folk I associate with commonly use "app" to mean "application". Eg: "This web app seems slow", and have done so long before Apple began selling phones.
Is Apple just trademarking common words like "podcast" and "app" to make up for some type of insecurity?
Is it tacked on like Kongie's Dong?
I'm no Apple fan, but to be fair, when I hear "app store", I think of Apple. When I hear of another company's service being referred to as an "app store", I think of Apple. Apple has made the term "app store" what it is. I don't think Microsoft would be too pleased about Apple beinging out their new Windows interface for iDevices.
That's funny... When I hear "app store" i think: $_ =~ s/app(lication)? store/repository/;
I've been using software repositories with Unix and Linux long before Apple decided to put a repo on a phone.
Point being: I guess association depends on what name it was introduced to you as, and on what device/platform when you first encountered the idea of software repositories.
'cmon, we all know Apple is trademark happy -- snapping up all i*, and *pod names, including established names like podcast -- No, I don't think trademarking generic terms, or terms that are already established is acceptable. Let them have "Apple App Store", doesn't roll off the tongue, but in commercials they can just say, "our app store".
Making a joke of the Trademark system?
Apple's got crap for that.
..in this case, as in: "All Your Apps are Approved By Steve",
Nope, the "App" in Apple's "App Store" doesn't stand for approval -- I can't purchase approval from Apple, fortunately Google's repository gives me the benefit of the doubt...
You are required to purchase approval from MS to distribute a 64 bit driver for their new OSs, so if "app" stands for approval, of course they're pissed off -- MS practically builds their entire product line around charging for approval.
(Know why you can't run a decent sever on MS Windows Home? You have to "upgrade" because MS added limits to the number of concurrent connections... Pro = permission to run servers.)
Huh? Department stores don't sell departments. And WTF is a toilet store?
You've never heard of The Container Store?
...or the "The Clothing Center".
... or "The Dump".
They sell what "Toilet Store" discards.
> Firefox has a much, much better spec on nearly every level, is open source, has the adblock extension available....
one thing it does not have, though, is H.264 support so this move actually brings Chrome on the same level Firefox is.
The Firefox VLC plugin works just fine for playing H.264 in Firefox.
Personally, I like being able to choose which program handles the <VIDEO> tag.
In short: Meh, what's all the fuss about?
http://www.chromium.org/
just thought you should know, as well as relevant plugins and extensions for chrome, which does now have an ad-blocker
Chrome != Chromium; Just thought you should know, Google's proprietary executable that is based on Chromium has extra unreleased source code added, and only Google knows what it does.
If I sold you a car with a lock on the hood, would that be okay with you? Come on, when I was developing the prototype I let you peek under the hood! I promise that I didn't install any secret remote kill switches, tracking or recording devices. Trust me!
What? No, you can still not look under the hood of this car, but you should buy it because I'm Google! You can trust me to "not be evil" because that used to be our company motto (well, more of a recommendation...) -- Besides, If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear!
Chrome == Chromium + proprietary Google juice == DO NOT WANT.
Chromium is OK I guess, but as a developer I contribute to Firefox because they don't just adopt and/or drop support for things that they are committed to without at least consulting the (dev) community... ::cough:: H.264 ::cough::
If you strike Assange Down he will become more powerful than you can imagine!
As Bjarne himself says, "The x is hexadecimal"
There is no hexadecimal digit 'X'. The '0x' is a prefix in some languages to differentiate a hex number from octal which, in C/C++, also starts with 0 (zero) and has so fractional part.
So, '0x' would be a syntax error, unless the next rev of C++ allows us to use arbitrary bases for our numbers, then '0x' would be at least 33 (in Base36 (0-9 & a-z) ), but more practically 211 in Base64 (for URL applications (A-Z, a-z, 0-9, _ & - ) ).
So, we're looking at 2033, 2211, or never -- since '0x' is a syntax error and will never compile.
For those that would argue that the x stands for an unknown digit -- Wow, just wow, use a variable, (practice what you preach Bjarne! How about "C++ giCompletionYear" ?) or a newly supported regular expression ( "C++ /[01]\d/"), sheesh.
IMHO, Bjarne isn't showing the full source code -- it's actually a two liner and the diffs show that he edits the first line frequently:
#define 0x 2012
C++ 0x
He's just too proud to admit it because he thinks macros are evil -- Ha!
When you are no longer here, your music should be freely open to the public. Copyright should ONLY last a lifetime... not 50 years after!
whoa, whoa, what about estates/families?
Well, when I'm dead I won't care... I'll donate my estate to the local Zoo and have my family put on public display.
Is there a modem app? I could set up a modem at home and dial into it and route data from my home broadband. Although my ISP doesn't want to supply the service they sold me either.
Maybe I should introduce a 'payment cap' ?
Obligatory Penny Arcade.
That's 34,000 man-years. 34,000 men for a year, or one man for 34,000 years (i.e. about 500 lifetimes). The pyramids didn't need that.
I'm sorry, you're flat-out wrong. The pyramids took more than 34 thousand man-years to build.
According to Herodotus, the Great Pyramid took 20 years to build and required the labor of 100,000 men. At just 8 hours a day that's 58,440 man-years, but the "builders" probably worked much longer days...
Note: That's just ONE pyramid, not "the pyramids," which would imply all of them.
Who ate what? "Gulf Bacteria Quickly Digested, Spilled Methane." -- Yum... (poot!)
Anyhow, this isn't really surprising. I hear those Gulf Bacteria will eat anything, Even Flesh!
Members of an organization need to be informed to make good decisions, and, in the case of a democratic government, the members are the citizens. Secrets and misinformation make an organization/constituency less informed, and more prone to making bad decisions. It's not a matter of privacy, since organizations aren't individuals.
One of the many problems with this is the demand for 100% governmental transparency unless that involved exposing individual privacy. The extreme views clash.
::Sigh:: Were I to run for a government office I would accept that, as part of my chosen job, I would be required to be more transparent than a normal citizen that is without the powers I would wield.
IMHO, Politicians and government officials don't take their job seriously enough, and try to have "private lives" as well as have a "public office". It's one or the other; Don't like transparecy? Don't run for PUBLIC office!
Your argument that it's the free software mentality that is killing off books is quite ridiculous considering that Free & Open Source OS users are actually in the minority.
From what I can tell, proprietary information sales (ebooks, movies, music, & esp. games) are at an all time high in an era where it's increasingly difficult (if not illegal) to consume these products on FOSS operating systems.
I use Linux and I don't use what doesn't work with my OS, and as much as I'd love to think that FOSS is having a severe impact on commercial shite, it's not.
"first-level" generalizations which are directly, perceptually obvious, such as the toddler's grasp of the fact that "pushed balls roll."
Why is this a fundamental level? Isn't the observed situation a special case (particular ball, surface, pusher and so on) from which the toddler might use induction to conclude that all pushed balls roll?
I've yet to find a toddler that hasn't pushed many balls, thereby expanding the special case to "all ball's I've encountered".
However, You are correct, this is still a special case. Point being: Upon discovering, and applying sufficient force to their own balls they will conclude some pushed balls roll, while other pushed balls hurt.
Of course this is all dependent upon frame of reference. For example: One might conclude that pushing on one's balls makes them sway to and fro, not roll; However, one who is suspended by their balls might conclude that their surroundings are moving to and fro instead.
Personally I find the use of toddlers in these types of experiments offensive -- I'm as capable, if not more so, than a toddler at ball play.
So when is wikileaks going to publish the identities, phone numbers, and home addresses of all the members of anonymous? There's no reason that any organization should keep anything secret after all. Right?
Well, you see, it's kind of hard to publish information that is not known -- even more difficult when the "organization" isn't one at all, and as such doesn't keep those types of records (let alone in a centrally accessible location).
You'd have as easier time expecting Wikileaks to release the personal information of everyone who has visited an arbitrary IRC chatroom (one that doesn't require authentication, you know, because the users are "Anonymous"), considering that "members" of Anonymous congregate in many different unrelated places.
(Not everything needs to be transparent to the average citizen people - you CAN DO something by voting for the candidate whom, after researching thoroughly and not because he or she is the right color (blue/red/black/white), you think is the most fit for the position. Go away anonymous, we don't nee you.)
And I suppose you expect me to make an informed decision to vote for a candidate "after researching thoroughly" without actually being able to perform the thorough research because it is bogously classified as vital to national security? Did you even attempt to think that through?
Absolutely. However, don't ask a public or private ER to treat you at their or taxpayer's expense when you snort crystal drain cleaner. Don't expect food stamps or welfare from taxpayers when you make stupid choices that make you un/underemployed. Don't expect even medicare to take care of ailments that are likely traceable to such stupid decisions.
OK, wait... four words: Lung Cancer and Alcoholics.
In addition: Don't try learning to ice skate! Everyone falls a few times while doing so -- It's stupid to think you'll be the only one not to fall down! Insurance & Medicare should be denied to people who are stupid enough to strap blades to their feet and travel unnaturally fast on slippery surfaces. (IMHO, Hockey is safer than Figure Skating -- The latter should wear protective gear.)
I agree completely with you, but there are two sides to the coin.
Likewise!
On one there is personal freedom, on the other is personal responsibility and accountability. Pick both or neither.
This is a false dichotomy! One can be both personally responsible, and a fool. One can be both free and restricted by laws.
Not all drugs are created equal. I would place marijuana somewhere between Tobacco and Alcohol -- Both of which are already legal.
Let us not forget that prohibition allowed the mobsters to use illegal alcohol profits to fuel their wars. Remember this when you consider the drug cartel wars that Mexico is experiencing.
The answer is simple -- Tax it and regulate recreational drugs, prohibition only funds the terrorists while draining our resources via a futile fight to preserve the ban.
Computer security 101:
When you run untrusted code on your computer, it is no longer your computer.
Esp. When the "untrusted" JavaScript code is compiled by IE's, Chrome's, and Firefox's engine into machine code on the fly... It's supposed to be run in a VM or interpreted, yet for the sake of speed we run it as machine code right on the metal -- Goodbye Sandbox!
Twitter has been ordered to produce
The following customer or subscriber account information for each account associated with Wikileaks; ...
Were I Twitter, I would send them thousands of account records -- Every user that has ever mentioned Wikileaks via Twitter and let them sort it out themselves.
The order said they must produce the information, but did not specify that the info must not be anonymized, or mixed in with thousands of other accounts.
Wardriving is one thing. Industrial strength wardriving is another.
Or do you think going fishing with your buddies on the weekend is the same thing as trawling nets across the Florida Keys?
Whispering is one thing. Shouting is another.
Or do you think that shouting at your buddies loud enough to be heard in the next house over has the same expectation of privacy as whispering behind closed doors?
Wifi is shouting. Ethernet is not.
Shouting in a made up language that only you and your buddies understand gives you a degree of secrecy, but when doing so you must realize that everyone within earshot can still hear you. Additionally, if you begin the made up language sentences with a common addressing protocol such as "Hey, Tim! Honk, honk, blarg, honk!", or "SSID, MAC, [encrypted data]" you shouldn't expect the non secret "Hey, Tim" or "SSID/MAC" part to be secret.