Zuck: Yeah so if you ever need info about anyone at Harvard Zuck: Just ask. Zuck: I have over 4,000 emails, pictures, addresses, SNS
[Redacted Friend's Name]: What? How'd you manage that one? Zuck: People just submitted it. Zuck: I don't know why. Zuck: They "trust me" Zuck: Dumb fucks.
TFA is just evidence of SNAFU: Situation Normal, All Fucked Up.
As I've said numerous times: kids shouldn't be learning mathematics without the most powerful way to directly apply it: Programming. Seriously, #1 complaint teaching a kid math more advanced than long division: "I'll never use this in the real world" -- Change that. Make the way algebra is taught to be via computer programs and kids could actually DO STUFF by applying their knowledge immediately. That's how I'm able to turn any kid fluniking out in math into the head of the class.
I learned BASIC on an Apple IIe by accident: I put in floppy upside down, it booted to a prompt so I started entering commands -- Imagine an 8 year old entering "list" and seeing page after page of source code race up the screen, then discovering how to change the lines of code and edit the software. That's what happens without ANY teachers involved, think if we taught kids number lines and linear equations, etc. all with the most amazing graphing calculators on the planet?
Folks would grow up knowing how to manage basic "data connectivity" themselves, and the ones who really were into programming would have far more interesting jobs.
Which part of "predictable resource management" did you not understand?
Which part of non-language-defined resource management flexibility don't you grasp? Linux IS a memory manager. You don't want RAII and other paridigms as shit to work around. It's C because C is close to the metal without being platform dependent. RAII? Are you serious? The kernel has pools of cartridges each conataining prefabed blocks of "objects" already initialized and ready to go prior to being needed. Fine, go create your mythical high level language that's specifically desigend for dynamic and static resource management. When you're done, it'll be the same as C.
Forgive the self reply, but today's humans have a hard time thinking about post-information scarcity so I'll give the answer to the typical response I get: "Well then how can they make any money at all" -- Simple, the same way any other laborer makes money. Since the bits are in infinite supply, they are not scarce; What's scarce is the work to configure the bits. Market the ability to do work like a car mechanic does: Agree upon a price for the work and do it, get paid, release the work "for free" since it's already been paid for by society. That's how I make a living writing FLOSS.
Copyright was never really needed. Authors have an unlimited monopoly over their work before they do it. Besides, all life is an information duplication process; You are trillions of copies. Your brain copies information so you can think. Making laws against nature -- human nature -- is how you create a police state.
That's not sensible reasoning. The point of copyright is to encourage authorship.
If that were true then there would be no copyright monopoly over any work once it's published. See, you'd have to do more work (authorship) to make more money then, right? Just like every other labor field? It's not like the mechanic charges you for each time you benefit from the work they did once with a coin slot on your ignition switch -- That's because they could just do a little work, then just kick back and not fix cars; Just collect rent on existing cars.
Copyright is the antithesis of encouraging authorship. "Piracy" can only exist because the information is artificially scarce. It's the Information Age: Bits are in infinite supply, ergo they should have zero cost regardless of cost to create if ECON:101 teaches us anything.
"Let's sell 1's and 0's to folks with computers" == "Let's sell ice to Eskimos" OP is right, and you are wrong. Copyright is pure greed.
We never did learn any lessons from prohibition of alcohol did we?
No, we learned it from prohibition of cocaine and caffeine -- Except the drink companies wouldn't budge on the caffeine front.
Lesson learned: Habit forming substances are OK as long as we can profit from them.... How do you keep folks from growing their own weed though? I mean it's WEED.
Kind of hard to leave 'em alone when they've got webcams on commemorating (not celebrating) soldier's sacrifice at their last get-together for all the world to see, eh?
Many Japanese were glad when news of surrender came and the war was finally over for them too. Not all their civilians were war mongers. I agree: War is hell for all involved, but for some it's more hellish than for others.
Everybody knows what it was doing in the first place. The cameras were taking pictures. The wifi software was sniffing for SSIDs / network IDs to link them with GPS coords to assist in their WIFI based location services, like several other companies do. The software they assembled to grab the over the air packets was from an open source project. They only needed the network IDs, but the software just grabbed whatever data was in the air. Google's the one that came out first and essentially said, "whoops, hey, we accidentally logged more data than we wanted to, we'll just keep the generated reports with the data we need and delete everything else, cool?" Then the governments at large realized that they could snoop through a bunch of their citizen's web traffic and email with GEO-location and network signatures attached, FOR FREE! So, they got all huffy and demanded google hand over the goods.
Google outted themselves to the "extent of their snooping" which equates to a lesser extent than stuff anyone with a wifi phone or laptop can see who's walking or driving by your house war-driving (it's similar to war-diling back in the day). This is VERY old news that's been covered thoroughly. Whatever, not like I give a damn about educating scared and literally ignorat folks like you. It doesn't ever change anyone's mind. FYI: Google's pretty damn open about the extent to which they gather information. It's not a secret, no one gives a damn -- what does Google have to loose?
The objective was to create an opportunity for people to ask "hey, what's that logo represent" and engage youngsters in a discussion on open source operating systems.
It works great as a conversation starter into free and open source software and/or legalization and cultivation of herbs, as the case may be. The reddened eyes mirror my own when hacking long into the night, or taking a break therefrom. I also have an Ubuntu tee-shirt serving as my dart board's bullseye for discussing things like TFA, your post, and our new Debian deployment.
The best talking piece was my large terrarium of green anolis for discussing the cycle of life and courtship to a lesser extent, but they didn't survive our discussion of the birds and bees -- The lizards that is; The children are fine... unfortunately.
I have one to sell you if you believe him. And i will toss in a bag of extremely rare muffler bearings.
My muffler is bearingless, but I keep hearing about these big ferocious cats, like Lions and Leopards. I've a rock that worked wonders on tigers, have you anything like that for, say, iOSX?
It's not a new thing. Remember the Red Scare? Remember the Internment Camps and Witch Hunts? It's the ancient fear of the unknown, of other tribes to be precise.
Fear is instinctual in humans, granted to us through millions of years of evolution. It exists, and need only be cultivated into hysteria to cloud minds. The fear comes from within, that's what makes it powerful. It should be considered a crime to wield fear against the ignorant masses. Those stoking the fear are fearmongers, or scaremongers -- The word looks familiar because these are the same as warmongers. As the Chomsky showed us decades ago, fear and filters are used to manufacture consent.
The question is wrong. We know where the fear comes from. The more apt question is why we are more scared of terrorists than fast cars and fast food, which combined claim over four hundred 9/11 scale attacks in victims every year? The answer isn't no one is brave. The answer is no one is educated. It's been over a decade. That's four thousand 9/11 scale attacks in victims... Will you still drive and occasionally eat junk food? Yes? Then how can anyone justify the spending to prevent such a minuscule threat to life in terrorism at such a great cost? It's because they're ignorant.
A small child turns on the light to reveal what the dark has kept from them, and is no longer afraid. Without ignorance there can be no fear. The scale of the threat is never given context, so it seem more ominous than it is; When in reality its not that big of a deal. Terrible, yes, but so are car accidents and heart attacks, yet we wouldn't agree to give up our Freedoms, Privacy or our French Fries to prevent them.
The warmongers who want to line their pockets with trillions we could be spending to actually protect and benefit us at home claim Terroists are nothing to sneeze at, but if you set a 9/11 scale attack next to the Flu, you'll notice there are six times more dead Americans every year from the Flu. Fire the liars. Fight fear with facts.
While I am all for having science knowledge be free, somebody has to edit and layout and do a quick check of the articles to make sure they are making sense, and somebody does have to host the articles and provide the delivery system.
What the hell are we paying colleges for then, eh? Hosting data is fucking cheap. I got 10 Terrabytes with unlimited bandwidth for $100 a year, and that's not the cheapest. Your concerns are ridiculous. Think. If people are doing work: We can pay them for that work. It matters not if that work is done behind a paywall or on a university's paper publishing wiki, except one way the work benefits the most people and the other the information is made artificially scarce so that publishers can extract money from the system for doing essentially nothing and adding no benefit.
HTML was created to be one giant open access journal of information. Thus heralding the dawn of The Information Age. Of course the "academics" will be the last ones to abandon their bogus and wrong practice of artificial scarcity of information. Instead of monetizing information which is infinitely reproducible and thus ECON:101 says has zero price regardless of cost to create, they could instead pull heads from asses and market that which is actually scarce: Their ability to do the work to create said information. Monetizing their ability more strongly would naturally follow the decrease in ablitiy to monopolize information. No work is done in a vacuum; The more information available to work from the better. Somehow they think that putting barriers in place to limit access of their work to those who would fund their future research is a good idea...
This is the first generation of the Information Age. Of course there will be some adjustments, but you'd think the supposed learned individuals wouldn't be so daft: The mechanic doesn't change you for each time you start the car, they charge for the work done once. Try getting a loan for your business plan of selling ice to Eskimos -- You'll be a laughing stock. Yet, somehow people think selling 1's and 0's to people with computers is a valid business strategy -- And we let them call themselves "scientists".
Software developer should NEVER try to roll their own authentication, just like they shouldn't try to roll their own encryption.
No. Authentication is far easier to understand. Proof of knowledge is simple to perform, and is new authentication protocols can be built from the cryptographic primitives with ease. I'm certain you have no knowledge in this area, if you had some experience creating authentication systems you would know the same advice for ciphers does not apply to authentication. It's true
Furthemore, today we lack a widely adopted authentication standard that provides revocation, and optional anonymity. There current major competing authentication standards are all laughable due to their reliance on the broken SSL trust graph. Firefox - settings - Advanced - Certificates - View Certificates - Hong Kong Post & CNNIC. These are root certificates that can be used by the Chineese government to create a "valid" cert for Google.com or Yourbank.com without those domain's permission. Together with an unsigned DNS root infrastructure the entire security system of the web is completely and utterly a security theater. Your route passes through there servers and you've still got a big green bar saying yourbank.com is secure when you've been MITM'd by the Chinese, Russians, Iran, Turkey, etc. Folks we are actively at "cyber war" with. I say this to illustrate the FACT: You MUST write your own authentication system, because EVERYONE ELSE who we thought COULD be trusted SHOULD NOT BE TRUSTED; They're all worse than morons, they've PURPOSEFULLY built a fucked up system.
HTTP AUTH already exists and is supported in every web browser. Since it asks for authentication before displaying any content it is the right direction (unlike EVERY OTHER AUTHENTICATION). However HTTP-AUTH is clunky and most redardedly HTTP and TLS do not know about each other so the nonce you send as proof of knowledge in the clear which could instead be used to key your TLS/SSL stream cipher DOES NOT do so.
All the well used existing authentication standards are fucking jokes. OAuth? Don't make me laugh: It's the best way to phish passwords EVER! Just make, say, a google or facebook login logo and have it redirect to a page that is not google or facebook to collect their password. Sure 2 factor exists, but it's not commonly used and even it has gaping huge holes.
So, what we need are PRE-REQUEST authentication systems. A browser plugin that detects you're about to visit a secured site (perhaps from its database of prior authentications) then it pops up the browser password dialog NOT ON THE PAGE and perform the secure handshake providing proof of knowledge of a key and another nonce to hash with you password [or HMAC(domain, pw) ] to generate a session cipher key and then immediately begin send encrypted data back and forth without any PKI bullshit needed at all since the endpoints already have a pre-shared secret with which to generate a session secret. The ONLY time you need Public Key crypto is when you register an account and establish the pre-shared key. That window is so small, and impractical since the shared key is not useful unless a permanently maintained MITM attack is performed on every connection attempt that it makes PKI hierarchy essentially moot (esp: considering that PKI is useless due to aforementioned explicit trust of enemy actors as roots).
Your advice to not create your own authentication system is the absolute WORSE advice you can possibly give since ALL prominent authentication standards are complete and utter rubbish. You at least have a CHANCE of creating something more secure than the blatant SECURITY THEATER that is everything else.
To be perfectly clear, this is infinitely better than everything else: Browser plugin asks for master password; For any domain, Domain GUID = HMAC( userID, domain ), HMAC( HMAC( Master PW + Salt ), domain + nonce ) = session cipher key; Send Domain GUID, nonce, and your encrypted data to the server.
The "all car fires" stat would then also include Tesla cars in the cases where fires were due to cigarettes or intentionally. Even disrgarding that considering Teslas alone having burned vs these stats is unfair to Tesla cars; They still come out on top. I had a car fire after just parking it on the side of the road in autum -- there were leaves. I checked, and my gassoline tank is still on the bottom of my car, so what is your point about the debris bit, mate? Are you trying to leverage confirmation bias on purpose?
Incorrect. Their malicious software deployment system (FOXACID) is run by barely tech-literate morons following a fucking flow-chart. They needed the geeks once to build the infrastructure. Once it could be ran by idiots it was. This is exceedingly dangerous. It's the equivalent of being Very Strong and Dumb. In the NSA we have created Frankenstein's Monster. It's sad, but we have to put it down. It should have never existed in the first place.
Slashdot Mirror
Zuck: Yeah so if you ever need info about anyone at Harvard
Zuck: Just ask.
Zuck: I have over 4,000 emails, pictures, addresses, SNS
[Redacted Friend's Name]: What? How'd you manage that one?
Zuck: People just submitted it.
Zuck: I don't know why.
Zuck: They "trust me"
Zuck: Dumb fucks.
TFA is just evidence of SNAFU: Situation Normal, All Fucked Up.
As I've said numerous times: kids shouldn't be learning mathematics without the most powerful way to directly apply it: Programming. Seriously, #1 complaint teaching a kid math more advanced than long division: "I'll never use this in the real world" -- Change that. Make the way algebra is taught to be via computer programs and kids could actually DO STUFF by applying their knowledge immediately. That's how I'm able to turn any kid fluniking out in math into the head of the class.
I learned BASIC on an Apple IIe by accident: I put in floppy upside down, it booted to a prompt so I started entering commands -- Imagine an 8 year old entering "list" and seeing page after page of source code race up the screen, then discovering how to change the lines of code and edit the software. That's what happens without ANY teachers involved, think if we taught kids number lines and linear equations, etc. all with the most amazing graphing calculators on the planet?
Folks would grow up knowing how to manage basic "data connectivity" themselves, and the ones who really were into programming would have far more interesting jobs.
Which part of "predictable resource management" did you not understand?
Which part of non-language-defined resource management flexibility don't you grasp? Linux IS a memory manager. You don't want RAII and other paridigms as shit to work around. It's C because C is close to the metal without being platform dependent. RAII? Are you serious? The kernel has pools of cartridges each conataining prefabed blocks of "objects" already initialized and ready to go prior to being needed. Fine, go create your mythical high level language that's specifically desigend for dynamic and static resource management. When you're done, it'll be the same as C.
Forgive the self reply, but today's humans have a hard time thinking about post-information scarcity so I'll give the answer to the typical response I get: "Well then how can they make any money at all" -- Simple, the same way any other laborer makes money. Since the bits are in infinite supply, they are not scarce; What's scarce is the work to configure the bits. Market the ability to do work like a car mechanic does: Agree upon a price for the work and do it, get paid, release the work "for free" since it's already been paid for by society. That's how I make a living writing FLOSS.
Copyright was never really needed. Authors have an unlimited monopoly over their work before they do it. Besides, all life is an information duplication process; You are trillions of copies. Your brain copies information so you can think. Making laws against nature -- human nature -- is how you create a police state.
That's not sensible reasoning. The point of copyright is to encourage authorship.
If that were true then there would be no copyright monopoly over any work once it's published. See, you'd have to do more work (authorship) to make more money then, right? Just like every other labor field? It's not like the mechanic charges you for each time you benefit from the work they did once with a coin slot on your ignition switch -- That's because they could just do a little work, then just kick back and not fix cars; Just collect rent on existing cars.
Copyright is the antithesis of encouraging authorship. "Piracy" can only exist because the information is artificially scarce. It's the Information Age: Bits are in infinite supply, ergo they should have zero cost regardless of cost to create if ECON:101 teaches us anything.
"Let's sell 1's and 0's to folks with computers" == "Let's sell ice to Eskimos" OP is right, and you are wrong. Copyright is pure greed.
Unconfirmed reports rumor that they've even shared the same POST.
We never did learn any lessons from prohibition of alcohol did we?
No, we learned it from prohibition of cocaine and caffeine -- Except the drink companies wouldn't budge on the caffeine front.
Lesson learned: Habit forming substances are OK as long as we can profit from them.... How do you keep folks from growing their own weed though? I mean it's WEED.
Kind of hard to leave 'em alone when they've got webcams on commemorating (not celebrating) soldier's sacrifice at their last get-together for all the world to see, eh?
Many Japanese were glad when news of surrender came and the war was finally over for them too. Not all their civilians were war mongers. I agree: War is hell for all involved, but for some it's more hellish than for others.
/oos/os/
Everybody knows what it was doing in the first place. The cameras were taking pictures. The wifi software was sniffing for SSIDs / network IDs to link them with GPS coords to assist in their WIFI based location services, like several other companies do. The software they assembled to grab the over the air packets was from an open source project. They only needed the network IDs, but the software just grabbed whatever data was in the air. Google's the one that came out first and essentially said, "whoops, hey, we accidentally logged more data than we wanted to, we'll just keep the generated reports with the data we need and delete everything else, cool?" Then the governments at large realized that they could snoop through a bunch of their citizen's web traffic and email with GEO-location and network signatures attached, FOR FREE! So, they got all huffy and demanded google hand over the goods.
Google outted themselves to the "extent of their snooping" which equates to a lesser extent than stuff anyone with a wifi phone or laptop can see who's walking or driving by your house war-driving (it's similar to war-diling back in the day). This is VERY old news that's been covered thoroughly. Whatever, not like I give a damn about educating scared and literally ignorat folks like you. It doesn't ever change anyone's mind. FYI: Google's pretty damn open about the extent to which they gather information. It's not a secret, no one gives a damn -- what does Google have to loose?
The objective was to create an opportunity for people to ask "hey, what's that logo represent" and engage youngsters in a discussion on open source operating systems.
For the same purpose I've got a large plush rastafarian penguin.
It works great as a conversation starter into free and open source software and/or legalization and cultivation of herbs, as the case may be. The reddened eyes mirror my own when hacking long into the night, or taking a break therefrom. I also have an Ubuntu tee-shirt serving as my dart board's bullseye for discussing things like TFA, your post, and our new Debian deployment.
The best talking piece was my large terrarium of green anolis for discussing the cycle of life and courtship to a lesser extent, but they didn't survive our discussion of the birds and bees -- The lizards that is; The children are fine... unfortunately.
I have one to sell you if you believe him. And i will toss in a bag of extremely rare muffler bearings.
My muffler is bearingless, but I keep hearing about these big ferocious cats, like Lions and Leopards. I've a rock that worked wonders on tigers, have you anything like that for, say, iOSX?
It's not a new thing. Remember the Red Scare? Remember the Internment Camps and Witch Hunts? It's the ancient fear of the unknown, of other tribes to be precise.
Fear is instinctual in humans, granted to us through millions of years of evolution. It exists, and need only be cultivated into hysteria to cloud minds. The fear comes from within, that's what makes it powerful. It should be considered a crime to wield fear against the ignorant masses. Those stoking the fear are fearmongers, or scaremongers -- The word looks familiar because these are the same as warmongers. As the Chomsky showed us decades ago, fear and filters are used to manufacture consent.
For what ends? Oh, I think we know that too, very well indeed.
The question is wrong. We know where the fear comes from. The more apt question is why we are more scared of terrorists than fast cars and fast food, which combined claim over four hundred 9/11 scale attacks in victims every year? The answer isn't no one is brave. The answer is no one is educated. It's been over a decade. That's four thousand 9/11 scale attacks in victims... Will you still drive and occasionally eat junk food? Yes? Then how can anyone justify the spending to prevent such a minuscule threat to life in terrorism at such a great cost? It's because they're ignorant.
A small child turns on the light to reveal what the dark has kept from them, and is no longer afraid. Without ignorance there can be no fear. The scale of the threat is never given context, so it seem more ominous than it is; When in reality its not that big of a deal. Terrible, yes, but so are car accidents and heart attacks, yet we wouldn't agree to give up our Freedoms, Privacy or our French Fries to prevent them.
The warmongers who want to line their pockets with trillions we could be spending to actually protect and benefit us at home claim Terroists are nothing to sneeze at, but if you set a 9/11 scale attack next to the Flu, you'll notice there are six times more dead Americans every year from the Flu. Fire the liars. Fight fear with facts.
Loads.
While I am all for having science knowledge be free, somebody has to edit and layout and do a quick check of the articles to make sure they are making sense, and somebody does have to host the articles and provide the delivery system.
What the hell are we paying colleges for then, eh? Hosting data is fucking cheap. I got 10 Terrabytes with unlimited bandwidth for $100 a year, and that's not the cheapest. Your concerns are ridiculous. Think. If people are doing work: We can pay them for that work. It matters not if that work is done behind a paywall or on a university's paper publishing wiki, except one way the work benefits the most people and the other the information is made artificially scarce so that publishers can extract money from the system for doing essentially nothing and adding no benefit.
Your move.
HTML was created to be one giant open access journal of information. Thus heralding the dawn of The Information Age. Of course the "academics" will be the last ones to abandon their bogus and wrong practice of artificial scarcity of information. Instead of monetizing information which is infinitely reproducible and thus ECON:101 says has zero price regardless of cost to create, they could instead pull heads from asses and market that which is actually scarce: Their ability to do the work to create said information. Monetizing their ability more strongly would naturally follow the decrease in ablitiy to monopolize information. No work is done in a vacuum; The more information available to work from the better. Somehow they think that putting barriers in place to limit access of their work to those who would fund their future research is a good idea...
This is the first generation of the Information Age. Of course there will be some adjustments, but you'd think the supposed learned individuals wouldn't be so daft: The mechanic doesn't change you for each time you start the car, they charge for the work done once. Try getting a loan for your business plan of selling ice to Eskimos -- You'll be a laughing stock. Yet, somehow people think selling 1's and 0's to people with computers is a valid business strategy -- And we let them call themselves "scientists".
For shame.
There is no such thing as a flawless system, never has been, never will be.
Consider the system of mathematics. Now prove that the number system has a flaw. Your argument is refuted.
I would feel better about.... paying for a murder directly than funding some asshat to go cause mass murders.
I take it you don't pay your taxes then? Got WMD?
It's the wireless signal no one will claim as their own: Free Public WiFi
Software developer should NEVER try to roll their own authentication, just like they shouldn't try to roll their own encryption.
No. Authentication is far easier to understand. Proof of knowledge is simple to perform, and is new authentication protocols can be built from the cryptographic primitives with ease. I'm certain you have no knowledge in this area, if you had some experience creating authentication systems you would know the same advice for ciphers does not apply to authentication. It's true
Furthemore, today we lack a widely adopted authentication standard that provides revocation, and optional anonymity. There current major competing authentication standards are all laughable due to their reliance on the broken SSL trust graph. Firefox - settings - Advanced - Certificates - View Certificates - Hong Kong Post & CNNIC. These are root certificates that can be used by the Chineese government to create a "valid" cert for Google.com or Yourbank.com without those domain's permission. Together with an unsigned DNS root infrastructure the entire security system of the web is completely and utterly a security theater. Your route passes through there servers and you've still got a big green bar saying yourbank.com is secure when you've been MITM'd by the Chinese, Russians, Iran, Turkey, etc. Folks we are actively at "cyber war" with. I say this to illustrate the FACT: You MUST write your own authentication system, because EVERYONE ELSE who we thought COULD be trusted SHOULD NOT BE TRUSTED; They're all worse than morons, they've PURPOSEFULLY built a fucked up system.
HTTP AUTH already exists and is supported in every web browser. Since it asks for authentication before displaying any content it is the right direction (unlike EVERY OTHER AUTHENTICATION). However HTTP-AUTH is clunky and most redardedly HTTP and TLS do not know about each other so the nonce you send as proof of knowledge in the clear which could instead be used to key your TLS/SSL stream cipher DOES NOT do so.
All the well used existing authentication standards are fucking jokes. OAuth? Don't make me laugh: It's the best way to phish passwords EVER! Just make, say, a google or facebook login logo and have it redirect to a page that is not google or facebook to collect their password. Sure 2 factor exists, but it's not commonly used and even it has gaping huge holes.
So, what we need are PRE-REQUEST authentication systems. A browser plugin that detects you're about to visit a secured site (perhaps from its database of prior authentications) then it pops up the browser password dialog NOT ON THE PAGE and perform the secure handshake providing proof of knowledge of a key and another nonce to hash with you password [or HMAC(domain, pw) ] to generate a session cipher key and then immediately begin send encrypted data back and forth without any PKI bullshit needed at all since the endpoints already have a pre-shared secret with which to generate a session secret. The ONLY time you need Public Key crypto is when you register an account and establish the pre-shared key. That window is so small, and impractical since the shared key is not useful unless a permanently maintained MITM attack is performed on every connection attempt that it makes PKI hierarchy essentially moot (esp: considering that PKI is useless due to aforementioned explicit trust of enemy actors as roots).
Your advice to not create your own authentication system is the absolute WORSE advice you can possibly give since ALL prominent authentication standards are complete and utter rubbish. You at least have a CHANCE of creating something more secure than the blatant SECURITY THEATER that is everything else.
To be perfectly clear, this is infinitely better than everything else: Browser plugin asks for master password; For any domain, Domain GUID = HMAC( userID, domain ), HMAC( HMAC( Master PW + Salt ), domain + nonce ) = session cipher key; Send Domain GUID, nonce, and your encrypted data to the server.
Buy Buy BUY!
The "all car fires" stat would then also include Tesla cars in the cases where fires were due to cigarettes or intentionally. Even disrgarding that considering Teslas alone having burned vs these stats is unfair to Tesla cars; They still come out on top. I had a car fire after just parking it on the side of the road in autum -- there were leaves. I checked, and my gassoline tank is still on the bottom of my car, so what is your point about the debris bit, mate? Are you trying to leverage confirmation bias on purpose?
Factor in the survivability of the fires as well. Gasoline fires tend to escalate rather quickly.
Physicists have evidence of the Wave-Particle Duality of Macroscopic Chickens in Minecraft.
Incorrect. Their malicious software deployment system (FOXACID) is run by barely tech-literate morons following a fucking flow-chart. They needed the geeks once to build the infrastructure. Once it could be ran by idiots it was. This is exceedingly dangerous. It's the equivalent of being Very Strong and Dumb. In the NSA we have created Frankenstein's Monster. It's sad, but we have to put it down. It should have never existed in the first place.