None of that is specific to Amazon - it's just a shady industry. I'm pretty sure Amazon is now the worlds largest market for sex toys, though, so I'm dubious of your claims about "manufacturers". Heck, I'd make a blind bet that the "counterfeits" are the same items made in the same Chinese factory as the "originals", just sold via someone less scrupulous about defects (that's a very common theme for discount items on Amazon: same Chinese factory, less QA).
I think you'll find that most bar shootings that make the news involve off duty police. The few I've heard of more directly were "A beats B in a fistfight; B returns some time later with a gun and shoots A".
I dunno about you, but I like to have at least the minimum protection that the products I buy somewhat resemble what it says on the box, rather than simply being a box full of a picture of a duck in a funny hat. Because fuck you, that's why.
If you pre-order you deserve whatever you get, even if it turn out to be the watching paint dry game. I'm still amazed people do that. Otherwise - just read the reviews (not the bought-and-paid-for magazine reviews, of course, the player reviews),.
Still, I do have to wonder if this was an old case. I've gotten Steam refunds twice now "because fuck you, that's why" no problem at all. Is Steam's 2 week / 2 hours gameplay limit too strict for Aussie law? It's certainly worked well for me.
If I am a free citizen, and I have a permit to concealed carry a gun, and the restaurant doesn't have any signs stating that guns are not permitted, then why in the world *shouldn't* I carry my gun, concealed, into the restaurant?
Many restaurant serve alcohol. Are there any states that let you carry in a place where alcohol is served? I don't know of any. No sign needed. There are places nicer than Luby's, you know (and less likely to have mass shootings).
you own guns, it means that you can afford guns, which means that you have money
Definitely false, as I know from my last jury duty. You can be quite poor indeed and have a gun, and go on to use that gun in a crime, and get banned from ever having a gun, and then be carrying a gun (and still be quite poor indeed) and then get busted.
The only statistic that matters is this: If you own a gun, are you and your family more or less likely to die by a gun?
Bullshit. Who care what you die from if you're dead. If you own a gun, are you more or less likely to die from any cause is what matters. Life expectancy is the right measure.
windows is the highest risk operating system by a HUGE margin.
It isn't Win95 any more. The Windows kernel is no more or less vulnerable than anything else commonly used. Windows users may have bad habits in terms of volunteering to install malware, but that doesn't apply to kiosk-style workstations attached to equipment.
I resisted a lot longer, but when they added karma an account became necessary. I've come to like it - more for the user identty than the moderation (I've always browsed at -1 anyway). When "someone is wrong on the internet", and it's someone you've had this exact conversation with before, it saves a lot of pointless bickering.
Yes - I'm not so worried about the any specific form of crypto behind SSH/SSL going away - there have been enough exploits now that we've gotten good at wholesale replacement/upgrades. Would suck if it "broke" keyless entry on cars though.
The Governator would be a Democrat in any other state (which is no doubt why he was so popular), but that's beside the point - the Governor doesn't control the budget. He certainly doesn't control small line items.
California's budgets, at the state, county, and city level are dominated by pension costs almost everywhere. Where I lived in Alameda county, the projected pension costs were ~100% of the budget. Not quite so bad at the state level, but still quite bad. The lack of funding for "all but pensions" isn't a partisan thing, it's a history of over-promising for retirement plans.
Political squabbling over the tiny budget fraction left for infrastructure and other things the people want the government to do is a distraction from the sinkhole for almost all of the budget.
I was talking about a keyfob (very limited embedded device), not Volvo's goofy app.
Out-of-band key exchange (e.g., you stick the blank keyfob into a special device) is as secure as your out-of-band process, which can be made more secure than anything done wirelessly.
A phone is different, as it's possible to steal the key stored on a phone without stealing the phone, given an exploit or two. A phone can also easily manage the size of certs and the required processing power. Much different trade-off there.
There are plenty of embedded devices than simply don't have the power to do asymmetric crypto - a problem we struggled with when working on the standard for tape drive hardware encryption.
I don't see how symmetric keys are more secure than asymmetric keys.
Just the theory behind the two. The security for all asymmetric crypto is based on unproven assumptions about the difficulty of some class of problems. A math breakthrough could render any given asymmetric algorithm trivial. Symmetric cyphers (at least the good ones) aren't. E.g., quantum computers don't help at all with AES.
Why on earth would you use public key crypto in an embedded device? The cert alone is many KB - what a waste. Program the remote initially with the same symmetric key the car has, then use zero-information proof of identity (challenge-response) to authenticate - lightweight and more secure than anything with public/private keypairs.
Quit trying to get the free market to solve all your issues for you - this is exactly what happens.
The entire set of problems that Net Neutrality is meant to address wouldn't be there in the first place if there were a competitive market for ISPs (and in the few places where there's good competition, there's far fewer problems). But we don't have a market: we have a bunch of government-granted cable monopolies, and areas of the US where there's only 1, maybe 2 viable cell phone carriers (the latter is more of a genuine market failure).
I don't like Net Neutrality - this is exactly the sort of government meddling that never ends well. But. But with government-granted cable monopolies, there's no other way. Better to fix the monopoly issue (make the last mile a public utility, ISPs compete beyond the "natural monopoly") - far better. Lacking that, discussions about free markets aren't relevant, and Net Neutrality is the least-bad option.
Wait, did the "Republican" troll accidentally log in? Is this Jawnn's "Doc Ruby moment"?
(FYI for those reading from abroad, there has been no real Republican power in the Cali government for many, many years now - certainly not enough to take money from specific programs and purposes.)
The laws of physics disagree with you. There's just no speed slow enough to avoid hitting someone who jumps out from behind an obstacle you can't see over. And the laws reflect that - if you step out into the street, not in a crosswalk, a driver is only required to exercise reasonable care. That does not include Superman's X-ray vision, or Superman's ability to stop a car in motion in 3 feet.
Normal flow of traffic is about 30 MPH on the roads around where I live (dense area), and there's street parking everywhere. Just walking out from between two cars and hoping for the best is a poor life strategy.
Putting people in a suspect list with no connection to a crime, based entirely on their speech, that is clearly forbidden to them.
Nope, it's not. Acting on that information, e.g. to search that person, or put them on a no-fly list, that's where they cross the line. But keeping track of public speech is legit.
(Meta-data tracking is a whole different discussion, omitted here.)
Heck, just think in terms of basic police work (rare as that may be): cop sees something in public that seems suspicious, but doesn't rise to probable cause. He's certainly allowed to react to that by looking harder for signs of illegal activity, as long as he doesn't cross the line into an actual search. Often the response is simply to walk up and chat with someone suspicious, just say hello and whatnot. That turns out to be a surprisingly effective crime prevention technique.
We should be outraged at the NSA record every telephone call anyone ever makes, not taking photos of bumper stickers.
One more successful data point for the "infallible crazy test": * For every sticker on a car (that's not a parking sticker), add 1 point * For every place the words "Ron" or "Paul" appear, add 2 points (each)
Results: 0 - So sane you're boring 1 - Normal colorful individual 2 - Borderline nuts, probably safe but keep away from sharp objects just in case 3+ Should be institutionalized for the safety of themselves and others
There's no better reason to vote for Donald Trump than to make SJWs heads fucking EXPLODE!!
Not just "SJWs". Someone scrawled "Trump 2016" in chalk in many places on the Emory University campus. Trivial vandalism, right? The student reaction?
That afternoon, a group of 40 to 50 students protested. According to the student newspaper, the Emory Wheel, they shouted in the quad, "You are not listening! Come speak to us, we are in pain!"...
Jim Wagner, the president of the university in Atlanta, met with the protesters and later sent an email to the campus community, explaining, in part, "During our conversation, they voiced their genuine concern and pain in the face of this perceived intimidation."
What are we becoming as a nation? This notion that "emoticon diversity is a core part of CS" is not some oddball exception. We've really lost the thread here.
Clearly the shit-eating could be just a general tendency temporally uncorrelated with the intercourse in question. As to all being male, well, whatever floats your goat.
The advantage was articulated in the post you're responding to: most people can't learn some subset of those without help. If you manage, great for you, but most people don't.
That was never going to happen - the question was about whether to restore from backups, or pay the trivial ransom amount. They made the right call, and went to backups, despite that costing more than $1600 in people's time.
Slashdot Mirror
None of that is specific to Amazon - it's just a shady industry. I'm pretty sure Amazon is now the worlds largest market for sex toys, though, so I'm dubious of your claims about "manufacturers". Heck, I'd make a blind bet that the "counterfeits" are the same items made in the same Chinese factory as the "originals", just sold via someone less scrupulous about defects (that's a very common theme for discount items on Amazon: same Chinese factory, less QA).
I think you'll find that most bar shootings that make the news involve off duty police. The few I've heard of more directly were "A beats B in a fistfight; B returns some time later with a gun and shoots A".
Every refund I've gotten has been for "didn't like it".
Really? Wow.
Designated shooter, I guess.
I love you too Ratzo.
I dunno about you, but I like to have at least the minimum protection that the products I buy somewhat resemble what it says on the box, rather than simply being a box full of a picture of a duck in a funny hat. Because fuck you, that's why.
If you pre-order you deserve whatever you get, even if it turn out to be the watching paint dry game. I'm still amazed people do that. Otherwise - just read the reviews (not the bought-and-paid-for magazine reviews, of course, the player reviews),.
Still, I do have to wonder if this was an old case. I've gotten Steam refunds twice now "because fuck you, that's why" no problem at all. Is Steam's 2 week / 2 hours gameplay limit too strict for Aussie law? It's certainly worked well for me.
If I am a free citizen, and I have a permit to concealed carry a gun, and the restaurant doesn't have any signs stating that guns are not permitted, then why in the world *shouldn't* I carry my gun, concealed, into the restaurant?
Many restaurant serve alcohol. Are there any states that let you carry in a place where alcohol is served? I don't know of any. No sign needed. There are places nicer than Luby's, you know (and less likely to have mass shootings).
you own guns, it means that you can afford guns, which means that you have money
Definitely false, as I know from my last jury duty. You can be quite poor indeed and have a gun, and go on to use that gun in a crime, and get banned from ever having a gun, and then be carrying a gun (and still be quite poor indeed) and then get busted.
The only statistic that matters is this: If you own a gun, are you and your family more or less likely to die by a gun?
Bullshit. Who care what you die from if you're dead. If you own a gun, are you more or less likely to die from any cause is what matters. Life expectancy is the right measure.
windows is the highest risk operating system by a HUGE margin.
It isn't Win95 any more. The Windows kernel is no more or less vulnerable than anything else commonly used. Windows users may have bad habits in terms of volunteering to install malware, but that doesn't apply to kiosk-style workstations attached to equipment.
Well some of us don't like using search engines that spy on and sell users' queries to scummy marketing companies. Might as well just use Google.
You have any basis for this accusation?
I resisted a lot longer, but when they added karma an account became necessary. I've come to like it - more for the user identty than the moderation (I've always browsed at -1 anyway). When "someone is wrong on the internet", and it's someone you've had this exact conversation with before, it saves a lot of pointless bickering.
Yes - I'm not so worried about the any specific form of crypto behind SSH/SSL going away - there have been enough exploits now that we've gotten good at wholesale replacement/upgrades. Would suck if it "broke" keyless entry on cars though.
The Governator would be a Democrat in any other state (which is no doubt why he was so popular), but that's beside the point - the Governor doesn't control the budget. He certainly doesn't control small line items.
California's budgets, at the state, county, and city level are dominated by pension costs almost everywhere. Where I lived in Alameda county, the projected pension costs were ~100% of the budget. Not quite so bad at the state level, but still quite bad. The lack of funding for "all but pensions" isn't a partisan thing, it's a history of over-promising for retirement plans.
Political squabbling over the tiny budget fraction left for infrastructure and other things the people want the government to do is a distraction from the sinkhole for almost all of the budget.
I was talking about a keyfob (very limited embedded device), not Volvo's goofy app.
Out-of-band key exchange (e.g., you stick the blank keyfob into a special device) is as secure as your out-of-band process, which can be made more secure than anything done wirelessly.
A phone is different, as it's possible to steal the key stored on a phone without stealing the phone, given an exploit or two. A phone can also easily manage the size of certs and the required processing power. Much different trade-off there.
There are plenty of embedded devices than simply don't have the power to do asymmetric crypto - a problem we struggled with when working on the standard for tape drive hardware encryption.
I don't see how symmetric keys are more secure than asymmetric keys.
Just the theory behind the two. The security for all asymmetric crypto is based on unproven assumptions about the difficulty of some class of problems. A math breakthrough could render any given asymmetric algorithm trivial. Symmetric cyphers (at least the good ones) aren't. E.g., quantum computers don't help at all with AES.
Why on earth would you use public key crypto in an embedded device? The cert alone is many KB - what a waste. Program the remote initially with the same symmetric key the car has, then use zero-information proof of identity (challenge-response) to authenticate - lightweight and more secure than anything with public/private keypairs.
Quit trying to get the free market to solve all your issues for you - this is exactly what happens.
The entire set of problems that Net Neutrality is meant to address wouldn't be there in the first place if there were a competitive market for ISPs (and in the few places where there's good competition, there's far fewer problems). But we don't have a market: we have a bunch of government-granted cable monopolies, and areas of the US where there's only 1, maybe 2 viable cell phone carriers (the latter is more of a genuine market failure).
I don't like Net Neutrality - this is exactly the sort of government meddling that never ends well. But. But with government-granted cable monopolies, there's no other way. Better to fix the monopoly issue (make the last mile a public utility, ISPs compete beyond the "natural monopoly") - far better. Lacking that, discussions about free markets aren't relevant, and Net Neutrality is the least-bad option.
Wait, did the "Republican" troll accidentally log in? Is this Jawnn's "Doc Ruby moment"?
(FYI for those reading from abroad, there has been no real Republican power in the Cali government for many, many years now - certainly not enough to take money from specific programs and purposes.)
The laws of physics disagree with you. There's just no speed slow enough to avoid hitting someone who jumps out from behind an obstacle you can't see over. And the laws reflect that - if you step out into the street, not in a crosswalk, a driver is only required to exercise reasonable care. That does not include Superman's X-ray vision, or Superman's ability to stop a car in motion in 3 feet.
Normal flow of traffic is about 30 MPH on the roads around where I live (dense area), and there's street parking everywhere. Just walking out from between two cars and hoping for the best is a poor life strategy.
Putting people in a suspect list with no connection to a crime, based entirely on their speech, that is clearly forbidden to them.
Nope, it's not. Acting on that information, e.g. to search that person, or put them on a no-fly list, that's where they cross the line. But keeping track of public speech is legit.
(Meta-data tracking is a whole different discussion, omitted here.)
Heck, just think in terms of basic police work (rare as that may be): cop sees something in public that seems suspicious, but doesn't rise to probable cause. He's certainly allowed to react to that by looking harder for signs of illegal activity, as long as he doesn't cross the line into an actual search. Often the response is simply to walk up and chat with someone suspicious, just say hello and whatnot. That turns out to be a surprisingly effective crime prevention technique.
We should be outraged at the NSA record every telephone call anyone ever makes, not taking photos of bumper stickers.
One more successful data point for the "infallible crazy test":
* For every sticker on a car (that's not a parking sticker), add 1 point
* For every place the words "Ron" or "Paul" appear, add 2 points (each)
Results:
0 - So sane you're boring
1 - Normal colorful individual
2 - Borderline nuts, probably safe but keep away from sharp objects just in case
3+ Should be institutionalized for the safety of themselves and others
There's no better reason to vote for Donald Trump than to make SJWs heads fucking EXPLODE!!
Not just "SJWs". Someone scrawled "Trump 2016" in chalk in many places on the Emory University campus. Trivial vandalism, right? The student reaction?
That afternoon, a group of 40 to 50 students protested. According to the student newspaper, the Emory Wheel, they shouted in the quad, "You are not listening! Come speak to us, we are in pain!"...
Jim Wagner, the president of the university in Atlanta, met with the protesters and later sent an email to the campus community, explaining, in part, "During our conversation, they voiced their genuine concern and pain in the face of this perceived intimidation."
What are we becoming as a nation? This notion that "emoticon diversity is a core part of CS" is not some oddball exception. We've really lost the thread here.
Clearly the shit-eating could be just a general tendency temporally uncorrelated with the intercourse in question. As to all being male, well, whatever floats your goat.
The advantage was articulated in the post you're responding to: most people can't learn some subset of those without help. If you manage, great for you, but most people don't.
instead of spending additional time pondering what moral or philosophical differences are implied by the different positions
In order to do that, I'd need to first understand your position, which you seem determined not to explain.
That was never going to happen - the question was about whether to restore from backups, or pay the trivial ransom amount. They made the right call, and went to backups, despite that costing more than $1600 in people's time.