Sorry, I wasn't trying to be funny, I'm trying to point out the positions that seem to be held by the Western governments, and the hypocrisy behind them, using sarcasm. Our words are those of "concern for human rights", but our actions are those of "we don't want to increase the prices we pay by demanding you clean up your environment or pay fair wages." It's terrible and it's ugly, and I hope China can suppress the corruption long enough to clean up your environment.
CO2 is still seen as a huge problem over here. Global climate change is happening rapidly, and most climatologists agree that it has a lot to do with humans freeing CO2 into the atmosphere. While it should not be your most immediate concern because you're already choking on a cloud of toxins and particulates that must be addressed, it is still a global problem.
1971 is a very sensible choice. 1971 marked the start of U.S. - China trade, which was the starting point of China's massive industrialization boom. China's pollution problems were minor until Tricky Dick's visit.
And while CO2 may not be the best number to measure for human health problems, it's an important measure with respect to global climate change. Other pollutants simply don't matter to the U.S. Chinese particulates are regional, and precipitate out long before they get across the Pacific. Remember, as long as we get cheap consumer goods from them we don't care how much China pollutes their own sky, their own dirt, or the oceans. We only want to worry about their contribution to CO2 around the globe, which everyone else says is causing global warming, and we want to look slightly less insane to Europe. And because in Congress it's easy to get near-unanimous agreement to say "China, you must pollute less," but the Republicans would never order our own industries to cut emissions of any sort.
I totally agree that getting the kids excited is the key.
While I wouldn't say that teaching by hacking or teaching history is necessarily a "better" way than teaching foundational basics such as Boolean math, CPU architecture, and storage, what I would say is that if the teacher has passion for the subject he or she is teaching, that's what will show through to the students. If the teacher is passionate about history, that's his best approach. If the teacher is passionate about flip flops and gates and making LEDs light up under control of an Arduino, then that's her best approach. If the teacher loves hacking, then show the kids some hacks, and say "don't try this at ourschool.edu, and Principal Skinner's password isn't killBart!"
But I'm not sure I agree with you that BASIC is the language to give them to start. Djikstra was right - learning to code in BASIC first (or any purely procedural language) makes it much harder for them to truly grok a functional or object oriented language. The problem with BASIC is a beginner can still do an awful lot the wrong way. They'll write a ten line program and it'll be fine, and the teacher can read it. Emboldened, they'll write a hundred line program and it will still work fine, even though it's not structured well, so they keep going. The key is they can keep going without understanding that it's not structured well. Then they'll write a five thousand line program, and come to a grinding halt of bugs and globals, and unlabeled GOTOs and forgotten GOSUBs, and not understand why it's so broken, or what to do to fix it.
I think what new programmers need, even more than a good language, is a good mentor, someone who can periodically review their code and show them the "right" ways to accomplish tasks. Keep them on track.
Because the closest thing they could come up with to describe how they'd cover the sky with a network of drones was Skynet, and TriStar already holds a copyright on that name.
That which doesn't kill me makes me stronger. Of course, that which doesn't kill the bugs makes them stronger, too. So will the stronger bugs will make me ever more disease resistant, or just kill me?
I don't think it's the data that the thieves are after
It doesn't matter. Once the machine is stolen, you don't know who stole it or for what purpose. Sure, money seems like the obvious target, but you simply do not know what are doing with it, therefore you have to assume anything not encrypted has been compromised. That could be unencrypted transaction data, it could be programs, it could be network configurations, it could be cached Windows credentials, could be private keys, diagnostic log files, the phone number the backup modem dials, it could be anything at all that's in persistent storage in that cabinet. You have to assume it all fell into the hands of a hacker.
Depends, if they were Evangelical Kopimists, then the GNU/GPL is the only TRUE gospel. Not only do you accept It into your life, but you must spread the word in all your earthly works.
The ones that follow the Creative Commons are like the people who only go to church on Christmas and Easter. They aren't real believers, they are "just in case it is true, at least I will get into heaven" believers.
You missed the Schism of 2007, when the heretical Branch Zero Kopimists formed their New Testament, V3. Of course they darn near burned down their compound while arguing about how to light the lamps, but hey, they're learning.
Add IR opaque contact lenses or eyeglasses. Otherwise a camera sensitive to IR could still locate your eyes easily using the Ghost Hunters effect.
I mean hey, if you're willing to paint your face like a zebra and wear a jellyfish wig, popping in a set of otherwise clear contacts should be nothing, right?
The country that sells politicians the same way it does sanitary towels. Somehow it seems strangely appropriate.
Oh, that we could discard them as easily as well.
...only to replace them with even worst, more brain-dead people?
I'm an optimist, and I (naively) think that most candidates get elected for the first time bringing genuine hope and optimism to their office. I don't think anyone goes to Washington the first time in order to be corrupted. But once they arrive they get corrupted by lobbyists and campaign donors, and subsequent elections replace their ideals with election machinations and partisan politics. My thought is that if you got a once-in-a-lifetime chance to represent the people of your district, rather than a golden ticket to drink from the campaign fund fountains, you hopefully would take the job more seriously.
If the parties existed to launch campaigns like ballistic rockets, that would be great. "Here's our platform, now jump off it and go be a representative!" But once they're in office the party should have no further influence over them, and the candidate shouldn't be beholden to them for a reelection campaign. Once elected, they should be free to accurately represent their constituents, rather than continue only doing what the national organization tells them they should accomplish. And if they fail to represent their electors, they should get the boot early.
Of course it was killed. It was non-partisan. Anything that reduced separation of the parties got in the way of their real message, which is "elect me, I'm different from them." And in this case, it was a non-partisan board that happened to arrive at recommendations based on reality, rather than politics, which are often at opposing ends of the spectrum.
In today's contentious environment, if you're not with us (meaning if you're not contributing to our campaign), you're an ENEMY OF THE STATE AND MUST BE KILLED. That leaves no room for rational thought.
Hey, maybe this is where Apple's censorship and keeping the walled garden safe from intrusion might really pay off. "Sorry, Mr. Obama, but your message is too political for the App Store. Lose the editorial cartoons lampooning the Republican Party and we'll give it another consideration."
"News for nerds, stuff that matters". I'd call prisons "stuff that matters". And nowhere did you attempt to refute any of the perfectly valid points made in the parent. You're simply complaining because he has a different opinion.
No, I'm complaining because we'd still have the SCADA vulnerability even if we "reformed" the prison system and figured out how to put fewer people in jail. No matter what we do, we're going to have prisons because we're going to have a certain number of society members who will commit crimes. And as long as we have one prison with a vulnerable SCADA controlled lock system, we still have a problem.
We could do all the stuff the GP posts about. We could make drugs legal, which would probably reduce the prison population by 4/5ths. We could try to "reform" instead of "imprison". But you know what? Until the day we accomplish every single one of those goals completely, the security systems at prisons better work right. So it doesn't matter if he doesn't like the current system -- it's still 100% necessary today.
If you want to talk about boo-hoo bad US prisons, may I suggest you go troll over at HuffPost? If you want to talk SCADA vulnerabilities, we'll be here.
It's a nice feature and all, but it seems to be more of a distraction from the lack of a proper, US-sized engine block under the hood than anything else.
What, sheer mass makes an engine "better"? I'll put my EcoBoost V6 up against the old 385 V8 Big Block, just because it's about 2/3 the weight for the same HP. And that thing just purrs like a happy kitten. A finely tuned happy kitten.
Of course the car it's wrapped in still comes in at over 2 tons.:-( Still, it gets better than twice the mileage of the old land whales that used to have the 385 (when I'm not driving it like I stole it.) Yes, I'd rather have it in a Mustang than a Taurus, but that wasn't an option for us.
Be cautious. If www.poorlysecuredforum.com keeps your password in the database, and I hack them and see someone with the user name of DMUTPeregrine and the password of 1CorrectHorseBatteryStaple+poorlysecuredforum.com? I'm going to try logging in here as DMUTPeregrine / 1CorrectHorseBatteryStaple+slashdot.org. And I'll try logging in to wellsfargo.com and citibank and usbank and chase all the same way.
Your suggestion of using a hash as the password is much more secure, assuming you actually use it. But next time you create a hash, try a little trick: google for it. Google is like the world's largest and fastest distributed rainbow table. Last time I checked, googling for the MD5 digest of "12345" returned something like 11,000 hits, all of which said "12345" right there on the search results. Time to go change the hash on my luggage.
Your statement doesn't take several risk factors into account. Ultimately, risk is something you have to assess for yourself: what is the value of your passwords? Are you guarding multi-million dollar corporate secrets, or are you risking a $50 credit card fee? It makes a difference as to how much effort to put into the task.
Long, random character passwords that are written down using actual pen-on-paper are still very secure against network based attacks. I have yet to see the virus that can read the password off a sticky note.
Having them on a piece of paper stuck in to your monitor in your house is going to expose them only to the people you invite in. Now, if you're talking about passwords at work, then you have coworkers, cleaning people, maintenance people, and all sorts of random passers-by that can read the note. Yes, those are less secure. But again, what are you guarding?
Having them inside a locked desk drawer improves the situation by quite a bit. Only someone who is specifically targeting you is likely to go after them. And if someone's targeting you personally, they'll probably do it the easy way with a keyboard sniffer or virus, rather than trying to break in to your office, bribe your janitor, or pick your desk drawer lock.
That said, in all cases you're still better off with an encrypted storage tool like a yubikey. Keep them with you, keep them encrypted. Much harder to leak that way.
develop something before you try to denounce poor spending in a field that to be competitive, at the cost of military failure and the detriment of an entire nation, must pursue even the most unlikely routes).
It depends on what you're trying to do. If you're responsible and want to conserve money, you let private inventors come up with new ideas, and let them risk their money building working prototypes. Only then do you think about investing in the ones that show some promise.
However, if you're a congressman, and your mission is to enrich the owners of the corporations in district #3A that donated to your campaign, then it's different. You rank the list of donor corporations in order of the amount they donated, and find out what they specialize in making. Say your top two donors make cotton string and brass eyelets. Then you write up a bunch of requirements for some invention that needs a net made of cotton string strung between brass eyelets, and make it sound really necessary. Invoking the safety of troops is always in vogue, so you might write up a request for a "biodegradable shell catcher to eliminate the possibility of reusing spent bullet casings as shrapnel in Improvised Explosive Devices." Never mind that the insurgents have never bothered using spent bullet casings for anything, but now you're selling cotton string and brass eyelets by the millions. The soldiers take one look at these things that show up one day and say "what the fuck are these useless things for?" Some kid figures out how to make beer holders attached to his bunk, and that's about all the action they see. So your contributors are richer, the taxpayers are poorer, and the troops have pallets of crap they don't care about shipped to bases where they don't want to be.
But by all means, let's pursue this unlikely route to ensure that brass casings are never used in IEDs again, and we can all breathe easier knowing our troops are safer. 9/11 !!! Never forget!!! O say can you see!
Or did I poorly judge these expenditures of time and money?
No, he never said anything like that, which is why I think he's at least being truthful. Had he fumbled out a press-conference-ready apology, it probably would have been a lie.
The guy's in the position of deciding if it's better to be an honest jerk, or a dishonest weasel. I just noticed that he's still an honest jerk.It may not be much better than nothing, but it's slightly better than nothing.
What if this guy's plan was to cheese off every single person who contacted them, in hopes that one of them would "out" him in the public's eye? Maybe he planned to be this company's scapegoat from day 0. Sure, he ticked off plenty of not-Daves on the way, but once he ticked off Dave, and Dave got so fed up he told Mike, then Mike told Gabe, and then they got noticed big-time.
At some point your behavior is so over the top that it's bound to be noticed by someone of importance who will take great pleasure in publicly spanking you for it. As long as you're "just some marketting firm" that can be reasonably separated from the company making the product, and know you'll be cut loose as soon as you look bad, the company selling the product is going to look almost like a victim of a scammer as opposed to a scheming manipulator. They get noticed, and they even get pity for having been tricked into hiring such a lousy PR guy.
I don't care what the newspapers say about me as long as they spell my name right. - P.T. Barnum, among others.
That's a helluva good point. Maybe this guy is really the most talented "marketter" ever. The product really does look useful, and I never would have heard of it if it weren't for the boing-boing story.
But it sure seems like a one-trick pony. I wouldn't hire this ass-clown to handle customer service complaints at a collection agency. His best bet now is to find a job as a sewer unblocker or ditch digger.
Slashdot Mirror
Seriously, does this thing have some amazing AI or other sci-fi requirements? Infinite zoom?
AND enhance!!
Sorry, I wasn't trying to be funny, I'm trying to point out the positions that seem to be held by the Western governments, and the hypocrisy behind them, using sarcasm. Our words are those of "concern for human rights", but our actions are those of "we don't want to increase the prices we pay by demanding you clean up your environment or pay fair wages." It's terrible and it's ugly, and I hope China can suppress the corruption long enough to clean up your environment.
CO2 is still seen as a huge problem over here. Global climate change is happening rapidly, and most climatologists agree that it has a lot to do with humans freeing CO2 into the atmosphere. While it should not be your most immediate concern because you're already choking on a cloud of toxins and particulates that must be addressed, it is still a global problem.
1971 is a very sensible choice. 1971 marked the start of U.S. - China trade, which was the starting point of China's massive industrialization boom. China's pollution problems were minor until Tricky Dick's visit.
And while CO2 may not be the best number to measure for human health problems, it's an important measure with respect to global climate change. Other pollutants simply don't matter to the U.S. Chinese particulates are regional, and precipitate out long before they get across the Pacific. Remember, as long as we get cheap consumer goods from them we don't care how much China pollutes their own sky, their own dirt, or the oceans. We only want to worry about their contribution to CO2 around the globe, which everyone else says is causing global warming, and we want to look slightly less insane to Europe. And because in Congress it's easy to get near-unanimous agreement to say "China, you must pollute less," but the Republicans would never order our own industries to cut emissions of any sort.
I totally agree that getting the kids excited is the key.
While I wouldn't say that teaching by hacking or teaching history is necessarily a "better" way than teaching foundational basics such as Boolean math, CPU architecture, and storage, what I would say is that if the teacher has passion for the subject he or she is teaching, that's what will show through to the students. If the teacher is passionate about history, that's his best approach. If the teacher is passionate about flip flops and gates and making LEDs light up under control of an Arduino, then that's her best approach. If the teacher loves hacking, then show the kids some hacks, and say "don't try this at ourschool.edu, and Principal Skinner's password isn't killBart!"
But I'm not sure I agree with you that BASIC is the language to give them to start. Djikstra was right - learning to code in BASIC first (or any purely procedural language) makes it much harder for them to truly grok a functional or object oriented language. The problem with BASIC is a beginner can still do an awful lot the wrong way. They'll write a ten line program and it'll be fine, and the teacher can read it. Emboldened, they'll write a hundred line program and it will still work fine, even though it's not structured well, so they keep going. The key is they can keep going without understanding that it's not structured well. Then they'll write a five thousand line program, and come to a grinding halt of bugs and globals, and unlabeled GOTOs and forgotten GOSUBs, and not understand why it's so broken, or what to do to fix it.
I think what new programmers need, even more than a good language, is a good mentor, someone who can periodically review their code and show them the "right" ways to accomplish tasks. Keep them on track.
Because the closest thing they could come up with to describe how they'd cover the sky with a network of drones was Skynet, and TriStar already holds a copyright on that name.
That which doesn't kill me makes me stronger. Of course, that which doesn't kill the bugs makes them stronger, too. So will the stronger bugs will make me ever more disease resistant, or just kill me?
I don't think it's the data that the thieves are after
It doesn't matter. Once the machine is stolen, you don't know who stole it or for what purpose. Sure, money seems like the obvious target, but you simply do not know what are doing with it, therefore you have to assume anything not encrypted has been compromised. That could be unencrypted transaction data, it could be programs, it could be network configurations, it could be cached Windows credentials, could be private keys, diagnostic log files, the phone number the backup modem dials, it could be anything at all that's in persistent storage in that cabinet. You have to assume it all fell into the hands of a hacker.
Depends, if they were Evangelical Kopimists, then the GNU/GPL is the only TRUE gospel. Not only do you accept It into your life, but you must spread the word in all your earthly works.
The ones that follow the Creative Commons are like the people who only go to church on Christmas and Easter. They aren't real believers, they are "just in case it is true, at least I will get into heaven" believers.
You missed the Schism of 2007, when the heretical Branch Zero Kopimists formed their New Testament, V3. Of course they darn near burned down their compound while arguing about how to light the lamps, but hey, they're learning.
Add IR opaque contact lenses or eyeglasses. Otherwise a camera sensitive to IR could still locate your eyes easily using the Ghost Hunters effect.
I mean hey, if you're willing to paint your face like a zebra and wear a jellyfish wig, popping in a set of otherwise clear contacts should be nothing, right?
"cell phones blast out a fair bit of RF power, on the order of 1 W,"
Holy crap, what decade do you think this is?
He's still wondering why his analog bag phone stopped ringing back in 2008.
The country that sells politicians the same way it does sanitary towels. Somehow it seems strangely appropriate.
Oh, that we could discard them as easily as well.
...only to replace them with even worst, more brain-dead people?
I'm an optimist, and I (naively) think that most candidates get elected for the first time bringing genuine hope and optimism to their office. I don't think anyone goes to Washington the first time in order to be corrupted. But once they arrive they get corrupted by lobbyists and campaign donors, and subsequent elections replace their ideals with election machinations and partisan politics. My thought is that if you got a once-in-a-lifetime chance to represent the people of your district, rather than a golden ticket to drink from the campaign fund fountains, you hopefully would take the job more seriously.
If the parties existed to launch campaigns like ballistic rockets, that would be great. "Here's our platform, now jump off it and go be a representative!" But once they're in office the party should have no further influence over them, and the candidate shouldn't be beholden to them for a reelection campaign. Once elected, they should be free to accurately represent their constituents, rather than continue only doing what the national organization tells them they should accomplish. And if they fail to represent their electors, they should get the boot early.
Of course it was killed. It was non-partisan. Anything that reduced separation of the parties got in the way of their real message, which is "elect me, I'm different from them." And in this case, it was a non-partisan board that happened to arrive at recommendations based on reality, rather than politics, which are often at opposing ends of the spectrum.
In today's contentious environment, if you're not with us (meaning if you're not contributing to our campaign), you're an ENEMY OF THE STATE AND MUST BE KILLED. That leaves no room for rational thought.
The country that sells politicians the same way it does sanitary towels. Somehow it seems strangely appropriate.
Oh, that we could discard them as easily as well.
Hey, maybe this is where Apple's censorship and keeping the walled garden safe from intrusion might really pay off. "Sorry, Mr. Obama, but your message is too political for the App Store. Lose the editorial cartoons lampooning the Republican Party and we'll give it another consideration."
"News for nerds, stuff that matters". I'd call prisons "stuff that matters". And nowhere did you attempt to refute any of the perfectly valid points made in the parent. You're simply complaining because he has a different opinion.
No, I'm complaining because we'd still have the SCADA vulnerability even if we "reformed" the prison system and figured out how to put fewer people in jail. No matter what we do, we're going to have prisons because we're going to have a certain number of society members who will commit crimes. And as long as we have one prison with a vulnerable SCADA controlled lock system, we still have a problem.
We could do all the stuff the GP posts about. We could make drugs legal, which would probably reduce the prison population by 4/5ths. We could try to "reform" instead of "imprison". But you know what? Until the day we accomplish every single one of those goals completely, the security systems at prisons better work right. So it doesn't matter if he doesn't like the current system -- it's still 100% necessary today.
If you want to talk about boo-hoo bad US prisons, may I suggest you go troll over at HuffPost? If you want to talk SCADA vulnerabilities, we'll be here.
It's a nice feature and all, but it seems to be more of a distraction from the lack of a proper, US-sized engine block under the hood than anything else.
What, sheer mass makes an engine "better"? I'll put my EcoBoost V6 up against the old 385 V8 Big Block, just because it's about 2/3 the weight for the same HP. And that thing just purrs like a happy kitten. A finely tuned happy kitten.
Of course the car it's wrapped in still comes in at over 2 tons. :-( Still, it gets better than twice the mileage of the old land whales that used to have the 385 (when I'm not driving it like I stole it.) Yes, I'd rather have it in a Mustang than a Taurus, but that wasn't an option for us.
Be cautious. If www.poorlysecuredforum.com keeps your password in the database, and I hack them and see someone with the user name of DMUTPeregrine and the password of 1CorrectHorseBatteryStaple+poorlysecuredforum.com? I'm going to try logging in here as DMUTPeregrine / 1CorrectHorseBatteryStaple+slashdot.org. And I'll try logging in to wellsfargo.com and citibank and usbank and chase all the same way.
Your suggestion of using a hash as the password is much more secure, assuming you actually use it. But next time you create a hash, try a little trick: google for it. Google is like the world's largest and fastest distributed rainbow table. Last time I checked, googling for the MD5 digest of "12345" returned something like 11,000 hits, all of which said "12345" right there on the search results. Time to go change the hash on my luggage.
Your statement doesn't take several risk factors into account. Ultimately, risk is something you have to assess for yourself: what is the value of your passwords? Are you guarding multi-million dollar corporate secrets, or are you risking a $50 credit card fee? It makes a difference as to how much effort to put into the task.
Long, random character passwords that are written down using actual pen-on-paper are still very secure against network based attacks. I have yet to see the virus that can read the password off a sticky note.
Having them on a piece of paper stuck in to your monitor in your house is going to expose them only to the people you invite in. Now, if you're talking about passwords at work, then you have coworkers, cleaning people, maintenance people, and all sorts of random passers-by that can read the note. Yes, those are less secure. But again, what are you guarding?
Having them inside a locked desk drawer improves the situation by quite a bit. Only someone who is specifically targeting you is likely to go after them. And if someone's targeting you personally, they'll probably do it the easy way with a keyboard sniffer or virus, rather than trying to break in to your office, bribe your janitor, or pick your desk drawer lock.
That said, in all cases you're still better off with an encrypted storage tool like a yubikey. Keep them with you, keep them encrypted. Much harder to leak that way.
develop something before you try to denounce poor spending in a field that to be competitive, at the cost of military failure and the detriment of an entire nation, must pursue even the most unlikely routes).
It depends on what you're trying to do. If you're responsible and want to conserve money, you let private inventors come up with new ideas, and let them risk their money building working prototypes. Only then do you think about investing in the ones that show some promise.
However, if you're a congressman, and your mission is to enrich the owners of the corporations in district #3A that donated to your campaign, then it's different. You rank the list of donor corporations in order of the amount they donated, and find out what they specialize in making. Say your top two donors make cotton string and brass eyelets. Then you write up a bunch of requirements for some invention that needs a net made of cotton string strung between brass eyelets, and make it sound really necessary. Invoking the safety of troops is always in vogue, so you might write up a request for a "biodegradable shell catcher to eliminate the possibility of reusing spent bullet casings as shrapnel in Improvised Explosive Devices." Never mind that the insurgents have never bothered using spent bullet casings for anything, but now you're selling cotton string and brass eyelets by the millions. The soldiers take one look at these things that show up one day and say "what the fuck are these useless things for?" Some kid figures out how to make beer holders attached to his bunk, and that's about all the action they see. So your contributors are richer, the taxpayers are poorer, and the troops have pallets of crap they don't care about shipped to bases where they don't want to be.
But by all means, let's pursue this unlikely route to ensure that brass casings are never used in IEDs again, and we can all breathe easier knowing our troops are safer. 9/11 !!! Never forget!!! O say can you see!
Or did I poorly judge these expenditures of time and money?
At least try to come up with a true example. That space pen one is bullshit.
http://www.snopes.com/business/genius/spacepen.asp
he needs a punching bag in the office or something.
Yep. Then he needs to climb inside it, and hire Mike Tyson.
No, he never said anything like that, which is why I think he's at least being truthful. Had he fumbled out a press-conference-ready apology, it probably would have been a lie.
The guy's in the position of deciding if it's better to be an honest jerk, or a dishonest weasel. I just noticed that he's still an honest jerk.It may not be much better than nothing, but it's slightly better than nothing.
What if this guy's plan was to cheese off every single person who contacted them, in hopes that one of them would "out" him in the public's eye? Maybe he planned to be this company's scapegoat from day 0. Sure, he ticked off plenty of not-Daves on the way, but once he ticked off Dave, and Dave got so fed up he told Mike, then Mike told Gabe, and then they got noticed big-time.
At some point your behavior is so over the top that it's bound to be noticed by someone of importance who will take great pleasure in publicly spanking you for it. As long as you're "just some marketting firm" that can be reasonably separated from the company making the product, and know you'll be cut loose as soon as you look bad, the company selling the product is going to look almost like a victim of a scammer as opposed to a scheming manipulator. They get noticed, and they even get pity for having been tricked into hiring such a lousy PR guy.
I don't care what the newspapers say about me as long as they spell my name right. - P.T. Barnum, among others.
That's a helluva good point. Maybe this guy is really the most talented "marketter" ever. The product really does look useful, and I never would have heard of it if it weren't for the boing-boing story.
But it sure seems like a one-trick pony. I wouldn't hire this ass-clown to handle customer service complaints at a collection agency. His best bet now is to find a job as a sewer unblocker or ditch digger.