Thought crime refers to the practice of making thoughts themselves illegal, not actions.
Right.... And de-anonymizing someone is a thought process. CAUSING IT TO BE KNOWN TO YOU the author behind an anonymized record.
The action of gathering, analyzing, and writing facts down is not otherwise capable of being a crime.
My understanding is if you analyze some data through whatever method, and the police interview you, and you admit that you KNOW or have thought out the real name of the person behind any one record, Or you have written down a personal note evidencing your Thoughtcrime, then you could be prosecuted under the new law.
This is basically a thought crime.... Banning the Mining and Analysis of data from multiple sources in order to derive more facts about an event or piece of information?
Windows 10 will not trust any new certificates from these CAs after September 2017."
Seriously.... you're going to rely on the CA's NotBefore date to decide to invalidate the cert? Did you forget that this CA doesn't participate in certificate transparency AND NotBefore date can technically be set to whatever the CA wants?
The so-called "Backdating certificates" issue, Although in reality, the NotBefore date is not an issuance date; it's a date before which the certificate should be treated as an invalid credential.
When you have an object with authenticated timestamp such as signed code, this distinction could be important, but certificates valid only for TLS aren't used for such, so usually NotBefore is the time of issuance; however, no guarantees.
I don't agree.... Researcher finds some Open public Rsync server publishing files on the internet. Initiates a bulk download to fetch everything being made available so they can take a look at what this is. 205GB is a drop in the bucket these days --- it's an insignificant amount of space assuming a decently fast Gigabit+ network connection and relatively modern PC (My new PC has two 4000GB hard drives in it, so 205 GB would be about 3% of my storage).
This paper was too well-written, and there was some logic in there that is too good to defeat on its merits. Let's fire the author instead, and burn the article... pretend it never happened!
I value diversity and inclusion, am not denying that sexism exists, and don’t endorse usingstereotypes. TL;DR Google’s political bias has equated the freedom from offense with psychological safety, but shaming into silence is the antithesis of psychological safety. This silencing has created an ideological echo chamber where some ideas are too sacred to be honestly discussed. The lack of discussion fosters the most extreme and authoritarian elements of this ideology.
Extreme: all disparities in representation are due to oppression
Authoritarian: we should discriminate to correct for this oppression
Differences in distributions of traits between men and women may in part explain why we don't have 50% representation of women in tech and leadership.
Discrimination to reach equal representation is unfair, divisive, and bad for business.
So how the hell can anybody legitimately interpret this memo as indicating the author encourages and wishes to perpetuate stereotypes?
Counts two, three and four all allege violations of 18 U.S.C. 2512.
Section 2512 is a rarely used law that criminalizes making, selling or advertising for sale illegal wiretapping devices.
Since when is it illegal in the UK to make wiretapping devices, and to sell them? The governing law for actions that occurred in the UK by a UK national would not be any part of 18 USC.
They'll just monitor the bots carefully and send them to a forced re-education camp in case they stray from the straight and narrow.... a strong motivator for humans.
Their real name is portable TELESCREENS; the way Oceania monitors and controls the population using a software tool called FACEBOOK. And this sort of thing was predicted decades in advance.
Not to mention VP9 and AV1 are royalty-free, so you can imagine hardware encoders being built into future devices and server GPU/CPUs for both of these.
therefore left is best because a bunch of randos who filled out a survey monkey are best equipped to design our UI for us
This implies that close to 50% of people will be happy with EITHER option, So why not create a Right-Click menu that allows you to CHOOSE between Left and Right-hand side?
That's like someone having terminal cancer and just taking pain killers to 'fix' it. You have the fix the root of the problem
Unavailability of electricity is a root of the problem for heat-related deaths in India; It is too hot (EVEN NOW for at least some people), so Electricity and ample cold water/Ice or A/C have changed from mere conveniences to life necessities to stay in that area -- people need access to tools to mitigate.
as well as ensuring human space explorers do not damage other planets, moons and objects in space.
THIS is the hard part of the job.
Otherwise, I'd go sign up for the $187,000/Year for 3 years, to protect earth from space microbes, BECAUSE the risk of a meaningful incident is extremely miniscule.
Anyways, they probably don't consider my experience in IT meaningful for what is essentially the same as the hospital safety officers who work to define rules, procedures, and compliance programs for doctors and medical practitioners to ensure safe sanitary practices and isolation of deadly hazards such as ebola.
so I can ask the applicants questions without them looking up answers in a search engine.
If they want to cheat, they could have a hidden microphone with a friend listening in on the interview; Googling the questions, and displaying the answers on their computer monitor while they're skyping and appearing to just be watching the video chat.
Still have HOURS-long confirmation times, tiny block size, etc.. makes it useless for F2F transactions, merchant payments, etc..
Not really, And BCC is not a viable solution to BTC's problems. There's more to making robust network software than constructing a shiny UI or simply hacking operations parameters to reach a higher size per TX; the actual protocol implementation has to be robust to scale with those features and not blow up.
We have had many plans that were bragged about by the party of the moral high ground turn out to be no plan at all.
Yeah... pretty much. The TRUE test of the quality of a security plan, is to be able to explain it in reasonable detail, AND not have experts laugh at you and point out slews of holes.
If you're trying to keep it secret, then it is most likely because you either have no credible plan, or you don't have much confidence in it....
We're talking about anti-hacker defenses. This is not a military endeavor, where we should be concerned about adversaries copying our defense tactics to their own security planning.
Even with the ancient adages about "security via obscurity", one does not wisely broadcast details about the security systems one is using.
In this case, they should explain what their plan is. If that would be a "concern", then it probably means that their plan is a flawwed one, and they should be taking comments from the public about potential alternative mitigation plans.
They could start by introducing Captchas on submission forms, for example.
You need a manager/marketer/fashion designer at the top, because engineers wouldn't know UI if their asinine choices bit them in the ass.
That's not true. You need Marketers/Fashion designers to guide project requirements and approval the results NOT to decide working conditions for professions conducting work they know almost nothing about.
Not if you have family members with health problems or made the mistake of having children you have to put through college.
"Putting children through college" is NOT something that you have to do; It is a personal choice, and a sacrifice only some people can afford because they're f*cking rich. It is probably also inadvisable; your kids should pay their way. Also, going to college is not necessarily recommended.
Again, for people with other family members having health problems that help out are making a personal sacrifice they would only be able to make in the first place because they are f*cking rich, in terms of income. Yes, you can sacrifice your richness to help with a good cause, such as survival, or survival of your loved ones, AND the government may even induce people to do so by means-testing programs that could help people pay for treatments, but should that affect the tax liability? Probably not; they still generated that $$$, and a less wealthy person would not have the option of making that sacrifice.
Here's a better thought: find non-engineering work for these engineers.
Yes.... encourage them to switch to management/business. Then within the next decade I look forward to US companies seeking to offshore all their company management (instead of engineering) to try and take advantage of the supply glut.
The EEOC has neither any legislative or judicial authority.
They judge the interpretation of the law within the executive as it pertains to that issue, and the courts can very well decide to go with their interpretation.
Slashdot Mirror
Thought crime refers to the practice of making thoughts themselves illegal, not actions.
Right.... And de-anonymizing someone is a thought process. CAUSING IT TO BE KNOWN TO YOU the author behind an anonymized record.
The action of gathering, analyzing, and writing facts down is not otherwise capable of being a crime.
My understanding is if you analyze some data through whatever method, and the police interview you, and you admit that you KNOW or have thought out the real name of the person behind any one record, Or you have written down a personal note evidencing your Thoughtcrime, then you could be prosecuted under the new law.
This is basically a thought crime.... Banning the Mining and Analysis of data from multiple sources in order to derive more facts about an event or piece of information?
Windows 10 will not trust any new certificates from these CAs after September 2017."
Seriously.... you're going to rely on the CA's NotBefore date to decide to invalidate the cert?
Did you forget that this CA doesn't participate in certificate transparency AND NotBefore date can
technically be set to whatever the CA wants?
The so-called "Backdating certificates" issue, Although in reality, the NotBefore date is not an issuance date;
it's a date before which the certificate should be treated as an invalid credential.
When you have an object with authenticated timestamp such as signed code, this distinction could be important,
but certificates valid only for TLS aren't used for such, so usually NotBefore is the time of issuance; however,
no guarantees.
Certainly no technical restraint on the CA.....
I don't agree.... Researcher finds some Open public Rsync server publishing files on the internet. Initiates a bulk download to fetch everything being made available so they can take a look at what this is. 205GB is a drop in the bucket these days --- it's an insignificant amount of space assuming a decently fast Gigabit+ network connection and relatively modern PC (My new PC has two 4000GB hard drives in it, so 205 GB would be about 3% of my storage).
This paper was too well-written, and there was some logic in there that is too good to defeat on its merits.
Let's fire the author instead, and burn the article... pretend it never happened!
EXACTLY. His frickin' memo starts with the texts
So how the hell can anybody legitimately interpret this memo as indicating the author encourages and wishes to perpetuate stereotypes?
Counts two, three and four all allege violations of 18 U.S.C. 2512.
Section 2512 is a rarely used law that criminalizes making, selling or advertising for sale illegal wiretapping devices.
Since when is it illegal in the UK to make wiretapping devices, and to sell them?
The governing law for actions that occurred in the UK by a UK national would not be any part of 18 USC.
and quickly turned into a misogynistic foul-mouthed racist.
It just said things that some PEOPLE believed (Probably overzealously) to imply misogyny and racism by the speaker.
In reality, such simple chat bots don't really have the ability to be guilty of any *ism. Although they may be influenced by the speech of others
They'll just monitor the bots carefully and send them to a forced re-education camp in case they stray from the straight and narrow.... a strong motivator for humans.
Their real name is portable TELESCREENS; the way Oceania monitors and controls the population using a software tool called FACEBOOK. And this sort of thing was predicted decades in advance.
Not to mention VP9 and AV1 are royalty-free, so you can imagine hardware encoders being built into future devices and server GPU/CPUs for both of these.
Giving people options is so last century.
OK, Then... Let's compromise then and put the window controls in the center.
Also, they should be drawn in the shape of a kitten.
therefore left is best because a bunch of randos who filled out a survey monkey are best equipped to design our UI for us
This implies that close to 50% of people will be happy with EITHER option, So why not create a Right-Click menu that allows you to CHOOSE between Left and Right-hand side?
That's like someone having terminal cancer and just taking pain killers to 'fix' it. You have the fix the root of the problem
Unavailability of electricity is a root of the problem for heat-related deaths in India; It is too hot (EVEN NOW for at least some people), so Electricity and ample cold water/Ice or A/C have changed from mere conveniences to life necessities to stay in that area -- people need access to tools to mitigate.
as well as ensuring human space explorers do not damage other planets, moons and objects in space.
THIS is the hard part of the job.
Otherwise, I'd go sign up for the $187,000/Year for 3 years, to protect earth from space microbes, BECAUSE the risk of a meaningful incident is extremely miniscule.
Anyways, they probably don't consider my experience in IT meaningful for what is essentially the same as the hospital safety officers who work to define rules, procedures, and compliance programs for doctors and medical practitioners to ensure safe sanitary practices and isolation of deadly hazards such as ebola.
so I can ask the applicants questions without them looking up answers in a search engine.
If they want to cheat, they could have a hidden microphone with a friend listening in on the interview; Googling the questions, and displaying the answers on their computer monitor while they're skyping and appearing to just be watching the video chat.
Still have HOURS-long confirmation times, tiny block size, etc.. makes it useless for F2F transactions, merchant payments, etc..
Not really, And BCC is not a viable solution to BTC's problems.
There's more to making robust network software than constructing a shiny UI or simply hacking operations parameters to reach a higher size per TX; the actual protocol implementation has to be robust to scale with those features and not blow up.
We have had many plans that were bragged about by the party of the moral high ground turn out to be no plan at all.
Yeah... pretty much. The TRUE test of the quality of a security plan, is to be able to explain it in reasonable detail, AND not have experts laugh at you and point out slews of holes.
If you're trying to keep it secret, then it is most likely because you either have no credible plan, or you don't have much confidence in it....
We're talking about anti-hacker defenses. This is not a military endeavor, where we should be concerned about adversaries copying our defense tactics to their own security planning.
Even with the ancient adages about "security via obscurity", one does not wisely broadcast details about the security systems one is using.
In this case, they should explain what their plan is. If that would be a "concern", then it probably means that their plan is a flawwed one, and they should be taking comments from the public about potential alternative mitigation plans.
They could start by introducing Captchas on submission forms, for example.
You need a manager/marketer/fashion designer at the top, because engineers wouldn't know UI if their asinine choices bit them in the ass.
That's not true. You need Marketers/Fashion designers to guide project requirements and approval the results NOT to decide working conditions for professions conducting work they know almost nothing about.
$150K-$300K isn't middle class. That's fucking rich.
Not if you have family members with health problems or made the mistake of having children you have to put through college.
"Putting children through college" is NOT something that you have to do; It is a personal choice, and a sacrifice only some people can afford because they're f*cking rich. It is probably also inadvisable; your kids should pay their way.
Also, going to college is not necessarily recommended.
Again, for people with other family members having health problems that help out are making a personal sacrifice they would only be able to make in the first place because they are f*cking rich, in terms of income.
Yes, you can sacrifice your richness to help with a good cause, such as survival, or survival of your loved ones, AND the government may even induce people to do so by means-testing programs that could help people pay for treatments, but should that affect the tax liability? Probably not; they still generated that $$$, and a less wealthy person would not have the option of making that sacrifice.
Here's a better thought: find non-engineering work for these engineers.
Yes.... encourage them to switch to management/business.
Then within the next decade I look forward to US companies seeking to offshore all their company management
(instead of engineering) to try and take advantage of the supply glut.
But Windows is safe
“Will you walk into my parlour?” said the Spider to the Fly,
'Tis the prettiest little parlour that ever you did spy;
The way into my parlour is up a winding stair,
And I've a many curious things to show when you are there.”
I do not want web apps to be "first class" citizens.
Even native apps should no longer be "first class" citizens. Sandbox everything 100%, FTW.
The EEOC has neither any legislative or judicial authority.
They judge the interpretation of the law within the executive as it pertains to that issue, and the courts can very well decide to go with their interpretation.