Hiring a war criminal and domestic-spying person may not change Dropbox's stance on privacy, but it shows another darker side of DB, it's business-at-the-expense-of-morality side.
Did they really think, "She approved the mass snooping of private data saved online, which certainly included targeting our infrastructure to breach our customers' privacy. Oh, we won't worry about that, we need her expertise, we'll hire her!".
Then again, writing the above paragraph, what the fuck was their stance on privacy then, if hiring her didn't make them ask themselves whether they're doing the right thing?
And how exactly will Dropbox succeed in the international scene, when all the foreign companies fucking realize that they're basically in-bed with the Washington "Elite", the same people that created and supported PRISM?!?
He talked to the civilian Chinese newspaper about the US government hacking Chinese civilian servers.
I trust him, if his motive was really to sell those secrets for money to the Chinese, he would've done it covertly. He wants everyone, not just the Chinese, to have information about what the US Secret Police is doing. Want to bet that there are backups of ALL the files on NSA's illegal activities in the hands of Guardian reporters too? Snowden can disappear at any moment, he'll have trusted someone like Greenwald/a Guardian IT person to take care of his secrets, maybe as an insurance policy as well.
Just like we get pissed if the Chinese hacked Google, the Chinese are pissed that the US hacked into university servers. If it were military targets like the Pentagon, we would think it's fair game...
It'd be more interesting to send parts of the password to different people. So for example 3 people out of a group of 7 would have to join their parts to get the whole password. Redundancies are there in case some of the people fall off the face of the planet. Ideally you'd find 7 people where no three of them would join up to conspire against you -- that is admittedly very hard.
I'm sure there's a mathematical function to split up a piece of information so that 3 out of 7 pieces is enough to restore it. How to do it is an exercise left for the reader.
I played with a BlackBerry in 2008, and they already had/have this. If an app doesn't have a particular permission, it would get a SecurityException. It's supposed to keep functioning (e.g. a chat app might not be able to read your contacts, so it would have to have its own contacts database that you'd manage manually).
But of course Google apps just say "I have to have all permissions or I won't install myself":(
Except that if you're serving content using a standard home connection, the upload bandwidth is a fraction of download bandwidth, and those pics will take forever to load compared to pics served by Facebook...
Actually, you're still right. A few years ago people were saying these 2 will be the future of the internet. So, "future of the internet" = don't invest! "passing fad!" = invest all the money!
He abused his position, broke his oath, and acted to place materials whose secrecy he was supposed to protect... into the hands of enemies (and friends, frenemies, neutrals, and basically anyone who cared to look).
Arguably, he was uphholding his oath of defending the US Constitution, and the best way he saw to do that was to expose the whole festering mess that was going on in the military. Machine-gunning kids, how the hell is that acceptable?
Frankly, he deserves what he gets.
OK, I can see you don't put much value in the Constitution anyway... Or your belief in it depends on whether you agree with a particular point or not...
I can think for myself, and when I read his writings, I can judge for myself whether he's misrepresenting the facts or not, whether his opinions are defending the truth or defending the evil, and whether I agree with him or not.
And for a lot of things, I agree with him. It's not like I'm hiring him to be my accountant, where it would be a lot easier to hide the facts, how can you not trust the act of writing? His articles are read by a lot of people (oh wait, maybe he's sock-puppeting his audience too!) and if they found lies in it they would've protested, and loudly too.
He sock-puppeted once, does that mean everything he's done and he's continuing to do is useless in your eyes? Keep thinking that, meanwhile he's turning out to be the champion of uncompromising progressives' causes (unlike those who protested torture under Bush and then supported them under Obama...)
Presumably there's an automated button somewhere to tell Facebook "I believe a third party knows my password" (which will be true) and a script will automatically change the password, and send a reset code to your e-mail address. Now is e-mail still sacred? If so, then the judge/the soon-to-be-ex can't touch that reset code, problem sort of solved...
Well, thats just because you're an ignorant idiot who either can't read or hasn't actually owned an iPhone so you really don't have any clue what the fuck you're talking about:)
And you're a very pleasant individual yourself, sir! (smiley face).
And what if the user, just like the majority of computer users, just hits OK to close whatever dialog box that popped up? "Well then it's their own fault!", I suppose Mr. Superior I'm-Not-An-Ignorant-Nor-An-Idiot would say.
Yeah, the first iPhone OS was well thought-of and intuitive, but after that it just relies on the user having to know some secrets to get it to work, e.g., who would've figured out that double-tapping the Home button on the lock screen would load Siri? That to move icons, group or delete apps on the home screen you have to hold them until they wiggle, and to group them you have to drag one onto another? Intuitive my butt...
Not that Android apps are any better. On some apps, hitting back actually means "go to the previous screen", even if that means leaving that app. But on my music player, if I load it, it goes to the "Now Playing" screen, which is the least useful screen since I can pause or skip songs on that screen, but I can do that from outside the app as well, so why would it show me that screen? Ok this is just nitpicking, it can't read my mind. But usually I open up the music app because I want to load up a different song. So I press the music app icon, I see the "Now playing" screen. Let's see, how do I see all songs? I press the menu button. No such option. I hit back. Ah, there it is. Real fucking intuitive..!
Does that make financial sense? If you only buy when you're running out of space, chances are you'll get a better deal. 2 years ago 1 TB would cost around (pulling number out of thin air...) $70, and now (or at least last week) for that amount of money you can get a 2TB disk..
I once believed in this argument, "look, the jailbreakers made your company billions of dollars through your 30% fee!", but someone else said that the cleanness of the iPhone API and the completeness of the SDK/documentation seems to suggest 3rd party app support was in Apple's plans from the beginning after all...
People who want to cheer the downfall of the USA, you can cheer, the soul of that country as envisioned by its founder is dead.
On another topic, Twitter. Bullshit artificial limitation (yeah yeah length of an SMS. What percentage of Twitterers actually use SMS instead of fancy-schmanscy smartphone anyway?) but popular because everyone else is using it...
Indeed, anyone who's ever SSH'ed into their iPhones would see it was just another UNIX machine, with a/home/mobile directory where the user's data is located. I had wondered what would happen if I made several directories under/home and just symlinked mobile to one of those directories, would that make the iPhone a multi-user device?
Yeah, this is basically an observation that would've fit in a tweet: "Oh look, the Polaroid SX70 bla bla port is almost the same size as the iPad data port.", instead Mr. Let's Waste Everyone's Time made a stupid video of him trying to force entry, and several useless paragraphs about it...
Look in the YouTube description, it's there... it started over the Pacific Ocean, around 0:11 I think you can see SF and LA, and it continued to Central and South America, ending with the sunrise around Antarctica.
Ouch, I used that service when it was still independent, although I mostly got "I'm too stupid to Google, can you answer this question for me?" kind of questions (for those who don't know Aardvark). So they let Google buy them, and then shut them? That must suck. Or don't the founders care, since they just cashed out?
Slashdot Mirror
Hiring a war criminal and domestic-spying person may not change Dropbox's stance on privacy, but it shows another darker side of DB, it's business-at-the-expense-of-morality side.
Did they really think, "She approved the mass snooping of private data saved online, which certainly included targeting our infrastructure to breach our customers' privacy. Oh, we won't worry about that, we need her expertise, we'll hire her!".
Then again, writing the above paragraph, what the fuck was their stance on privacy then, if hiring her didn't make them ask themselves whether they're doing the right thing?
And how exactly will Dropbox succeed in the international scene, when all the foreign companies fucking realize that they're basically in-bed with the Washington "Elite", the same people that created and supported PRISM?!?
And yet, the Newsweek "journalist" thought "Oh my god, this guy's name matches the pseudonym, it must be him!"
How dense do you have to be!?! I'd like to give her one of those "how to occupy a blonde" birthday cards that tell you to flip it over and over...
The way I see it, the men in black pointed the gun at him and said "Take those drugs! Now!"...
Android 4.3 now has multiple user capabilities, where features can be disabled: http://www.howtogeek.com/170191/share-your-android-tablet-and-keep-your-privacy-with-a-guest-account/
I'd say have 3 accounts: Admin, for Kindergarten use (no games), and for play time (Kiddie has to ask a parent for the password)...
He talked to the civilian Chinese newspaper about the US government hacking Chinese civilian servers.
I trust him, if his motive was really to sell those secrets for money to the Chinese, he would've done it covertly. He wants everyone, not just the Chinese, to have information about what the US Secret Police is doing. Want to bet that there are backups of ALL the files on NSA's illegal activities in the hands of Guardian reporters too? Snowden can disappear at any moment, he'll have trusted someone like Greenwald/a Guardian IT person to take care of his secrets, maybe as an insurance policy as well.
Just like we get pissed if the Chinese hacked Google, the Chinese are pissed that the US hacked into university servers. If it were military targets like the Pentagon, we would think it's fair game...
It'd be more interesting to send parts of the password to different people. So for example 3 people out of a group of 7 would have to join their parts to get the whole password. Redundancies are there in case some of the people fall off the face of the planet. Ideally you'd find 7 people where no three of them would join up to conspire against you -- that is admittedly very hard.
I'm sure there's a mathematical function to split up a piece of information so that 3 out of 7 pieces is enough to restore it. How to do it is an exercise left for the reader.
I played with a BlackBerry in 2008, and they already had/have this. If an app doesn't have a particular permission, it would get a SecurityException. It's supposed to keep functioning (e.g. a chat app might not be able to read your contacts, so it would have to have its own contacts database that you'd manage manually).
But of course Google apps just say "I have to have all permissions or I won't install myself" :(
Except that if you're serving content using a standard home connection, the upload bandwidth is a fraction of download bandwidth, and those pics will take forever to load compared to pics served by Facebook...
Overuse of smileys detected... God damnit, wie alt seid ihr, 16?
Second Life and MySpace says hi!
Actually, you're still right. A few years ago people were saying these 2 will be the future of the internet. So, "future of the internet" = don't invest! "passing fad!" = invest all the money!
Ah crap, hit the wrong button, sorry!
He abused his position, broke his oath, and acted to place materials whose secrecy he was supposed to protect... into the hands of enemies (and friends, frenemies, neutrals, and basically anyone who cared to look).
Arguably, he was uphholding his oath of defending the US Constitution, and the best way he saw to do that was to expose the whole festering mess that was going on in the military. Machine-gunning kids, how the hell is that acceptable?
Frankly, he deserves what he gets.
OK, I can see you don't put much value in the Constitution anyway... Or your belief in it depends on whether you agree with a particular point or not...
abcd
I can think for myself, and when I read his writings, I can judge for myself whether he's misrepresenting the facts or not, whether his opinions are defending the truth or defending the evil, and whether I agree with him or not.
And for a lot of things, I agree with him. It's not like I'm hiring him to be my accountant, where it would be a lot easier to hide the facts, how can you not trust the act of writing? His articles are read by a lot of people (oh wait, maybe he's sock-puppeting his audience too!) and if they found lies in it they would've protested, and loudly too.
He sock-puppeted once, does that mean everything he's done and he's continuing to do is useless in your eyes? Keep thinking that, meanwhile he's turning out to be the champion of uncompromising progressives' causes (unlike those who protested torture under Bush and then supported them under Obama...)
Presumably there's an automated button somewhere to tell Facebook "I believe a third party knows my password" (which will be true) and a script will automatically change the password, and send a reset code to your e-mail address. Now is e-mail still sacred? If so, then the judge/the soon-to-be-ex can't touch that reset code, problem sort of solved...
And you're a very pleasant individual yourself, sir! (smiley face).
And what if the user, just like the majority of computer users, just hits OK to close whatever dialog box that popped up? "Well then it's their own fault!", I suppose Mr. Superior I'm-Not-An-Ignorant-Nor-An-Idiot would say.
Yeah, the first iPhone OS was well thought-of and intuitive, but after that it just relies on the user having to know some secrets to get it to work, e.g., who would've figured out that double-tapping the Home button on the lock screen would load Siri? That to move icons, group or delete apps on the home screen you have to hold them until they wiggle, and to group them you have to drag one onto another? Intuitive my butt...
Not that Android apps are any better. On some apps, hitting back actually means "go to the previous screen", even if that means leaving that app. But on my music player, if I load it, it goes to the "Now Playing" screen, which is the least useful screen since I can pause or skip songs on that screen, but I can do that from outside the app as well, so why would it show me that screen? Ok this is just nitpicking, it can't read my mind. But usually I open up the music app because I want to load up a different song. So I press the music app icon, I see the "Now playing" screen. Let's see, how do I see all songs? I press the menu button. No such option. I hit back. Ah, there it is. Real fucking intuitive..!
Does that make financial sense? If you only buy when you're running out of space, chances are you'll get a better deal. 2 years ago 1 TB would cost around (pulling number out of thin air...) $70, and now (or at least last week) for that amount of money you can get a 2TB disk..
I once believed in this argument, "look, the jailbreakers made your company billions of dollars through your 30% fee!", but someone else said that the cleanness of the iPhone API and the completeness of the SDK/documentation seems to suggest 3rd party app support was in Apple's plans from the beginning after all...
Will they be also tweeting things like "the opinion of this court is not available to Public"?
People who want to cheer the downfall of the USA, you can cheer, the soul of that country as envisioned by its founder is dead.
On another topic, Twitter. Bullshit artificial limitation (yeah yeah length of an SMS. What percentage of Twitterers actually use SMS instead of fancy-schmanscy smartphone anyway?) but popular because everyone else is using it...
Indeed, anyone who's ever SSH'ed into their iPhones would see it was just another UNIX machine, with a /home/mobile directory where the user's data is located. I had wondered what would happen if I made several directories under /home and just symlinked mobile to one of those directories, would that make the iPhone a multi-user device?
I gotta try that with my iPod this weekend...
Yeah, this is basically an observation that would've fit in a tweet: "Oh look, the Polaroid SX70 bla bla port is almost the same size as the iPad data port.", instead Mr. Let's Waste Everyone's Time made a stupid video of him trying to force entry, and several useless paragraphs about it...
Look in the YouTube description, it's there... it started over the Pacific Ocean, around 0:11 I think you can see SF and LA, and it continued to Central and South America, ending with the sunrise around Antarctica.
Ouch, I used that service when it was still independent, although I mostly got "I'm too stupid to Google, can you answer this question for me?" kind of questions (for those who don't know Aardvark). So they let Google buy them, and then shut them? That must suck. Or don't the founders care, since they just cashed out?