2d) supposes you're one of the people who can't learn a new method of transferring files and are still using Outlook or some other "thick" email client.
1) Most people won't accept "large*" email (admittedly the definition of large has shifted as capacity has shifted) 2) Binary files have to be encoded as 7bit text for transmission which means your 50Mb email file can take a file that is ~37.5Mb 2a) Your/sending/ email server may well let you upload ALL of a 500Mb file, dump it to/dev/null THEN tell you it's not taking files over 50Mb 2b) When you split the file into 50Mb chunks it will then let you upload those too, and then tell you it's not taking your 66Mb email (see 2)) 2c) A lot of people have really shitty upload speeds which means 2a and 2b take a LOT of time. 2d) Uploading the file to Google Drive or some other service will be a lot faster, supports resuming, and doesn't barf retrospectively. 3) Email has to be stored for some time, on the sending and receiving email servers, for no real reason (some email servers strip sent attachments before storing) 5) Most people don't even realise that they're still sending the email (from clients like Outlook) when the email disappears, they think it's instant. 5a) This leads to stupidity like "have you got it yet?" moments after sending even though they haven't sent it yet, and the recipient would still need to download it as well 6) the list goes on, but I'm bored and you stopped reading.
I've read this several times this year, and I have to say... I don't believe it.
Then you're an idiot.
Uber's only cost is not your ride, in fact it costs them zero (that's what the 80% is supposed to cover), their costs are all in the back end (remember those engineers being sexually harassed?)
Then somehow they're also supposed to return a profit to their investors (though at the moment most of those are just hoping for capital gains).
Uber is a Ponzi scheme though, they use their investor capital to create the appearance of success.
They're doing a little fiddling around the edges squeezing their drivers in some markets to try and stem the bleeding, but if they don't eventually kill off taxis altogether so they can charge what the service actually costs + profit, they're dead.
Losing any public/customer support is a Big Deal when you're reliant on investors to keep your company solvent.
When Google first launched their search engine, they didn't have ads
What, for about 18 months? It was nice back then, but honestly between 1996 and 1999 search was comically bad. Google's innovation was making search/work/.
I'm not even sure what other people's work you might be talking about... news? Big old bag of "meh" for you there. Not that I search for news on Google, but if I did I wouldn't be reading it there and if the site I click through to can't work out how to make people pay for advertising that would be their problem, not Google's.
I dunno, maybe you could focus your complaint a little?
The article says nothing to back up your claim, and in fact the most likely explanation of what it does cover would be slack marking of the role and not voter fraud, but do continue your incoherent rambling. I'm sure someone gives a damn, somewhere, what you think.
Sorry, should have been clearer. Without leaving Google.
There may be for one of them, eventually... but the entire argument here is predicated on staff retention, not the ability of an engineer to eventually become CEO of an entirely different company.
Why do I need to forge a cert? I make a similar named email address and get gmail to issue me a cert.
Give you're auto accepting any and all certs handed to you, you don't know that this is a new cert in a new name for a new email address, unless you notice the tiny change in spelling. Very few people do.
(the 2 "at gmail.com" addresses above were different)
Don't see why it has to be government.. mine, yours, or even third-party.
If you're in the habit of accepting public keys from anyone that sends one, and rekeying, automatically, then you're never going to notice an intercept, and you're sure as hell not going to notice an email from zealath at gmail.com as being something other than zaelath at gmail.com so I really don't have to be government.
So: - They're really keen on money so they've become CEO of a company they founded in hopes of pulling a Zuckerburg, or - They're not really keen on money and want to work on things that interest them.
perhaps it could be standardized with some automatic key exchange mechanism
And there's your problem, key exchange is the hardest (most expensive at least) part of PKI.
It's a serious weakness in things like Signal, somewhat ameliorated by letting you know someone's key was changed, but unless you're communicating via some other channel while doing the key exchange you can't really know the key is valid.
Slashdot Mirror
2d) supposes you're one of the people who can't learn a new method of transferring files and are still using Outlook or some other "thick" email client.
Multiple reasons:
1) Most people won't accept "large*" email (admittedly the definition of large has shifted as capacity has shifted) /sending/ email server may well let you upload ALL of a 500Mb file, dump it to /dev/null THEN tell you it's not taking files over 50Mb
2) Binary files have to be encoded as 7bit text for transmission which means your 50Mb email file can take a file that is ~37.5Mb
2a) Your
2b) When you split the file into 50Mb chunks it will then let you upload those too, and then tell you it's not taking your 66Mb email (see 2))
2c) A lot of people have really shitty upload speeds which means 2a and 2b take a LOT of time.
2d) Uploading the file to Google Drive or some other service will be a lot faster, supports resuming, and doesn't barf retrospectively.
3) Email has to be stored for some time, on the sending and receiving email servers, for no real reason (some email servers strip sent attachments before storing)
5) Most people don't even realise that they're still sending the email (from clients like Outlook) when the email disappears, they think it's instant.
5a) This leads to stupidity like "have you got it yet?" moments after sending even though they haven't sent it yet, and the recipient would still need to download it as well
6) the list goes on, but I'm bored and you stopped reading.
I've read this several times this year, and I have to say... I don't believe it.
Then you're an idiot.
Uber's only cost is not your ride, in fact it costs them zero (that's what the 80% is supposed to cover), their costs are all in the back end (remember those engineers being sexually harassed?)
Then somehow they're also supposed to return a profit to their investors (though at the moment most of those are just hoping for capital gains).
Uber is a Ponzi scheme though, they use their investor capital to create the appearance of success.
They're doing a little fiddling around the edges squeezing their drivers in some markets to try and stem the bleeding, but if they don't eventually kill off taxis altogether so they can charge what the service actually costs + profit, they're dead.
Losing any public/customer support is a Big Deal when you're reliant on investors to keep your company solvent.
There was lashings of sarcasm in my post.. given Imrik appeared to be suggesting a return of prohibition, for soda.
Yeah, then do the same with booze. Wow, how come nobody has thought of this before? We'll be so healthy!
When Google first launched their search engine, they didn't have ads
What, for about 18 months? It was nice back then, but honestly between 1996 and 1999 search was comically bad. Google's innovation was making search /work/.
I'm not even sure what other people's work you might be talking about... news? Big old bag of "meh" for you there. Not that I search for news on Google, but if I did I wouldn't be reading it there and if the site I click through to can't work out how to make people pay for advertising that would be their problem, not Google's.
I dunno, maybe you could focus your complaint a little?
Really Detroit? More votes cast for HilLIARy! than registered voters in the precinct?
The article says nothing to back up your claim, and in fact the most likely explanation of what it does cover would be slack marking of the role and not voter fraud, but do continue your incoherent rambling. I'm sure someone gives a damn, somewhere, what you think.
Buying a butcher knife with the intent to use it on someone is attempted murder
In what jurisdiction? Doesn't seem to be US, UK, Australia, ... ?
"Ignorance is no excuse in the eyes of the law".
Uh huh, but you also need mens rea unless it's a strict liability offence.
The internet is the biggest source of misinformation
No shit.
How far in the past? https://arstechnica.com/securi...
What, like these? https://arstechnica.com/securi...
There is no ACTUAL EVIDENCE. You're on the wrong site. Go away.
You can't Chicken Little away negligence.
Sorry, should have been clearer. Without leaving Google.
There may be for one of them, eventually... but the entire argument here is predicated on staff retention, not the ability of an engineer to eventually become CEO of an entirely different company.
Why do I need to forge a cert? I make a similar named email address and get gmail to issue me a cert.
Give you're auto accepting any and all certs handed to you, you don't know that this is a new cert in a new name for a new email address, unless you notice the tiny change in spelling. Very few people do.
(the 2 "at gmail.com" addresses above were different)
Don't see why it has to be government.. mine, yours, or even third-party.
If you're in the habit of accepting public keys from anyone that sends one, and rekeying, automatically, then you're never going to notice an intercept, and you're sure as hell not going to notice an email from zealath at gmail.com as being something other than zaelath at gmail.com so I really don't have to be government.
Yeah, that's one. What do you think the odds are of the same thing happening to every Engineer at Google w/ aspirations of being a CEO?
There's no career path from Engineer to CEO.
So:
- They're really keen on money so they've become CEO of a company they founded in hopes of pulling a Zuckerburg, or
- They're not really keen on money and want to work on things that interest them.
Being cash bloated lets you do either.
perhaps it could be standardized with some automatic key exchange mechanism
And there's your problem, key exchange is the hardest (most expensive at least) part of PKI.
It's a serious weakness in things like Signal, somewhat ameliorated by letting you know someone's key was changed, but unless you're communicating via some other channel while doing the key exchange you can't really know the key is valid.
These key signing parties aren't just an excuse to earn frequent flier miles: https://www.theguardian.com/te...
This. You can delete the rest of the thread and close it to comments now.
If you mean allowing businesses to /draw/ on your bank account w/ ACH, then yes, that's broken as hell and I won't go near it.
If you mean having a business /deposit/ to your bank account, then I don't see what security you need on it?
Weren't they on the Golgafrincham "B" Ark?
Anti-discrimination (civil rights act) and no-smoking laws (don't know or care, probably state laws anyway) are not in the constitution.
If you want Federal protection for Nazis on Reddit then get it Federal funding.
Free market and small-government people on the right are, by definition, NOT fascist.
Is that why they're ALT-right? Because they're not free market/small government, they're white supremacist/protectionists. Or just Fascist.