At first glance that looks a lot like the old privacy-oriented chat/file-sharing client WASTE. It was a really interesting piece of software, but rather difficult to set up and use. I wonder if qTox has avoided similar shortcomings.
Using the Service to communicate by chat, our servers store the content of your chat conversation and log other information such as the time and date of your conversations, and the other user or users with whom you are communicating.
Kind of awkward if that means what I think it means.
It should have been caught in testing, but of course someone wanted to save money and then it's testing that gets shaved first.
Too often this is true. Not only do you, as a tester, have to fight for a case of testing with suppliers, you often have to fight off internal forces too. Suppliers hate you for demonizing their product and QA and your bosses hate you for subsequent late deliveries. Everybody hates testers.
One thing I've found to be a somewhat working solution is to present cost saving estimates directly related to successes in software testing to our management. They speak money and that's what you should speak to them too. Turn that software testing into a few nice pie charts, histograms and refined statistics.
A couple of years ago I heard of a late-70's VAX still being used at a small power plant. To my knowledge it controlled some sort of HVAC systems. Another old system, one I've actually seen, was a mid-80's computer of unknown make/model used to control traffic lights in a small city. It's funny, or actually impressive, to see such old systems still in use. The old-school guys that keep them running tell nice stories about flea market and eBay scavenging.
His contributions to encryption and privacy can not be underestimated, but it seems everyone has their faux pas moments. The implications with this approach are a bit similar to those of torture; it may be used "just this once", but then again, you can only sell once the core values of a democratic society.
Although that is obviously an exaggerated statement of the ridiculousness of the current situation we're in, I'm afraid it might turn into reality soon. There will be audacious attempts at banning encryption, and they will be laughed out. Soon after this they'll "compromise" with government-mandated backdoors in most-used consumer products. Then we'll, of course, be wondering how the hell did we end up there.
We live dangerous times, people. Keep a tight grip of your privacy and take a moral stance against government control.
Privilege escalation, unauthenticated remote commands to system daemons running with admin privileges... this is everyday life with the biggest IT shops out there.
What's even worse? They don't care! Countless times have I sent these big companies detailed bug/security reports only to find the exact same fucking "feature" in their systems a year later. The only way to make a difference is to stop giving them money, if even for a while. Then they usually come back to you and *might* listen.
I think this is an excellent view. We should collectively try to rise above petty politics and have an objective look at what she did. She needs to go through the due process just like everyone else, no exceptions.
One could of course argue that there are other immoral or illegal actions closely tied to certain politicians (torture to death for example), but the glass shield needs to be broken somewhere. Once you punch through, the whole illusion of privilege tied to high positions in the political system will come down.
Imagine algebra being the driving school and practical statistics as driving a car. You can hardly drive a car in an urban environment unless you've gone to driving school and know how the system around you works.
Sure, the end result is where everybody wants to get, but there are (sadly) no shortcuts.
That's rather creepy. In most civilized countries employers can not spy on employees because privacy is both a basic and constitutional right, protected "even" at work. Listening, for example. calls in most situations would be outright criminal, let alone reading emails sent by the employee without explicit written consent.
I sort of understand their point in this matter, at least partially. When money comes into play regarding whitelisting, that's where I'm having a hard time accepting ad blocking companies' actions. It's like being forced to claim a Yelp business profile so you can respond to critical comments.
What I don't have any objections against are non-profit adblocking software that let the user fully control what they see or don't see while respecting their privacy. No hidden URL tracking policies, data collection, ad whitelisting schemes or any similar nonsense. There are already a metric shitton of means to get around ad blocking software and improving user privacy at the same time.
Remind yourself of that when your unfaithful spouse contracts you with HIV. Or when your kid gets it from a needle when he's going through his rebel years.
If you don't want to live in a civilized society that takes care of everyone, maybe you should try moving over to Somalia. I heard they don't pay much taxes there and it's every man for himself.
Could be, but that's not to say there's not an immense effort to find a cure. That's going to be one for the history books, a Nobel prize or two and whatnot.
Slashdot Mirror
Ironically, it's foot-pound for energy and pound-foot for torque. :-)
My personal favorites:
It's nice to see you are actively scanning general discussions for areas in need of improvement, that's a big bonus.
I wonder what happens if you don't accept the end-user license agreement. Surely it must ask for acceptance before it does anything.
Ah, now that I see that there's an ncurses client, how could I ever resist trying it. :-)
At first glance that looks a lot like the old privacy-oriented chat/file-sharing client WASTE. It was a really interesting piece of software, but rather difficult to set up and use. I wonder if qTox has avoided similar shortcomings.
Using the Service to communicate by chat, our servers store the content of your chat conversation and log other information such as the time and date of your conversations, and the other user or users with whom you are communicating.
Kind of awkward if that means what I think it means.
Enough for a BINGO.
My sincere advice to everyone: stay as far away from HPE as you possibly can. They mean trouble.
It should have been caught in testing, but of course someone wanted to save money and then it's testing that gets shaved first.
Too often this is true. Not only do you, as a tester, have to fight for a case of testing with suppliers, you often have to fight off internal forces too. Suppliers hate you for demonizing their product and QA and your bosses hate you for subsequent late deliveries. Everybody hates testers.
One thing I've found to be a somewhat working solution is to present cost saving estimates directly related to successes in software testing to our management. They speak money and that's what you should speak to them too. Turn that software testing into a few nice pie charts, histograms and refined statistics.
A couple of years ago I heard of a late-70's VAX still being used at a small power plant. To my knowledge it controlled some sort of HVAC systems. Another old system, one I've actually seen, was a mid-80's computer of unknown make/model used to control traffic lights in a small city. It's funny, or actually impressive, to see such old systems still in use. The old-school guys that keep them running tell nice stories about flea market and eBay scavenging.
I believe somebody just rebooted the server.
I completely fail to see any point in what you just wrote. Maybe you failed to see the point in what I wrote as well.
I for one vote we go back to Kent economy.
His contributions to encryption and privacy can not be underestimated, but it seems everyone has their faux pas moments. The implications with this approach are a bit similar to those of torture; it may be used "just this once", but then again, you can only sell once the core values of a democratic society.
Outlaw encryption entirely.
Although that is obviously an exaggerated statement of the ridiculousness of the current situation we're in, I'm afraid it might turn into reality soon. There will be audacious attempts at banning encryption, and they will be laughed out. Soon after this they'll "compromise" with government-mandated backdoors in most-used consumer products. Then we'll, of course, be wondering how the hell did we end up there.
We live dangerous times, people. Keep a tight grip of your privacy and take a moral stance against government control.
Privilege escalation, unauthenticated remote commands to system daemons running with admin privileges... this is everyday life with the biggest IT shops out there.
What's even worse? They don't care! Countless times have I sent these big companies detailed bug/security reports only to find the exact same fucking "feature" in their systems a year later. The only way to make a difference is to stop giving them money, if even for a while. Then they usually come back to you and *might* listen.
I think this is an excellent view. We should collectively try to rise above petty politics and have an objective look at what she did. She needs to go through the due process just like everyone else, no exceptions.
One could of course argue that there are other immoral or illegal actions closely tied to certain politicians (torture to death for example), but the glass shield needs to be broken somewhere. Once you punch through, the whole illusion of privilege tied to high positions in the political system will come down.
Imagine algebra being the driving school and practical statistics as driving a car. You can hardly drive a car in an urban environment unless you've gone to driving school and know how the system around you works.
Sure, the end result is where everybody wants to get, but there are (sadly) no shortcuts.
That's rather creepy. In most civilized countries employers can not spy on employees because privacy is both a basic and constitutional right, protected "even" at work. Listening, for example. calls in most situations would be outright criminal, let alone reading emails sent by the employee without explicit written consent.
I sort of understand their point in this matter, at least partially. When money comes into play regarding whitelisting, that's where I'm having a hard time accepting ad blocking companies' actions. It's like being forced to claim a Yelp business profile so you can respond to critical comments.
What I don't have any objections against are non-profit adblocking software that let the user fully control what they see or don't see while respecting their privacy. No hidden URL tracking policies, data collection, ad whitelisting schemes or any similar nonsense. There are already a metric shitton of means to get around ad blocking software and improving user privacy at the same time.
And this is based on what? My personal experience is quite the contrary.
You can't really fire most of the IT directors out there, now can you?
Skid reborn as a reference to script kiddie?
Remind yourself of that when your unfaithful spouse contracts you with HIV. Or when your kid gets it from a needle when he's going through his rebel years.
If you don't want to live in a civilized society that takes care of everyone, maybe you should try moving over to Somalia. I heard they don't pay much taxes there and it's every man for himself.
Could be, but that's not to say there's not an immense effort to find a cure. That's going to be one for the history books, a Nobel prize or two and whatnot.