(my favorite variation is where the database has a decryption stored procedure)
So? What matters is how you protect the key. I don't think you really understand the reasoning behind doing that which is protecting data at rest.
You're also just throwing random things out there without knowing what the PSN transaction processing backend really looks like. At this point, you do not know if any cardholder information was compromised outside of name & address. You don't even know if the address or name are from the PSN profile or CC account. You don't know if they violated any PCI guidelines which BTW, require isolation of this data, but not in the crazy manner that you prescribe. I like rumors as much as the next person, but get real.
By the way, I just happened to use the same login and password on the PSN as I did for my GMail account. Gmail informed me the other day that someone had accessed the account from an IP in China. That when I started changing EVERYTHING and started watching my accounts like a hawk..
ZOMG, maybe you got it backwards and it was the Chinese who hacked into Google. Nah, that's impossible.
I'm not trying to connect these two unrelated things, but hey.. you are, so fuck it, right?
They previously announced that no credit card numbers were compromised. Can we get some outside verification on this because they obviously have no issue with lying to us.
Where does this "news" say a credit card number was compromised? It's just a rehashing of what we already know with stupid wording.
Or maybe you can tell me what this "credit card protection service" is? There is no such thing. It's "credit protection", because of the names, addresses, birth dates, etc that are known to be compromised.
Sony, I thought you said no CC numbers were exposed! How will we ever trust you again when you lie like this? A month of PSN Plus you say?
There is no news in the article, just a rehashing of what we've been already told, "out of an abundance of caution...", "... may have...", etc.
There is no such thing as "credit card protection service", the dumb author meant "credit protection", which is offered due to the information we DO already know was compromised.
I'm not optimistic enough to not ask for new cards to be issued, that is the smart thing to do anyways. But, there's no excuse for you running your mouth like a fucking retard.
Do you even know what Ubuntu is? Have you ever used it?
Linux, and by extension Ubuntu, don't care about the UX.
What? Ubuntu has always been about streamlining user experience as compared to other distributions. With varying degrees of success, sure, but that's always been their mission statement.
The only success Linux has had is with integrated applications where the UX is designed completely from scratch by a third party private company.
You mean like exactly what Ubuntu is doing with Unity? I almost hope you're a troll. "UX"..., sigh.
The GP is right and wrong. Some Linux distributors "care" about the user experience, like well... Canonical anyway. He is right, they are not successful, outside things like Android. Even there, we could have a good debate on wether the user experience sucks or not.
That's just my opinion, I'd gladly listen if you think you can explain how Linux with "stock" Gnome or KDE UI is successful, anywhere.
I put a half a case of.223 through my AR-15 on a hot day in July over the span of about two hours. I'm not sure I noticed much in changed accuracy, although I was only shooting clay targets set on edge at a 100 yards. I was still easily hitting the center of the targets.
I personally don't think that the barrel heating issue matters much for slow fire; perhaps at extreme distances (700+ yards), but I would also assume that bull barrels would compensate easily.
Um, have you ever sighted in a rifle?
Anyways, we're talking about the realm of 1000 yard firing ranges here, and in practice shooting at distances of - google it
Am I alone in feeling disturbed at the trend to separate the combatants by ever increasing distances? It is separating the human cause and effect so that the soldiers are increasingly disconnected from their actions. What motivation is there to peacefully settle the argument when you can just continue to blast the opposition?
We should fight closer so there is opportunity to "settle the argument" rather than fight? You make it sound like war is a one way affair, like we aren't being blown up and shot at, but carelessly throw stones at others.
Was war less brutal in the dark ages or something, cause I'm not following you. Short distances did not make the world a more friendly place, nor did it prevent any war.
I suppose that the rot really started when kings stopped leading their troops into battle
So.. when leaders participated in battle, and got blood on their hands... these were better times and they what, were better decision makers?
Here's a tip bub, when your king or general is personally slaughtering folks, there is no hope for peace.
You know, this actually is somewhat promising news. It means that, if the Tories gauged it right, this is enough of an issue for the voting public to keep it from becoming law. Either they're worried about voters getting pissed off at new copyright restrictions, or they realize that bowing to international pressure from the US makes them look weak, which their rivals won't hesitate to exploit.
They will just wait until after elections to vote on things like these. TFS even says "delay". They WILL vote on this! Anyone who even peripherally follows politics knows how divisive issues wax and wane during election cycles to attract moderates. In this case, younger voters. Sorry to burst your bubble, but they are after swing voters, it's not that your opinion is particularly popular.
For the love of God folks, read real fucking news!
The thing that makes me laugh about this submission is heeding the EFF's advice and sharing your ISP connection - most likely against your TOS, then coming here to ask how to control and restrict it in ways that would make the EFF kersplode if the ISP were to do it. I suppose in the same spirit it would be OK if I hacked someone's router and shared the _whole_ connection with everyone else right? I'd like to see the argument against that.
I can see doing it out of personal convenience, knowing the risks I guess. But knowing the risks, why is it the EFF's business to recommend this???
It all sounds a bit like "I want to live life the way Jesus intended, but umm.. I don't really like poor people - those leeches, and is there a way to do this while like, keeping all my stuff?"
Please explain how the following claim would have any utility at all if it is supposed to be just a cache:
10. The method of claim 9, further comprising: querying the database for at least a portion of the location history data; retrieving network information from the database that is responsive to the query; translating the network information into position coordinates; displaying a map view; and displaying markers on the map view as a timeline according to the position coordinates, the markers indicating the location history of the location aware device for the time span..
Does cache mean the same thing to you as it does for example, a dictionary? It says "for the time span..." right there in your quote, did you read it? Time span == Cache duration. Since when does a cache need to have expiration times to be a cache anyway??1!
One theory about the cause behind the network's downtime was recently espoused on Reddit by 'chesh,' a moderator at PlayStation-modding enthusiast site PSX-Scene.com. According to him,... [snip] He acknowledges that this theory is speculation.
Slashdot should to change its moniker to "Jerry Springer for Nerds". All that's missing is a video feed of some grimy sweat pants wearing nerds furiously typing away virtual beatdowns over who got who's virtual girlfriend knocked up.
CLI lovers may be welcome, but do they actually use it? Everybody I know who said that OS X was great because of the CLI has since switched to Linux.
Someone who thinks OS X is great "because of the CLI" is lost in the sauce. However, it does have a great CLI toolbox, and a terminal emulator which makes it almost worth switching to OS X by itself.
AFAIK, you still cannot search gnome-terminal's terminal history?? I have noticed they added a unlimited terminal history size option at least, and with a decent window manager it can do transparency. You have to understand that Terminal.app has done this stuff in a standard way, for a pretty long time now.
OS X also has a bunch of other neat features for the average pro unix admin (I'm assuming this is my audience, else why would OS X vs. Linux be brought up) Like.. I can use my company's.pac file and expect more than just firefox to be able to parse it./me glares at *nix
I think OS X is the best workstation/frontend for UNIX administration you can get.
So long as you pass on to your customers the benefits that you gained by adopting GPL'd software, no problem. They can use it. If you want to pass on a version with additional restrictions on what they can do with the software, then no, you can't do that. And that's the entire point of the GPL. Is it so hard to understand?
Let me get this straight, I take your free crap and make it better and want to sell THAT. My customer is free to go get YOUR unchanged crap at their leisure. I have an incentive to make mine better. You want me to be forced to give away my improved version of your work, which gives me no incentive to improve on it in the first place (for people other than myself).
To be clear, in both models everyone is looking out for themselves. The difference is in one, we trade money for features other people want. In the other, we trade features WE as developers want.
the bloggers seem to have been doing a vastly better job of reporting on this than almost any major paper or news corp.
It's actually stunning how poor the reporting has been from the major news networks .
The somthingawful GBS topic on it outlined the situation clearly and explained it far far better than any news article, after reading it I was left agape thinking "why the fuck can't reuters explain the situation that well when some kneckbeard with time on his hands can"
Umm.. the blog that started this discussion is outright fear mongering, and here's a quote from the nytimes that I think is informative and representative.
Japanâ(TM)s limits on iodine 131 are far lower than those of the International Atomic Energy Agency, measured in a unit called a becquerel. Japan says older children and adults should get no more than 300 becquerels per liter while the I.A.E.A. recommends a limit of 3,000 becquerels. Greg Webb, an I.A.E.A. spokesman in Vienna, said he could not immediately provide his agencyâ(TM)s recommendation for infants. The level that raised the alarm for infants on Wednesday was 120 becquerels; that had fallen to 79 on Thursday, according to the Tokyo city authorities.
I think that like radiation levels in Japan, quality of journalism is being discussed with complete disregard to scale. Bloggers... blech.
Your browser already trusts a certificate authority run by the Chinese government, along with one that delegated authority to them.
Your browser also trusts certificate authorities in Africa, *stan countries, and the non-EU portion of Eastern Europe. How many of these could be bribed or coerced if you knew the right people or worked for a random 3rd-world government?
Really, the lock/key icon and colored URL box are totally misleading. You have almost no security. Given the rotten certificate authority situation, failing to accept self-signed and expired certificates is actually a loss for security. You might as well get encryption against a passive attacker. Pretending to be secure against active attackers is just providing a false sense of security.
Please, for the love of God someone with a clue about PKI, trust, and risk mod this down.
His idea of "passive attacker" is one who _accidentally_ snoops your traffic and is incapable of loitering for more than a few minutes to catch the start of a new session.
What, they don't support revocation lists already? This should be a non-issue, once someone realized it happened.
Yah, you get a new one in your browser patch. Those are manually distributed lists. You might be thinking OCSP. I think most browsers now do OCSP by default and have for a few years, and Comodo does support it so most people might already be set. This doesn't help all the weaker SSL clients out there, like what, almost every non-browser application using SSL.
Well thank you, Taco, for calling everybody who doesn't approve of homosexuality a bigot. Have you, or any of the other homosexuality-supporters, ever considered that there are more than two sides to this? You don't have to fully 100% approve or disaprove of homosexuality, and as a Catholic I take offense when being labled as one of them.
The Catholic Church knows that there's a difference between homosexual attraction and homosexual acts, something that many people on "both" sides often forget.
My hat's off to the Catholic Church for trying so hard to keep reason and logic in the discussion despite being in a position of centralized power and authority. Seriously, kudos to all the popes I've listened to in my lifetime anyway. That job can't be getting any easier over the years for sure.
Now, the way I see it is you're trying to find technical reasons to justify a position that your two thousand year old book takes. Because... your two thousand year old book says so. You might try to disguise all the religious dogma behind your motives, and push that on to other churches (wow, nice one), but I know it's there. I know the Pope is sincere, but the reasoning is not.
Animals do lots of things that aren't socially acceptable
So here we are. Where did we establish homosexual acts are a social problem? Or blow jobs, or hand jobs, or other non-lifegiving sex acts?
It is a problem, to you, because your book and church says so, and you look for other means to justify it. I respect that you do try, but unless the Book is rewritten or the Pope makes a stunning reversal, this isn't a real debate we're having is it? See, I think you fit the very definition of bigoted. You are prejudiced and stubborn because an ancient book and old man tell you what to think.
The mere existence of all of these doesn't change the fact that I'm allowed to have an opinion about sticking reproductive organs into germ-infested digestive tracts for little reason besides pleasure.
Anyone can have an opinion, that doesn't make one more or less bigoted.
Bigot is a harsh sounding word man, and I'm sorry for insensitively throwing it around while trying to make my point. If I knew a better word, I'd use it. Obstinately prejudiced bible believer? Is that... better?
I can totally get why the word "Cure" would be offensive - that would insinuate that being gay is a disease. Rename the app to something more PC, but I don't think pulling the app is correct.
Thing is, Stallman is saying that just including a header file. eg. #include "stdio.h" does not make the program a derivative of stdio.h.
It doesn't however mean you can get stdio.h, remove all the comments and copyrights then pass that off as your own file, which is what Google have allegedly done.
I'm lost at including a header not creating a derivative work, but the act of linking to the library created with that header is (unless it is LGPL)? How is this?
60-year-old John Jacques has appealed his conviction for engaging in sexually graphic online conversations with a police officer posing as a 13-year-old girl
Explicit conversations with people under 18 are illegal? And can get you on the sex offender list?
Am I the only one who sees that as rather ridiculous?
What I don't get is if two consenting adults have the same conversation with one telling the other (he/she) is under 18, and it is not a sting like this, is that a crime for either one or the other or both?
What if two adults tell each other they are both under 13 and have said conversation? What if they roleplay, same conversation, knowing the correct ages? Same conversation with a child CLAIMING (he/she) is an older age?
I don't get why "I knew you were not under 18 because you did XYZ in the chatroom" is not a defensible position? Does anybody else see a trend in how evidence is collected for morality crimes? Or maybe what I really mean are crimes involving legal status of one or more parties. Like adultery, immigration, terrrrerist, etc.
If I walk into a bank and say hi, I am a terrorist from blah blah blah, can I open a bank account? Can they open it as long as I don't show up on lexis nexis or whatever? I mean, I'm just playing around, I know such an incident would end badly with lots of wasted public resources, but.. still.. stuff involving one person being aware, or thinking they are aware(?) of someone else's legal status always confuses me.
Sure, ignorance of the law is not an excuse, but legal status..? In the absence of quick background check service accessibility prior to initiating brief social or business transactions, who is really in a position to prove anybody knew anything... on the Internet no less?
um, NFC IS an approved standard, and with Google behind it it pretty much IS an industry standard. With both Google and Apple behind it, then it would DEFINITELY be an industry standard.
Wow, did you even read that page you linked? It sounds like the over the air protocol is standardized and not much else.. like IDK, the payment system? Not to mention the security issues listed that are unaddressed by any current standards.
You do know the world is bigger than Google and Apple, right? Right?
Netflix streaming is a good example of good pricing vs content offered. TV shows and movies sold on the iTunes Store is a good example of bad pricing. TV Shows in HD should cost 99 cents to own, 50 cents to stream and SD shows should cost 50 cents to own and 25 cents to stream. Movies should be priced at least half if not a quarter of the price for the DVD or BluRay version.
Yah, and the corner Quickie-Mart should not be charging $4 USD for a gallon of milk either. Do you understand the concept of paying for convenience? Oh that's right, this is the Internet, of course not, piracy is convenient and free, so somehow that lets you demand lower prices under the threat of more piracy. WHAT? If you really think about it, content producers are right in making new media as inconvenient as fuck.
Lowering prices in response to the threat of people stealing your stuff is not right, and shouldn't be condoned by any government. There is no excuse for pirating something when you can simply not purchase it AND not steal it at the same time. Amazing.
Slashdot Mirror
(my favorite variation is where the database has a decryption stored procedure)
So? What matters is how you protect the key. I don't think you really understand the reasoning behind doing that which is protecting data at rest.
You're also just throwing random things out there without knowing what the PSN transaction processing backend really looks like. At this point, you do not know if any cardholder information was compromised outside of name & address. You don't even know if the address or name are from the PSN profile or CC account. You don't know if they violated any PCI guidelines which BTW, require isolation of this data, but not in the crazy manner that you prescribe. I like rumors as much as the next person, but get real.
By the way, I just happened to use the same login and password on the PSN as I did for my GMail account. Gmail informed me the other day that someone had accessed the account from an IP in China. That when I started changing EVERYTHING and started watching my accounts like a hawk..
ZOMG, maybe you got it backwards and it was the Chinese who hacked into Google. Nah, that's impossible.
I'm not trying to connect these two unrelated things, but hey.. you are, so fuck it, right?
They previously announced that no credit card numbers were compromised. Can we get some outside verification on this because they obviously have no issue with lying to us.
Where does this "news" say a credit card number was compromised? It's just a rehashing of what we already know with stupid wording.
Or maybe you can tell me what this "credit card protection service" is? There is no such thing. It's "credit protection", because of the names, addresses, birth dates, etc that are known to be compromised.
Moron.
Sony, I thought you said no CC numbers were exposed! How will we ever trust you again when you lie like this? A month of PSN Plus you say?
There is no news in the article, just a rehashing of what we've been already told, "out of an abundance of caution...", "... may have ...", etc.
There is no such thing as "credit card protection service", the dumb author meant "credit protection", which is offered due to the information we DO already know was compromised.
I'm not optimistic enough to not ask for new cards to be issued, that is the smart thing to do anyways.
But, there's no excuse for you running your mouth like a fucking retard.
Do you even know what Ubuntu is? Have you ever used it?
Linux, and by extension Ubuntu, don't care about the UX.
What? Ubuntu has always been about streamlining user experience as compared to other distributions. With varying degrees of success, sure, but that's always been their mission statement.
The only success Linux has had is with integrated applications where the UX is designed completely from scratch by a third party private company.
You mean like exactly what Ubuntu is doing with Unity? I almost hope you're a troll. "UX"..., sigh.
The GP is right and wrong. Some Linux distributors "care" about the user experience, like well... Canonical anyway.
He is right, they are not successful, outside things like Android. Even there, we could have a good debate on wether the user experience sucks or not.
That's just my opinion, I'd gladly listen if you think you can explain how Linux with "stock" Gnome or KDE UI is successful, anywhere.
I put a half a case of .223 through my AR-15 on a hot day in July over the span of about two hours. I'm not sure I noticed much in changed accuracy, although I was only shooting clay targets set on edge at a 100 yards. I was still easily hitting the center of the targets.
I personally don't think that the barrel heating issue matters much for slow fire; perhaps at extreme distances (700+ yards), but I would also assume that bull barrels would compensate easily.
Um, have you ever sighted in a rifle?
Anyways, we're talking about the realm of 1000 yard firing ranges here, and in practice shooting at distances of - google it
Am I alone in feeling disturbed at the trend to separate the combatants by ever increasing distances? It is separating the human cause and effect so that the soldiers are increasingly disconnected from their actions. What motivation is there to peacefully settle the argument when you can just continue to blast the opposition?
We should fight closer so there is opportunity to "settle the argument" rather than fight?
You make it sound like war is a one way affair, like we aren't being blown up and shot at, but carelessly throw stones at others.
Was war less brutal in the dark ages or something, cause I'm not following you. Short distances did not make the world a more friendly place, nor did it prevent any war.
I suppose that the rot really started when kings stopped leading their troops into battle
So.. when leaders participated in battle, and got blood on their hands... these were better times and they what, were better decision makers?
Here's a tip bub, when your king or general is personally slaughtering folks, there is no hope for peace.
What
The
Fuck
Are
You
Smoking
You know, this actually is somewhat promising news. It means that, if the Tories gauged it right, this is enough of an issue for the voting public to keep it from becoming law. Either they're worried about voters getting pissed off at new copyright restrictions, or they realize that bowing to international pressure from the US makes them look weak, which their rivals won't hesitate to exploit.
They will just wait until after elections to vote on things like these. TFS even says "delay". They WILL vote on this! Anyone who even peripherally follows politics knows how divisive issues wax and wane during election cycles to attract moderates. In this case, younger voters. Sorry to burst your bubble, but they are after swing voters, it's not that your opinion is particularly popular.
For the love of God folks, read real fucking news!
"were worried about the electoral implications"
THAT gives you new faith in government?
The thing that makes me laugh about this submission is heeding the EFF's advice and sharing your ISP connection - most likely against your TOS, then coming here to ask how to control and restrict it in ways that would make the EFF kersplode if the ISP were to do it. I suppose in the same spirit it would be OK if I hacked someone's router and shared the _whole_ connection with everyone else right? I'd like to see the argument against that.
I can see doing it out of personal convenience, knowing the risks I guess. But knowing the risks, why is it the EFF's business to recommend this???
It all sounds a bit like "I want to live life the way Jesus intended, but umm.. I don't really like poor people - those leeches, and is there a way to do this while like, keeping all my stuff?"
Code written to allow per-workspace wallpaper in GNOME as part of a Summer of Code 2008 project:
http://gsocblog.jsharpe.net/
Result?
Ignored by GNOME.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=543596
Thanks, GNOME.
Thanks, SÃren Sandmann.
Never mind GNOME, why would Google be paying for that??
Please explain how the following claim would have any utility at all if it is supposed to be just a cache:
10. The method of claim 9, further comprising: querying the database for at least a portion of the location history data; retrieving network information from the database that is responsive to the query; translating the network information into position coordinates; displaying a map view; and displaying markers on the map view as a timeline according to the position coordinates, the markers indicating the location history of the location aware device for the time span. .
Does cache mean the same thing to you as it does for example, a dictionary? It says "for the time span..." right there in your quote, did you read it? Time span == Cache duration. Since when does a cache need to have expiration times to be a cache anyway??1!
One theory about the cause behind the network's downtime was recently espoused on Reddit by 'chesh,' a moderator at PlayStation-modding enthusiast site PSX-Scene.com. According to him, ... [snip]
He acknowledges that this theory is speculation.
Slashdot should to change its moniker to "Jerry Springer for Nerds". All that's missing is a video feed of some grimy sweat pants wearing nerds furiously typing away virtual beatdowns over who got who's virtual girlfriend knocked up.
This whole "new media" thing is unconvincing.
CLI lovers may be welcome, but do they actually use it? Everybody I know who said that OS X was great because of the CLI has since switched to Linux.
Someone who thinks OS X is great "because of the CLI" is lost in the sauce.
However, it does have a great CLI toolbox, and a terminal emulator which makes it almost worth switching to OS X by itself.
AFAIK, you still cannot search gnome-terminal's terminal history?? I have noticed they added a unlimited terminal history size option at least, and with a decent window manager it can do transparency. You have to understand that Terminal.app has done this stuff in a standard way, for a pretty long time now.
OS X also has a bunch of other neat features for the average pro unix admin (I'm assuming this is my audience, else why would OS X vs. Linux be brought up) .pac file and expect more than just firefox to be able to parse it. /me glares at *nix
Like.. I can use my company's
I think OS X is the best workstation/frontend for UNIX administration you can get.
So long as you pass on to your customers the benefits that you gained by adopting GPL'd software, no problem. They can use it. If you want to pass on a version with additional restrictions on what they can do with the software, then no, you can't do that. And that's the entire point of the GPL. Is it so hard to understand?
Let me get this straight, I take your free crap and make it better and want to sell THAT. My customer is free to go get YOUR unchanged crap at their leisure. I have an incentive to make mine better. You want me to be forced to give away my improved version of your work, which gives me no incentive to improve on it in the first place (for people other than myself).
To be clear, in both models everyone is looking out for themselves. The difference is in one, we trade money for features other people want. In the other, we trade features WE as developers want.
Which do you think serves the public best?
the bloggers seem to have been doing a vastly better job of reporting on this than almost any major paper or news corp.
It's actually stunning how poor the reporting has been from the major news networks .
The somthingawful GBS topic on it outlined the situation clearly and explained it far far better than any news article, after reading it I was left agape thinking "why the fuck can't reuters explain the situation that well when some kneckbeard with time on his hands can"
Umm.. the blog that started this discussion is outright fear mongering, and here's a quote from the nytimes that I think is informative and representative.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/25/world/asia/25japan.html?_r=1&hp
Japanâ(TM)s limits on iodine 131 are far lower than those of the International Atomic Energy Agency, measured in a unit called a becquerel. Japan says older children and adults should get no more than 300 becquerels per liter while the I.A.E.A. recommends a limit of 3,000 becquerels. Greg Webb, an I.A.E.A. spokesman in Vienna, said he could not immediately provide his agencyâ(TM)s recommendation for infants. The level that raised the alarm for infants on Wednesday was 120 becquerels; that had fallen to 79 on Thursday, according to the Tokyo city authorities.
I think that like radiation levels in Japan, quality of journalism is being discussed with complete disregard to scale.
Bloggers... blech.
Your browser already trusts a certificate authority run by the Chinese government, along with one that delegated authority to them.
Your browser also trusts certificate authorities in Africa, *stan countries, and the non-EU portion of Eastern Europe. How many of these could be bribed or coerced if you knew the right people or worked for a random 3rd-world government?
Really, the lock/key icon and colored URL box are totally misleading. You have almost no security. Given the rotten certificate authority situation, failing to accept self-signed and expired certificates is actually a loss for security. You might as well get encryption against a passive attacker. Pretending to be secure against active attackers is just providing a false sense of security.
Please, for the love of God someone with a clue about PKI, trust, and risk mod this down.
His idea of "passive attacker" is one who _accidentally_ snoops your traffic and is incapable of loitering for more than a few minutes to catch the start of a new session.
What, they don't support revocation lists already? This should be a non-issue, once someone realized it happened.
Yah, you get a new one in your browser patch. Those are manually distributed lists. You might be thinking OCSP. I think most browsers now do OCSP by default and have for a few years, and Comodo does support it so most people might already be set. This doesn't help all the weaker SSL clients out there, like what, almost every non-browser application using SSL.
Well thank you, Taco, for calling everybody who doesn't approve of homosexuality a bigot. Have you, or any of the other homosexuality-supporters, ever considered that there are more than two sides to this? You don't have to fully 100% approve or disaprove of homosexuality, and as a Catholic I take offense when being labled as one of them.
The Catholic Church knows that there's a difference between homosexual attraction and homosexual acts, something that many people on "both" sides often forget.
My hat's off to the Catholic Church for trying so hard to keep reason and logic in the discussion despite being in a position of centralized power and authority. Seriously, kudos to all the popes I've listened to in my lifetime anyway. That job can't be getting any easier over the years for sure.
Now, the way I see it is you're trying to find technical reasons to justify a position that your two thousand year old book takes.
Because... your two thousand year old book says so. You might try to disguise all the religious dogma behind your motives, and push that on to other churches (wow, nice one), but I know it's there. I know the Pope is sincere, but the reasoning is not.
Animals do lots of things that aren't socially acceptable
So here we are. Where did we establish homosexual acts are a social problem? Or blow jobs, or hand jobs, or other non-lifegiving sex acts?
It is a problem, to you, because your book and church says so, and you look for other means to justify it. I respect that you do try, but unless the Book is rewritten or the Pope makes a stunning reversal, this isn't a real debate we're having is it? See, I think you fit the very definition of bigoted. You are prejudiced and stubborn because an ancient book and old man tell you what to think.
The mere existence of all of these doesn't change the fact that I'm allowed to have an opinion about sticking reproductive organs into germ-infested digestive tracts for little reason besides pleasure.
Anyone can have an opinion, that doesn't make one more or less bigoted.
Bigot is a harsh sounding word man, and I'm sorry for insensitively throwing it around while trying to make my point.
If I knew a better word, I'd use it. Obstinately prejudiced bible believer? Is that... better?
I can totally get why the word "Cure" would be offensive - that would insinuate that being gay is a disease. Rename the app to something more PC, but I don't think pulling the app is correct.
Then resubmit with a less insulting name?
You just justified Apple's decision.
Thing is, Stallman is saying that just including a header file. eg. #include "stdio.h" does not make the program a derivative of stdio.h.
It doesn't however mean you can get stdio.h, remove all the comments and copyrights then pass that off as your own file, which is what Google have allegedly done.
I'm lost at including a header not creating a derivative work, but the act of linking to the library created with that header is (unless it is LGPL)? How is this?
60-year-old John Jacques has appealed his conviction for engaging in sexually graphic online conversations with a police officer posing as a 13-year-old girl
Explicit conversations with people under 18 are illegal? And can get you on the sex offender list?
Am I the only one who sees that as rather ridiculous?
What I don't get is if two consenting adults have the same conversation with one telling the other (he/she) is under 18, and it is not a sting like this, is that a crime for either one or the other or both?
What if two adults tell each other they are both under 13 and have said conversation?
What if they roleplay, same conversation, knowing the correct ages?
Same conversation with a child CLAIMING (he/she) is an older age?
I don't get why "I knew you were not under 18 because you did XYZ in the chatroom" is not a defensible position?
Does anybody else see a trend in how evidence is collected for morality crimes? Or maybe what I really mean are crimes involving legal status of one or more parties. Like adultery, immigration, terrrrerist, etc.
If I walk into a bank and say hi, I am a terrorist from blah blah blah, can I open a bank account? Can they open it as long as I don't show up on lexis nexis or whatever? I mean, I'm just playing around, I know such an incident would end badly with lots of wasted public resources, but.. still.. stuff involving one person being aware, or thinking they are aware(?) of someone else's legal status always confuses me.
Sure, ignorance of the law is not an excuse, but legal status..? In the absence of quick background check service accessibility prior to initiating brief social or business transactions, who is really in a position to prove anybody knew anything... on the Internet no less?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near_field_communication#Standards [wikipedia.org]
Just because Apple say there isn't a standard doesn't mean you have to blindly believe them.
Then explain to us the "standard" process for something simple like.. securely purchasing a bottle of coke with a NFC device.
Innnnnn.. Canada.
No, Mexico.
1. Bits are sent over the air from one NFC device to a receiver located at ???.
2. ???
3. Drink bottle of coke.
um, NFC IS an approved standard, and with Google behind it it pretty much IS an industry standard. With both Google and Apple behind it, then it would DEFINITELY be an industry standard.
Its got ISO approval and everything.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near_field_communication#Standards
Wow, did you even read that page you linked? It sounds like the over the air protocol is standardized and not much else.. like IDK, the payment system? Not to mention the security issues listed that are unaddressed by any current standards.
You do know the world is bigger than Google and Apple, right? Right?
Netflix streaming is a good example of good pricing vs content offered. TV shows and movies sold on the iTunes Store is a good example of bad pricing. TV Shows in HD should cost 99 cents to own, 50 cents to stream and SD shows should cost 50 cents to own and 25 cents to stream. Movies should be priced at least half if not a quarter of the price for the DVD or BluRay version.
Yah, and the corner Quickie-Mart should not be charging $4 USD for a gallon of milk either.
Do you understand the concept of paying for convenience? Oh that's right, this is the Internet, of course not, piracy is convenient and free, so somehow that lets you demand lower prices under the threat of more piracy. WHAT? If you really think about it, content producers are right in making new media as inconvenient as fuck.
Lowering prices in response to the threat of people stealing your stuff is not right, and shouldn't be condoned by any government. There is no excuse for pirating something when you can simply not purchase it AND not steal it at the same time. Amazing.