Banning a letter from the Internet is harder than Chinese Algebra. And, since the letter 'n' was just banned along with a few numbers, that is getting quite difficult indeed...
I love how you compared Google firing a guy for being a tool with a autocrat weeding out and enslaving his political opponents.
The right will scream that this guy is being persecuted for expressing his point of view, but where are the business friendly conservatives who will champion a company's right to fire people that they don't like? I thought conservatives liked to have less government regulation and interference, and now the seem to be howling for it...
I do think that people who use illegal and/or non-prescribed drugs are personally and mentally weak. If you can't deal with your life without using drugs, there is something wrong with you and your life and you should change yourself and/or your life.
Spoken with the compassion that the right wing became famous for. 'My life is good, and fuck anyone who wasn't lucky enough to be born with my genes/family/environment'.
Look asshole, nobody is asking you to devote your life to the orphans of Calcutta, but why don't you try to show some decency to people who aren't as fortunate as you? Do you really think that people actively choose to be come habitual drug users? Really?
Having worked inside some big pre-ipo companies, I think that the leadership isn't too excited about having to answer to shareholders who might be whimsical, panicky, transitory, etc. corporate execs serve at the whim of the board of directors who are essentially the shareholders.Having a privately held company allows you to do whatever you want without having to answer for it. Want to lose money for a few years to grow the business? Not really a problem.
Also being publicly traded causes your stock price to fluctuate based on the irrational whims of the economy. Why deal with that if you don't need the cash infusion? The push to go to an IPO is only to get the VC's a quick payout. If the business is really a good one and it is growing, why not let your capital investment grow longer? Just so impatient VC's want to move on to the next company?
...but that doesn't detract from the monumental shit show the FBI orchestrated and how badly the FISA courts can be abused. This dossier doesn't answer every question but it sure does answer quite a few and highlights various abuses of FISA and the FBI.
Cool, lets investigate them, too.
The GOP seems to think that 'But, Hillary...' somehow constitutes a defense or excuse of illegal and immoral behavior. I hear this whenever someone comments on unethical GOP behavior within earshot of a right wing supporter. Perhaps there was some sort of internal collusion in the FBI to 'get' Trump. It doesn't matter. Light has been shined on his questionable actions and justice will be severed. I have no problem with investigations into Donald, Hillary, and every other fucking clown in DC, regardless of political affiliation. If this memo raises questions, add them to the list of people who are being scrutinized. We will get to them all in good time. 'Illegal' isn't a term that allows for relative morality.
I want every one of our representatives to be held to the highest standards of ethical behavior. If there are people who have engaged in contact with Russian agents in an illegal fashion, I want them (literally) lynched as an object lesion to others who might be weighing the risk / reward of selling out the country for their own gain. Putin is far to dangerous to treat with kid gloves or to be fucking around with petty partisan political games.
This is why the utopia of a democratized internet of citizen reporters and transparency is a false hope. As much as you'd like to believe in such a future, we need *authorities* and institutions to do the work (yes, hard work) to determine what is truth and have some objective standards.
The problem is that there is no penalty for producing information that is outright fabrication, no punishment for acting against the interests of the greater good of an information based society. You can lie and fabricate for your own selfish ends as much as you like, and people don't realize that.
In a way, the Internet is like an early capitalist economy, where any actor can engage in predatory monopolistic behavior without any fear or repercussions. In a truly free market, you should act as destructively as possible towards ecenomic rivals before they catch on and do the same to you. In an open Internet, why not just produce lies and propaganda to support your POV or political ends? If you don't do it, your rivals will.
An open and free Internet is an achievable goal. It just requires a few rules that can be enforced fairly for all parties involved. Eventually there will be some sort of Internet laws created that are agreed on by a number of countries, and all the rest of the world will be forced to play by them or kicked off the Internet. It will be something like:
1) No attacking underlying infrastructure
2) No censoring other parties
3) No spreading false or misleading information.
It won't likely be soon though, so expect more bullshit like this until it happens...
If you were to run the numbers for humans up to the age of 30 and just truncate any data points beyond that, would humans end up looking a lot like mole rats? Women wouldn't appear to go through menopause, cancer would be very rare, and there would be almost zero incidence of mental degenerative diseases.
On the flip side, if you could manage to keep a mole rat alive for an additional 40 years, I propose that all the problems we experience in our later years would start to appear.
There may be something special about mole rat biology, or they might just have a propensity to die by the age of thirty because they have unusually weak hearts. (or whatever. I don't know what the leading cause of death is in thirty year old mole rats). A really interesting medical investigation might be to see if you can prolong the life of Mole Rats by addressing the leading causes of death.
There is an engineering axiom of, "Everything is a trade off". There might be a way to live 1000 years, but there is going to be some kind of cost. The fundamental question is going to be, "Is it worth paying?"
Ron Wyden, my crypto-homie! Slappin DOWN that fuzz with the verbal beatstick ->
I would like to learn more about how you arrived at and justify this ill-informed policy proposal. Please provide me with a list of the cryptographers with whom you've personally discussed this topic since our July 2017 meeting and specifically identify those experts who advised you that companies can feasibly design government access features into their products without weakening cybersecurity. Please provide this information by February 23, 2018.
...SO I CAN BITCH SLAP THEM SUCCA-FOOLZ TOO!
Man, I never heard of him before, but I like this Ron guy.
Parent post shouldn't have been voted down, it is probably pretty accurate. I think that most flat-earthers are either doing it for attention or money. I suppose a few might have genuine mental health problems. But it is pretty hard to swallow that someone who is sane would actually think that the Earth is flat. in the face of modern technology and the evidence it presents.
Of course this guy is a troll. He has the technical acumen to construct a primitive rocket, but yet it has not occurred to him to just put a camera on a small model rocket to 'prove' his theory rather than risk his life on an expensive and complicated stunt? Weather balloons are super cheap compared to rocketry, and those can go to the edges of space. He has a number of options to test his theories with little effort.
He isn't trying to prove anything, he just wants attention.
Putin isn't a lunatic who wants to end the world. He has murdered and robbed his way to the top, and he very much wants to retire with all his loot somewhere and enjoy it. Greedy materialists aren't really the type to want to destroy the world. North Korea isn't likely to shoot first unless Kim thinks that the US is about to kill him, and Putin is no different. His life is great, he has an entire country under his thumb. Both of these guys are monsters, but they are somewhat predictable in that they have motivation to want to keep their money, power, and health intact. They will act to preserve these things first and foremost.
Any investigation into doomsday weapons will be colored by these motivations. A super torpedo would be very, very slow compared to a ICBM. It would also be very large, and if detected in transit, it would give an opponent quite a bit of time to react. Moreover, there is the Dr.Strangelove problem: Unless you tell everyone about it, it serves as no deterrent so you cannot keep it secret. By telling people about it, you are giving them a first strike target and making it less likely that it will survive to complete its mission. This weapon is also limited to hitting coastal targets, that is quite a limitation.
This seems like a really expensive and risky weapon to construct. Wouldn't it just be simpler to restart the nuclear arms race, and start cranking out thousands and thousands of more conventional nuclear weapons to saturate anti-missile systems? You only need one or two to connect with a target.
However, this doomsday weapon is a great disinformation weapon if you want to 'leak' its existence and cause your opponents to worry. How much time and money will they spend trying to detect and defend from such a weapon?
Companies of that size should NOT be nationalized. Doing so would not remove the centralized anti-competitive power that is so tempting to misuse. It should be broken up into many smaller companies.
In an ecosystem the more biodiversity there is, the more resistant an ecosystem is to disruptive change. This also holds true to economic fields. If you only have three banks managing all of a countrie's finances, failure of one or two will cause dire problems for the entire economy, top to bottom. If there were two hundred banks, two could fail, and it woulden't cause more than a minor ripple.
Decentralization and diversification will make any industry more competitive, more resistant disruption, fiscally efficient, and nimble. This is good for the consumer, the economy, investors, and society as a whole. It also reduces the ability of individuals to tamper with laws to their own ends via graft and bribery.
The fix to make this happen everywhere would be a simple one, too. Just outlaw a corporation from owning another corporation, and prevent any consolidation or acquisition activity that gives a corporation grater than 25% of a market. Aside from an occasional Microsoft that grabs 90% market share without buying anyone out, this will stop quite a bit of predatory activity by corporations.
We should give corporations as much leeway as possible to compete and profit, but encouragement to do so in a way that isn't creating efficiency through predatory behavior or eroding the stability of the market.
Keep government out of the business of trying to run companies, and in the business of providing infrastructure, defense, social programs, etc. that private industry does not. Until they get that perfected, they don't need more on their plates....
Read him: Flatland: A Romance of Many Dimensions. Its an old novella that got rediscovered when Al was becoming famous, because it had a 2d dimensional characters that discover a 3d world, and many of the ideas also could be extended to thinking about being a 3d entity living in 4th dimensional space-time.
He can wait until 4th grade before you show him the field equations and teach him PDEs....
The problem isn't Christians, it is ANY religious group that can't keep it's fucking beliefs to itself. If you want to believe in flying invisible sky bullies, fine, I am glad it makes you happy and gives you purpose. Just stop trying to push your morale agenda on others. If your made up bullshit worldview isn't compelling enough that people actively seek you out and ask you to share it (you know, like Science...), then it probably isn't worth trying to force on others.
If I manufacture a product the use of which does harm not just to me, but the entire ecosystem of the planet and all civilizations, and I then knowingly and willingly try to misrepresent or hide the damage it's doing to further my own profit, that's deceitful and damaging to everyone. and it's definitely something that one should get sued over.
One should not get sued over that. One should be imprisoned over that.It is knowingly committing fraud, and technically conspiracy to commit manslaughter, as climate change on the scale we are seeing is going to directly lead to a non-zero number of deaths. (manslaughter, as murder is usually reserved for death with intent, but manslaughter is more typically applied to negligent death cases).
On the other hand, if people can't encrypt their data (or that encryption is breakable), then it creates an entirely different set of problems. People can't safeguard their data or protect their systems. It increases the vulnerability of our infrastructure. It increases the chances that criminals and terrorists can gain access to important and private information.
Funny, when I first glanced at the deadline that is the angle that I thought the article was going to take, but then I saw that the quote was attributed to the FBI, and I realized that wasn't going to be the case.
What I really want to know is, what devices were being used in the mentioned 7,800 cases that they couldn't get in? I need to go shopping...
I suspect that it will be a short case. The plaintiff will claim that he was discriminated against by Google for being conservative, and they will roll out the HR termination paperwork documenting how he was abusing other employees because they weren't white. Google is going to fire anyone who is doing that, regardless of their color or gender because they will be sued by victims of said abuse if they don't. They have a really good motive to insure equality and a harassment workplace - mainly an army of drooling tort lawyers eyeing their bank account totals.
There probably are occasional (but rare) instances of straight white conservative men being discriminated against, but I don't think this is it. All this guy is going to do is insure that he never gets hired again, because what employer is going to hire someone with a history of suing their employers?
Big business has shoved these changes through, despite the wishes of the end users. Now as a result, they aren't going to have to deal with one set of regulations, they will have to deal with 50 sets of differing regulations and the resulting lawsuits when they screw up.
Part of the problem might be that there are about a million titles these days, and product fatigue is probably an issue. How many books do I have to read to keep up with whatever wolverine and spider-man are doing each month? Back in the 80's it would have been about 3. In addition, there a huge number of independent titles and publishers getting in on the game, so there is more competition for readers than ever.
On top of that, re-writing all the classic heroes to be more ethnically and gender diverse is kinda lame. Don't make the Hulk Asian and Ms. Marvel Moslem, just keep them they way they were, and create new characters and give them their own books. If they are well written, they will sell. If they don't sell, at least you haven't fucked up your classic characters.
Modern comics aren't cheap either. Back in the golden age of comics they were printed cheaply on flimsy newsprint and cranked out in en mass so they were pretty affordable. Over the years we got to the point that they are printed on super high quality paper and bound in book format, but when publishing shifted to digital format, I am not sure that there was any price drop to reflect the efficiency in moving to non-physical distribution.
Well, lets just ignore the moral questions about eating meat for a moment. There is a bigger problem that will likely decide the issue. It takes quite a bit of grain and water to raise animals for food. This isn't a big deal when you have 100 million people on the planet, but it gets to be a problem when the world population climbs towards the 10 billion plus mark.
Assuming that moral views of meat doesn't change, and that science doesn't invent a way to just grow protein in a vat using only sunlight, the cost of the resources required to grow the animals will likely put a hamburger out of reach for a lot of people. So, change is coming one way or another.
Good point, but the author's premise has more flaws. From the article:
To prevent attackers from knowing whether an account exists or not your signup must only take an email address and provide no feedback in the UI if the sign up succeeded or not. Instead the user would receive an email saying they’re signed up. The only way an attacker would know if an account exists is if they had access to the target’s email.
Sending a confirmation email w/o UI feedback isn't denying an attacker confirmation about the existence of a email address, it is just moving that confirmation from the UI to email, and in the process creating a muddled confusing sign up process. Did I succeed in singing up and the server is slow, or is there already a user with that screen name?
The author is an idiot, because he is advocating trading simplicity and usability for a majority of your users in return for very slightly slowing (but not stopping) attackers. They will get the exact same info, it will just take their script an extra step or two.
In Asia, I pay 2 cents per pill for an "obsolete drug" that stops some common forms of cancer metastasis but is unadvertised, ignored and/or unavailable in most of the world. This saves me $20-30,000 a month in the US for a biotech drug.
Any why is that I wonder? An obsolete miracle drug that stops the spread of common forms of cancer, it is cheap to make, and nobody outside Asia makes it or uses it... Doesn't that sound a little fishy to you? At what point does your bullshit detector go off? Asian 'medicine' is notorious for all sorts of worthless quack treatments and the FDA was created to keep useless, dangerous, and addictive medicine away from people. They aren't perfect, but they do a pretty good job of that.
If you have a real condition that is treated by this 'medicine', I am happy for you and I wish you a long life. But you should really read what you wrote and think carefully about why the entire rest of the world isn't using this miracle drug.
I don't know, bio weapon research and testing near the capitol would insure that the politicians have a vested interest in making sure that the research lab is well funded, safe, and being run by responsible parties. Politicians behave quite responsibly when they have skin in the game.
The Earth is not flat. This is a lie spread by fools and idiots. If the earth was flat, the water would run off the edge. It is CLEARLY bowl shaped, as this is the only shape that would retain water over time.
Do not believe this idiot, his ideas will lead you down a path of folly and ruin.
I thought the same thing. Electricity is increasingly becoming 100% green as more non-coal power plants come online, where as cars (gasoline) aren't. Once everyone has an electric car, that metric might change, but for now you can probably do a lot to help save the planet by staying home and jerking off.
Alternately, I suppose if you were REALLY into conserving energy, you could call up all the guys in your neighborhood and invite them to come jerk off with you. That way, you wouldn't have to power dozens of computers all just surfing for porn.
Slashdot Mirror
Banning a letter from the Internet is harder than Chinese Algebra. And, since the letter 'n' was just banned along with a few numbers, that is getting quite difficult indeed...
I love how you compared Google firing a guy for being a tool with a autocrat weeding out and enslaving his political opponents.
The right will scream that this guy is being persecuted for expressing his point of view, but where are the business friendly conservatives who will champion a company's right to fire people that they don't like? I thought conservatives liked to have less government regulation and interference, and now the seem to be howling for it...
I do think that people who use illegal and/or non-prescribed drugs are personally and mentally weak. If you can't deal with your life without using drugs, there is something wrong with you and your life and you should change yourself and/or your life.
Spoken with the compassion that the right wing became famous for. 'My life is good, and fuck anyone who wasn't lucky enough to be born with my genes/family/environment'.
Look asshole, nobody is asking you to devote your life to the orphans of Calcutta, but why don't you try to show some decency to people who aren't as fortunate as you? Do you really think that people actively choose to be come habitual drug users? Really?
Having worked inside some big pre-ipo companies, I think that the leadership isn't too excited about having to answer to shareholders who might be whimsical, panicky, transitory, etc. corporate execs serve at the whim of the board of directors who are essentially the shareholders.Having a privately held company allows you to do whatever you want without having to answer for it. Want to lose money for a few years to grow the business? Not really a problem.
Also being publicly traded causes your stock price to fluctuate based on the irrational whims of the economy. Why deal with that if you don't need the cash infusion? The push to go to an IPO is only to get the VC's a quick payout. If the business is really a good one and it is growing, why not let your capital investment grow longer? Just so impatient VC's want to move on to the next company?
...but that doesn't detract from the monumental shit show the FBI orchestrated and how badly the FISA courts can be abused. This dossier doesn't answer every question but it sure does answer quite a few and highlights various abuses of FISA and the FBI.
Cool, lets investigate them, too.
The GOP seems to think that 'But, Hillary...' somehow constitutes a defense or excuse of illegal and immoral behavior. I hear this whenever someone comments on unethical GOP behavior within earshot of a right wing supporter. Perhaps there was some sort of internal collusion in the FBI to 'get' Trump. It doesn't matter. Light has been shined on his questionable actions and justice will be severed. I have no problem with investigations into Donald, Hillary, and every other fucking clown in DC, regardless of political affiliation. If this memo raises questions, add them to the list of people who are being scrutinized. We will get to them all in good time. 'Illegal' isn't a term that allows for relative morality.
I want every one of our representatives to be held to the highest standards of ethical behavior. If there are people who have engaged in contact with Russian agents in an illegal fashion, I want them (literally) lynched as an object lesion to others who might be weighing the risk / reward of selling out the country for their own gain. Putin is far to dangerous to treat with kid gloves or to be fucking around with petty partisan political games.
This is why the utopia of a democratized internet of citizen reporters and transparency is a false hope. As much as you'd like to believe in such a future, we need *authorities* and institutions to do the work (yes, hard work) to determine what is truth and have some objective standards.
The problem is that there is no penalty for producing information that is outright fabrication, no punishment for acting against the interests of the greater good of an information based society. You can lie and fabricate for your own selfish ends as much as you like, and people don't realize that.
In a way, the Internet is like an early capitalist economy, where any actor can engage in predatory monopolistic behavior without any fear or repercussions. In a truly free market, you should act as destructively as possible towards ecenomic rivals before they catch on and do the same to you. In an open Internet, why not just produce lies and propaganda to support your POV or political ends? If you don't do it, your rivals will.
An open and free Internet is an achievable goal. It just requires a few rules that can be enforced fairly for all parties involved. Eventually there will be some sort of Internet laws created that are agreed on by a number of countries, and all the rest of the world will be forced to play by them or kicked off the Internet. It will be something like:
1) No attacking underlying infrastructure
2) No censoring other parties
3) No spreading false or misleading information.
It won't likely be soon though, so expect more bullshit like this until it happens...
If you were to run the numbers for humans up to the age of 30 and just truncate any data points beyond that, would humans end up looking a lot like mole rats? Women wouldn't appear to go through menopause, cancer would be very rare, and there would be almost zero incidence of mental degenerative diseases.
On the flip side, if you could manage to keep a mole rat alive for an additional 40 years, I propose that all the problems we experience in our later years would start to appear.
There may be something special about mole rat biology, or they might just have a propensity to die by the age of thirty because they have unusually weak hearts. (or whatever. I don't know what the leading cause of death is in thirty year old mole rats). A really interesting medical investigation might be to see if you can prolong the life of Mole Rats by addressing the leading causes of death.
There is an engineering axiom of, "Everything is a trade off". There might be a way to live 1000 years, but there is going to be some kind of cost. The fundamental question is going to be, "Is it worth paying?"
Ron Wyden, my crypto-homie! Slappin DOWN that fuzz with the verbal beatstick ->
...SO I CAN BITCH SLAP THEM SUCCA-FOOLZ TOO!
I would like to learn more about how you arrived at and justify this ill-informed policy proposal. Please provide me with a list of the cryptographers with whom you've personally discussed this topic since our July 2017 meeting and specifically identify those experts who advised you that companies can feasibly design government access features into their products without weakening cybersecurity. Please provide this information by February 23, 2018.
Man, I never heard of him before, but I like this Ron guy.
Parent post shouldn't have been voted down, it is probably pretty accurate. I think that most flat-earthers are either doing it for attention or money. I suppose a few might have genuine mental health problems. But it is pretty hard to swallow that someone who is sane would actually think that the Earth is flat. in the face of modern technology and the evidence it presents.
Of course this guy is a troll. He has the technical acumen to construct a primitive rocket, but yet it has not occurred to him to just put a camera on a small model rocket to 'prove' his theory rather than risk his life on an expensive and complicated stunt? Weather balloons are super cheap compared to rocketry, and those can go to the edges of space. He has a number of options to test his theories with little effort.
He isn't trying to prove anything, he just wants attention.
Putin isn't a lunatic who wants to end the world. He has murdered and robbed his way to the top, and he very much wants to retire with all his loot somewhere and enjoy it. Greedy materialists aren't really the type to want to destroy the world. North Korea isn't likely to shoot first unless Kim thinks that the US is about to kill him, and Putin is no different. His life is great, he has an entire country under his thumb. Both of these guys are monsters, but they are somewhat predictable in that they have motivation to want to keep their money, power, and health intact. They will act to preserve these things first and foremost.
Any investigation into doomsday weapons will be colored by these motivations. A super torpedo would be very, very slow compared to a ICBM. It would also be very large, and if detected in transit, it would give an opponent quite a bit of time to react. Moreover, there is the Dr.Strangelove problem: Unless you tell everyone about it, it serves as no deterrent so you cannot keep it secret. By telling people about it, you are giving them a first strike target and making it less likely that it will survive to complete its mission. This weapon is also limited to hitting coastal targets, that is quite a limitation.
This seems like a really expensive and risky weapon to construct. Wouldn't it just be simpler to restart the nuclear arms race, and start cranking out thousands and thousands of more conventional nuclear weapons to saturate anti-missile systems? You only need one or two to connect with a target.
However, this doomsday weapon is a great disinformation weapon if you want to 'leak' its existence and cause your opponents to worry. How much time and money will they spend trying to detect and defend from such a weapon?
Companies of that size should NOT be nationalized. Doing so would not remove the centralized anti-competitive power that is so tempting to misuse. It should be broken up into many smaller companies.
In an ecosystem the more biodiversity there is, the more resistant an ecosystem is to disruptive change. This also holds true to economic fields. If you only have three banks managing all of a countrie's finances, failure of one or two will cause dire problems for the entire economy, top to bottom. If there were two hundred banks, two could fail, and it woulden't cause more than a minor ripple.
Decentralization and diversification will make any industry more competitive, more resistant disruption, fiscally efficient, and nimble. This is good for the consumer, the economy, investors, and society as a whole. It also reduces the ability of individuals to tamper with laws to their own ends via graft and bribery.
The fix to make this happen everywhere would be a simple one, too. Just outlaw a corporation from owning another corporation, and prevent any consolidation or acquisition activity that gives a corporation grater than 25% of a market. Aside from an occasional Microsoft that grabs 90% market share without buying anyone out, this will stop quite a bit of predatory activity by corporations.
We should give corporations as much leeway as possible to compete and profit, but encouragement to do so in a way that isn't creating efficiency through predatory behavior or eroding the stability of the market.
Keep government out of the business of trying to run companies, and in the business of providing infrastructure, defense, social programs, etc. that private industry does not. Until they get that perfected, they don't need more on their plates....
Read him: Flatland: A Romance of Many Dimensions. Its an old novella that got rediscovered when Al was becoming famous, because it had a 2d dimensional characters that discover a 3d world, and many of the ideas also could be extended to thinking about being a 3d entity living in 4th dimensional space-time.
He can wait until 4th grade before you show him the field equations and teach him PDEs....
Fucking Christians.
The problem isn't Christians, it is ANY religious group that can't keep it's fucking beliefs to itself. If you want to believe in flying invisible sky bullies, fine, I am glad it makes you happy and gives you purpose. Just stop trying to push your morale agenda on others. If your made up bullshit worldview isn't compelling enough that people actively seek you out and ask you to share it (you know, like Science...), then it probably isn't worth trying to force on others.
If I manufacture a product the use of which does harm not just to me, but the entire ecosystem of the planet and all civilizations, and I then knowingly and willingly try to misrepresent or hide the damage it's doing to further my own profit, that's deceitful and damaging to everyone. and it's definitely something that one should get sued over.
One should not get sued over that. One should be imprisoned over that.It is knowingly committing fraud, and technically conspiracy to commit manslaughter, as climate change on the scale we are seeing is going to directly lead to a non-zero number of deaths. (manslaughter, as murder is usually reserved for death with intent, but manslaughter is more typically applied to negligent death cases).
On the other hand, if people can't encrypt their data (or that encryption is breakable), then it creates an entirely different set of problems. People can't safeguard their data or protect their systems. It increases the vulnerability of our infrastructure. It increases the chances that criminals and terrorists can gain access to important and private information.
Funny, when I first glanced at the deadline that is the angle that I thought the article was going to take, but then I saw that the quote was attributed to the FBI, and I realized that wasn't going to be the case.
What I really want to know is, what devices were being used in the mentioned 7,800 cases that they couldn't get in? I need to go shopping...
I suspect that it will be a short case. The plaintiff will claim that he was discriminated against by Google for being conservative, and they will roll out the HR termination paperwork documenting how he was abusing other employees because they weren't white. Google is going to fire anyone who is doing that, regardless of their color or gender because they will be sued by victims of said abuse if they don't. They have a really good motive to insure equality and a harassment workplace - mainly an army of drooling tort lawyers eyeing their bank account totals.
There probably are occasional (but rare) instances of straight white conservative men being discriminated against, but I don't think this is it. All this guy is going to do is insure that he never gets hired again, because what employer is going to hire someone with a history of suing their employers?
Big business has shoved these changes through, despite the wishes of the end users. Now as a result, they aren't going to have to deal with one set of regulations, they will have to deal with 50 sets of differing regulations and the resulting lawsuits when they screw up.
It couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of guys.
Part of the problem might be that there are about a million titles these days, and product fatigue is probably an issue. How many books do I have to read to keep up with whatever wolverine and spider-man are doing each month? Back in the 80's it would have been about 3. In addition, there a huge number of independent titles and publishers getting in on the game, so there is more competition for readers than ever.
On top of that, re-writing all the classic heroes to be more ethnically and gender diverse is kinda lame. Don't make the Hulk Asian and Ms. Marvel Moslem, just keep them they way they were, and create new characters and give them their own books. If they are well written, they will sell. If they don't sell, at least you haven't fucked up your classic characters.
Modern comics aren't cheap either. Back in the golden age of comics they were printed cheaply on flimsy newsprint and cranked out in en mass so they were pretty affordable. Over the years we got to the point that they are printed on super high quality paper and bound in book format, but when publishing shifted to digital format, I am not sure that there was any price drop to reflect the efficiency in moving to non-physical distribution.
Well, lets just ignore the moral questions about eating meat for a moment. There is a bigger problem that will likely decide the issue. It takes quite a bit of grain and water to raise animals for food. This isn't a big deal when you have 100 million people on the planet, but it gets to be a problem when the world population climbs towards the 10 billion plus mark.
Assuming that moral views of meat doesn't change, and that science doesn't invent a way to just grow protein in a vat using only sunlight, the cost of the resources required to grow the animals will likely put a hamburger out of reach for a lot of people. So, change is coming one way or another.
Good point, but the author's premise has more flaws. From the article:
To prevent attackers from knowing whether an account exists or not your signup must only take an email address and provide no feedback in the UI if the sign up succeeded or not. Instead the user would receive an email saying they’re signed up. The only way an attacker would know if an account exists is if they had access to the target’s email.
Sending a confirmation email w/o UI feedback isn't denying an attacker confirmation about the existence of a email address, it is just moving that confirmation from the UI to email, and in the process creating a muddled confusing sign up process. Did I succeed in singing up and the server is slow, or is there already a user with that screen name?
The author is an idiot, because he is advocating trading simplicity and usability for a majority of your users in return for very slightly slowing (but not stopping) attackers. They will get the exact same info, it will just take their script an extra step or two.
In Asia, I pay 2 cents per pill for an "obsolete drug" that stops some common forms of cancer metastasis but is unadvertised, ignored and/or unavailable in most of the world. This saves me $20-30,000 a month in the US for a biotech drug.
Any why is that I wonder? An obsolete miracle drug that stops the spread of common forms of cancer, it is cheap to make, and nobody outside Asia makes it or uses it... Doesn't that sound a little fishy to you? At what point does your bullshit detector go off? Asian 'medicine' is notorious for all sorts of worthless quack treatments and the FDA was created to keep useless, dangerous, and addictive medicine away from people. They aren't perfect, but they do a pretty good job of that.
If you have a real condition that is treated by this 'medicine', I am happy for you and I wish you a long life. But you should really read what you wrote and think carefully about why the entire rest of the world isn't using this miracle drug.
I don't know, bio weapon research and testing near the capitol would insure that the politicians have a vested interest in making sure that the research lab is well funded, safe, and being run by responsible parties. Politicians behave quite responsibly when they have skin in the game.
The Earth is not flat. This is a lie spread by fools and idiots. If the earth was flat, the water would run off the edge. It is CLEARLY bowl shaped, as this is the only shape that would retain water over time.
Do not believe this idiot, his ideas will lead you down a path of folly and ruin.
I thought the same thing. Electricity is increasingly becoming 100% green as more non-coal power plants come online, where as cars (gasoline) aren't. Once everyone has an electric car, that metric might change, but for now you can probably do a lot to help save the planet by staying home and jerking off.
Alternately, I suppose if you were REALLY into conserving energy, you could call up all the guys in your neighborhood and invite them to come jerk off with you. That way, you wouldn't have to power dozens of computers all just surfing for porn.
Ma always said I was full of great ideas....
the thousands of gallons of sperm wasted
Wasted? Do you have a better use in mind?
I would love to hear your ideas.....