Way to only focus on the false allegations, and not all the ludicrous things that make you a a "sex offender".
Also, you neglected to mention that some studies found obscenely high rates of false rape accusations- well over half, in fact.
Lastly: let's not let a little thing like The Innocence Project get in the way of anything. You know, that project where they free huge numbers of death row inmates after proving they're innocent, usually using DNA testing? Funny how they find so many innocent people on death row, given murders receive the heaviest investigation.
"Sex crime" includes everything from pissing on the side of a building in an alley, to being underage and having consensual sex. Possession of certain pornography counts. Etc.
The wikipedia article you link to, in fact, goes to great lengths to cover all the ridiculous things that make someone considered to be a "sex offender".
Let's also not forget that rape crimes have the highest false-accusal rate of any category of crime; an astounding number of "victims" later admit they filed complaints only for revenge for something else. In fact, the false accusal rate is greater by a factor of ten (I'm too lazy to dig up the FBI and Wikipedia links, sorry.)
So, no shit the recidivism rate is low...most of them are innocent in the first place.
Both vehicles have about 25kG of batteries.
The difference: Sunswift 4 was operating only off solar power, whereas Nuna was in a race where batteries were not only allowed, but required (the race was over several days.) Nuna had both solar and battery power for acceleration.
Didn't they learn with Safari on the PC (which magically installed itself via Apple Software Update, which came with iTunes and Quicktime) that people don't appreciate new applications being installed with a security and bugfix release? Seriously, wtf, Apple? Would it have killed you to make it a separate update so people could decide for themselves?
I wonder how much that primitive joke of an "operating system" will derail the widespread adoption of these hybrid technologies.
The primitive joke of an operating system that introduced USB-flash based application acceleration (no such similar feature for any free operating system, and supported SSD TRIM commands before any other operating system? (OS X still doesn't and there are no announced plans to; Linux 2.6.32+, I believe, does only on a kernel level, but support amongst various filesystems seems inconsistent or not present; it's hard to tell. hdparm supports manually running TRIM using areas reported by the filesystem as free, but that's hardly equivalent to Windows, which "just works".)
What alternative do you propose? I must have accounts on 100 different websites by now, including this one. I can't create and remember 100 distinct strong username/password combinations on all of those websites. Unless you're an autistic savant you can't either.
Keepass. Clients are available for all major platforms, desktop and mobile. Combined with Dropbox, I can add/change passwords to the database on any system and my other systems are updated. This includes my Android mobile phone. One could implement something similar with rsync or something, I imagine...
Also, consider a common password, but one modified through some easily-remembered scheme. For example, use two words with a number inbetween. Add a letter after the number; make it the second letter in the site's domain name (ie dropbox would be r). Whoever steals thousands or hundreds of thousands of passwords is interested in getting into sites with identical passwords; your password scheme is safe unless they get the passwords to more than one site...even then, you're still a little due to safety in numbers; attackers are still only interested in the easy targets, just like the people who go down the street testing car door handles until they find the unlocked car.
No shit, really? I never thought to try that! Good thing you suggested it! I was just going to use my google phone without signing into any google services!
The first generation of the LVX system will transmit data at speeds of about three megabits per second, roughly as fast as a residential DSL line.
Is that physical layer rate? If so, what's the rate after protocol overhead?
Let's assume that is the physical layer rate. Which would make it three and a half times slower than 802.11b, and 18 times slower than 802.11g, which is virtually everywhere. And, drumroll please, at least one hundred times slower than 802.11n, which is 300-600Mbit/sec (physical layer speed.)
The third edition of Hello, Android brings the book up to date on Android versions from 1.5 to 2.2 (FroYo)
Perfect. Just in time for gingerbread, which just hit the market a few weeks ago with the Nexus S.
Doing a reset on my phone (trying to cure a number of problems, like not being able to type from the homescreen to start a search, and general ass-slow performance) a few days ago showed the sad state of affairs of the Android platform. Virtually none of the installed applications, including a number of Google apps, retained their settings...which were supposedly backed up "in the cloud" (yes, I have always had such options enabled.) Application preference backup was provided in a new API in Froyo, and apparently not even Google is taking advantage of their own API.
Hell, even my system preferences changed; I started getting notifications about open Wifi points (had been disabled), my screen brightness changed, etc.
The EPA said contaminated material from the Molycorp site includes about 328 million tons of acid-generating waste rock, more than 100 million tons of tailings and acid-rock drainage at the mine and seepage at the tailings facility.
Anyone want to place bets on whether or not the US government will press environmental regulations on Molycorp this time, now that national security interests are involved?
1)You don't "accidentally" retain sniffed traffic logs of that size, across your entire international operations, for months if not years, "accidentally." See http://gizmodo.com/5671049/google-street-view-cars-collected-emails-and-passwords I mean come on...someone would have noticed the drives filling up, wondered why, etc. These people are supposedly geniuses, right?
2)There's no political grandstanding here. This is a major privacy invasion. The "grandstanding" has been international, because people are PISSED. Google collected and correlated with location data...MAC addresses and IPs of base stations and client devices. Email addresses. Passwords. URLs. I'm going to be VERY generous and assume that they only captured the sniffed traffic, and not that they intentionally extracted all that from traffic and only stored the extracted data, because that would have been even more obviously-intentional.
3)It's slightly creepy when you go around wardriving. When an international corporation which has a always demonstrated an intense interest in profiling its users and mining its users data for advertising purposes, does it, across the planet? That's just slightly different.
As I understand it, some of these servers are hosted on IP addresses shared with other websites, and apparently this setup is incompatible with SSL
Bullshit. There's nothing about virtual hosting that prohibits the use of SSL.
In addition, we have not yet identified a signing authority that we feel confident that would be resistant to coercion and subornation by agencies looking to discredit or manipulate Wikileaks. (Got a suggestion? Reply to this post!)
Oh PLEASE. Then make your own CA (it's not hard, you need a laptop and a safe deposit box) and publish the CA's public key via multiple methods. If the tech community can distribute the keys to DVD/Bluray encryption schemes, it can probably handle this.
Also: dump Julianne - he's toxic as hell. The media are being whipped up into a feeding frenzy and focusing on him and his legal issues exclusively, instead of the content of the leaks. Which is the dream of the governments around the world, because the press are no longer covering the leaks. The second those charges came out he should have stepped down officially, and let someone new take the helm, at least as the public face. Preferably someone who wasn't having sex with near-strangers and bragging about his "work" on a free dating site.
Your organization's mission has been completely subverted by the fact that Julianne didn't have the foresight to realize that it might be a good idea to keep his dick out of strange pussy before and during the organization's work.
They have their place, but...10 years and by one of the most anal-retentive, paranoid coding groups out there. Ouch.
Anal-retentive and paranoid have nothing to do with competence.
I think it's pretty well established that Theo and his gang have about the largest egos in the entire open-source community. The man doesn't have a single ounce of humility in his body, and he's a textbook bully.
Why is it any surprise that for ten years there was a backdoor right under his nose? I bet some people may have even noticed, but were afraid to step forward for fear of being wrong and ridiculed.
You've insinuated gross incompetence on the part of the researchers. Have you actually gone out and tried to find the answers to these questions? Are you qualified in the field to question the research? Or are you just going off the article, which is a summary of research that was almost undoubtedly much more in-depth than a journalists' summary?
I consider myself a strong skeptic, but one of the duties of a skeptic is to realize their limits. I don't attend a graduate-level lecture and start asking questions - I'd be asked to leave, or at least laughed at. So when I'm confronted with something that doesn't seem right, I seek more information. You're not. You're just throwing out questions. Rather slanted ones.
I see this often, and I suspect it is an actual class of logical fallacy...
1)A slashdotter posts a series of slanted questions and wondering-alouds that are very FUD-ish.
2)The questions aren't (properly) answered, because the audience (jokes about parent's basements aside) doesn't have much knowledge on the subject. Or, the answers that are qualified aren't noticed by moderators.
3)The questions, which are more a challenge to refute a contrary viewpoint to the article than anything else, appear to be valid because there's no response visible. And thus what was probably perfectly legitimate research gets shot down by someone with no background in the subject. Probably not even a mild background in research.
Lastly: the burden of proof no longer rests on the shoulders of the public. After decades of the chemical industry producing toxins and marketing them for uses which were harmful, then doing everything to cover it all up...they are no longer entitled to public trust. If you want to manufacture a chemical and spray it on thousands of square miles of farmland, you better prove first that it doesn't cause problems.
This is especially so, given that research shows that old farming techniques and organic practices are equally or more effective, and cause no permanent damage to people or the environment. Virtually none of the artificial stuff spread on the farmlands of the world are *necessary*, even if one's sole criteria is increased yield.
If anyone wants to see another scary example of this "what, me worry?" attitude, check out methyl iodide, a known toxin, which was just approved for use by California:
"Hey, it's okay to spread this toxic crap all over the ground, because we'll only use what we think is just enough, and people want pretty strawberries."
The real value here is that we'll get to see who has been astroturfing one of the "most popular" blog networks...and dumb enough to use obvious personal or work email addresses.
In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if Gawker copywriters were 'turfing their own stories too, given how much emphasis Gawker places on story viewcounts.
I use VERP on most of of the forced registration systems. Unless the spammers strip VERP stuff out, I'll know exactly which spammers got my address from Gawker's network. Not that it'll do much good except satisfy some curiosity...
The other side effect is that your account is a little harder to break into, in cases where the login ID is an email address. Obviously not the case here (username works fine too.)
What should be awesome: we'll get to see how many Gawker commentators are astroturfing. That should be extra special fun.
Most clients support DHT and PEX, and have for some time. You just need a single peer to bootstrap yourself, and you're good to go.
You also need to have a torrent that doesn't disable DHT and peer exchange. This has to be the most irritating "feature" of BitTorrent; the torrent file controls whether they're allowed. I understand why it exists and it'd be OK...if tracker administrators didn't abuse the hell out of it. I've lost track of how many times I've found a fairly new torrent that had a dead tracker.
Wikileaks isn't just sitting on the recent material so they can release it bit by bit to the press, as many people implied. On the contrary, it's quite the other way around: 'only after considering advice from five news organizations
Right. Why would the major news organizations possibly be interested in having exclusive access to most of the content? Gee, I wonder.
Also, a slow trickle is much friendlier to their publishing process, and will keep the public's attention longer. I suppose in the end that's not a bad thing, but we're still going to be reading everything through a filter, which is hardly in line with Wikileak's goal.
Also, is anyone else tired of the "wiki" in wikileaks? There's absolutely nothing "wiki" about "Cablegate."
Boston: crude package with exposed electronics, section wrapped in black plastic (later found to have the batteries.) Attached to interstate highway bridge, with no obvious purpose.
Response: abundance of caution in removing it (and shutting down the highway until they knew WTF it was/had it off the bridge), search other bridges (and subsequent discovery of multiple devices.) "Artists" knew of police response and did not contact police, but instead watched with glee and told all their friends. Meanwhile, I spent an hour stuck in a subway car, squeezed in so tight I had just enough space to breathe. So don't fucking lecture me about overreactions, because you weren't affected by it (in fact, most of the keyboard heros who bitched about Boston's "overreaction" weren't affected by it.)
Denver: toy robot on the ground- nothing suspicious about it. Response: blew it up.
So, how is Boston overreacting worse than Denver here?
so, just as drunken truck drivers can move classified "special weaponry" across the country routinely, as we read earlier this week,
The agents in question were never driving drunk, with or without the nuclear materials. There were two incidents (in the agency's entire history, reportedly) where *some* agents got completely hammered and the cops were called on them. They were not drunk while transporting the materials.
Slashdot Mirror
Way to only focus on the false allegations, and not all the ludicrous things that make you a a "sex offender".
Also, you neglected to mention that some studies found obscenely high rates of false rape accusations- well over half, in fact.
Lastly: let's not let a little thing like The Innocence Project get in the way of anything. You know, that project where they free huge numbers of death row inmates after proving they're innocent, usually using DNA testing? Funny how they find so many innocent people on death row, given murders receive the heaviest investigation.
"Sex crime" includes everything from pissing on the side of a building in an alley, to being underage and having consensual sex. Possession of certain pornography counts. Etc.
The wikipedia article you link to, in fact, goes to great lengths to cover all the ridiculous things that make someone considered to be a "sex offender".
Let's also not forget that rape crimes have the highest false-accusal rate of any category of crime; an astounding number of "victims" later admit they filed complaints only for revenge for something else. In fact, the false accusal rate is greater by a factor of ten (I'm too lazy to dig up the FBI and Wikipedia links, sorry.)
So, no shit the recidivism rate is low...most of them are innocent in the first place.
Both vehicles have 25KG battery packs. Read the spec sheet. The difference is that they didn't use the batteries in the world speed record run.
Both vehicles have about 25kG of batteries. The difference: Sunswift 4 was operating only off solar power, whereas Nuna was in a race where batteries were not only allowed, but required (the race was over several days.) Nuna had both solar and battery power for acceleration.
Didn't they learn with Safari on the PC (which magically installed itself via Apple Software Update, which came with iTunes and Quicktime) that people don't appreciate new applications being installed with a security and bugfix release? Seriously, wtf, Apple? Would it have killed you to make it a separate update so people could decide for themselves?
I wonder how much that primitive joke of an "operating system" will derail the widespread adoption of these hybrid technologies.
The primitive joke of an operating system that introduced USB-flash based application acceleration (no such similar feature for any free operating system, and supported SSD TRIM commands before any other operating system? (OS X still doesn't and there are no announced plans to; Linux 2.6.32+, I believe, does only on a kernel level, but support amongst various filesystems seems inconsistent or not present; it's hard to tell. hdparm supports manually running TRIM using areas reported by the filesystem as free, but that's hardly equivalent to Windows, which "just works".)
What alternative do you propose? I must have accounts on 100 different websites by now, including this one. I can't create and remember 100 distinct strong username/password combinations on all of those websites. Unless you're an autistic savant you can't either.
Keepass. Clients are available for all major platforms, desktop and mobile. Combined with Dropbox, I can add/change passwords to the database on any system and my other systems are updated. This includes my Android mobile phone. One could implement something similar with rsync or something, I imagine...
Also, consider a common password, but one modified through some easily-remembered scheme. For example, use two words with a number inbetween. Add a letter after the number; make it the second letter in the site's domain name (ie dropbox would be r). Whoever steals thousands or hundreds of thousands of passwords is interested in getting into sites with identical passwords; your password scheme is safe unless they get the passwords to more than one site...even then, you're still a little due to safety in numbers; attackers are still only interested in the easy targets, just like the people who go down the street testing car door handles until they find the unlocked car.
No, it's not all going to Japan, just some.
Really? Then show me a list of US companies Molycorp has announced deals with.
Show me what US companies Molycorp has secured hundreds of millions of dollars in financing from.
*insert sound of crickets*
No shit, really? I never thought to try that! Good thing you suggested it! I was just going to use my google phone without signing into any google services!
The first generation of the LVX system will transmit data at speeds of about three megabits per second, roughly as fast as a residential DSL line.
Is that physical layer rate? If so, what's the rate after protocol overhead?
Let's assume that is the physical layer rate. Which would make it three and a half times slower than 802.11b, and 18 times slower than 802.11g, which is virtually everywhere. And, drumroll please, at least one hundred times slower than 802.11n, which is 300-600Mbit/sec (physical layer speed.)
The third edition of Hello, Android brings the book up to date on Android versions from 1.5 to 2.2 (FroYo)
Perfect. Just in time for gingerbread, which just hit the market a few weeks ago with the Nexus S.
Doing a reset on my phone (trying to cure a number of problems, like not being able to type from the homescreen to start a search, and general ass-slow performance) a few days ago showed the sad state of affairs of the Android platform. Virtually none of the installed applications, including a number of Google apps, retained their settings...which were supposedly backed up "in the cloud" (yes, I have always had such options enabled.) Application preference backup was provided in a new API in Froyo, and apparently not even Google is taking advantage of their own API.
Hell, even my system preferences changed; I started getting notifications about open Wifi points (had been disabled), my screen brightness changed, etc.
Despite the story's GO AMERICA slant, a lot of material is going straight to Japan, where most of it is consumed in the first place. Like to Hitachi: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6BK5PL20101221
Oh look. They also signed deals with Sumitomo and Mitsubishi: http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/business/T101219002181.htm
They got huge piles of cash from Sumitomo, Mitsubishi, and Hitachi...which is why it's hilarious to hear the CEO of Molycorp waving American flags in various quotes. Oh, and Molycorp's stock has shot up since their IPO in July: http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-07-28/molycorp-s-ipo-aims-at-chinese-grip-on-smart-bombs.html
Also, how interesting that the EPA announces cleanup plan of Molycorp site just a few days ago: http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=12460111
The EPA said contaminated material from the Molycorp site includes about 328 million tons of acid-generating waste rock, more than 100 million tons of tailings and acid-rock drainage at the mine and seepage at the tailings facility.
Anyone want to place bets on whether or not the US government will press environmental regulations on Molycorp this time, now that national security interests are involved?
1)You don't "accidentally" retain sniffed traffic logs of that size, across your entire international operations, for months if not years, "accidentally." See http://gizmodo.com/5671049/google-street-view-cars-collected-emails-and-passwords I mean come on...someone would have noticed the drives filling up, wondered why, etc. These people are supposedly geniuses, right?
2)There's no political grandstanding here. This is a major privacy invasion. The "grandstanding" has been international, because people are PISSED. Google collected and correlated with location data...MAC addresses and IPs of base stations and client devices. Email addresses. Passwords. URLs. I'm going to be VERY generous and assume that they only captured the sniffed traffic, and not that they intentionally extracted all that from traffic and only stored the extracted data, because that would have been even more obviously-intentional.
3)It's slightly creepy when you go around wardriving. When an international corporation which has a always demonstrated an intense interest in profiling its users and mining its users data for advertising purposes, does it, across the planet? That's just slightly different.
As I understand it, some of these servers are hosted on IP addresses shared with other websites, and apparently this setup is incompatible with SSL
Bullshit. There's nothing about virtual hosting that prohibits the use of SSL.
In addition, we have not yet identified a signing authority that we feel confident that would be resistant to coercion and subornation by agencies looking to discredit or manipulate Wikileaks. (Got a suggestion? Reply to this post!)
Oh PLEASE. Then make your own CA (it's not hard, you need a laptop and a safe deposit box) and publish the CA's public key via multiple methods. If the tech community can distribute the keys to DVD/Bluray encryption schemes, it can probably handle this.
Also: dump Julianne - he's toxic as hell. The media are being whipped up into a feeding frenzy and focusing on him and his legal issues exclusively, instead of the content of the leaks. Which is the dream of the governments around the world, because the press are no longer covering the leaks. The second those charges came out he should have stepped down officially, and let someone new take the helm, at least as the public face. Preferably someone who wasn't having sex with near-strangers and bragging about his "work" on a free dating site.
Your organization's mission has been completely subverted by the fact that Julianne didn't have the foresight to realize that it might be a good idea to keep his dick out of strange pussy before and during the organization's work.
They have their place, but...10 years and by one of the most anal-retentive, paranoid coding groups out there. Ouch.
Anal-retentive and paranoid have nothing to do with competence.
I think it's pretty well established that Theo and his gang have about the largest egos in the entire open-source community. The man doesn't have a single ounce of humility in his body, and he's a textbook bully.
Why is it any surprise that for ten years there was a backdoor right under his nose? I bet some people may have even noticed, but were afraid to step forward for fear of being wrong and ridiculed.
You've insinuated gross incompetence on the part of the researchers. Have you actually gone out and tried to find the answers to these questions? Are you qualified in the field to question the research? Or are you just going off the article, which is a summary of research that was almost undoubtedly much more in-depth than a journalists' summary?
I consider myself a strong skeptic, but one of the duties of a skeptic is to realize their limits. I don't attend a graduate-level lecture and start asking questions - I'd be asked to leave, or at least laughed at. So when I'm confronted with something that doesn't seem right, I seek more information. You're not. You're just throwing out questions. Rather slanted ones.
I see this often, and I suspect it is an actual class of logical fallacy...
1)A slashdotter posts a series of slanted questions and wondering-alouds that are very FUD-ish.
2)The questions aren't (properly) answered, because the audience (jokes about parent's basements aside) doesn't have much knowledge on the subject. Or, the answers that are qualified aren't noticed by moderators.
3)The questions, which are more a challenge to refute a contrary viewpoint to the article than anything else, appear to be valid because there's no response visible. And thus what was probably perfectly legitimate research gets shot down by someone with no background in the subject. Probably not even a mild background in research.
Lastly: the burden of proof no longer rests on the shoulders of the public. After decades of the chemical industry producing toxins and marketing them for uses which were harmful, then doing everything to cover it all up...they are no longer entitled to public trust. If you want to manufacture a chemical and spray it on thousands of square miles of farmland, you better prove first that it doesn't cause problems.
This is especially so, given that research shows that old farming techniques and organic practices are equally or more effective, and cause no permanent damage to people or the environment. Virtually none of the artificial stuff spread on the farmlands of the world are *necessary*, even if one's sole criteria is increased yield.
If anyone wants to see another scary example of this "what, me worry?" attitude, check out methyl iodide, a known toxin, which was just approved for use by California:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=%2Fn%2Fa%2F2010%2F12%2F01%2Fnational%2Fa143424S98.DTL&tsp=1
"Hey, it's okay to spread this toxic crap all over the ground, because we'll only use what we think is just enough, and people want pretty strawberries."
The real value here is that we'll get to see who has been astroturfing one of the "most popular" blog networks...and dumb enough to use obvious personal or work email addresses. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if Gawker copywriters were 'turfing their own stories too, given how much emphasis Gawker places on story viewcounts.
I use VERP on most of of the forced registration systems. Unless the spammers strip VERP stuff out, I'll know exactly which spammers got my address from Gawker's network. Not that it'll do much good except satisfy some curiosity...
The other side effect is that your account is a little harder to break into, in cases where the login ID is an email address. Obviously not the case here (username works fine too.)
What should be awesome: we'll get to see how many Gawker commentators are astroturfing. That should be extra special fun.
The term was used to refer to AMERICAN men. Drop the hyper-anti-US bullshit.
The woman who faced down Facebook and was dissed by Silicon Valley business boys as 'an old-fashioned scold'
What's with the cheap ad hominem that wasn't in the original article? Unless they were under 18, they're not boys, just like she's not a "girl".
Also, why does it matter that she's a woman, and they're men? Again, it wasn't in the article.
Most clients support DHT and PEX, and have for some time. You just need a single peer to bootstrap yourself, and you're good to go.
You also need to have a torrent that doesn't disable DHT and peer exchange. This has to be the most irritating "feature" of BitTorrent; the torrent file controls whether they're allowed. I understand why it exists and it'd be OK...if tracker administrators didn't abuse the hell out of it. I've lost track of how many times I've found a fairly new torrent that had a dead tracker.
Wikileaks isn't just sitting on the recent material so they can release it bit by bit to the press, as many people implied. On the contrary, it's quite the other way around: 'only after considering advice from five news organizations
Right. Why would the major news organizations possibly be interested in having exclusive access to most of the content? Gee, I wonder.
Also, a slow trickle is much friendlier to their publishing process, and will keep the public's attention longer. I suppose in the end that's not a bad thing, but we're still going to be reading everything through a filter, which is hardly in line with Wikileak's goal.
Also, is anyone else tired of the "wiki" in wikileaks? There's absolutely nothing "wiki" about "Cablegate."
Boston: crude package with exposed electronics, section wrapped in black plastic (later found to have the batteries.) Attached to interstate highway bridge, with no obvious purpose.
Response: abundance of caution in removing it (and shutting down the highway until they knew WTF it was/had it off the bridge), search other bridges (and subsequent discovery of multiple devices.) "Artists" knew of police response and did not contact police, but instead watched with glee and told all their friends. Meanwhile, I spent an hour stuck in a subway car, squeezed in so tight I had just enough space to breathe. So don't fucking lecture me about overreactions, because you weren't affected by it (in fact, most of the keyboard heros who bitched about Boston's "overreaction" weren't affected by it.)
Denver: toy robot on the ground- nothing suspicious about it. Response: blew it up.
So, how is Boston overreacting worse than Denver here?
http://www.google.com/search?q=grandstanding
so, just as drunken truck drivers can move classified "special weaponry" across the country routinely, as we read earlier this week,
The agents in question were never driving drunk, with or without the nuclear materials. There were two incidents (in the agency's entire history, reportedly) where *some* agents got completely hammered and the cops were called on them. They were not drunk while transporting the materials.