Most of the RAV4 EVs and original Priuses are still on their original batteries, some after more than 200,000 miles. And every carmaker selling EVs is guaranteeing battery life of approx 8 yrs. They can't all be so stupid to guarantee free replacements for twice the expected life of the product.
Bullshit. You live in a fantasy world where you actually believe the marketing bullshit thats fed to you.
The physics of Priuses batteries prevent what you claim from being true.
You do realize that solar power is another example of 'causes more pollution during production than it will ever save during its lifetime' right?
You also realize that gasoline burning cars are roughly an order of magnitude better for the environment (as measurable as you can make that number) than an electric powered by anything other than hydro or nuclear power... right?
Contrary to what you might think, your car should ALWAYS be charged by running the engine unless you happen to be on wind, nuke or hydro power.
If you charge your car with coal, you're producing far more pollution than burning gasoline. Since the mass of our power comes from coal, its a safe bet that for you, its stupid environmentally to charge your car from coal rather than just burning the gasoline required.
If if you happen to get SOME power from non-coal sources, you're likely still getting the majority of your power from coal.
According to studies done at Chernobyl. After a couple of years, new births rapidly stop being part of the cancer riddle group. It doesn't even take decades, just a few years.
Look at factual information from Hiroshima and Nagasaki, not nearly as horrible as its made out to be. Yes, people got cancer... but it wasn't enough that they moved away. The cities were rebuilt where they once stood. Hell, Hiroshima doubled in size within just a few years! As long as you didn't stand on the glowing spot in the center of town, its not nearly as dangerous as people think.
Yes, because we've established Wikipedia as authoritative and never biased.
These models show the opposite of what happens in nature. A single volcano can release more energy than all of the nukes on the planet combined... yet there isn't any indication of 'years' of uninhabitable Earth due to said volcanos. Said volcanos actually blast dust into the air... rather than a detonation of a nuke in air... which directs most of its force down
You have no idea how much energy it takes to damage this planet. The physics tell us you're wrong.
Maintaining a nuclear arsenal is really pricy. They're full of dangerous things.
Which is why it makes sense to leave them where they are. Decommissioning is even more pricey.
And dealing with the decay that you let build up because you were too lazy to maintain them is more costly still. No, 'let them sit' is a stupid fucking idea. Far more cost effective and safe to reprocess them into reactor fuel.
They require LOTS of upkeep. You have to guard them. (They have the power to destroy the world after all) The infrastructure to maintain your active arsenal is massive and costs piles of money, which seems silly for something you hope to never use.
Most of the cost is military. Personally, I think guarding holes in the desert is a much finer jobs program than bombing people in the Middle East. Safer for the people who get the make-work jobs, too.
You should probably try becoming part of this century before telling us about nuclear stockpiles. We don't have nukes sitting in holes in the desert anymore, which is why we don't need as many. We just launch them from subs that no one knows where they are so they can't be taken out.
Some say the nuclear arms race was as much as way to drain money out of the USSR until it collapsed as much as anything else.
Yeah, those people obviously don't work for the Brookings Institute, or the Sante Fe Institute, and so they have no understanding of the games theory basis that led to the policy of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD), resulted in the "Cold War", and kept us out of a hot war.
We're done with that, and I'm sure both sides are sick of throwing money in to a pit. You really only need to blow the world up once, if you're going to do it at all.
If we were sick of throwing money into a pit, we wouldn't have approved TARP, TARP2, and we would have had some campaign promises kept, like closing Gitmo, and getting us out of our two major wars, instead of getting us into two new ones as well. That'd save a bunch of money right there.
I would suggest you take a basic economics and a history course, then learn WHY TARP actually happened rather than what your friends told you. You first need to understand that the magical failed banks failed because laws were changed that suddenly... on PAPER... made them insolvable. They were never actually doing bad, they just suddenly became illegal to operate.
I also hear that most nuclear material for peacetime power reactors comes from decommissioned nuclear warheads.
You heard incorrectly. RTG's, or Radioisotope Thermionic Generators, operate on Plutonium. These are used in spacecraft and space probes, Mars landers, and so on. The U.S. mostly buys the Plutonium for those from Russia and other former Soviet republics. Commercial power reactors, other than breeders, run off of Uranium, and the Uranium not only isn't weapons grade, it *can't* be, since if it were, the reactors wouldn't operate properly. Breeders can run on Plutonium, but most of them operate from reprocessed fuel, or as a means of reprocessing fuel.
The U.S. only operates two breeder sites, for the purpose of producing medically useful isotopes, and they are generally not run at capacity. They are under the control of the DOE, and there has been serious talk lately about shutting the one in Oak Ridge down. At which point we will be buying those isotopes from Japan and France - assuming Japan restarts their reactor network again, rather than it committing seppuku after Fukushima made them paranoid.
Or the operate on other things, which even wikipedia lists. blah blah blha I stopped reading here because you're just spewing untrue bullshit.
Why are you using the past tense for something that hasn't happened yet?
Businesses regularly say 'we are going to do XXX' just to see how the public reacts. Microsoft is notorious for inventing entire software products, marketing campaigns and release dates... and never writing a single line of code. The (and many many others, mine included) do it to test reception for a potential product so it can be canceled earlier if its an unsure idea or as misdirection towards competition.
Saying one thing initially and doing something else after customer input is SOP at any company that intends to stay in business.
There are multiple documented ways to do exactly this. Those ways are even included with the Apple Cinema Display and Apple Thunderbolt Display monitors.
Most of us can do it, but we'd rather use that time to do something useful other than wasn't 30 seconds deciding what scripts to allow from a site we're going to spend 10 looking at.
You should go get laid or something. Find a purpose to your life, don't waste it away being smug that you prevented some javascript from running.
he promise of the internet was accessibility, the ability to freely share information, and to connect everything together.
You use that word differently that most of the rest of the world.
Accessibility is generally meant to mean able to access by the majority of the population, not 'every living soul, regardless of their disability, have full access!
You are being ridiculous and wanting to hold back the majority for a minority. No. Sorry, the world doesn't work that way.
This push towards app-ification of the internet, the W3C caving to DRM in HTML5... it's after the very heart and soul of the internet. The internet we built, as hackers, as creatives, as professors, academics, researchers, scientists... it's being gutted. And Firefox, the white horse of the "free" internet, in it's 11th hour of need, chooses this?
So... you have a political agenda where no one should be allowed to control access to their own works because you don't like not being to have whatever you want whenever you want without paying... Cut off your nose to spite your own face. Freedom, means freedom of choice. Firefox supporting DRM gives you the choice between sites that want to use DRM and those that don't.
If Firefox decides no DRM... then you simply have no choice to visit those sites. You lose freedom.
You are an unrealistic idealist at best, more likely just a loud mouth freeloader. You didn't help build the Internet. You sat around talking about how your perfectly little world would be while the rest of the world built the Internet... which is 100% control by PRM, like it or not. Physical Rights Management,. deal with it.
Also deal with the fact that you actually do not get to tell others how they share their stuff. Its not your stuff.
IE had ActiveX and such. It was stupid. It was a security issue. It was almost impossible to avoid.
Mozilla Gecko (the framework Firefox is built on) makes extensive use of XPCOM, which is functionally equivalent of ActiveX in every way, except that it works outside of Windows.
Some Firefox plugins are... XPCOM objects.
XPCOM has been at the core of the Firefox design as long as I've seen the source (I was embedding gecko into apps in my former life, at least 7 years).
You have absolutely no idea what so ever what ActiveX is, nor do you have any idea what the actual problem with IE was that resulted in so many ActiveX related exploits.
ActiveX is a self describing plugin system which allows an application to load and potentially use a plugin without any prior knowledge, EXACTLY like XPCOM in Firefox. Again, they are 100% functionally the same.
Internet Explorer had retarded defaults (allow any unsigned activex to install without asking) to begin with, then those were 'fixed', and then the install without prompting exploits started, so malicious sites would install activex controls without your consent... and then... we also have to deal with all activex controls which were installed with improper ActiveX safety flags.
The safety flags were 2 flags set aside to allow an ActiveX control to say 'hey, I'm safe to use in Internet Explorer' and 'I'm safe to allow any random website to use me in IE!'. The morons in the Excel team (as one example) would, out of ignorance, flag all of their controls for Excel as safe for IE/safe for scripting... so IE thought it was perfectly acceptable to load a control that will read and write random files on the drive. Every time a Windows Update patch for 'ActiveX killbits' comes out... this is what they are talking about, changing the OS to ignore controls flagged as safe when they are known not to be.
Mozilla has no such support for flagging controls as safe for browser/safe for scripting. It tries to pretend it is an uncrossable barrier, but that is in fact no way the case.
So any time an 'ActiveX' issue comes up, you should be aware that it wasn't an ActiveX problem, it was an Internet Explorer implementation of ActiveX, and other developers bad code that was exploitable.
You really can't 'exploit' ActiveX any more than you can 'exploit' DLL or SO. You can exploit bad implementations of the loader.
Imagine if Firefox allowed web page scripting to automatically install Firefox plugins. Would you blame XPCOM then? Thats what you do when you blame ActiveX.
Finally, it makes you look fucking stupid when you blame ActiveX. All you do is make it clear that you don't actually know what the problem was, let alone understand what it was. You just sound like an ignorant drama queen.
Well, the few seconds you take to go into the hall will allow you to calm down before your freaked out ass babbles incoherently at the operator. You clearly overreact if you think the 5 seconds it takes you to get outside the theater is going to be relevant compared to the fact that someone is going to have to put down their sand which, and drive the ambulance to your ass. They aren't going to rush either, its in fact, part of their training to not over react and rush... because more shit goes wrong than right in those situations.
While you're flipping out, the medical emergency is going to continue on and those seconds are going to be lost on you.
... So when they repeatedly state that the built in database is for evaluation purposes ONLY and that usage of it may result in data corruption or loss... on EVERY PAGE ADMIN PAGE UNTIL YOU SWITCH OFF OF the built in database, that wasn't enough of a warning for you?
I'm not sure how much more warning you can get, short of them corrupting your database intentionally on a daily basis so you get the point sooner.
Manning is a traitor in every form of the word, including the legal definition. This isn't negotiable, it is fact.
You may agree with his actions, but he's still a traitor.
Snowden is another Assange. He IS an ego maniac. Not a traitor be definition, but certainly neither is doing it 'for the public good', as you can tell by their behavior alone.
If they cared about the world knowing the truth, they would have told the WORLDs news agencies and left themselves out of it. They do not. They tell a few news agencies... then setup interviews. This is when they become traitors. They aren't trying to help you or inform you, they are just using your emotional response to the government doing bad things to get attention for themselves, and you're falling for it hook line and sinker.
You are being played, you just haven't figured it out yet.
Doesn't change anything about the information they leaked, but pretending these guys are heros just makes it clear you're gullible.
So... what you're actually saying is he opened YOUR EYES to the fact that theres a bigger world around you.
I'd hardly call that a win. In my experience the people who suddenly become aware of politics when something like this happens are the worst kind to be involved. A bunch of armchair idiots who think they know how the game is played suddenly telling the players how it should be done.
Yeah, if you're some Iraqi kid that the Americans shot from a helicopter for no particular reason?
You're seriously still bringing up the fucking video that clearly shows what you're saying is entirely untrue... AND getting marked +5 insightful?
Its mind numbing how you can see reality in front of you and warp it into something entirely different. You sir, are completely out of touch with reality. You take a single event, edit the video in your favor, it still doesn't show what you claim, but none the less, you rant on.
People like you are why so many people trust the government. The government has far better propaganda and lies. Your propaganda and lies are so obvious its not even funny.
The problem is that implementations that are checking the certificate are not requiring third party authenticated signing timestamps.
If the implementations checking certificates required a trusted root signed timestamp with the digital signature in any of those implementations, then expired certificates would be useless.
Certificates can be compromised, but they are far better than passwords people use.
There has yet to be an actual problem with certificates, just bad implementations.
I would love for you to point me at some software that has never had any implementation faults.
Snowden is a no body. Thats why he's getting out of Russia. If he had anything that mattered, he would have 'never landed in Russia' and disappeared.
What he has 'leaked', the rest of the world sat back and said 'uhm, yea? You didn't figure that out 30 years ago?'
Snowden's leaks just show he's a traitor, they bring no actual value to the table, no new information, just a basic confirmation of what we already knew.
Slashdot Mirror
At what point in your lifetime has America not had jobs? I'm only in my mid 30s, but at no point in my life has America not had jobs.
In the past few years there were plenty of lazy fucks who were unwilling to work a job that was 'beneath' them.
The people 'taking our jobs' are taking jobs the complainers are unwilling to work for pay they are unwilling to accept.
Foreigners don't take American jobs, American's are too fucking lazy to do them in the first place.
Most of the RAV4 EVs and original Priuses are still on their original batteries, some after more than 200,000 miles. And every carmaker selling EVs is guaranteeing battery life of approx 8 yrs. They can't all be so stupid to guarantee free replacements for twice the expected life of the product.
Bullshit. You live in a fantasy world where you actually believe the marketing bullshit thats fed to you.
The physics of Priuses batteries prevent what you claim from being true.
The moon is moving away from Earth, a slight amount of orbital decay would be a good thing if you're thinking about the billions of years plan.
Great, when that starts happening ... THEN they will be a benefit, until then, they are actually worse.
You do realize that solar power is another example of 'causes more pollution during production than it will ever save during its lifetime' right?
You also realize that gasoline burning cars are roughly an order of magnitude better for the environment (as measurable as you can make that number) than an electric powered by anything other than hydro or nuclear power ... right?
Contrary to what you might think, your car should ALWAYS be charged by running the engine unless you happen to be on wind, nuke or hydro power.
If you charge your car with coal, you're producing far more pollution than burning gasoline. Since the mass of our power comes from coal, its a safe bet that for you, its stupid environmentally to charge your car from coal rather than just burning the gasoline required.
If if you happen to get SOME power from non-coal sources, you're likely still getting the majority of your power from coal.
According to studies done at Chernobyl. After a couple of years, new births rapidly stop being part of the cancer riddle group. It doesn't even take decades, just a few years.
Look at factual information from Hiroshima and Nagasaki, not nearly as horrible as its made out to be. Yes, people got cancer ... but it wasn't enough that they moved away. The cities were rebuilt where they once stood. Hell, Hiroshima doubled in size within just a few years! As long as you didn't stand on the glowing spot in the center of town, its not nearly as dangerous as people think.
He could say that ... he wouldn't be the first russian leader to think that way. Its worked out great so far, hasn't it.
Yes, because we've established Wikipedia as authoritative and never biased.
These models show the opposite of what happens in nature. A single volcano can release more energy than all of the nukes on the planet combined ... yet there isn't any indication of 'years' of uninhabitable Earth due to said volcanos. Said volcanos actually blast dust into the air ... rather than a detonation of a nuke in air ... which directs most of its force down
You have no idea how much energy it takes to damage this planet. The physics tell us you're wrong.
Maintaining a nuclear arsenal is really pricy. They're full of dangerous things.
Which is why it makes sense to leave them where they are. Decommissioning is even more pricey.
And dealing with the decay that you let build up because you were too lazy to maintain them is more costly still. No, 'let them sit' is a stupid fucking idea. Far more cost effective and safe to reprocess them into reactor fuel.
They require LOTS of upkeep. You have to guard them. (They have the power to destroy the world after all) The infrastructure to maintain your active arsenal is massive and costs piles of money, which seems silly for something you hope to never use.
Most of the cost is military. Personally, I think guarding holes in the desert is a much finer jobs program than bombing people in the Middle East. Safer for the people who get the make-work jobs, too.
You should probably try becoming part of this century before telling us about nuclear stockpiles. We don't have nukes sitting in holes in the desert anymore, which is why we don't need as many. We just launch them from subs that no one knows where they are so they can't be taken out.
Some say the nuclear arms race was as much as way to drain money out of the USSR until it collapsed as much as anything else.
Yeah, those people obviously don't work for the Brookings Institute, or the Sante Fe Institute, and so they have no understanding of the games theory basis that led to the policy of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD), resulted in the "Cold War", and kept us out of a hot war.
We're done with that, and I'm sure both sides are sick of throwing money in to a pit. You really only need to blow the world up once, if you're going to do it at all.
If we were sick of throwing money into a pit, we wouldn't have approved TARP, TARP2, and we would have had some campaign promises kept, like closing Gitmo, and getting us out of our two major wars, instead of getting us into two new ones as well. That'd save a bunch of money right there.
I would suggest you take a basic economics and a history course, then learn WHY TARP actually happened rather than what your friends told you. You first need to understand that the magical failed banks failed because laws were changed that suddenly ... on PAPER ... made them insolvable. They were never actually doing bad, they just suddenly became illegal to operate.
I also hear that most nuclear material for peacetime power reactors comes from decommissioned nuclear warheads.
You heard incorrectly. RTG's, or Radioisotope Thermionic Generators, operate on Plutonium. These are used in spacecraft and space probes, Mars landers, and so on. The U.S. mostly buys the Plutonium for those from Russia and other former Soviet republics. Commercial power reactors, other than breeders, run off of Uranium, and the Uranium not only isn't weapons grade, it *can't* be, since if it were, the reactors wouldn't operate properly. Breeders can run on Plutonium, but most of them operate from reprocessed fuel, or as a means of reprocessing fuel.
The U.S. only operates two breeder sites, for the purpose of producing medically useful isotopes, and they are generally not run at capacity. They are under the control of the DOE, and there has been serious talk lately about shutting the one in Oak Ridge down. At which point we will be buying those isotopes from Japan and France - assuming Japan restarts their reactor network again, rather than it committing seppuku after Fukushima made them paranoid.
Or the operate on other things, which even wikipedia lists. blah blah blha I stopped reading here because you're just spewing untrue bullshit.
Microsoft really screwed up this launch
Why are you using the past tense for something that hasn't happened yet?
Businesses regularly say 'we are going to do XXX' just to see how the public reacts. Microsoft is notorious for inventing entire software products, marketing campaigns and release dates ... and never writing a single line of code. The (and many many others, mine included) do it to test reception for a potential product so it can be canceled earlier if its an unsure idea or as misdirection towards competition.
Saying one thing initially and doing something else after customer input is SOP at any company that intends to stay in business.
There are multiple documented ways to do exactly this. Those ways are even included with the Apple Cinema Display and Apple Thunderbolt Display monitors.
I wouldn't be too proud of it.
Most of us can do it, but we'd rather use that time to do something useful other than wasn't 30 seconds deciding what scripts to allow from a site we're going to spend 10 looking at.
You should go get laid or something. Find a purpose to your life, don't waste it away being smug that you prevented some javascript from running.
HTML is a form of code. As is ascii. Its all interpreted and used to control the monitor in some way.
he promise of the internet was accessibility, the ability to freely share information, and to connect everything together.
You use that word differently that most of the rest of the world.
Accessibility is generally meant to mean able to access by the majority of the population, not 'every living soul, regardless of their disability, have full access!
You are being ridiculous and wanting to hold back the majority for a minority. No. Sorry, the world doesn't work that way.
This push towards app-ification of the internet, the W3C caving to DRM in HTML5... it's after the very heart and soul of the internet. The internet we built, as hackers, as creatives, as professors, academics, researchers, scientists... it's being gutted. And Firefox, the white horse of the "free" internet, in it's 11th hour of need, chooses this?
So ... you have a political agenda where no one should be allowed to control access to their own works because you don't like not being to have whatever you want whenever you want without paying ... Cut off your nose to spite your own face. Freedom, means freedom of choice. Firefox supporting DRM gives you the choice between sites that want to use DRM and those that don't.
If Firefox decides no DRM ... then you simply have no choice to visit those sites. You lose freedom.
You are an unrealistic idealist at best, more likely just a loud mouth freeloader. You didn't help build the Internet. You sat around talking about how your perfectly little world would be while the rest of the world built the Internet ... which is 100% control by PRM, like it or not. Physical Rights Management,. deal with it.
Also deal with the fact that you actually do not get to tell others how they share their stuff. Its not your stuff.
IE had ActiveX and such. It was stupid. It was a security issue. It was almost impossible to avoid.
Mozilla Gecko (the framework Firefox is built on) makes extensive use of XPCOM, which is functionally equivalent of ActiveX in every way, except that it works outside of Windows.
Some Firefox plugins are ... XPCOM objects.
XPCOM has been at the core of the Firefox design as long as I've seen the source (I was embedding gecko into apps in my former life, at least 7 years).
You have absolutely no idea what so ever what ActiveX is, nor do you have any idea what the actual problem with IE was that resulted in so many ActiveX related exploits.
ActiveX is a self describing plugin system which allows an application to load and potentially use a plugin without any prior knowledge, EXACTLY like XPCOM in Firefox. Again, they are 100% functionally the same.
Internet Explorer had retarded defaults (allow any unsigned activex to install without asking) to begin with, then those were 'fixed', and then the install without prompting exploits started, so malicious sites would install activex controls without your consent ... and then ... we also have to deal with all activex controls which were installed with improper ActiveX safety flags.
The safety flags were 2 flags set aside to allow an ActiveX control to say 'hey, I'm safe to use in Internet Explorer' and 'I'm safe to allow any random website to use me in IE!'. The morons in the Excel team (as one example) would, out of ignorance, flag all of their controls for Excel as safe for IE/safe for scripting ... so IE thought it was perfectly acceptable to load a control that will read and write random files on the drive. Every time a Windows Update patch for 'ActiveX killbits' comes out ... this is what they are talking about, changing the OS to ignore controls flagged as safe when they are known not to be.
Mozilla has no such support for flagging controls as safe for browser/safe for scripting. It tries to pretend it is an uncrossable barrier, but that is in fact no way the case.
So any time an 'ActiveX' issue comes up, you should be aware that it wasn't an ActiveX problem, it was an Internet Explorer implementation of ActiveX, and other developers bad code that was exploitable.
You really can't 'exploit' ActiveX any more than you can 'exploit' DLL or SO. You can exploit bad implementations of the loader.
Imagine if Firefox allowed web page scripting to automatically install Firefox plugins. Would you blame XPCOM then? Thats what you do when you blame ActiveX.
Finally, it makes you look fucking stupid when you blame ActiveX. All you do is make it clear that you don't actually know what the problem was, let alone understand what it was. You just sound like an ignorant drama queen.
So? Slashvertising doesn't mean anyone actually cares that you too can copy and paste something someone else wrote to a website.
Well, the few seconds you take to go into the hall will allow you to calm down before your freaked out ass babbles incoherently at the operator. You clearly overreact if you think the 5 seconds it takes you to get outside the theater is going to be relevant compared to the fact that someone is going to have to put down their sand which, and drive the ambulance to your ass. They aren't going to rush either, its in fact, part of their training to not over react and rush ... because more shit goes wrong than right in those situations.
While you're flipping out, the medical emergency is going to continue on and those seconds are going to be lost on you.
... So when they repeatedly state that the built in database is for evaluation purposes ONLY and that usage of it may result in data corruption or loss ... on EVERY PAGE ADMIN PAGE UNTIL YOU SWITCH OFF OF the built in database, that wasn't enough of a warning for you?
I'm not sure how much more warning you can get, short of them corrupting your database intentionally on a daily basis so you get the point sooner.
Manning is a traitor in every form of the word, including the legal definition. This isn't negotiable, it is fact.
You may agree with his actions, but he's still a traitor.
Snowden is another Assange. He IS an ego maniac. Not a traitor be definition, but certainly neither is doing it 'for the public good', as you can tell by their behavior alone.
If they cared about the world knowing the truth, they would have told the WORLDs news agencies and left themselves out of it. They do not. They tell a few news agencies ... then setup interviews. This is when they become traitors. They aren't trying to help you or inform you, they are just using your emotional response to the government doing bad things to get attention for themselves, and you're falling for it hook line and sinker.
You are being played, you just haven't figured it out yet.
Doesn't change anything about the information they leaked, but pretending these guys are heros just makes it clear you're gullible.
So ... what you're actually saying is he opened YOUR EYES to the fact that theres a bigger world around you.
I'd hardly call that a win. In my experience the people who suddenly become aware of politics when something like this happens are the worst kind to be involved. A bunch of armchair idiots who think they know how the game is played suddenly telling the players how it should be done.
Thats never a good thing, and thats what you are.
Yeah, if you're some Iraqi kid that the Americans shot from a helicopter for no particular reason?
You're seriously still bringing up the fucking video that clearly shows what you're saying is entirely untrue ... AND getting marked +5 insightful?
Its mind numbing how you can see reality in front of you and warp it into something entirely different. You sir, are completely out of touch with reality. You take a single event, edit the video in your favor, it still doesn't show what you claim, but none the less, you rant on.
People like you are why so many people trust the government. The government has far better propaganda and lies. Your propaganda and lies are so obvious its not even funny.
The problem is that implementations that are checking the certificate are not requiring third party authenticated signing timestamps.
If the implementations checking certificates required a trusted root signed timestamp with the digital signature in any of those implementations, then expired certificates would be useless.
Certificates can be compromised, but they are far better than passwords people use.
There has yet to be an actual problem with certificates, just bad implementations.
I would love for you to point me at some software that has never had any implementation faults.
The Hindenburg doesn't, at least not anymore.
Snowden is a no body. Thats why he's getting out of Russia. If he had anything that mattered, he would have 'never landed in Russia' and disappeared.
What he has 'leaked', the rest of the world sat back and said 'uhm, yea? You didn't figure that out 30 years ago?'
Snowden's leaks just show he's a traitor, they bring no actual value to the table, no new information, just a basic confirmation of what we already knew.