Additionally, the man is effectively in captivity under a lot of stress. That can present a very different person than that individual might be if not for being locked in the fucking embassy, for example.
Which - based on the implications, would require 1/100th of the muscle just to seek parity with a normal human muscle. So, it sounds like this should be quite easy to have it do much more work than a human muscle.
It's also perhaps not great that this is the method they are tracking cheats, because using a VPN or proxy will likely thwart some of the positives they would be looking for here. So the method of tracking was via obscurity, which is now gone.
This is hilarious. You think there's some company that doesn't say you're fucked if you give out your information? It's just legal boilerplate. That doesn't mean it's enforceable.
The fact that they're restricting access that was easily and openly given out before is just a slow attempt to cover up the barn door which has been left open. It's pretty funny, to be quite honest.
This has to be approved and/or actually pass to even get towards attempting to ban someone's phone from being used. Whether it is even legal or not at that point is going to likely fall on "not a legal bill", as the first amendment doesn't stop just because someone else doesn't like it - which is what sums up this bill.
A lack of anything being quantifiable makes a theory completely unsound. That's not to say it can't be a theory, but the "probability" is 0. That's not "very low", it's zero.
"The classic design in 2018? Probably not going to cut it?"
Have you thought about how long the classic design stayed in place? One of the reasons is specifically how well it works. I hope you should realize that good design lasts, while shoddy design doesn't.
Hint: the new design doesn't particularly appear good or even usable. It looks more like reddit without being able to upvote/downvote articles.
This is wrong. Considering Issa is one of the people actually pushing back against the NSA, suing without a solid foundation/way to prove it's solidly outside of the realm of law as only that information is starting to trickle out now (initial leaks did not do this), the POTUS will tear him apart if he does some bullshit/shaky lawsuit that even the judges will be compelled to dismiss.
It sucks, but both laws need to reformed AND people need to be held accountable. You can't do one without the other.
To claim that our focus is liberty is like to claim our focus is freedom. It's to mislead from the first sentence by stating "I am supporting a strawman political view which is incompatible with society". I don't accept that.
Re: charging : carbon credits (a form of bullshit, really) has worked out so well for us before. I mean, it surely stopped pollution, right? All they became is a source of financial trading and didn't actually reduce emissions.
Financial penalties do not motivate companies to do anything other than avoid them. Financial incentives can change things, if they are the right ones. Here's what you give companies: a tax credit for measuring and proving that they have reduced emissions in a variety of fashions by a percentage. Higher tax credits for continuing the trend over say, 5 years. Difficulty: writing this in a way that isn't exploited by violating the spirit of the law. Is this easy? no, not at all. Is it going to be picked apart by interested parties? Absolutely.
Guess what? the US gov't already provides this in a few forms for reducing waste, and it works much better but simply can't be ramped up as much as is necessary.
Either you stand up for your own views, or you don't.
The rest is hilarious. Steam is the best of the worst, and the second someone offers something better I would leave steam forever. I see no reason to provide them business or loyalty on a personal level unless it cannot be avoided. Fortunately humblebundle is starting to encroach on the Steam situation by noticeably not requiring DRM on a majority of their titles and so does desura.
You go right back to the "lets find a line between good and evil" and then "let's find a line between using a compromised source with uncompromised software running on top of it". Neither of those examples are correct from the Stallman perspective. It's already making a compromise by merely being in those situations, merely for the sake of (reason omitted because you sure as hell didn't provide one). MS needs to make windows GPLv3 - in which they hilariously think would end their company's reign when in reality it would easily have 100% adoption the day they do it. Day one defacto standard. Could they still make money in that situation? Absolutely.
I don't see anything in your post that has any merit whatsoever.
A philosophy and/or a moral is exactly that. His rests on specific and solid legal foundation, so to imply the individual should change his philosophy is to deny both correct legal foundations and actual facts.
That's like saying "I'd like to see (individual) have their history rewritten because it supports (my) personal worldview".
I can't think of situations where that is the correct response to correct opinions. Stallman's view was and is correct, and to blame him for the results of it is to deny that the problems are with every single tech company that takes decisions to the contrary. It's not any different than the free speech vs surveillance vs security debate, and look at how we're doing with the latter of those? People have compromised their philosophical values there too.
No, it's not. That's not a choice, it's a false dichotomy.
Open software constructed with open standards is preferable to proprietary software. You're implying that a lesser evil is somehow still ok. No thanks.
No, many people have claimed to have started moving away frmo GPL with GPLV3. Repeating a false statement more times doesn't mean it's more true. The people who claimed to have moved away needed GPLv2's loopholes and/or BSD.
First: All libertarian spells out is ignorance. Actual libertarianism is truly incompatible with any modern society. People don't seem to understand that an excess of liberty is just as bad as a lack of liberty, and that truth lands somewhere in the middle away from libertarians and republicans who call themselves libertarians, and away from the entire political spectrum. The truth lies in facts, not political viewpoints.
That said, not only is every country guilty of allowing too much pollution in different ways, but nobody wants to try to crack down on china due to their own problems being exposed. Even at a time where global warming is explicitly acknowledged as a manmade effect, countries are still not even cracking down on their own populace to reduce emissions - and it's not a single country that would fix the problem, either - including China and the US.
Hopefully this highlights that global pollution requires global action, not "China's polluting California!" but "why do both countries not have more significant actions being taken to reduce emissions"?
I would fail to find that relevant at all. 100% sidetrack.
You have both the fairly significant difficulty of having to find them in the first place, and the fact that most people are simply not going to go through that effort as well. The problem is you can't simply quantify or guarantee that you *do* have them, but you also cannot guarantee that you do not. The fact that the NSA has explicit documentation showing that they use these tactics however, guarantees that security is compromised by the NSA - and while they think it's "For" themselves, it benefits anyone who can figure out their exploits.
The real question is, how can we prevent this to ensure that we don't have security compromised by the NSA?
it's a digital product and it's also a public broadcast. This would be like saying I'm stealing from slashdot by posting the slashdot logo somewhere else. Give me a fucking break with your leap of logic.
Slashdot Mirror
Additionally, the man is effectively in captivity under a lot of stress. That can present a very different person than that individual might be if not for being locked in the fucking embassy, for example.
Considering how this information is sent, it may be trivial for the NSA to capture such information by definition.
Way to go, Microsoft.
Which - based on the implications, would require 1/100th of the muscle just to seek parity with a normal human muscle. So, it sounds like this should be quite easy to have it do much more work than a human muscle.
It's also perhaps not great that this is the method they are tracking cheats, because using a VPN or proxy will likely thwart some of the positives they would be looking for here. So the method of tracking was via obscurity, which is now gone.
Fair enough, I do forget to separate the two. I do assume you understood what I meant, though.
There are still single core systems that aren't legacy and use java?
This is hilarious. You think there's some company that doesn't say you're fucked if you give out your information? It's just legal boilerplate. That doesn't mean it's enforceable.
The fact that they're restricting access that was easily and openly given out before is just a slow attempt to cover up the barn door which has been left open. It's pretty funny, to be quite honest.
This has to be approved and/or actually pass to even get towards attempting to ban someone's phone from being used. Whether it is even legal or not at that point is going to likely fall on "not a legal bill", as the first amendment doesn't stop just because someone else doesn't like it - which is what sums up this bill.
A lack of anything being quantifiable makes a theory completely unsound. That's not to say it can't be a theory, but the "probability" is 0. That's not "very low", it's zero.
"The classic design in 2018? Probably not going to cut it?"
Have you thought about how long the classic design stayed in place? One of the reasons is specifically how well it works. I hope you should realize that good design lasts, while shoddy design doesn't.
Hint: the new design doesn't particularly appear good or even usable. It looks more like reddit without being able to upvote/downvote articles.
I don't quite understand, what is really being changed?
Not that I think it needs to be changed, but isn't moderation and threading still here?
Because it's incredibly easy to pad numbers and claim them as fact without focusing on the real details?
This is wrong. Considering Issa is one of the people actually pushing back against the NSA, suing without a solid foundation/way to prove it's solidly outside of the realm of law as only that information is starting to trickle out now (initial leaks did not do this), the POTUS will tear him apart if he does some bullshit/shaky lawsuit that even the judges will be compelled to dismiss.
It sucks, but both laws need to reformed AND people need to be held accountable. You can't do one without the other.
To claim that our focus is liberty is like to claim our focus is freedom. It's to mislead from the first sentence by stating "I am supporting a strawman political view which is incompatible with society". I don't accept that.
Re: charging : carbon credits (a form of bullshit, really) has worked out so well for us before. I mean, it surely stopped pollution, right? All they became is a source of financial trading and didn't actually reduce emissions.
Financial penalties do not motivate companies to do anything other than avoid them. Financial incentives can change things, if they are the right ones. Here's what you give companies: a tax credit for measuring and proving that they have reduced emissions in a variety of fashions by a percentage. Higher tax credits for continuing the trend over say, 5 years. Difficulty: writing this in a way that isn't exploited by violating the spirit of the law. Is this easy? no, not at all. Is it going to be picked apart by interested parties? Absolutely.
Guess what? the US gov't already provides this in a few forms for reducing waste, and it works much better but simply can't be ramped up as much as is necessary.
Either you stand up for your own views, or you don't.
The rest is hilarious. Steam is the best of the worst, and the second someone offers something better I would leave steam forever. I see no reason to provide them business or loyalty on a personal level unless it cannot be avoided. Fortunately humblebundle is starting to encroach on the Steam situation by noticeably not requiring DRM on a majority of their titles and so does desura.
You go right back to the "lets find a line between good and evil" and then "let's find a line between using a compromised source with uncompromised software running on top of it". Neither of those examples are correct from the Stallman perspective. It's already making a compromise by merely being in those situations, merely for the sake of (reason omitted because you sure as hell didn't provide one). MS needs to make windows GPLv3 - in which they hilariously think would end their company's reign when in reality it would easily have 100% adoption the day they do it. Day one defacto standard. Could they still make money in that situation? Absolutely.
I don't see anything in your post that has any merit whatsoever.
A philosophy and/or a moral is exactly that. His rests on specific and solid legal foundation, so to imply the individual should change his philosophy is to deny both correct legal foundations and actual facts.
That's like saying "I'd like to see (individual) have their history rewritten because it supports (my) personal worldview".
I can't think of situations where that is the correct response to correct opinions. Stallman's view was and is correct, and to blame him for the results of it is to deny that the problems are with every single tech company that takes decisions to the contrary. It's not any different than the free speech vs surveillance vs security debate, and look at how we're doing with the latter of those? People have compromised their philosophical values there too.
No, it's not. That's not a choice, it's a false dichotomy.
Open software constructed with open standards is preferable to proprietary software. You're implying that a lesser evil is somehow still ok. No thanks.
No, many people have claimed to have started moving away frmo GPL with GPLV3. Repeating a false statement more times doesn't mean it's more true. The people who claimed to have moved away needed GPLv2's loopholes and/or BSD.
First:
All libertarian spells out is ignorance. Actual libertarianism is truly incompatible with any modern society. People don't seem to understand that an excess of liberty is just as bad as a lack of liberty, and that truth lands somewhere in the middle away from libertarians and republicans who call themselves libertarians, and away from the entire political spectrum. The truth lies in facts, not political viewpoints.
That said, not only is every country guilty of allowing too much pollution in different ways, but nobody wants to try to crack down on china due to their own problems being exposed. Even at a time where global warming is explicitly acknowledged as a manmade effect, countries are still not even cracking down on their own populace to reduce emissions - and it's not a single country that would fix the problem, either - including China and the US.
Hopefully this highlights that global pollution requires global action, not "China's polluting California!" but "why do both countries not have more significant actions being taken to reduce emissions"?
You are dead on. This article is basically apple marketing and posturing.
The equivalent to "you don't have anything to hide" response is 100% incorrect. https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20131126/01352025373/if-you-dont-care-about-nsa-because-you-havent-done-anything-wrong-youre-wrong.shtml That's simply stating that you feel you are not a target at the moment, but that's not to say you can't be completely screwed the second you are the target. So not only is that also a sidetrack, it's wrong.
I would fail to find that relevant at all. 100% sidetrack.
You have both the fairly significant difficulty of having to find them in the first place, and the fact that most people are simply not going to go through that effort as well. The problem is you can't simply quantify or guarantee that you *do* have them, but you also cannot guarantee that you do not. The fact that the NSA has explicit documentation showing that they use these tactics however, guarantees that security is compromised by the NSA - and while they think it's "For" themselves, it benefits anyone who can figure out their exploits.
The real question is, how can we prevent this to ensure that we don't have security compromised by the NSA?
This doesn't exist. Condoms come in multiple sizes, and anyone who thinks there is a one size fits all is actually very misinformed about condoms.
There's nothing to "steal":
it's a digital product and it's also a public broadcast. This would be like saying I'm stealing from slashdot by posting the slashdot logo somewhere else. Give me a fucking break with your leap of logic.
Not enough people read techdirt, sadly. They think it's biased but really it's one of the best sources for digging out information as of lately.