Yes, the current CA system is bad, but having a single point of failure is even worse IMO.
There's a difference between trusting the best out of 400 and the sum of 400.
Every single out of 400+ CAs can falsify a certificate. No matter if they're sloppy, broken into, operated by a bad government or susceptible to orders from a bad government -- all it takes is to get a single CA to cooperate against you.
On the other hand, with DNSSEC+DANE, you're trusting only a single TLD operator and a single registry. You even get to pick the latter arbitrarily, and get to pick the former if you're fine with changing the TLD. Thus, assuming both certs were generated with the same security, DNSSEC+DANE is already strictly better than the CA cartel.
But they're not -- if you can subvert DNS, most CAs will gladly grant you a certificate.
In fact, the Linux community pretty much rejects the Unix philosophy these days. Systemd and PulseAudio are Gnome 3 are more like Windows than they are anything Unix-like.
That's not the Linux community, that's the FreeDesktop community. That'd be like claiming that a single political party is same as a country. Windows is like North Korea, but Linux is not.
On their own, the vast majority of policemen are honest, or a good enough approximation of that. But when an order comes from the above, most will choose to keep their jobs over defending you.
Since the image choice is not yours, let me assure you, the image(s) that get planted won't be just borderline. Also, the police are assumed to never, ever plant such images even in cases it's widely known they hate your guts.
And you can keep your whataboutism - we're discussing Trump here, not whatever phantoms you wish to deflect criticism of "your guy".
How exactly is Trump "my guy"? For starters, the last time I checked, I'm not in America. Nor am I a right-winger in any way. I'm just responding to AmiMoJo, pointing out which side of the American fence is more similar to the Nazis. At this point, what you guys are doing is not just pot calling the kettle black, it's pot calling a slightly dirty refrigerator black.
My family had some unpleasantries with actual Nazis. My paternal grandma was raised in a family with 8 kids, 6 of which (adult at the time) got killed by Germans in the Warsaw Uprising, so was her first husband -- two weeks after they got married.
But I'm also not forgetting that the Uprising started when the Russian army was coming and already had footholds not just in the city but even on the other side of Vistula river. Then they backpedaled and waited several months for the Germans to squash the Uprising, all while not only denying the Americans/British/Poles-in-UK any opportunity to supply the Uprising but even actively shooting at American planes who tried to help anyway. Thus, while my grandma's siblings were directly killed by Germans, I blame the Ruskies more for their deaths. It is still possible to die in a winning battle but that's a calculated risk, not assuming someone might be so vile to sabotage their own war effort for a minor propaganda gain ("we relieved Warsaw" vs "we 'liberated' Warsaw").
And what riles me the most is that history books still call Russians "allies". "Allies" who started the war as enemies, were enemies the day after the war ended, and shot at your planes midway in the war. So please stop ignoring all wrongness done by those you consider "your side".
Symapthiser isn't the word I'd use. But he associated with them and fails to condemn them when given the opportunity, because he knows that distancing himself from them would damage his base.
We are not comparing Trump to Hitler, we are pointing out that there are literal, actual Nazis involved in his administration and in his electoral campaign. And many others who are not literal Nazis, but have supported Nazis or nationalists, or are nationalists, or are just generally awful people.
You mean, the same Trump whose first foreign visit was to Israel, and whose daughter is Jewish, is a Nazi sympathiser? While your side keeps shouting praise of a vile theo-political ideology who literally (in the real sense of this word) tend to have "death to Jews" on their flags?
You're like Putin whose propaganda went all out towards equating Ukraine with Pravyi Sektor when it had 1 parliament member. Of the two sides of American politics, it's the left whose mainstream politicians give support to a violent "kill those who have a different skin color than us" terrorist hate group: Sanders gave BLM a wholehearted support while Clinton was at least somewhat in favour of it. I don't see Trump praising the alt-right.
Thus, of the two violent red-white-and-black flag raising, raised-hand gesture, racist groups, the left are worse (in the US).
Things are different for example in Poland or Turkey, but Facebook has nowhere as much influence here.
And globally, Hitler killed "only" 21 millions, while communists clock around 180M (totalling Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, etc). Weighting religious wars upon how much they were religious and how much secular, I'd give Christianity 100M and Islam around 75M (vast majority of it in India). So yeah, even literal Nazis (not to be confused with alt-right who are racist but mostly not nationalist and almost never socialist) were nowhere as bad as your heroes. (Preempting your likely answer, no, killing 21M folks doesn't make you good.)
So sorry but I refuse to discriminate between "hate those with a different skin color, shape of genitals we dislike, etc" groups -- they all are a plague that humanity suffers from.
Well, there are more extreme cases. I heard of a wedding party 2ky ago where they ran out of booze; such estimations were mastered even that long ago thus I expect the housekeeper's error to be minimal. Yet the shortage, in modern units, was between 450 and 680 liters. Even assuming the whole village and the village next to it had been invited, the amount of alcohol per person must have been of truly biblical proportions.
Your FCC claims that Net Neutrality kills innovation on the Internet. Our Ministry of Education's curriculum board says sexual education must preach virginity until marriage, while even high schoolers (including those who are 18) should not be teached anything about actual intercourse, and that birth control is "contrary to moral norms".
All three are political organizations, not panels of impartial engineers/doctors.
Or, another approach: as such studies are done on a limited sample that often suffers from some sort of selection bias, let's instead compare whole countries. Here are the figures for %HIV prevalence in the entire population, and ratios of prevalence in circumcized to uncircumcized men:
(Sorry for the broken table, Slashdot considers any non-trivial <pre> to be "junk".) country %HIV c/i =i/c Kenya 6.7% 0.24 (1/4.20) Burkina Faso 1.8% 0.62 (1/1.61) Uganda 6.45 0.68 (1/1.47) Ivory Coast 4.75 0.74 (1/1.35) Ethiopia 1.4% 0.82 (1/1.22)
As you can see, especially in countries with a high incidence of HIV, circumcized men are more affected.
There are two strong outliers: Cameroon where intact is better, and Kenya where cut it better. But, in the latter, the vast majority (84%) of men are circumcised, while most of the rest belong to a single ethnic group. That group, the only tribe in Kenya that shuns circumcision, not only practices polygamy, but also has a deeply rooted custom of "wife inheritance" -- if your brother's wife dies, you're supposed to take her (this was known in ancient Middle East as "levirate marriage"). The mortality rate in age groups that have sexual relations is very small compared to the general population, thus AIDS is the most common cause of death among sexually active people. Thus, that brother had usually died of AIDS...
All of the above countries are among the least developed. So let's take a look at rich educated countries: the US with AIDS prevalence of 0.6% vs Europe with 0.2%. Which one of them has a high circumcision rate, and in which it is hardly ever practised?
in this case it's being done for a very positive reason, which is that it's known to reduce the transmission of AIDS
Nope, the preponderance of evidence say the transmission of AIDS is either unaffected or enhanced by circumcision.
Almost any claims that circumcision protects from AIDS quote the infamous Camp Orange/Orange Farms study. That study consists of an egregious list of scientific misconduct. For example, the circumcised group had received sexual education while the control group did not -- so it's not surprising that men who had a downtime and were taught safe(r) practices will have less AIDS. The researchers' bias was so strong they immediately destroyed the control group "so they can benefit too" before even the data was tabulated.
But, if a study is funded by the Gates Foundation, it will be stopped early "because of futility" of protection, while in fact the preliminary data show a strong increase of risk.
(though I'm circumcised, as are most American men, and I don't consider myself "mutilated"
I'm sorry for you. Alas, people who suffer from some malady tend to have a strong bias that "it's the right thing to do". For example, the strongest driver for female circumcision are older women who were circumcised themselves. Same for the deaf.
even if it does (theoretically) reduce a little sexual pleasure
"theoretically", "a little"?!? While you're unable to make this test yourself, you can ask an intact friend: wear regular underwear (ie, not commando, not boxers), retract the foreskin, try walking. For extra bonus, do it where there are people around so you can't adjust (this randomly happened to me a couple times). The chafing is so strong it's a pain. If penises get so calloused such chafing is not noticeable, there's hardly any feeling left.
I'm concerned and I'd like to read a study that has not been sponsored by the industry hawking the product.
Ha ha ha. This bridge can reach not only Terabithia but up to Mars' orbit. Just count studies that say male genital mutilation has no or bad effect on STD transmission (most of them) vs ones that claim it is a miracle cure for AIDS (the ridiculously bad Orange Farms study, a few that have a conclusion that contradicts their own data, and that's it) -- then compare with what you read in press or even on Wikipedia. Or, see "not sponsored by the industry, honest" studies of tobacco and sugar a few decades ago. Or, gender wage gap. Or, global warming "not being caused by humans". Or...
No, because it will be chemically indistinguishable from the meat you get from slaughtering an animal.
So lemme give you a small sack of sand, with a few grains of gold and many other trace metals, and toss in a lump of partially rusted iron -- while I get a computer. They are chemically indistinguishable from each other, you see.
Just a recent case, the "terrorist" in Charlottesville. While it hurts me to defend a neo-Confederate, I don't see even any malice there. The guy was an idiot, but what would you do when an angry hostile mob that beats people around you surrounds your car, doesn't let you go and tries to pry the doors open to beat (or worse) you? The guy panicked and drove free over the mob.
The police during that rally was so extremely biased that I don't believe a word of what they say. There's been enough of the same going on in Poland, Turkey -- not to mention countries like Russia that don't even bother with color of law anymore.
In Poland, bastards from our far-right government keep reassigning, firing, and even jailing cops and judges who try to be fair. For example, there's been a series of cases where govt members illegally declared their cars to be "emergency vehicles", used light signals but not sound, travelled at a reckless speed then when inevitable accidents occurred, had the police declare people they slammed into to be guilty. Who cares about witnesses and physical evidence? They can force the cops and judges to do their bidding.
Alt-right is no worse and no better than Antifa -- both are hate groups. It just depends on which side happens to be liked by people in charge.
* intellectual property laws: some vague stuff for example here; there's so many hits for their relations to "intellectual property" that it's hard to tell the whaff away. I can't search tonight, lemme find better citations later.
He also made massive donations to promoting genital mutilation (instead of fighting it).
He also prefers $1000 per dose meds bought from companies he cooperates with instead of $2 per dose of the same substance produced locally. Worse, receiving those $1000 meds usually comes with strings attached where they're contingent on passing laws that shut down production of generics in the name of "intellectual property".
The difference is, supporters of neo-Nazi groups are really few, while a good part of leftist public figures (politicians like Sanders, CEOs like Zuckerberg, etc) support BLM.
Thus, this time it's the left that's the bigger problem in the US. I dread the next time the pendulum swings...
In the meanwhile, Poland, Hungary, Turkey have far-right in power.
You mean, you're not a hate group if you call for murdering police officers, any white people, and especially a particular hispanic guy who dared to defend himself against a violent thief -- right?
The only people who claim it is are themselves members of hate groups.
Hmm, in a sense... I do hate racists. But I don't think recursion works here -- I hate their acts, not their skin color or gender.
If you discriminate based on irrelevant[1] attributes, don't count on me liking you.
[1]. Skin color is relevant for a movie about vikings, gender and appearance for a Hooters waitress.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, the current CA system is bad, but having a single point of failure is even worse IMO.
There's a difference between trusting the best out of 400 and the sum of 400.
Every single out of 400+ CAs can falsify a certificate. No matter if they're sloppy, broken into, operated by a bad government or susceptible to orders from a bad government -- all it takes is to get a single CA to cooperate against you.
On the other hand, with DNSSEC+DANE, you're trusting only a single TLD operator and a single registry. You even get to pick the latter arbitrarily, and get to pick the former if you're fine with changing the TLD. Thus, assuming both certs were generated with the same security, DNSSEC+DANE is already strictly better than the CA cartel.
But they're not -- if you can subvert DNS, most CAs will gladly grant you a certificate.
In fact, the Linux community pretty much rejects the Unix philosophy these days. Systemd and PulseAudio are Gnome 3 are more like Windows than they are anything Unix-like.
That's not the Linux community, that's the FreeDesktop community. That'd be like claiming that a single political party is same as a country. Windows is like North Korea, but Linux is not.
Yeah, we voted in a Black and a White Mobster, but we'll vote in a Woman next chance we get, promise!
With Americans so stuck on their religion, I don't see her winning -- she's Jewish.
On their own, the vast majority of policemen are honest, or a good enough approximation of that. But when an order comes from the above, most will choose to keep their jobs over defending you.
There's been nothing decent since N900. Yet Gemini looks promising.
Since the image choice is not yours, let me assure you, the image(s) that get planted won't be just borderline. Also, the police are assumed to never, ever plant such images even in cases it's widely known they hate your guts.
And you can keep your whataboutism - we're discussing Trump here, not whatever phantoms you wish to deflect criticism of "your guy".
How exactly is Trump "my guy"? For starters, the last time I checked, I'm not in America. Nor am I a right-winger in any way. I'm just responding to AmiMoJo, pointing out which side of the American fence is more similar to the Nazis. At this point, what you guys are doing is not just pot calling the kettle black, it's pot calling a slightly dirty refrigerator black.
My family had some unpleasantries with actual Nazis. My paternal grandma was raised in a family with 8 kids, 6 of which (adult at the time) got killed by Germans in the Warsaw Uprising, so was her first husband -- two weeks after they got married.
But I'm also not forgetting that the Uprising started when the Russian army was coming and already had footholds not just in the city but even on the other side of Vistula river. Then they backpedaled and waited several months for the Germans to squash the Uprising, all while not only denying the Americans/British/Poles-in-UK any opportunity to supply the Uprising but even actively shooting at American planes who tried to help anyway. Thus, while my grandma's siblings were directly killed by Germans, I blame the Ruskies more for their deaths. It is still possible to die in a winning battle but that's a calculated risk, not assuming someone might be so vile to sabotage their own war effort for a minor propaganda gain ("we relieved Warsaw" vs "we 'liberated' Warsaw").
And what riles me the most is that history books still call Russians "allies". "Allies" who started the war as enemies, were enemies the day after the war ended, and shot at your planes midway in the war. So please stop ignoring all wrongness done by those you consider "your side".
Symapthiser isn't the word I'd use. But he associated with them and fails to condemn them when given the opportunity, because he knows that distancing himself from them would damage his base.
You mean, like this?
Even if he didn't, I'd blame your Dear Leader for this only once I hear Hillary and Bernie condemning BLM. To the contrary, they keep singing praise.
We are not comparing Trump to Hitler, we are pointing out that there are literal, actual Nazis involved in his administration and in his electoral campaign. And many others who are not literal Nazis, but have supported Nazis or nationalists, or are nationalists, or are just generally awful people.
You mean, the same Trump whose first foreign visit was to Israel, and whose daughter is Jewish, is a Nazi sympathiser? While your side keeps shouting praise of a vile theo-political ideology who literally (in the real sense of this word) tend to have "death to Jews" on their flags?
You're like Putin whose propaganda went all out towards equating Ukraine with Pravyi Sektor when it had 1 parliament member. Of the two sides of American politics, it's the left whose mainstream politicians give support to a violent "kill those who have a different skin color than us" terrorist hate group: Sanders gave BLM a wholehearted support while Clinton was at least somewhat in favour of it. I don't see Trump praising the alt-right.
Thus, of the two violent red-white-and-black flag raising, raised-hand gesture, racist groups, the left are worse (in the US).
Things are different for example in Poland or Turkey, but Facebook has nowhere as much influence here.
And globally, Hitler killed "only" 21 millions, while communists clock around 180M (totalling Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, etc). Weighting religious wars upon how much they were religious and how much secular, I'd give Christianity 100M and Islam around 75M (vast majority of it in India). So yeah, even literal Nazis (not to be confused with alt-right who are racist but mostly not nationalist and almost never socialist) were nowhere as bad as your heroes. (Preempting your likely answer, no, killing 21M folks doesn't make you good.)
So sorry but I refuse to discriminate between "hate those with a different skin color, shape of genitals we dislike, etc" groups -- they all are a plague that humanity suffers from.
Well, there are more extreme cases. I heard of a wedding party 2ky ago where they ran out of booze; such estimations were mastered even that long ago thus I expect the housekeeper's error to be minimal. Yet the shortage, in modern units, was between 450 and 680 liters. Even assuming the whole village and the village next to it had been invited, the amount of alcohol per person must have been of truly biblical proportions.
So Firefox users on Windows and Mac get something, so do those on Chrome... but, what can I get on eLinks on arm64 Linux?
The UN health organization disagrees with you.
Your FCC claims that Net Neutrality kills innovation on the Internet. Our Ministry of Education's curriculum board says sexual education must preach virginity until marriage, while even high schoolers (including those who are 18) should not be teached anything about actual intercourse, and that birth control is "contrary to moral norms".
All three are political organizations, not panels of impartial engineers/doctors.
Or, another approach: as such studies are done on a limited sample that often suffers from some sort of selection bias, let's instead compare whole countries. Here are the figures for %HIV prevalence in the entire population, and ratios of prevalence in circumcized to uncircumcized men:
(Sorry for the broken table, Slashdot considers any non-trivial <pre> to be "junk".)
country %HIV c/i =i/c
Kenya 6.7% 0.24 (1/4.20)
Burkina Faso 1.8% 0.62 (1/1.61)
Uganda 6.45 0.68 (1/1.47)
Ivory Coast 4.75 0.74 (1/1.35)
Ethiopia 1.4% 0.82 (1/1.22)
Cameroon 5.5% 3.73
Rwanda 3.0% 1.67
Lesotho 23.5% 1.50
Malawi 11.8% 1.39
Tanzania 7.0% 1.16
Ghana 2.2% 1.14
Swaziland 25.9% 1.12
As you can see, especially in countries with a high incidence of HIV, circumcized men are more affected.
There are two strong outliers: Cameroon where intact is better, and Kenya where cut it better. But, in the latter, the vast majority (84%) of men are circumcised, while most of the rest belong to a single ethnic group. That group, the only tribe in Kenya that shuns circumcision, not only practices polygamy, but also has a deeply rooted custom of "wife inheritance" -- if your brother's wife dies, you're supposed to take her (this was known in ancient Middle East as "levirate marriage"). The mortality rate in age groups that have sexual relations is very small compared to the general population, thus AIDS is the most common cause of death among sexually active people. Thus, that brother had usually died of AIDS...
All of the above countries are among the least developed. So let's take a look at rich educated countries: the US with AIDS prevalence of 0.6% vs Europe with 0.2%. Which one of them has a high circumcision rate, and in which it is hardly ever practised?
in this case it's being done for a very positive reason, which is that it's known to reduce the transmission of AIDS
Nope, the preponderance of evidence say the transmission of AIDS is either unaffected or enhanced by circumcision.
Almost any claims that circumcision protects from AIDS quote the infamous Camp Orange/Orange Farms study. That study consists of an egregious list of scientific misconduct. For example, the circumcised group had received sexual education while the control group did not -- so it's not surprising that men who had a downtime and were taught safe(r) practices will have less AIDS. The researchers' bias was so strong they immediately destroyed the control group "so they can benefit too" before even the data was tabulated.
Let's take a look at other studies:small increase of risk; no effect; large increase. Or for gay men: UK, US, Scotland.
On the other hand, there's a significant increase of MtF transmission.
But, if a study is funded by the Gates Foundation, it will be stopped early "because of futility" of protection, while in fact the preliminary data show a strong increase of risk.
Or, papers outright lie about the conclusion: "Declining Rates in Male Circumcision amidst Increasing Evidence of its Public Health Benefit -- in all categories other than one the "benefit" is negative, and the only category where circumcision slightly wins (heterosexuals with syphilis) had a sample of 6.
(though I'm circumcised, as are most American men, and I don't consider myself "mutilated"
I'm sorry for you. Alas, people who suffer from some malady tend to have a strong bias that "it's the right thing to do". For example, the strongest driver for female circumcision are older women who were circumcised themselves. Same for the deaf.
even if it does (theoretically) reduce a little sexual pleasure
"theoretically", "a little"?!? While you're unable to make this test yourself, you can ask an intact friend: wear regular underwear (ie, not commando, not boxers), retract the foreskin, try walking. For extra bonus, do it where there are people around so you can't adjust (this randomly happened to me a couple times). The chafing is so strong it's a pain. If penises get so calloused such chafing is not noticeable, there's hardly any feeling left.
I'm concerned and I'd like to read a study that has not been sponsored by the industry hawking the product.
Ha ha ha. This bridge can reach not only Terabithia but up to Mars' orbit. Just count studies that say male genital mutilation has no or bad effect on STD transmission (most of them) vs ones that claim it is a miracle cure for AIDS (the ridiculously bad Orange Farms study, a few that have a conclusion that contradicts their own data, and that's it) -- then compare with what you read in press or even on Wikipedia. Or, see "not sponsored by the industry, honest" studies of tobacco and sugar a few decades ago. Or, gender wage gap. Or, global warming "not being caused by humans". Or...
No, because it will be chemically indistinguishable from the meat you get from slaughtering an animal.
So lemme give you a small sack of sand, with a few grains of gold and many other trace metals, and toss in a lump of partially rusted iron -- while I get a computer. They are chemically indistinguishable from each other, you see.
Can we please have some labelling laws so this thing can't be legally called "meat"?
There's enough problems with processed food already. Here we have a processed thing that did not even start from being food.
Captain anakata provides a better service here.
You haven't seen his opponent, have you?
Just a recent case, the "terrorist" in Charlottesville. While it hurts me to defend a neo-Confederate, I don't see even any malice there. The guy was an idiot, but what would you do when an angry hostile mob that beats people around you surrounds your car, doesn't let you go and tries to pry the doors open to beat (or worse) you? The guy panicked and drove free over the mob.
The police during that rally was so extremely biased that I don't believe a word of what they say. There's been enough of the same going on in Poland, Turkey -- not to mention countries like Russia that don't even bother with color of law anymore.
In Poland, bastards from our far-right government keep reassigning, firing, and even jailing cops and judges who try to be fair. For example, there's been a series of cases where govt members illegally declared their cars to be "emergency vehicles", used light signals but not sound, travelled at a reckless speed then when inevitable accidents occurred, had the police declare people they slammed into to be guilty. Who cares about witnesses and physical evidence? They can force the cops and judges to do their bidding.
Alt-right is no worse and no better than Antifa -- both are hate groups. It just depends on which side happens to be liked by people in charge.
Citations?
* male genital mutilation
* intellectual property laws: some vague stuff for example here; there's so many hits for their relations to "intellectual property" that it's hard to tell the whaff away. I can't search tonight, lemme find better citations later.
He also made massive donations to promoting genital mutilation (instead of fighting it).
He also prefers $1000 per dose meds bought from companies he cooperates with instead of $2 per dose of the same substance produced locally. Worse, receiving those $1000 meds usually comes with strings attached where they're contingent on passing laws that shut down production of generics in the name of "intellectual property".
B&M Gates Foundation is one of worst charities.
The difference is, supporters of neo-Nazi groups are really few, while a good part of leftist public figures (politicians like Sanders, CEOs like Zuckerberg, etc) support BLM.
Thus, this time it's the left that's the bigger problem in the US. I dread the next time the pendulum swings...
In the meanwhile, Poland, Hungary, Turkey have far-right in power.
You mean, you're not a hate group if you call for murdering police officers, any white people, and especially a particular hispanic guy who dared to defend himself against a violent thief -- right?
The only people who claim it is are themselves members of hate groups.
Hmm, in a sense... I do hate racists. But I don't think recursion works here -- I hate their acts, not their skin color or gender.
If you discriminate based on irrelevant[1] attributes, don't count on me liking you.
[1]. Skin color is relevant for a movie about vikings, gender and appearance for a Hooters waitress.
Using legal means to reduce the exposure of White Supremacist groups is moral.
But if you do so while promoting hate groups such as BLM or Ada Initiative, that's hypocrisy of the worst degree.
Unless you somehow argue there's such as thing as "good racism".
Some Microsoft ball mice were great, this can't be said about any of their optical mice, though. All the rest of their hardware was and is crap.
And let's not even start about Microsoft's software.