The only thing I would add is that a ketogenic diet is really hard on the kidneys (look at the studies of kids on ketogenic diets for epileptic seizures, their rate of kidney stones is significantly higher than those on non-ketogenic diets). And it makes your breath stink after a while, too.
In my opinion (and I'm a programmer, FWIW), you need one day a week where you eat a lot of carbs (and the other days, your carbs should be as close to 0 as possible, especially simple carbs). Call it a weekly thanksgiving, a cheat day, or whatever. The end goal is that you prevent the body from going fully ketogenic. This serves a few purposes. First, you don't have to give up your favorite foods, you just have to wait for your cheat day. Second, it helps protect the kidneys. Third, it also prevents the body from going into famine-mode, so that it is less likely to store carbs when they are consumed.
Agreed.It's amazing how the food industry fooled everyone into thinking that lipids were the bad guy making everyone fat, when all evidence seems to show that it's the abundance of carbs causing the problem.
Every single person I know who has restricted carbs to 1-2 days a week only has seen incredible success in managing their weight - a gradual loss of weight that does not come back. It's a mostly ketogenic diet, like what they put some epileptic kids on, but with a weekly "cheat day" where one can consume as many carbs as desired, which helps reset the metabolism and prevents the body from going all the way into ketosis, which can be hard on the kidneys (as evidenced by the high rate of kidney stones for those on ketogenic diets).
It's actually interesting in my wife's case, as once a year she has a "cheat week" where she eats carbs all week long. It's really remarkable to see how fast she gains and subsequently loses weight once she returns to her normal carb-restricted diet.
Seems like you didn't have the attention span to investigate what he actually leaked. Mr. Manning only released cables that were designated SIPDIS, i.e. already labeled for wide distribution. Nothing - not a single thing - was Top Secret.
I would ask what evidence you have that he "got impatient", but I doubt you have any.
I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "actively tracked". I think 21 CFR 1002.20 implies that any time a manufacturer finds out that anyone was injured by a laser, they have to send a notice to the FDA's director of CDRH "immediately".
A LOT of things are different whenever you change levels. For instance, Class I devices do not need emission indicators. But higher powered lasers do need emission indicators. In fact, they need fail-safe emission indicators, which typically means using two LEDs and two current limiting resistors and two GPIO pins on your microcontroller. Not only that, but the color of the emission indicator must be substantially different from the emissions themselves, so that an operator wearing safety glasses can still see the indicator light up.
Plus, there's that whole product report thing that you have to send to the FDA's CDRH. I'm not entirely sure but it's probably a felony to put false statements into the Initial Product Report.
Any random person above the age of 16 can acquire a driver's license. There is no restriction, other than age.
Any random person above the age of 21 can purchase alcohol. There is no restriction, other than age.
Those statements are not true when it comes to controlled substances. The Controlled Substances Act effectively bans all Schedule I drugs for any purpose. Even people who would otherwise be allowed to manufacture, purchase, or consume Schedule I drugs (i.e. medical marijuana) are in violation of the federal law.
Now, is the CSA a regulation? Yes. All bans are a regulation, but not all regulations are a ban. This concept is easy to understand in terms of "all squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares". Why is it so difficult when it comes to government regulations?
Have governments have banned you from driving? Because the government regulates who can and cannot drive, in the form of a driver's license. They also regulate how fast you can travel on the road.
Have governments banned you from drinking? Because government regulates who can and cannot buy alcohol.
I saw this article earlier and it's a bit misleading. Buried much more deeply...
The NIST tests were conducted on randomly selected commercial laser devices labeled as Class IIIa or 3R and sold as suitable for demonstration use in classrooms and other public spaces
That whole "Class IIIa/3R" thing is a pretty big deal. Lasers of this class are pretty heavily regulated because of the danger they can potentially pose. The color of the laser is almost unimportant, except for the minor detail of how green lasers are generated by dividing infrared light in half, which makes them subject to a bit more regulation since infrared is not a visible emission; invisible emissions are more strictly regulated, since there's no blink reflex to save your eyes.
I wonder what percentage of commercial laser pointers are Class IIIa/3R?
For the record, I did some research on lasers, because we were going to incorporate one into one of our products...until we learned how heavily regulated they are, and went with a diode that pumps out like 50x as much wattage, but doesn't fall under regulations since the emissions aren't coherent. Throughout my research, I learned that no one - literally, no one - has ever reported being injured by a Class IIIa/3R laser. The danger posed by these emissions is more theoretical than practice.
Innovation isn't gimmickry, but the Wii was gimmickry
I beg to differ. See, everyone always complains about the Wii's motion sensing. Yeah, it's pretty gimmicky and there are very few times that it actually works well.
But one thing that NO ONE ever gives credit to the Wii for is the POINTING. The ability to use a pointer in game is absolutely amazing. I never enjoyed shooters on the console until I could use the Wii to aim. The pointing technology in the Wii revolutionized games that were ported from other systems. My hit ratio in Resident Evil 4 went from 75% (on a good day) to 90% (on just about any day). It was much more fun to play Okami on the Wii than the PS2.
Rag on the motion controls all you want, but the pointing controls for the Wii made it the superior console in my opinion. The only thing better than the Wii is a computer with a mouse and keyboard.
You can hack at IOS (not iOS, IOS, the microkernel that runs on Starlet) and add SDHC support to any IOS you want.
In fact, you can even hack IOS so that it can redirect access from the SD card through Wifi. You can even redirect disc access through Wifi. It's a program called Riivolution. I used it once while texture hacking; just save the texture file to the right folder, tickle the game (e.g. leave area and come back) until it reloads the texture.
As mentioned by sibling posts, the problem is that Nintendo wanted to keep a fork of every single IOS ever, and games will always use the IOS that they request. So you either hack the IOS which gets loaded by your game, or you hack the game to request a new IOS, or you write a loader which ignores the IOS the game requests and loads a pre-specified one (e.g. Gecko OS uses IOS36, I believe)
PA has 13 red districts and 5 blue districts. OH has 12 red districts and 4 blue districts.
Sounds Republican controlled to me. Now, if you want to talk about a Republican popular vote...OH is still Republican controlled (51% R, 46% D in the last election), but PA would be narrowly controlled by Democrats (50% D, 49% R). But having a higher popular vote in today's United States of America doesn't necessarily mean that you control the associated legislature.
No. They predicted a >0% chance of an earthquake but told people it was a 0% chance, resulting in people who were already preparing for an earthquake to stop their preparations.
The experts determined that it was "unlikely" but not impossible that a major quake would take place, despite concern among the city's residents over recent seismic activity.
But [Claudio] Eva insisted neither he nor his colleagues had given any reassurances in their brief, 40-minute meeting. "We always maintained it was not possible to predict or exclude an earthquake," he said.
Now who do I believe, some guy named Rary on the Internet, or Jethro Mullen from CNN and Tom Kington from the Guardian?
Would BDSM be considered violent? What about the stuff from Kink.com, where a woman may be tied up and beaten with various whips? I think they even have a series where two women wrestle and the winner fucks the loser with a strap-on.
Does the legality change when there's an interview at the beginning or end where the female explicitly states that they consented to their treatment, going so far as to describe what was done to her and whether she enjoyed it?
I admire the goal of trying to get rid of truly violent porn - the stuff that lacks consent. If it was limited to nonconsensual stuff, I can see it kinda sorta working. But as long as two consenting adults can violate the law, said law will be immoral and unethical - and nearly impossible to enforce.
But what if you have a corporate officer whose sole job is to manage risk, and that officer tells you "this is too risky", and you fire that guy because you didn't like what he said, and the next guy stood up and took notice that he could get fired from his cushy six figure job if he doesn't say what the boss wants to hear...
Remember how everyone is a felon? All the ratings agencies committed fraud. Everyone knows it.
The government is suing S&P for $5 billion. S&P will cease to exist if found guilty (they should have settled like Goldman Sachs). And the government likely has the evidence to prove fraud, against S&P and all the others.
Not that I think it's right. But if S&P had just refused to engage in fraud, the Feds would have no leverage. You reap what you sow.
I think you have it slightly backwards. You're starting with supply - there's a lot of loans, what do we do with them?
The problem is that brokers won't make shady loans unless they have someone to turn around and sell them to. This fraud did not start on the supply side.
I think that instead, what you had was someone figuring out how to cook a CDO with normal MBS. And there's big demand for AAA-rated debt. So you give all the good borrowers mortgages.
But there is still so much demand for AAA-rated debt! So let's give mortgages to okay borrowers. We can use MBS and CDO to turn those okay mortgages into AAA-rated debt.
But there is still so much demand for AAA-rated debt! So let's give mortgages to risky borrowers.
I personally believe the problem started with demand. Without the demand for any and every mortgage to be packaged into MBS/CDO, the small-time scammers would have had no one to sell their risky mortgages to.
I've wondered a few times whether Mr. Swartz should have created something like "Information Liberation Inc." or something to that effect. Perhaps if he had engaged in his actions as a company instead of an individual, he could have avoided being labeled a felon and thrown in prison.
I mean, Carmen Ortiz let it work for St. Jude's. And GlaxoSmithKline. And Forest Laboratories.
It does matter if the combined investment/commercial banks starts using the deposits from customers of the commercial bank as part of their capital requirements when building toxic investments. Without the commercial deposits to fatten the denominator of their fractional lending ratio, the numerator wouldn't have been able to get quite so large.
Joe Sixpack: Yanno guy, I don't think I can afford a $500,000 house on a police officer's income.
Scamming Broker: Don't worry about it. Housing prices keep going up. Sure, the interest payments on this mortgage are going to balloon in five years, but that's why you refi in four years instead.
Joe: Are you sure about this? I'm a little worried. What if I can't refi?
Broker: Don't worry about it. We've been doing this for years. I'm a certified professional. You're paying me thousands of dollars because I know what I'm doing. Trust me, you will be okay.
---
Is it still Joe's fault for believing the certified professional from which he sought advice?
And by the way, the security ratings mean quite a lot, actually. Many investors, such as pension funds, are only legally allowed to buy AAA-rated debt. The demand for AAA-rated debt is quite large, which is why they were able to sell so many toxic MBS/CDO. The demand for less-than-AAA-rated debt is MUCH smaller, and certainly not big enough to absorb all those toxic mortgages. Had the ratings agencies done their job (all of them, not just one or two), Wall Street would have been unable to sell toxic CDOs, which means they were unable to buy/sell toxic MBS, which means they were unable to buy toxic mortgages from scammers, which means the scammers were never able to lend money to people for toxic mortgages.
Investors should be able to count on the debt ratings. They're baked into laws, after all. The problem is that the people bundling the CDOs were the ones who paid for the ratings agencies to rate their debt. This creates a conflict of interest - the ratings agencies don't want to rate the debt too low or they'll lose market share to their competitors when all the firms on Wall Street go there for the better ratings. Instead, ratings should be paid for by investors, not the people peddling the debt.
No. If I buy a home, I'm paying a broker or a real-estate agent to do my homework for me. That's why I pay him the big bucks - because he knows the laws and regulations already. I shouldn't be the one calculating how much down payment I will need to avoid mortgage insurance, and how much interest I will owe over the life of the loan - that's why I'm paying thousand of dollars in fees to the other guy to do it!
I'm sorry, but at the point a broker or loan officer is giving out NINJA loans, he's engaging in fraud and he damn well knows it. It's not the borrower's job to know laws and regulations, it's the lender's.
I mean, if you went to a lawyer and paid him for legal advice, would you turn around and totally ignore his advice and do your own homework instead?
Please remember that Trusted Platform Module chips have special protection against side channel attacks. And differential power analysis is not impossible to foil. Consider the example in section IV.B) of the following paper: https://www.nics.uma.es/seciot10/files/pdf/liu_seciot10_paper.pdf
1) Blind the message M using vi: M0 = vi M mod N. 2) Blind the exponent E using a random number r (for a 1024-bit RSA, r is typically 32 bits): E0 = E +r fN. 3) Do exponentiation after blinding: C0 = M0E0 mod N. 4) After receiving C0, un-blind it to get the original value of C: C = v f C0 mod N.
Blinding the exponent and the message significantly increases resistance to DPA. And that's just some people running some code on an 8-bit microcontroller, I imagine the big names can invent even better methods of resisting DPA. Off the top of my head, how about a series of resistors that are flipped on and off randomly during calculations to create distortion in the input power?
So says the government that is constantly making mistakes that carries out their execution without trial, evidence, or conviction
Indeed, as posted elsewhere, the government regularly makes mistakes, with both US citizens and foreign nationals. This was just a quick list of everyone I can remember off the top of my head, I'm sure further research could add to it.
We are all ignorant, that's for sure. Perhaps if the US government had given US citizens due process, as required by the Constitution, then we would know what Abdulrahman was doing over there, and whether he was an enemy combatant.
And, even if Abdulrahman were taking up arms against the US [citation needed], and even if he weren't a US citizen, the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, article 37, limits the punishment of anyone under the age of 18, specifically excluding capital punishment of the type that was meted out to Abdulrahman.
Due process is an amazing thing. You see, the government isn't always right. Sometimes they accuse the wrong person. Certainly the man who launched the "Amerithrax" attack on America is an evil terrorist who deserves no rights, correct? Lucky for Dr. Steven Hatfill, we still had due process back then. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Hatfill
Or how about the guy who bombed some trains in Madrid in 2004? They found his fingerprints on the bag containing the bombs. Open and shut case, right? Well, lucky for Mr. Brandon Mayfield, we still had due process back then. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandon_Mayfield
And those are just US citizens! If we expand the scope of government fuckups to include foreign nationals, the list gets much bigger, much faster. Off the top of my head:
All were alleged terrorists. They weren't delivering pizza (Boumediene in particular was a member of the Red Crescent, which is a lot like our Red Cross), but all were eventually proven innocent of being terrorists.
I assure you that the anti-war crowd is not being silent. We still hate the war just as much, as well as Obama's violations of civil liberties. It's the talking heads who changed the subject.
Slashdot Mirror
Excellent, good to see this here.
The only thing I would add is that a ketogenic diet is really hard on the kidneys (look at the studies of kids on ketogenic diets for epileptic seizures, their rate of kidney stones is significantly higher than those on non-ketogenic diets). And it makes your breath stink after a while, too.
In my opinion (and I'm a programmer, FWIW), you need one day a week where you eat a lot of carbs (and the other days, your carbs should be as close to 0 as possible, especially simple carbs). Call it a weekly thanksgiving, a cheat day, or whatever. The end goal is that you prevent the body from going fully ketogenic. This serves a few purposes. First, you don't have to give up your favorite foods, you just have to wait for your cheat day. Second, it helps protect the kidneys. Third, it also prevents the body from going into famine-mode, so that it is less likely to store carbs when they are consumed.
Agreed.It's amazing how the food industry fooled everyone into thinking that lipids were the bad guy making everyone fat, when all evidence seems to show that it's the abundance of carbs causing the problem.
Every single person I know who has restricted carbs to 1-2 days a week only has seen incredible success in managing their weight - a gradual loss of weight that does not come back. It's a mostly ketogenic diet, like what they put some epileptic kids on, but with a weekly "cheat day" where one can consume as many carbs as desired, which helps reset the metabolism and prevents the body from going all the way into ketosis, which can be hard on the kidneys (as evidenced by the high rate of kidney stones for those on ketogenic diets).
It's actually interesting in my wife's case, as once a year she has a "cheat week" where she eats carbs all week long. It's really remarkable to see how fast she gains and subsequently loses weight once she returns to her normal carb-restricted diet.
Seems like you didn't have the attention span to investigate what he actually leaked. Mr. Manning only released cables that were designated SIPDIS, i.e. already labeled for wide distribution. Nothing - not a single thing - was Top Secret.
I would ask what evidence you have that he "got impatient", but I doubt you have any.
I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "actively tracked". I think 21 CFR 1002.20 implies that any time a manufacturer finds out that anyone was injured by a laser, they have to send a notice to the FDA's director of CDRH "immediately".
"Simply" changing the level?
A LOT of things are different whenever you change levels. For instance, Class I devices do not need emission indicators. But higher powered lasers do need emission indicators. In fact, they need fail-safe emission indicators, which typically means using two LEDs and two current limiting resistors and two GPIO pins on your microcontroller. Not only that, but the color of the emission indicator must be substantially different from the emissions themselves, so that an operator wearing safety glasses can still see the indicator light up.
Plus, there's that whole product report thing that you have to send to the FDA's CDRH. I'm not entirely sure but it's probably a felony to put false statements into the Initial Product Report.
Any random person above the age of 16 can acquire a driver's license. There is no restriction, other than age.
Any random person above the age of 21 can purchase alcohol. There is no restriction, other than age.
Those statements are not true when it comes to controlled substances. The Controlled Substances Act effectively bans all Schedule I drugs for any purpose. Even people who would otherwise be allowed to manufacture, purchase, or consume Schedule I drugs (i.e. medical marijuana) are in violation of the federal law.
Now, is the CSA a regulation? Yes. All bans are a regulation, but not all regulations are a ban. This concept is easy to understand in terms of "all squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares". Why is it so difficult when it comes to government regulations?
Have governments have banned you from driving? Because the government regulates who can and cannot drive, in the form of a driver's license. They also regulate how fast you can travel on the road.
Have governments banned you from drinking? Because government regulates who can and cannot buy alcohol.
I saw this article earlier and it's a bit misleading. Buried much more deeply...
That whole "Class IIIa/3R" thing is a pretty big deal. Lasers of this class are pretty heavily regulated because of the danger they can potentially pose. The color of the laser is almost unimportant, except for the minor detail of how green lasers are generated by dividing infrared light in half, which makes them subject to a bit more regulation since infrared is not a visible emission; invisible emissions are more strictly regulated, since there's no blink reflex to save your eyes.
I wonder what percentage of commercial laser pointers are Class IIIa/3R?
For the record, I did some research on lasers, because we were going to incorporate one into one of our products...until we learned how heavily regulated they are, and went with a diode that pumps out like 50x as much wattage, but doesn't fall under regulations since the emissions aren't coherent. Throughout my research, I learned that no one - literally, no one - has ever reported being injured by a Class IIIa/3R laser. The danger posed by these emissions is more theoretical than practice.
Something tells me you don't know the difference between a Code of Federal Regulations and a ban.
Innovation isn't gimmickry, but the Wii was gimmickry
I beg to differ. See, everyone always complains about the Wii's motion sensing. Yeah, it's pretty gimmicky and there are very few times that it actually works well.
But one thing that NO ONE ever gives credit to the Wii for is the POINTING. The ability to use a pointer in game is absolutely amazing. I never enjoyed shooters on the console until I could use the Wii to aim. The pointing technology in the Wii revolutionized games that were ported from other systems. My hit ratio in Resident Evil 4 went from 75% (on a good day) to 90% (on just about any day). It was much more fun to play Okami on the Wii than the PS2.
Rag on the motion controls all you want, but the pointing controls for the Wii made it the superior console in my opinion. The only thing better than the Wii is a computer with a mouse and keyboard.
You can hack at IOS (not iOS, IOS, the microkernel that runs on Starlet) and add SDHC support to any IOS you want.
In fact, you can even hack IOS so that it can redirect access from the SD card through Wifi. You can even redirect disc access through Wifi. It's a program called Riivolution. I used it once while texture hacking; just save the texture file to the right folder, tickle the game (e.g. leave area and come back) until it reloads the texture.
As mentioned by sibling posts, the problem is that Nintendo wanted to keep a fork of every single IOS ever, and games will always use the IOS that they request. So you either hack the IOS which gets loaded by your game, or you hack the game to request a new IOS, or you write a loader which ignores the IOS the game requests and loads a pre-specified one (e.g. Gecko OS uses IOS36, I believe)
PA has 13 red districts and 5 blue districts. OH has 12 red districts and 4 blue districts.
Sounds Republican controlled to me. Now, if you want to talk about a Republican popular vote...OH is still Republican controlled (51% R, 46% D in the last election), but PA would be narrowly controlled by Democrats (50% D, 49% R). But having a higher popular vote in today's United States of America doesn't necessarily mean that you control the associated legislature.
No. They predicted a >0% chance of an earthquake but told people it was a 0% chance, resulting in people who were already preparing for an earthquake to stop their preparations.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/23/world/europe/italy-quake-scientists-guilty
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/oct/23/italian-scientist-earthquake-condemns-court
Now who do I believe, some guy named Rary on the Internet, or Jethro Mullen from CNN and Tom Kington from the Guardian?
Would BDSM be considered violent? What about the stuff from Kink.com, where a woman may be tied up and beaten with various whips? I think they even have a series where two women wrestle and the winner fucks the loser with a strap-on.
Does the legality change when there's an interview at the beginning or end where the female explicitly states that they consented to their treatment, going so far as to describe what was done to her and whether she enjoyed it?
I admire the goal of trying to get rid of truly violent porn - the stuff that lacks consent. If it was limited to nonconsensual stuff, I can see it kinda sorta working. But as long as two consenting adults can violate the law, said law will be immoral and unethical - and nearly impossible to enforce.
But what if you have a corporate officer whose sole job is to manage risk, and that officer tells you "this is too risky", and you fire that guy because you didn't like what he said, and the next guy stood up and took notice that he could get fired from his cushy six figure job if he doesn't say what the boss wants to hear...
Remember how everyone is a felon? All the ratings agencies committed fraud. Everyone knows it.
The government is suing S&P for $5 billion. S&P will cease to exist if found guilty (they should have settled like Goldman Sachs). And the government likely has the evidence to prove fraud, against S&P and all the others.
Not that I think it's right. But if S&P had just refused to engage in fraud, the Feds would have no leverage. You reap what you sow.
I think you have it slightly backwards. You're starting with supply - there's a lot of loans, what do we do with them?
The problem is that brokers won't make shady loans unless they have someone to turn around and sell them to. This fraud did not start on the supply side.
I think that instead, what you had was someone figuring out how to cook a CDO with normal MBS. And there's big demand for AAA-rated debt. So you give all the good borrowers mortgages.
But there is still so much demand for AAA-rated debt! So let's give mortgages to okay borrowers. We can use MBS and CDO to turn those okay mortgages into AAA-rated debt.
But there is still so much demand for AAA-rated debt! So let's give mortgages to risky borrowers.
I personally believe the problem started with demand. Without the demand for any and every mortgage to be packaged into MBS/CDO, the small-time scammers would have had no one to sell their risky mortgages to.
I've wondered a few times whether Mr. Swartz should have created something like "Information Liberation Inc." or something to that effect. Perhaps if he had engaged in his actions as a company instead of an individual, he could have avoided being labeled a felon and thrown in prison.
I mean, Carmen Ortiz let it work for St. Jude's. And GlaxoSmithKline. And Forest Laboratories.
It does matter if the combined investment/commercial banks starts using the deposits from customers of the commercial bank as part of their capital requirements when building toxic investments. Without the commercial deposits to fatten the denominator of their fractional lending ratio, the numerator wouldn't have been able to get quite so large.
Joe Sixpack: Yanno guy, I don't think I can afford a $500,000 house on a police officer's income.
Scamming Broker: Don't worry about it. Housing prices keep going up. Sure, the interest payments on this mortgage are going to balloon in five years, but that's why you refi in four years instead.
Joe: Are you sure about this? I'm a little worried. What if I can't refi?
Broker: Don't worry about it. We've been doing this for years. I'm a certified professional. You're paying me thousands of dollars because I know what I'm doing. Trust me, you will be okay.
---
Is it still Joe's fault for believing the certified professional from which he sought advice?
And by the way, the security ratings mean quite a lot, actually. Many investors, such as pension funds, are only legally allowed to buy AAA-rated debt. The demand for AAA-rated debt is quite large, which is why they were able to sell so many toxic MBS/CDO. The demand for less-than-AAA-rated debt is MUCH smaller, and certainly not big enough to absorb all those toxic mortgages. Had the ratings agencies done their job (all of them, not just one or two), Wall Street would have been unable to sell toxic CDOs, which means they were unable to buy/sell toxic MBS, which means they were unable to buy toxic mortgages from scammers, which means the scammers were never able to lend money to people for toxic mortgages.
Investors should be able to count on the debt ratings. They're baked into laws, after all. The problem is that the people bundling the CDOs were the ones who paid for the ratings agencies to rate their debt. This creates a conflict of interest - the ratings agencies don't want to rate the debt too low or they'll lose market share to their competitors when all the firms on Wall Street go there for the better ratings. Instead, ratings should be paid for by investors, not the people peddling the debt.
No. If I buy a home, I'm paying a broker or a real-estate agent to do my homework for me. That's why I pay him the big bucks - because he knows the laws and regulations already. I shouldn't be the one calculating how much down payment I will need to avoid mortgage insurance, and how much interest I will owe over the life of the loan - that's why I'm paying thousand of dollars in fees to the other guy to do it!
I'm sorry, but at the point a broker or loan officer is giving out NINJA loans, he's engaging in fraud and he damn well knows it. It's not the borrower's job to know laws and regulations, it's the lender's.
I mean, if you went to a lawyer and paid him for legal advice, would you turn around and totally ignore his advice and do your own homework instead?
Yes, please do go into details.
Please remember that Trusted Platform Module chips have special protection against side channel attacks. And differential power analysis is not impossible to foil. Consider the example in section IV.B) of the following paper: https://www.nics.uma.es/seciot10/files/pdf/liu_seciot10_paper.pdf
1) Blind the message M using vi: M0 = vi M mod N.
2) Blind the exponent E using a random number r (for a 1024-bit RSA, r is typically 32 bits): E0 = E +r fN.
3) Do exponentiation after blinding: C0 = M0E0 mod N.
4) After receiving C0, un-blind it to get the original value of C: C = v f C0 mod N.
Blinding the exponent and the message significantly increases resistance to DPA. And that's just some people running some code on an 8-bit microcontroller, I imagine the big names can invent even better methods of resisting DPA. Off the top of my head, how about a series of resistors that are flipped on and off randomly during calculations to create distortion in the input power?
So says the government that is constantly making mistakes that carries out their execution without trial, evidence, or conviction
Indeed, as posted elsewhere, the government regularly makes mistakes, with both US citizens and foreign nationals. This was just a quick list of everyone I can remember off the top of my head, I'm sure further research could add to it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Hatfill
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandon_Mayfield
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lakhdar_Boumediene
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murat_Kurnaz
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalid_El-Masri
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maher_Arar
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hassan_Anvar
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmad_Tourson
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdul_Helil_Mamut
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huzaifa_Parhat
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emam_Abdulahat
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jalal_Jalaladin
We are all ignorant, that's for sure. Perhaps if the US government had given US citizens due process, as required by the Constitution, then we would know what Abdulrahman was doing over there, and whether he was an enemy combatant.
And, even if Abdulrahman were taking up arms against the US [citation needed], and even if he weren't a US citizen, the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, article 37, limits the punishment of anyone under the age of 18, specifically excluding capital punishment of the type that was meted out to Abdulrahman.
Due process is an amazing thing. You see, the government isn't always right. Sometimes they accuse the wrong person. Certainly the man who launched the "Amerithrax" attack on America is an evil terrorist who deserves no rights, correct? Lucky for Dr. Steven Hatfill, we still had due process back then. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Hatfill
Or how about the guy who bombed some trains in Madrid in 2004? They found his fingerprints on the bag containing the bombs. Open and shut case, right? Well, lucky for Mr. Brandon Mayfield, we still had due process back then. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandon_Mayfield
And those are just US citizens! If we expand the scope of government fuckups to include foreign nationals, the list gets much bigger, much faster. Off the top of my head:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lakhdar_Boumediene
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murat_Kurnaz
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalid_El-Masri
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maher_Arar
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hassan_Anvar
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmad_Tourson
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdul_Helil_Mamut
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huzaifa_Parhat
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emam_Abdulahat
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jalal_Jalaladin
All were alleged terrorists. They weren't delivering pizza (Boumediene in particular was a member of the Red Crescent, which is a lot like our Red Cross), but all were eventually proven innocent of being terrorists.
I assure you that the anti-war crowd is not being silent. We still hate the war just as much, as well as Obama's violations of civil liberties. It's the talking heads who changed the subject.