Very much so. Just because their business model requires people to make bad decisions, doesn't mean they have a right to enforce bad decisions.
The web browsing they want is like, if you walked into a reseraunt to meet a group of 10 people, 1 of whom you know, and are told in this circle, we greet eachother with unprotected anal sex....at which point, everyone at the table stands up to "greet you".
What I see is him pledging to implement a technical loophole. How is making someone else do the collection and storage (with far less security than their own current collection) really any real change? Do you honestly think the people who were complaining about this are just policy wonks who want the letter of the law followed but who don't actually care about the real privacy implications?
Oh he is good. So the collection is a problem, so lets end the collection by outsouricing it. Problem solved.
As long as we maintain our ability to search through the records, we don't need to "collect them". CLearly the public only ever policy wonks about technicalities, nobody actually wants or needs privacy right?
Not just CS, a bigger problem is more lack of understanding about networking and more operational details.
You see it especially well in educated people in other fields in their interactions. A particular friend of mine is a chemist. He is aware enough to recognize a web browser with noscript, but his answer to that is to go to a site and based on (when discussing it after) "this site is reputable" hit "allow all temporarily" without any awareness of the actual issues involved like whether affiliate sites can be considered "reputable".... case in point, the site in question referenced doubleclick.
I of course used this as an opportunity to describe using a web browser in the most common way using my favorite analogy ever... "Imagine if we replaced hand shakes with unprotected anal sex. You get a party invite, and you go. You know youre friend is reputable but, does that mean you want to 'greet' all of his friends too? That is what web browsing is like by default, the website is a crowded diner table, and 'greetings' are going around the table"
I would actually consider this reasonable for a self parking feature. I have no issue with a flawed system that is the best you can make. Its early versions ffs, this is decent.
What is not reasonable is realizing its a problem, developing a fix, and then selling a fix for a safety flaw as a bonus feature. Even more so, if its just a software upgrade it should be a recall and fix, if it requires additional hardware or replacement, it should be offfered to existing owners at a reasonable price.
The release I understand. However, leaving it that way and continuing to sell models with a known flaw, that is a different issue really.
You may get the same thing when you buy a Windows CD, but at least one of the first things it does is download the free updates. You will never go to a store and have to choose between Windows 10 and Windows 10 with security updates and then be stuck with what you chose when you get home.
Nah, you pay someone to deface his page with slander and lies, and have your staffer fix it immediately and release that you have no connection to such underhanded tactics as to spread....insert reference to slander and lies.
That way, you have a legitimate reason to speak your slander and lies, while making it someone else's fault; and take credit for being fair.
It pisses me off to no end that they can just violate our rights all they want, do it for years on end, then....no harm no foul in the end.
There is no scenario to my mind where every person involved should be walking free in the sunlight. Every single analyst, every politician, every single person who knew the facts and didn't turn them in.
All broke the law, all are guilty and deserve to be made individual example of for they are each individually 100% guilty of what they did.
Don't count on never, this isn't kerbal space program, I don't think that would garauntee you a stable orbit. Your jump would likely be vertical, so you would see the top of the building move forward, as if you slowed down.
Pretending it is kerbal and there are no other bodies with gravity or uneven gravity etc.... your periapse would be slightly higher where you jumped, and slightly lower at the other side, where you would have a higher speed.
With the right parameters for roof size and starting height, you might have a chance at landing back on the roof after a massive 1/2 rotation jump..... I mean, its already a ridiculous structure right? Why not make it wide too?
What is a kilometer or two between thought experimenters?
Sounds right to me, except for the assumption that link batching would necessarily increase latency. I believe tor already handles asycnronously in most cases and only rotates circuits as needed or about every 10 minutes.
So circuit creation time, generally speaking, should have little effect that the user can see (unless he requests a new circuit through a control app).
I came here to say a lot of this. Especially since, as I have gotten into the devops world myself, and there is a bit of an equalizer in that a lot of the big buzzwords are things that most people have kind of similar and easily obtainable levels of experience with.
Chef hasn't been around so long that there are many people with more than a couple of years epxerience....but its also all done in ruby, which is decently easy to pick up at a basic level, especially if you know perl. You could easily get yourself up to speed, especially with any sysadmin background.
If you can make it through the level of the advanced chef courses, which, seriously, for someone who knows what they are doing we are talking, a few weeks here you could be up to speed with most candidates out there. Which isn't a dig on them at all, its just that, most of the experience from administrative work or writing, running services is directly translatable, its really just a new toolbox to get get familiar with; for someone who can already fill admin and dev shoes, its a very natural move
Hard to say but it will happen eventually. I have seen it go a few years, then lose 2 within a few months. Always make sure monitoring works and will alert you if its degraded. You can run degraded mode for a long time without monitoring.....till the next one fails.
They are mechanical, so manufacturing quality and environment will factor in. My drives likely see a lot of shake and heat being on the third floor of a 100 year old house, between the wind, the washing machine and seasonal heat.... its no data center in here.
>The other reason to regenerate frequently is to limit the window of opportunity for brute force attacks, but that doesn't make much sense either:
Lets not lose sight of the fact that, even doing it only once EVER, even if you then redistribute that result to every future machine you build, is already far better than the status quo.
The current standard appears to be "use the same default ones distributed to everyone else". So really even "each unique machine generates a new set once" is a massive improvement and downgrade to the usefulness of breaking any given prime.
That was my solution too, it took longer to realize it wasn't trickier than that than it did to realize the solution.
Though the solution only works if you assume the earth is a sphere and north means the where the current pole of the planets spin is and not magnetic north. However those are pretty normal assumptions for a brain teaser.
as a gauge of how easy it is I asked my wife since, she isn't someone who has done math for fun or played 1000+ hours of kerbal..... and well her answer was "Why are you asking me this? does this have a point?" Maybe I would have gotten better data after she finished her coffee?
Why need? Because its required for some other older services so you just assume the regulation makes sense here too because you want them to be the same in every way and you can't admit that an existing restriction may not make sense to continue in a new paradigm?
I see no reason why a person deciding to use his personal car occasionally to make some extra cash should require commercial plates. Hell, I could see a stronger case for requiring pizza delivery drivers to have commercial plates, and nobody requires that.
Those are services, if you can't tell the difference between making laws to threaten people with punishment if they don't do what you want and providing a service to people to help those who want it....then i don't know what more I can explain that would be helpful.
Except that isn't the case, individuals are insuring their own cars, and this new offering from the insurance companies is between them and the insurance companies, it has nothing to do with Uber specifically.
In fact, if anything what I don't see is any need for a new law. Existing law clearly already covers it by requiring insurance, and insurance company policies not covering that usage....so where is a law needed where we already have one and already have people working to comply with the ones we have?
I don't have one, I have a competitors product the RSA key, which has no USB port at all, you type in the numbers it gives you. Little LCD screen and a buttion. I don't keep mine on any chain, I carry it seperately from anything else.
However, I have to say, for what it is, I have been quite impressed with its durability, in fact, I would say it sets a standard that few devices I have encountered have met, but most all really should....has it ever been through the wash?
My wife has unceremoniously washed, and dried (not hanging dry, in the electric dryer) my RSA key no less than 3 times. Each time it has stopped working properly for a few hours, occasionally displaying gibberish, but it has always started working ust fine again, and usually the visible water drops under the screen go away within a few days.
After the first couple of times I paniced, I have since decided this is in fact the standard of quality we should expect from more devices.
> And yes, I have heard of that Google thing, but one of the prime tenets of good communication is to not make your audience go elsewhere for fundamental information.
No, I don't think you quite got it there.
However the fundamental tennent of answering a question is actually answering it. If all you have to say is "I know, but I am not going to tell you", you haven't actually communicated anything because knowing that you know is, in every way, equivalent to not knowing at all.
Its not communication at all, its just noise like pans falling down stairs, noise without signal.
So basically a new situation arose specifically around insurance and insurance companies, seeing this new gap are already moving to fill it? So what you are saying is, this problem is self correcting? Nice. Good to hear.
Except for the fact that they were already addicts before they became customers, and that the alternative was that they do what exactly? Tell them to go elsewhere to someone who wouldn't even do that much?
The only evil here is the people who make laws out of ignorance. Idiots who think drug laws work are the true evil and the ones responsible for the entire mess. Its sad that we have to allow prohibitionists to share the clean air and sunshine that the good people of the world enjoy.
They are the ONLY ones to blame here, their policies created exactly the situation they did before. They are the ones who filled our burn units with meth cooks; how many houses went up in flames before prohibitionist scum came along and gave them financial incentive to burn?
Slashdot Mirror
Please do, I can't think of any better way to explain it to people in a context they will understand intuitively.
Very much so. Just because their business model requires people to make bad decisions, doesn't mean they have a right to enforce bad decisions.
The web browsing they want is like, if you walked into a reseraunt to meet a group of 10 people, 1 of whom you know, and are told in this circle, we greet eachother with unprotected anal sex....at which point, everyone at the table stands up to "greet you".
He did? Funny I don't see it that way at all.
What I see is him pledging to implement a technical loophole. How is making someone else do the collection and storage (with far less security than their own current collection) really any real change? Do you honestly think the people who were complaining about this are just policy wonks who want the letter of the law followed but who don't actually care about the real privacy implications?
This is not progress, its window dressing.
Oh he is good. So the collection is a problem, so lets end the collection by outsouricing it. Problem solved.
As long as we maintain our ability to search through the records, we don't need to "collect them". CLearly the public only ever policy wonks about technicalities, nobody actually wants or needs privacy right?
Not just CS, a bigger problem is more lack of understanding about networking and more operational details.
You see it especially well in educated people in other fields in their interactions. A particular friend of mine is a chemist. He is aware enough to recognize a web browser with noscript, but his answer to that is to go to a site and based on (when discussing it after) "this site is reputable" hit "allow all temporarily" without any awareness of the actual issues involved like whether affiliate sites can be considered "reputable".... case in point, the site in question referenced doubleclick.
I of course used this as an opportunity to describe using a web browser in the most common way using my favorite analogy ever... "Imagine if we replaced hand shakes with unprotected anal sex. You get a party invite, and you go. You know youre friend is reputable but, does that mean you want to 'greet' all of his friends too? That is what web browsing is like by default, the website is a crowded diner table, and 'greetings' are going around the table"
I would actually consider this reasonable for a self parking feature. I have no issue with a flawed system that is the best you can make. Its early versions ffs, this is decent.
What is not reasonable is realizing its a problem, developing a fix, and then selling a fix for a safety flaw as a bonus feature. Even more so, if its just a software upgrade it should be a recall and fix, if it requires additional hardware or replacement, it should be offfered to existing owners at a reasonable price.
The release I understand. However, leaving it that way and continuing to sell models with a known flaw, that is a different issue really.
You may get the same thing when you buy a Windows CD, but at least one of the first things it does is download the free updates. You will never go to a store and have to choose between Windows 10 and Windows 10 with security updates and then be stuck with what you chose when you get home.
Nah, you pay someone to deface his page with slander and lies, and have your staffer fix it immediately and release that you have no connection to such underhanded tactics as to spread ....insert reference to slander and lies.
That way, you have a legitimate reason to speak your slander and lies, while making it someone else's fault; and take credit for being fair.
It pisses me off to no end that they can just violate our rights all they want, do it for years on end, then....no harm no foul in the end.
There is no scenario to my mind where every person involved should be walking free in the sunlight. Every single analyst, every politician, every single person who knew the facts and didn't turn them in.
All broke the law, all are guilty and deserve to be made individual example of for they are each individually 100% guilty of what they did.
ahhh missed that one, yah that tends to mean you are going to have a bad time.
Don't count on never, this isn't kerbal space program, I don't think that would garauntee you a stable orbit. Your jump would likely be vertical, so you would see the top of the building move forward, as if you slowed down.
Pretending it is kerbal and there are no other bodies with gravity or uneven gravity etc.... your periapse would be slightly higher where you jumped, and slightly lower at the other side, where you would have a higher speed.
With the right parameters for roof size and starting height, you might have a chance at landing back on the roof after a massive 1/2 rotation jump..... I mean, its already a ridiculous structure right? Why not make it wide too?
What is a kilometer or two between thought experimenters?
Sounds right to me, except for the assumption that link batching would necessarily increase latency. I believe tor already handles asycnronously in most cases and only rotates circuits as needed or about every 10 minutes.
So circuit creation time, generally speaking, should have little effect that the user can see (unless he requests a new circuit through a control app).
I came here to say a lot of this. Especially since, as I have gotten into the devops world myself, and there is a bit of an equalizer in that a lot of the big buzzwords are things that most people have kind of similar and easily obtainable levels of experience with.
Chef hasn't been around so long that there are many people with more than a couple of years epxerience....but its also all done in ruby, which is decently easy to pick up at a basic level, especially if you know perl. You could easily get yourself up to speed, especially with any sysadmin background.
If you can make it through the level of the advanced chef courses, which, seriously, for someone who knows what they are doing we are talking, a few weeks here you could be up to speed with most candidates out there. Which isn't a dig on them at all, its just that, most of the experience from administrative work or writing, running services is directly translatable, its really just a new toolbox to get get familiar with; for someone who can already fill admin and dev shoes, its a very natural move
Hard to say but it will happen eventually. I have seen it go a few years, then lose 2 within a few months. Always make sure monitoring works and will alert you if its degraded. You can run degraded mode for a long time without monitoring.....till the next one fails.
They are mechanical, so manufacturing quality and environment will factor in. My drives likely see a lot of shake and heat being on the third floor of a 100 year old house, between the wind, the washing machine and seasonal heat.... its no data center in here.
Well for starters, the people on Hacker's List apparently. If you really wanted to know who they are, you can, in fact, easily go ask them.
I have been running a 4 disk RAID 5 array for a few years now at home, and did a replacement upgrade a couple of years back.
Overall I find in a 4 disk scenario I lose just a bit less than one disk per year. Maybe one disk every year and a half.
So when you say RAID 0 that is 3 years old, that sounds about right. I would call such an array in serious danger of loss.
>The other reason to regenerate frequently is to limit the window of opportunity for brute force attacks, but that doesn't make much sense either:
Lets not lose sight of the fact that, even doing it only once EVER, even if you then redistribute that result to every future machine you build, is already far better than the status quo.
The current standard appears to be "use the same default ones distributed to everyone else". So really even "each unique machine generates a new set once" is a massive improvement and downgrade to the usefulness of breaking any given prime.
That was my solution too, it took longer to realize it wasn't trickier than that than it did to realize the solution.
Though the solution only works if you assume the earth is a sphere and north means the where the current pole of the planets spin is and not magnetic north. However those are pretty normal assumptions for a brain teaser.
as a gauge of how easy it is I asked my wife since, she isn't someone who has done math for fun or played 1000+ hours of kerbal..... and well her answer was "Why are you asking me this? does this have a point?" Maybe I would have gotten better data after she finished her coffee?
Why when you are not a taxi but a person providing a service out of your own personal transportation?
Just because you want to shoehorn all new services into the same regulation as old ones doesn't mean its justified.
Why need? Because its required for some other older services so you just assume the regulation makes sense here too because you want them to be the same in every way and you can't admit that an existing restriction may not make sense to continue in a new paradigm?
I see no reason why a person deciding to use his personal car occasionally to make some extra cash should require commercial plates. Hell, I could see a stronger case for requiring pizza delivery drivers to have commercial plates, and nobody requires that.
Those are services, if you can't tell the difference between making laws to threaten people with punishment if they don't do what you want and providing a service to people to help those who want it....then i don't know what more I can explain that would be helpful.
Except that isn't the case, individuals are insuring their own cars, and this new offering from the insurance companies is between them and the insurance companies, it has nothing to do with Uber specifically.
In fact, if anything what I don't see is any need for a new law. Existing law clearly already covers it by requiring insurance, and insurance company policies not covering that usage....so where is a law needed where we already have one and already have people working to comply with the ones we have?
I don't have one, I have a competitors product the RSA key, which has no USB port at all, you type in the numbers it gives you. Little LCD screen and a buttion. I don't keep mine on any chain, I carry it seperately from anything else.
However, I have to say, for what it is, I have been quite impressed with its durability, in fact, I would say it sets a standard that few devices I have encountered have met, but most all really should....has it ever been through the wash?
My wife has unceremoniously washed, and dried (not hanging dry, in the electric dryer) my RSA key no less than 3 times. Each time it has stopped working properly for a few hours, occasionally displaying gibberish, but it has always started working ust fine again, and usually the visible water drops under the screen go away within a few days.
After the first couple of times I paniced, I have since decided this is in fact the standard of quality we should expect from more devices.
> And yes, I have heard of that Google thing, but one of the prime tenets of good communication is to not make your audience go elsewhere for fundamental information.
No, I don't think you quite got it there.
However the fundamental tennent of answering a question is actually answering it. If all you have to say is "I know, but I am not going to tell you", you haven't actually communicated anything because knowing that you know is, in every way, equivalent to not knowing at all.
Its not communication at all, its just noise like pans falling down stairs, noise without signal.
So basically a new situation arose specifically around insurance and insurance companies, seeing this new gap are already moving to fill it? So what you are saying is, this problem is self correcting? Nice. Good to hear.
Except for the fact that they were already addicts before they became customers, and that the alternative was that they do what exactly? Tell them to go elsewhere to someone who wouldn't even do that much?
The only evil here is the people who make laws out of ignorance. Idiots who think drug laws work are the true evil and the ones responsible for the entire mess. Its sad that we have to allow prohibitionists to share the clean air and sunshine that the good people of the world enjoy.
They are the ONLY ones to blame here, their policies created exactly the situation they did before. They are the ones who filled our burn units with meth cooks; how many houses went up in flames before prohibitionist scum came along and gave them financial incentive to burn?