It becomes exciting when you see athletes from so many countries competing on a level playing field (socioeconomically). It's only in such instances where humanity gets to see that we're all pretty much the same.
~10 people competing for a medal every 4 years doesnt mean zit. if it is exciting, you should go out and compete in your local area, on equal grounds socioeconomically.
How else could you gather thousands of people together from potentially all the countries in the world without sport and competition?
internet. community gatherings. littlest example, lebowski fest happens every year, yet it surpasses olympics that happens every 4 years.
ating the Olympics is about as nihilistic and pessimistic as one can get.
i didnt say anything about hating, yet i dont see anything wrong with hating it either. its pointless.
we are not in 19th century anymore. we already have discovered the approximate limits of human body. so why should i care if someone increases the world record in some field from 9.125 to 9.124 seconds ? and that is if some record is broken. if not, people get medals. they compete, some win some lose, and some get medals. so ? life IS a competition these days. we're having more than we ask for. we dont need to watch competition in our leisure time too.
and with all the shitty stunt china pulls, in tibet, in darfur, suppressing bloggers, olympics are all the while less attractive.
If you're paying less than that, you're probably on shared hosting which is incompatible with SSL anyway. No need for a cert, because you can't use it
it only requires assignment of a dedicated ip.
Uh, actually that situation is impossible too. Wildcard SSL certificates REQUIRE a domain name (so *.yourdomain.com) and if you're going to do that, just send everyone to panel.yourdomain.com instead.
not only not impossible, but also a reality for many small time businesses providing vpses and control panels to their customers. AND for it to work for even shared hosting accounts, the accounts need to be on the same server, or the same load balanced cluster.
its much safer and less risk for identity thieves to acquire one's personal information by eavesdropping (now unencrypted, thanks to lessening usage of self signed certs) many sites than trying to get ONE person's bank account.
a bank account can be frozen with a call, a bank account may not contain any usable cash, a credit card can be charged back. but personal details CANT be retrieved once they are in the wild.
its much more horrible to have a LLC opened in your name and credit acquired for it from a bank, with your stolen identity, than losing $750 or $1000 from a bank account.
and you can shove your wiseass poem in your.... well you know.
This is exactly why this is the correct behavior. Consider Joe Bloggs, visiting their online bank from a random WiFi point. Suddenly they get a cryptic popup, something about "SSL" and "self-signed". Whatever, they click ok and login. The next day a few thousand dollars leaves their account.
that joe bloggs will be letting go of his personal information bit by bit in the (now) non ssl using websites in the form of name here, mother's maiden name there, secret question over there. because the websites that were using self signed certs wont be using them anymore, and eavesdropping more than one site in one shot is much easier than a man in the middle attack for a single person's bank account.
you can get a bank account frozen in an instant. you can get a credit card blocked with a call. but you cant get your personal details back, once it goes in the wild.
if the warning sign is too prohibitive for the non geek people and if the adding exception process is too much effort (it is), it means that practically ff3 forces usage of paid certs. and if you go for a paid cert, you dont go for less recognized certs like a moron. there are 4 mainstream certs in market, comodo, rapidssl, verisign and geotrust. you cant be sure with the comodo and rapidssl recognition rates, but geotrust and verisign are the most recognized certs. and geotrust belongs to verisign.
so in theory what you say holds true. whereas in practice, it doesnt.
no it doesnt. the warning is SO prohibitive that even for people who knows what it is it creates a sense of foreboding. for less technologically adept people it means a big red sign. NO choice.
who is the internet market going to cater to when they are practically cut down from rest of the world ? excuse me, what was your population again ? ~300 mil. how much of that uses internet in a manner that will sustain it financially (apart from using only mail) ? probably ~100 mil. compare this number to the user number for the entire world, which is 1,463,632,361 , and youll see what will happen. http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm
i hate to break it to you but an isolated economy cant survive. u.s. i.t. sector wont be able to live only doing small time automation websites/intranet bastardizations to mid size manufacturers. because thats what you will be reduced to when cut from rest of the world.
remember what happened to u.s. tourism after that patriot act shit was dropped in the congress ? u.s. tourism sector NEVER recovered from it.
excuse me but the rest of the world cant take that kind of shit from u.s. again. if that happens, we all will just create another internet, complete with its root dnses (possibly in brussels), and get done with it. and then u.s. broadband, backbone providers can shove the fibers they laid in those senators asses. because they will be good for only doing that afterwards.
for a national health care. they are SO predatory, SO villainous, SO phony that they make worst nationalized health care system look like out of heaven.
The article quotes a consultant on how hard it is to find COBOL programmers; he says you usually have to draw them out of retirement. Problem is, if there were any such folks on the employment rolls in California, Gov. Schwarzenegger fired them all last week, too.
thats what happens when you vote a musclehead into power. all these years of steroid usage has to have a cumulative effect.
your personal details have a much higher chance of going out bit by bit (because every lesser service asks 'security questions', 'birthplaces' as well as names etc) in a post ff3 environment by eavesdropping than getting taken out by a man in the middle. for, it is much easier to let go of a piece of personal information on any website.
Thank you for making the opposition's argument for you. Now kindly cease your fidgiting and let the adults talk.
grow up yourself first. dont post in a mature discussion if youre not able to cope.
Your second post is actually pretty interesting, but presents a more nuanced argument. It's just that your assertion that things were working before 1950 offends the ghosts of many economic victims, pre-globalization.
of course, that statement does not purports to mean that everything was perfect. it means comparably better, system not being manipulatable in the scale we know it today. with the scope of damage being localized rather than global.
FWIW, I think you might be mistaken about the relative sizes of the Gilded Age and the modern leisure classes; that is, I think the leisure class of the Gilded Age may have been larger than you're suggesting (there were people besides robber barons).
definitely. just like there were many bourgeois enjoying the pleasures of luxuries even in 10th century, when society was much more feudal in europe. but the part that interests me is the number, and the composition/nature of the influential circles. what im thinking is that, the corporationism today is much more widespread, structured, "grassroots" if you will, and far reaching than robber baron influence in 19th century.
That said, I am terrified by corporations. I find them profoundly undemocratic, and popular culture excuses them from behaving according to any ethical or moral code ("It's their duty to maximize shareholder returns, they shouldn't be concerned with decency," is the refrain, despite it not being strictly true). That is all in addition to the usual bureaucratic shielding that organization offers ("It's company policy").
feeling the same here. you can add to that list the exploitation of copyright, patents, eventually law system for shielding misdeeds.
My perspective: Globalization is only superficially related to the rise of the megacorporation. Megacorporations thrive in the global scale because of anarchy. It doesn't help that every attempt at international regulation has been hijacked by ideology (the Church of Friedman, I'm looking at you) or by outright gamesmanship. IMHO, the best defense against the new corporate paradigm is citizen-of-the-world action in support of real international justice.
i believe you are wrong in the anarchy part. because the very tool that corporationism uses to assert its power is the international treaties, organizations. for example, riaa/mpaa is trying to push the same oppressive copyright system to other countries by pressuring through WTO, or, by exploiting the administration and having them pressure other countries that u.s. makes trade treaties with. if there had been anarchy, they couldnt do that.
Slashdot Mirror
It becomes exciting when you see athletes from so many countries competing on a level playing field (socioeconomically). It's only in such instances where humanity gets to see that we're all pretty much the same.
~10 people competing for a medal every 4 years doesnt mean zit. if it is exciting, you should go out and compete in your local area, on equal grounds socioeconomically.
How else could you gather thousands of people together from potentially all the countries in the world without sport and competition?
internet. community gatherings. littlest example, lebowski fest happens every year, yet it surpasses olympics that happens every 4 years.
ating the Olympics is about as nihilistic and pessimistic as one can get.
i didnt say anything about hating, yet i dont see anything wrong with hating it either. its pointless.
then ff3 pushes all the web into the lap of rapidssl, which is 'the one you mentioned'. hardly any difference.
we are not in 19th century anymore. we already have discovered the approximate limits of human body. so why should i care if someone increases the world record in some field from 9.125 to 9.124 seconds ? and that is if some record is broken. if not, people get medals. they compete, some win some lose, and some get medals. so ? life IS a competition these days. we're having more than we ask for. we dont need to watch competition in our leisure time too.
and with all the shitty stunt china pulls, in tibet, in darfur, suppressing bloggers, olympics are all the while less attractive.
If you're paying less than that, you're probably on shared hosting which is incompatible with SSL anyway. No need for a cert, because you can't use it
it only requires assignment of a dedicated ip.
Uh, actually that situation is impossible too. Wildcard SSL certificates REQUIRE a domain name (so *.yourdomain.com) and if you're going to do that, just send everyone to panel.yourdomain.com instead.
not only not impossible, but also a reality for many small time businesses providing vpses and control panels to their customers. AND for it to work for even shared hosting accounts, the accounts need to be on the same server, or the same load balanced cluster.
one word : browser recognition rates.
ok its more than one word.
if they ever can climb to the top, that is.
yes but the system is already upon us. so what to do.
you should research browser recognition rates and 2nd year renewal charges for ssl certs before going wiseass on them.
if you dont think so, i have a certificate to sell you for $1 a year.
its much safer and less risk for identity thieves to acquire one's personal information by eavesdropping (now unencrypted, thanks to lessening usage of self signed certs) many sites than trying to get ONE person's bank account.
.... well you know.
a bank account can be frozen with a call, a bank account may not contain any usable cash, a credit card can be charged back. but personal details CANT be retrieved once they are in the wild.
its much more horrible to have a LLC opened in your name and credit acquired for it from a bank, with your stolen identity, than losing $750 or $1000 from a bank account.
and you can shove your wiseass poem in your
This is exactly why this is the correct behavior. Consider Joe Bloggs, visiting their online bank from a random WiFi point. Suddenly they get a cryptic popup, something about "SSL" and "self-signed". Whatever, they click ok and login. The next day a few thousand dollars leaves their account.
that joe bloggs will be letting go of his personal information bit by bit in the (now) non ssl using websites in the form of name here, mother's maiden name there, secret question over there. because the websites that were using self signed certs wont be using them anymore, and eavesdropping more than one site in one shot is much easier than a man in the middle attack for a single person's bank account.
you can get a bank account frozen in an instant. you can get a credit card blocked with a call. but you cant get your personal details back, once it goes in the wild.
if the warning sign is too prohibitive for the non geek people and if the adding exception process is too much effort (it is), it means that practically ff3 forces usage of paid certs. and if you go for a paid cert, you dont go for less recognized certs like a moron. there are 4 mainstream certs in market, comodo, rapidssl, verisign and geotrust. you cant be sure with the comodo and rapidssl recognition rates, but geotrust and verisign are the most recognized certs. and geotrust belongs to verisign.
so in theory what you say holds true. whereas in practice, it doesnt.
no it doesnt. the warning is SO prohibitive that even for people who knows what it is it creates a sense of foreboding. for less technologically adept people it means a big red sign. NO choice.
dunno why, but i feel like that is the start of the breakthrough for linux, big time.
The jingle in the pocket doesn't make the boot stamping on a face forever any more palatable.
i just had to bookmark this comment.
who is the internet market going to cater to when they are practically cut down from rest of the world ? excuse me, what was your population again ? ~300 mil. how much of that uses internet in a manner that will sustain it financially (apart from using only mail) ? probably ~100 mil. compare this number to the user number for the entire world, which is 1,463,632,361 , and youll see what will happen. http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm
i hate to break it to you but an isolated economy cant survive. u.s. i.t. sector wont be able to live only doing small time automation websites/intranet bastardizations to mid size manufacturers. because thats what you will be reduced to when cut from rest of the world.
in u.s.
remember what happened to u.s. tourism after that patriot act shit was dropped in the congress ? u.s. tourism sector NEVER recovered from it.
excuse me but the rest of the world cant take that kind of shit from u.s. again. if that happens, we all will just create another internet, complete with its root dnses (possibly in brussels), and get done with it. and then u.s. broadband, backbone providers can shove the fibers they laid in those senators asses. because they will be good for only doing that afterwards.
for a national health care. they are SO predatory, SO villainous, SO phony that they make worst nationalized health care system look like out of heaven.
if i have low health risk score anyway ?
The article quotes a consultant on how hard it is to find COBOL programmers; he says you usually have to draw them out of retirement. Problem is, if there were any such folks on the employment rolls in California, Gov. Schwarzenegger fired them all last week, too.
thats what happens when you vote a musclehead into power. all these years of steroid usage has to have a cumulative effect.
the indirect losses in this case will be more than the direct benefit. in such cases, one needs to do what is for greater good.
Thank you for making the opposition's argument for you. Now kindly cease your fidgiting and let the adults talk.
grow up yourself first. dont post in a mature discussion if youre not able to cope.
Your second post is actually pretty interesting, but presents a more nuanced argument. It's just that your assertion that things were working before 1950 offends the ghosts of many economic victims, pre-globalization.
of course, that statement does not purports to mean that everything was perfect. it means comparably better, system not being manipulatable in the scale we know it today. with the scope of damage being localized rather than global.
FWIW, I think you might be mistaken about the relative sizes of the Gilded Age and the modern leisure classes; that is, I think the leisure class of the Gilded Age may have been larger than you're suggesting (there were people besides robber barons).
definitely. just like there were many bourgeois enjoying the pleasures of luxuries even in 10th century, when society was much more feudal in europe. but the part that interests me is the number, and the composition/nature of the influential circles. what im thinking is that, the corporationism today is much more widespread, structured, "grassroots" if you will, and far reaching than robber baron influence in 19th century.
That said, I am terrified by corporations. I find them profoundly undemocratic, and popular culture excuses them from behaving according to any ethical or moral code ("It's their duty to maximize shareholder returns, they shouldn't be concerned with decency," is the refrain, despite it not being strictly true). That is all in addition to the usual bureaucratic shielding that organization offers ("It's company policy").
feeling the same here. you can add to that list the exploitation of copyright, patents, eventually law system for shielding misdeeds.
My perspective: Globalization is only superficially related to the rise of the megacorporation. Megacorporations thrive in the global scale because of anarchy. It doesn't help that every attempt at international regulation has been hijacked by ideology (the Church of Friedman, I'm looking at you) or by outright gamesmanship. IMHO, the best defense against the new corporate paradigm is citizen-of-the-world action in support of real international justice.
i believe you are wrong in the anarchy part. because the very tool that corporationism uses to assert its power is the international treaties, organizations. for example, riaa/mpaa is trying to push the same oppressive copyright system to other countries by pressuring through WTO, or, by exploiting the administration and having them pressure other countries that u.s. makes trade treaties with. if there had been anarchy, they couldnt do that.
being taxed for social security and healthcare is WAY better than being taxed for a foreign war.
for the former, you can actually measure and account for what you get back, and if applicable, hold politicians accountable. for the latter, you cant.
'a night life that involves actually talking to creative people doing exciting things.'
withering away one's life in a dark bar corner with sleazy sluts and calling it fun didnt make much sense ever anyways.
than your freedoms.
for you can make more money. but you cant gain more freedoms.