> we do have to balance this issue of privacy and security.
is of course also BOGUS, because privacy is actually fundamental to security, and you can't "balance" security against its own foundation. Every move that shrinks privacy will also diminish security.
PPTP is about as secure as WEP. Both can be broken within seconds. And both are unfixable, since the vulnerability isn't in the implementation, but the protocol itself.
I very much disagree with you. While I think that derogatory statements might (might!) be a problem, I totally disagree when it comes to swearing. It's what we (Europeans!) do, and I really, really, can't cope with this US-American anti-swearing self-censorship-shit.
It's immature, and it's constantly lamp-shading itself, actually drawing attention to itself by telling me "I would be swearing, but I'm censoring myself now" constantly. In other media, it's even worse: Beeping is just obscene.
But she won't, because she's the playing ball of lobbyists.
It became very apparent in the debate about copyright a few years back, where the Queen was parroting the copyright maximalists, and you could see that she did not have any grasp on what was really going on.
The same will happen here; because the Queen lives in a very bad filter bubble.
Re: Re: I've heard that music all over the place for years.
> A re-orchestration of Rossini’s overture from William Tell.
And actually, the original value of Wendy Carlos arrangement is so low, it wouldn't even meet the standard for copyright eligibility in most of the world. It's just a copy of Rossinis work.
The point being, to be on the moral high ground, it's not sufficient just to be on the "right side", but more importantly, you need to only use just means.
In other words, the END DOES NOT JUSTIFY THE MEANS. And within that framework, the FBI is right now, a band of bandits, criminals, and outlaws.
Maybe the US should invest more resources in DEFENDING from cyber attacks
You've got two choices.
a) fix vulnerabilities, which will make everyone safer and more secure. That is the defensive stance. Fixing vulnerabilities, however, will also make your enemies more safe, and thus diminish your offensive potential.
b) hoard knowledge of vulnerabilities. This will make everyone, including yourself, more vulnerable. But then you have a bigger offensive arsenal.
One of these choices shows you're an idiot, unless your side has less technology that needs defending in the first place (like: if you're a terrorist outfit, and not a country, then you don't need to defend anyone).
Your so-called "French" fries are actually Belgian in origin. And hereabouts we call them by their French name, which happens to be "pommes frites" (fried potatoes; the pommes would be short for pommes-de-terre, actually).
That's no reason. I've got around 2500 games on Linux. Around 2000 on steam and 500 more on GOG.com, humble bundle, itch.io and others.
So the reason can only be some "specific game", which neither runs natively on Linux, nor works with wine. Which, for all intents and purposes, is right now Fallout 4 in most cases ;).
Skype works, if you want to put up with 32bit software on your 64bit OS, and have a shitload of 32bit-libraries in ancient versions installed. Oh, and it's an older skype-version as well.
The colonies' plans to import more tea and tea ingredients with lowered tariffs to make our many varieties widely available across borders will have "severe negative impacts on our industry and incentives to invest, which would stunt economic growth and innovation for years to come."
You nailed it. This is exactly what we are seeing with CETA, TTIP and so on. It's the resurgence of mercantilism.
The thing is actually, that this prude 19th century (starts somewhere after 1815 and goes right up to 1918) is to blame for a lot of things we get wrong in history. We tend to apply the 19th century prudery to the 18th century or the middle ages, which were decidedly less prude.
Both these 15th century paintings are rather benign. They just depict "as-is" without too much moral baggage. Which can not be said about the following caricatures from the late 18th century:
We need to focus on curtailing this activity from the top-down, putting in place strict behavioral guidelines
"strict behavioural guidelines". Is that an euphemism? Because actually the only thing that's even near a possible solution is to totally OUTLAW SURVEILLANCE. Like slavery, it's an abomination.
On the post: President Obama Claims He Cannot Pardon Snowden; He's Wrong
balance privacy and security.
> we do have to balance this issue of privacy and security.
is of course also BOGUS, because privacy is actually fundamental to security, and you can't "balance" security against its own foundation. Every move that shrinks privacy will also diminish security.
On the post: Companies Keep Asking Us To Track You; We'd Rather You Be Protected From Tracking
PPTP
Don't ever use them.
On the post: Companies Keep Asking Us To Track You; We'd Rather You Be Protected From Tracking
Re: Re: Re:
This is EXACTLY the kind of fucking self-censorship I really can't stand.
What you're doing isn't even swearing, you're just talking about swear-words, and STILL you're self-censoring yourself.
On the post: Companies Keep Asking Us To Track You; We'd Rather You Be Protected From Tracking
Cultural differences
I very much disagree with you. While I think that derogatory statements might (might!) be a problem, I totally disagree when it comes to swearing. It's what we (Europeans!) do, and I really, really, can't cope with this US-American anti-swearing self-censorship-shit.
It's immature, and it's constantly lamp-shading itself, actually drawing attention to itself by telling me "I would be swearing, but I'm censoring myself now" constantly. In other media, it's even worse: Beeping is just obscene.
I'd rather have people writing honest.
On the post: Companies Keep Asking Us To Track You; We'd Rather You Be Protected From Tracking
Re: Re: You still need to test your connection
Also, please forget FTP; the protocol is a disgrace.
On the post: Parliament Passes Snooper's Charter, Opens Up Citizens To Whole New Levels Of Domestic Surviellance
The Queen could stop this
It became very apparent in the debate about copyright a few years back, where the Queen was parroting the copyright maximalists, and you could see that she did not have any grasp on what was really going on.
The same will happen here; because the Queen lives in a very bad filter bubble.
On the post: Music Composer For 'A Clockwork Orange' Sues Australian Who Created 'A Trumpwork Orange' Parody Trailer
Re: Re: I've heard that music all over the place for years.
And actually, the original value of Wendy Carlos arrangement is so low, it wouldn't even meet the standard for copyright eligibility in most of the world. It's just a copy of Rossinis work.
On the post: UK Home Secretary Agrees To Turn Over Accused Hacker Lauri Love To US Government
Re: Somewhat off point, but...
> f**ked by this.
That was after your team fucked your own candidate and defrauded your own party, to make Clinton your candidate instead of Sanders.
On the post: CNN Uses Copyright To Block Viral Clip Of Van Jones' Impassioned Statement
Re: Re: Left did not lose ... anti-establishment won
The left isn't even in the picture. The right wing of the democrats booted them out, and now the democrats are loosing as well.
On the post: The FBI Wants To Hire Young Tech Savants, Has No Idea How To Attract Them
Categorical imperative
In other words, the END DOES NOT JUSTIFY THE MEANS. And within that framework, the FBI is right now, a band of bandits, criminals, and outlaws.
And you don't want to work for organized crime.
On the post: Hillary Clinton Thinks Real-World Military Responses To Hacking Attacks Are A Nifty Idea
Re: Re:
On the post: Hillary Clinton Thinks Real-World Military Responses To Hacking Attacks Are A Nifty Idea
Re:
You've got two choices.
a) fix vulnerabilities, which will make everyone safer and more secure. That is the defensive stance. Fixing vulnerabilities, however, will also make your enemies more safe, and thus diminish your offensive potential.
b) hoard knowledge of vulnerabilities. This will make everyone, including yourself, more vulnerable. But then you have a bigger offensive arsenal.
One of these choices shows you're an idiot, unless your side has less technology that needs defending in the first place (like: if you're a terrorist outfit, and not a country, then you don't need to defend anyone).
On the post: Former Intelligence Official Leaks Details Of NSA's Hack Of French Presidential Network
Re: Change the sign, Again!!
On the post: DRM: Still Hurting Paying Customers The Most
Re: Re:
That's no reason. I've got around 2500 games on Linux. Around 2000 on steam and 500 more on GOG.com, humble bundle, itch.io and others.
So the reason can only be some "specific game", which neither runs natively on Linux, nor works with wine. Which, for all intents and purposes, is right now Fallout 4 in most cases ;).
On the post: DRM: Still Hurting Paying Customers The Most
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Visual Studio, of course, is not available.
On the post: DRM: Still Hurting Paying Customers The Most
Re: Repeat after me: DIGITAL RIGHTS MISMANAGEMENT!
Like "artificial scarcity for the digital age".
On the post: Hollywood Freaking Out That Europe Might Make It Marginally Easier For People To Legally Access Content
Re: This happened before
You nailed it. This is exactly what we are seeing with CETA, TTIP and so on. It's the resurgence of mercantilism.
On the post: Another 19th Century Moral Panic: Theater
Re:
http://www.abcfrancais.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/F%C3%A9vrier1.jpg -- around 1410, yes, there are genitals visible https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c5/Les_Tr%C3%A8s_Riches_Heures_du_duc_de_Berry_aout .jpg -- around 1410, people bathing naked.
Both these 15th century paintings are rather benign. They just depict "as-is" without too much moral baggage. Which can not be said about the following caricatures from the late 18th century:
http://www.sexualfables.com/images/Thomas_Rowlandson.jpg
http://www.sexualfables.com/images/T homas_Rowlandson2.jpg
On the post: Another 19th Century Moral Panic: Theater
Re: Little known facts
You got it wrong. It's actually man fucking a goat.
http://cdn-www.cracked.com/phpimages/article/8/7/1/20871.jpg
On the post: Another 19th Century Moral Panic: Theater
Re: Re: Re: The more things change...
"strict behavioural guidelines". Is that an euphemism? Because actually the only thing that's even near a possible solution is to totally OUTLAW SURVEILLANCE. Like slavery, it's an abomination.
Next >>