Amadou

62 ms·

571.
by Amadou 13y ago
Don't make the mistake of putting the cart before the horse. Just because things worked out a certain way is not proof that the end result was intentional.
572.
by Amadou 13y ago
First off, those two things aren't even in the same jurisdiction. But, you know that can go both ways. Maybe the caller was sympathetic to Miranda's situation but his hands were tied by the bureaucracy and all of his fellows who
573.
by Amadou 13y ago
Who knows? Some little mom-and-pop juice-bar, probably not. Megalocorp like Starbucks with millions to spend on such a project, quite possibly. After all, birth-date + gender + zip-code is enough uniquely identify 87% of the population -
574.
by Amadou 13y ago
No, it isn't because these lists are one-way. Once you are detained no one in authoritay ever considers the possibility that you are on the list incorrectly. There is absolutely no benefit to themselves to question the list. If they
575.
by Amadou 13y ago
If you talk with any of your non-tech friends about this topic, does a single one of them care? FWIW, the nephew of a very close friend of mine mentioned the topic of Snowden to me. He's a former army ranger, just recently mustered
576.
by Amadou 13y ago
I don't think it was a coincidence that Greenwald was contacted as soon as Miranda was detained. He was not, it was 3 hours later.
577.
by Amadou 13y ago
I think it is quite possible that it was clerical. Some nameless official put anyone plausibly close to Snowden on one of however many "people of interest" type lists the UK has. It might even be a trickle down from some list in
578.
by Amadou 13y ago
It was also manufactured with much more resources than any terrorist group could hope to muster. This is a problem in discussions of this topic - al-qaeda is not some james bond villain like goldfinger.
579.
by Amadou 13y ago
I don't think has anything to do with saving money. It really seems like a case of trying to take human judgment out of the equation. Strict adherence to rules is easy for bean-counters to push but frequently problematic for dealing
580.
by Amadou 13y ago
Here's my story, for what it is worth. I'm an American. I don't normally go into places like Starbucks. I recently went to a "juice bar" and was one of only two customers there. I paid with cash as I always do no
581.
by Amadou 13y ago
In the case of a ultra-simple design available to terrorists that reaches critical mass by simply "dropping" one chunk of fissile material on another there is no explosion if it doesn't actually reach critical mass. Israel is
582.
by Amadou 13y ago
you can make the simplest atomic bomb by dropping one piece of fissile material on another, provided they are big enough to become a critical mass. My understanding of Ted Taylor's claims about compact fission bombs is that, absent h
583.
by Amadou 13y ago
I find that it helps to mentally substitute "idempotent" for "lossy" when talking about these algorithms.
584.
by Amadou 13y ago
We should all take the bit about being able to construct a “relatively sophisticated nuclear device,” with a grain of salt. An actual bomb is beyond the capability of anybody but a nation-state. Al-qaeda, et al don't have a chance of
585.
by Amadou 13y ago
The typo was bought => brought. He did mean barnes and noble.
586.
by Amadou 13y ago
I think the key part of that paragraph is in the last sentence: "... in order to serve the goal of providing and supporting only free and open source software that is not restricted by software patents by default. " So, not a le
587.
by Amadou 13y ago
I fully understood his point and acknowledged it as pedancy.
588.
by Amadou 13y ago
Yep, but the smart people just dumb down their resume. Resumes are marketing tools, they should be tailored for the job no matter the "level." I'm not saying lie, I'm just saying put in the truth that will get you hired
589.
by Amadou 13y ago
Imagine using your hand as a mouse. Just move it around on the desk next to your keyboard, tap the surface of the desk with a finger to click, you've automatically got five buttons - one for each finger, etc. I guess that would be ki
590.
by Amadou 13y ago
No, I am meant that $1.87 is absurdly high compared to how much money AMC makes from cable viewers. See the analysis a little further down, it's less than 40c per episode.
591.
by Amadou 13y ago
Confirmation? PJ Media is a horrible news source, editorial standards poorer than Glenn Beck's "The Blaze." And this wasn't even reporting, it was an opinion piece in the blogs section. I'm all for piling on the m
592.
by Amadou 13y ago
13 episodes is 3 months. So that $4.20 is really closer to $1. Bump it to $1.50 as a generous amount for advertising. Apply your 25% modifier and you are still at $5/season or 38c/episode.
593.
by Amadou 13y ago
They pull 3 million viewers for the first showing in the US. Then there are all the catch-up viewings later in the week plus the showings in foreign markets. I don't know if BB will be syndicated, usually takes around 100 episodes be
594.
by Amadou 13y ago
I use NoScript too and 99 times out of 100 when I do enable javascript for a particular site it is just froofroo crap that adds noise not signal. But I've been using the web since before java, much less javascript, was invented so m
595.
by Amadou 13y ago
I'm also happy to spend $1.87 per episode for Breaking Bad Compared to what they earn from regular viewers - subscription fees and commercials - that pricing is nuts.
596.
by Amadou 13y ago
It ought to be a surprise. It certainly is contrary to all the rhetoric that I swallowed hook, line and sinker in high school about what kind of country the USA is. I'm willing to bet that Chomsky was not surprised one bit by these
597.
by Amadou 13y ago
FWIW I do my best to completely avoid stores that have loyalty cards. I consider it unfair to expect people to give up their privacy for normal pricing - the rich people get to keep their privacy and the poor people don't have a choic
598.
by Amadou 13y ago
It isn't that there is no profit in it. There is profit - but it is craigslist level of profit, not google level profit.
599.
by Amadou 13y ago
Why can't the next social network by a peer-to-peer network where your personal data stays on your personal machine at home and where you have total control over who has access to what. Eben Moglen's FreedomBox project has been
600.
by Amadou 13y ago
So what? If we are going to be pedants about the literal definition of endless then coming up with mathematical analogies is not in the spirit of pedantry. Limitless may be a definition of endless but it is not the only definition. e

More ›