Asbostos

12 ms·

61.
by Asbostos 11y ago
Why on earth isn't this common practice for any software that can be remotely controlled over the internet? Ie anything rendering parts of web pages, opening untrusted files, etc? Everyone has known what a massive security risk unsafe
62.
by Asbostos 11y ago
Is it also awesome that the Japanese soldiers they fought also sacrificed so much? If so, then how is it a good thing for people to kill each other with no apparent purpose? If not then who decides which side is right and which is wrong? Ad
63.
by Asbostos 11y ago
Why are child soldiers a human rights violation when they happen in Africa, but a hero when they happen in America? Is it the difference between volunteering and being forced to fight? That shouldn't apply to children who are too young
64.
by Asbostos 11y ago
Several of my friends, neighbors and family members have died. In none of those cases did I hear about it on the news and call to make sure it wasn't them. If I did that, I'd be doing it daily, because there are always car acciden
65.
by Asbostos 11y ago
I suppose not if terrorism has to give fear to the whole country, not just one group. But it was surely meant to intimidate by random-seeming violence. It wasn't part of a war, which distinguishes it from general war killing. Nor was i
66.
by Asbostos 11y ago
Don't worry. Driverless cars are coming and the lives they save will quickly outweigh all deaths from terrorism and mass shootings. The US will be such a massively safer place without those 30,000 road deaths each year. It'll be a
67.
by Asbostos 11y ago
You didn't need Facebook to tell you that. You could have just assumed it was true based on the enormous population of Paris (2 million) and the small number of deaths in this incident (100-200).
68.
by Asbostos 11y ago
I suspect law abiding black citizens in gangland ghettos aren't doing most of the shootings either. What you've done here is to subdivide the whole American population into a group of "not many shooters" and "Higher
69.
by Asbostos 11y ago
They already failed to prevent 600 common murders each year. You could call that completely ineffective or you could call it diminishing returns on investment in security. You can't prevent all of them without an unacceptable number of
70.
by Asbostos 11y ago
Not that it makes up for it, but France also committed state-sponsored terrorism (by any definition of the word) in New Zealand in the 80's. Though they only killed one person with their bomb. https://en.wikipedia.org/w
71.
by Asbostos 11y ago
Yes, people like to blame the outsider, no matter how ridiculous it is. Ever hear a news story about an angry partner killing a spouse? About a person stabbed to death in the street? Pushed in front of a train? Hit by a car? Most of these y
72.
by Asbostos 11y ago
Does that have any value beyond reinforcing people's irrational fear of mass deaths? What if you let your family know you're not one of the 100 killed in this attack then die as one of the 600 murdered in France each year by commo
73.
by Asbostos 11y ago
> The company’s contract specifically provides that calls “to telephone numbers known to belong [to] attorneys are NOT recorded” and that “if any call to an attorney is inadvertently recorded, the recording is destroyed as soon as it is
74.
by Asbostos 11y ago
Maybe it's not a problem. Squatters have to pay ongoing registration fees to maintain their stock so that puts a cap on registering of every possible domain. You could even see them as providing a service by keeping desirable domains a
75.
by Asbostos 11y ago
How is that a problem? They don't have IP protection on the idea. It's quite fair and lawful for another company to copy it. They still need to overcome network effects and actually implement it. As the article shows, this was har
76.
by Asbostos 11y ago
How is driving hands free different from being the lowest common denominator? The people in those videos weren't doing much more than taking their hands off the wheel. Sure, one was holding other items, but he could have dropped them a
77.
by Asbostos 11y ago
When I use my phone to pay for things in a shop, there's surely a lot of complicated security going on, and a bit of ugly technology is even exposed when it displays a QR code for the cashier to scan. But nowhere ever did it ask me any
78.
by Asbostos 11y ago
That's not funding. That's boredom or perhaps ideology. Most FOSS developers don't bother thinking about UX or even implementing a UI because it's boring. They're interested in the high-tech stuff that their softwar
79.
by Asbostos 11y ago
As long as people are living in them, what does it matter where the owner lives? I'd agree with you if they're leaving them empty, waiting to sell again, and perhaps some investors are. But otherwise it's a way to allocate ho
80.
by Asbostos 11y ago
>This is clearly not a cost issue Whenever something is done cheaply and it looks like it's not a cost issue because it's only miniscule part of the total cost of the product, it's usually actually is a cost issue. The buy
81.
by Asbostos 11y ago
I'd argue that rents are high because too many people want to live near each other. Property that people want is a scarce resource so something has to stop people getting it - if not price then what? A waiting list? A lottery? If you s
82.
by Asbostos 11y ago
So we need the original authors to come back with their own re-replication. Instead of throwing their published paper over the wall and moving on, they are the people in the best position to actually defend it and address problems with repl
83.
by Asbostos 11y ago
Not only is lack of replication bad, but I think also excess of new research is bad too. Everybody makes their own unique study, too different to compare to existing research, too small a sample size to be reliable, too singular among thous
84.
by Asbostos 11y ago
This sounds a lot like the well established - but poorly implemented - idea of constructivist learning [1]. A difference seems to be that it would be much easier to design an activity in the Singapore method since it's OK if the studen
85.
by Asbostos 11y ago
Here's some good news about somebody doing something important more efficiently than their competitors and gaining economic benefits from that. But many comments seem to be suggesting it's a bad thing because of environmental cost
86.
by Asbostos 11y ago
If it does become law, then it'll be because that's what people want, or because people don't care. If you care strongly enough to want to influence others with money, then you're effectively wanting to corrupt the syste
87.
by Asbostos 11y ago
This really doesn't seem that bad. It's mainly restricting what governments can do to restrict their people. In other words - keeping trade free. Isn't that kind of a good thing? - Governments are not allowed to restrict wher
88.
by Asbostos 11y ago
Keep in mind that this is natural shrinking of glaciers that's been going on for 10,000 years. Nothing to do with the newer AGW.
89.
by Asbostos 11y ago
What's wrong with non-renewable? That simply means it won't last forever. Is it really important that whatever energy generation we use can be repeatedly maintained and operated forever? I don't see any problem in making the
90.
by Asbostos 11y ago
Vaporized sodium is at the heart of nearly every streetlight. They're not causing disasters. Just having the same material doesn't make the safety the same.

More ›