BoringCode

6 ms·

1.
by BoringCode 9y ago
Yes, there is more to life than the cult of Snowden. No reason to run around with our heads cut off just because the man gave an interview.
2.
by BoringCode 9y ago
WSJ will show the full article if your referer header is set to twitter.com. You can do a search on Google like so: " https://www.wsj.com/articles/uber-faces-fbi-probe-overprogra... site:twitter.com" https:&#
3.
by BoringCode 9y ago
Don't bother, this poster is just trolling and moving the goal posts is one method to do so. You could bring up how spirited and competitive the World Baseball Classic was. How it featured teams from all over the world and was watched
4.
by BoringCode 9y ago
Baseball is played around the world. This comment is slightly insulting and pointless.
5.
by BoringCode 9y ago
Misleading comment. 7.08 (a) 2 specifically applies to the scenario like in this comment: > Rule 7.08(a) Comment: Any runner after reaching first base who leaves the base path heading for his dugout or his position believing that there i
6.
by BoringCode 9y ago
I am concurring with you. The point I'm making is that it's a matter of resources and trust, not literal "open source" that matters. If I trust an organization to put the resources towards properly auditing their softwar
7.
by BoringCode 9y ago
Many open-source projects simply don't have the resources to adequately test their products or provide support. Contrast this with a large company which has the resources and the willpower to provide support for their software. Often t
8.
by BoringCode 10y ago
> A better strategy would be to determine which ISP serves Congress, and pay them for the data of IPs originating from Congress. Except that would be illegal (and no ISP is going to sell raw data, even if they could)
9.
by BoringCode 10y ago
Universal 2nd Factor. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_2nd_Factor
10.
by BoringCode 10y ago
Not conclusively, no.
11.
by BoringCode 10y ago
I'm not sure speculation changes the central premise of the question. Assume that the document was up to date with the latest techniques. Would you still that consider it to be a document worth leaking for the public good? edit: I will
12.
by BoringCode 10y ago
I suspected I'd see a variation of this answer in this thread. While on some level it makes sense for some cases (the information is so benign that it doesn't matter if it is leaked), in this case I don't think it quite adds
13.
by BoringCode 10y ago
If your analogy was true, there would be a stronger moral argument for revealing such information. But it isn't. I'm talking about this very specific case.
14.
by BoringCode 10y ago
Honest question: is this the type of material that should be leaked? Is there an overriding good to revealing this document to the public? I lean towards no, but I'd be interested in discussion on this.
15.
by BoringCode 10y ago
ZType is also really fun (and it runs in the browser) http://zty.pe/
16.
by BoringCode 10y ago
> (If you’re wondering what data the NSA collects, its own site[1] offers a list and this statement: “The standard operating procedure for the Domestic Surveillance Directorate is to ‘collect all available information from all available
17.
by BoringCode 10y ago
It's not just dead, they've yet to perform untethered flight on any of their prototypes. The Terrafugia Transition is an example of a far more practical form of "flying car"
18.
by BoringCode 10y ago
As addressed elsewhere, the linked document is not supposed to be a proof for Russian involvement. The latter part of my comment was meant to provide some context as to why that type of information hasn't been publicly released. If the
19.
by BoringCode 10y ago
I'm addressing the poor thesis that "the IC has been (deliberately) wrong before, therefore they can't be trusted without an undefined amount of evidence." The points you raise are good and worth discussing, but unrelate
20.
by BoringCode 10y ago
You clearly don't understand the intelligence process if this is your critique. First, the people making the DNC hack report are not the same as the analysts who worked on Iraq. The IC is not a monolith. Second, the Bush White House sa
21.
by BoringCode 10y ago
That's fine, you should be skeptical. But do you really expect a nation state to say "hey, this is exactly how were are damaged. Please exploit us." That's just the nature of the intelligence business, it's hard to
22.
by BoringCode 10y ago
Due to the nature of this type of damage you likely won't hear any evidence for many years.
23.
by BoringCode 10y ago
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say the above poster was being sarcastic.
24.
by BoringCode 10y ago
It is coming to Android early next year though.
25.
by BoringCode 10y ago
Maybe, but those can't be deployed on a company's network.
26.
by BoringCode 10y ago
> milquetoast I actually had to look that up. Thanks for a new word that I can throw around. I don't think a personal attack on the author helps your argument, but that's your prerogative. Also, thanks for clarifying your posit
27.
by BoringCode 10y ago
Addendum: very disappointed that I got downvoted for giving my on-topic opinion. I thought HN was better than this. Many of you gave your thoughts in the comments, which is great! Debate is far preferable to abusing the voting system.
28.
by BoringCode 10y ago
I was summarizing the article, that's why I chose that language because it reflected my interpretation of what the author was saying. But I think a more balanced approach is necessary. The leaker should have at least some knowledge of
29.
by BoringCode 10y ago
Targeted leaking can be justified. Indiscriminately stealing information can not be. I think that's a better summary of the article. Now, there are a lot of subtleties to this, especially in regards to what Snowden actually did. But I
30.
by BoringCode 10y ago
"If any corporation is corrupt, all others must be too"

More ›