EdHominem

17 ms·

91.
by EdHominem 10y ago
What's a duct-ape and how did you learn to control them?
92.
by EdHominem 10y ago
What though, is wrong with it? As far as I can see, simply that the same company helps them get the loan is the same one that pays them to drive. And also that they probably buy new cars and are upside down on the loan as soon as they drive
93.
by EdHominem 10y ago
If you want to help these drivers I think they'd prefer access to an overnight parking lot and a community-center shower for $10 than a sleezy hotel for $100. If you really came through with the extra pay I think they still sleep in th
94.
by EdHominem 10y ago
Do you know the legal requirements to work in the certificate-granting department of a CA? There is no legal bar whatsoever. No bond, nothing. > I think it is probably safe to say that a single digit percentage of attorneys in NY state
95.
by EdHominem 10y ago
Symantec can threaten larger lawsuits than you can, so we know how that'd come out. Also, and most critically, it's musical chairs between cloud and security companies. If Symantec came to Google to complain it's likely they&
96.
by EdHominem 10y ago
>You realise that no bank was fined for _actively_ laundering money? And no banker was jailed for 2008. > And by that I mean there was no institutional conspiracy to do so. That simply means that the conspiracy was too big to reasonab
97.
by EdHominem 10y ago
We've got a real too-big-to-fail going on here. If a little company screwed something up this badly they'd be dead. But when one the size of Symantec screws up - oh well they've got too many customers for us to revoke their s
98.
by EdHominem 10y ago
Nope, the plan to invade Iraq was created before 9/11 and information was faked to get us to go to war. No smart people told us we should go, it was only Bush, Cheney, etc. The smart people worldwide were pretty much all in agreement a
99.
by EdHominem 10y ago
Only if you leave juicy content in the unencrytped subject. Also, "What? subjects and recipients are unencrypted!?" -- Every User Ever
100.
by EdHominem 10y ago
I'm using the NSA as an example of a foe of sufficient capability, not saying that this is what they do (to our own agencies at any rate.) Someone who can trojan hardware, suborn any given person, etc. I was hoping to use a very advanc
101.
by EdHominem 10y ago
I'm just saying you're making claims you cannot possibly verify. You say nobody is collecting your keys even though all you have is a lack of evidence either way. I also think you're probably, accidentally, right in this case
102.
by EdHominem 10y ago
> I remember in Berlin, the laws changed and were enforced in such a way as Uber was just a call service for all the standard taxi companies, so it's the same price whether you use Uber or just flag one down. Which defeats the whole
103.
by EdHominem 10y ago
The disruption is that it surfaces all those problems which already exist for taxi drivers in the current system. They often work insane shifts, lose money if it's a slow day, etc. They have to enter into long exploitive contracts just
104.
by EdHominem 10y ago
> Perhaps it would be better to force the state's criminal-court attorneys to spend equal time as prosecutors and as public defenders That's a brilliant idea. What better way to find systematic holes in the system than by makin
105.
by EdHominem 10y ago
> They're not. [keys not collected by another agency] Right. I think you're absolutely correct, now. And I fully expect (hope!) that the NSA will one-day come to you with some more-secure hardware and that you will gladly coope
106.
by EdHominem 10y ago
> Federal expansion programs are not sustainable. Is the federal government sustainable? How many employees is enough? Have we already passed that? Would it be better if we privatized the road crews? > [Programs] ... They can help, bu
107.
by EdHominem 10y ago
Yes, I worked on a product with a DLP feature we touted yet it would fail to identify credit cards if you put extra characters between sets of numbers. It sounds good, and because compliance is about by making good-sounding things mandatory
108.
by EdHominem 10y ago
> It would have to be one of the four people with root. Or anyone who'd ever gotten access to the computer, or installed a camera near it, etc. The critical part of that answer though, is "one of the". The system fails if
109.
by EdHominem 10y ago
Do you really have a policy that would survive an NSA-directed evil-sysadmin attack from any of the participants in your chain of trust? As a civilian branch of the government? It's pretty hard to setup a system that would survive an p
110.
by EdHominem 10y ago
Not entirely. Even if run right after one another, running two tests buckets the results into early/late, which simply using a larger sample set does not. Assume your first samples show the effect and the later ones don't. The fir
111.
by EdHominem 10y ago
Sorta. But it's not that I think we'd never get 52%. Or 66%. I'm not trying to set a higher bar just to stop political change, but to make it more inclusive when it happens. To get those higher mandates we'd have to try
112.
by EdHominem 10y ago
Yeah, I don't want us to allow abortion by 51% either even though I am pro-choice. That doesn't convince anyone and just sets them up to try to repeal it as soon as the sentiment swings 2%. When a politician elected with maybe 40%
113.
by EdHominem 10y ago
> But really, since I'm using the words for their correct English meanings, I don't see why I have to justify my use at all. I'm not fighting to justify something incorrect; Ehh, somewhat. Why did you pick beg instead of s
114.
by EdHominem 10y ago
I understand, but you can't just throw a DB at it and walk away. For instance, which DB? Setup how? Running on what type of hosts? What topological requirements does this have? How much does of a multiplier does it place on your data l
115.
by EdHominem 10y ago
> > It's much easier and safer to declare your constraints rather than trying to enforce them. > Furthermore I am not sure how this relates to FP. I'm saying that FP is great for ensuring correctness. > But that is a s
116.
by EdHominem 10y ago
No, but your rules don't resonate with me even though I feel the same overall. 1) Not the best language, but not the worst either. There's no excuse except microcontrollers for C these days (even though I still like it) and the fa
117.
by EdHominem 10y ago
I hear this data-integrity thing a lot but I don't run into these problems myself. I think it might be a functional-programming thing. It's much easier and safer to declare your constraints rather than trying to enforce them. If y
118.
by EdHominem 10y ago
Why are all of you going on about race?
119.
by EdHominem 10y ago
> Incorrect based on what standard? Based on the part names the person wants to refer to. If you place an order and get exactly what you asked for but not what you want or need, you're wrong. > What standard for language correctn
120.
by EdHominem 10y ago
Learns how? Horrible title. As if the shark tried many times but finally discovered this one simple trick...

More ›