LLWM

18 ms·

181.
by LLWM 12y ago
That claim is logically impossible. If most people were committing felonies without harm, that would lend plausible deniability to harmful felons, thus indirectly causing harm.
182.
by LLWM 12y ago
Yes. I don't find "most people do it" to be a convincing excuse for personal flaws.
183.
by LLWM 12y ago
No, I don't, and no, I'm not.
184.
by LLWM 12y ago
Thanks, you too!
185.
by LLWM 12y ago
Normal people graduate from college with tens of thousands of dollars in student loans. Normal people are unhealthily obese. Normal people go bankrupt from unexpected medical expenses. Is it your aspiration in life to be normal?
186.
by LLWM 12y ago
That's what a lot of people want. We get it by not committing felonies.
187.
by LLWM 12y ago
Factual correction is not the same as changing someone's mind. On a subject like what is an acceptable level of domestic espionage, the contention is about moral values and priorities within society. Disagreement about facts doesn&#x27
188.
by LLWM 12y ago
When is the last time you saw an argument on an internet message board change anyone's mind? I am sure there are plenty of government and military bureaucrats who aren't bothered by futility of their efforts, but the leaks we&#x27
189.
by LLWM 12y ago
We lived in that universe for a long time before the leaks, and many people still live in that universe today, either out of ignorance or apathy. How are they worse off for it?
190.
by LLWM 12y ago
So this is yet another NASA-like example of military spending driving research that eventually gets repurposed for civilian use? Great!
191.
by LLWM 12y ago
There was a large leak that included what was basically an internal catalog of TAO-created devices and modules. That's what they are crossreferencing the codenames against.
192.
by LLWM 12y ago
It's the way of the world. Everything has impact on everything else. In the past, you had "privacy" speaking with someone in your own home. Even though the vibrations could theoretically be felt through the walls, we didn&#x2
193.
by LLWM 12y ago
Of course there isn't. The US would be the attacker in this scenario. And we most certainly still do bomb people with aircraft.
194.
by LLWM 12y ago
Did you even read the article? If they cared to actually silence someone, they would, and you would never know. People (or even robots) disagreeing with you on an internet forum is so far from effective that it's almost insulting to a
195.
by LLWM 12y ago
If the NSA is really that overwhelmingly powerful, it is irrelevant whether a jury can be convinced of some random hacker's guilt. Let him go free if you must. If he is legitimately dangerous, the NSA can shut him down or point him the
196.
by LLWM 12y ago
You're in the wrong world then, buddy. If the software is not yet ready, users are expected to encounter serious bugs. Your QA department is paid to help provide you with information to diagnose and troubleshoot those bugs, but users a
197.
by LLWM 12y ago
Privacy has nothing to do with it. If the software is not yet ready, users are expected to encounter serious bugs. Your QA department is paid to help provide you with information to diagnose and troubleshoot those bugs, but users aren'
198.
by LLWM 12y ago
It's perfectly reasonable to expect extra data to be collected when using prerelease versions of software. Complaining about it now is premature.
199.
by LLWM 12y ago
Which of those other regulations got this much discussion on HN?
200.
by LLWM 12y ago
That's not what I said. I'm talking about the default state of information being a more protected one. Not the state it ends up in after some negotiation. To tie it to your analogy, it would be as if you could initially decline an
201.
by LLWM 12y ago
No more than encrypting information causes encryption to lose its meaning. Something that should be declassified still can be. It just means that the default state is different. Would you say that if your innocuous slashdot browsing was enc
202.
by LLWM 12y ago
Neither of those are the thing. I'm talking about default states. You're talking about actual states.
203.
by LLWM 12y ago
It's astonishing that people can still talk about such a thing as an "independent lab" with a straight face.
204.
by LLWM 12y ago
That's a superior bargaining position. Any other government could require the same things China does, but they don't, because companies aren't as desperate to do business there. The principle is no different from any other t
205.
by LLWM 12y ago
The knowledge of how to make and deploy nuclear weapons isn't going away. In the future, technology might develop to such a point where having the weapons themselves ready is unnecessary because they can be created instantly as they ar
206.
by LLWM 12y ago
And yet the same people complaining about classified by default as a de facto government policy are pushing for encryption by default everywhere.
207.
by LLWM 12y ago
As the cost of doing so diminishes, so does the requirement for justification. These days, the only noticeable cost is psychological. IMO, sufficiently justified by "we might need it one day". Of course, 20 years ago, or even 5 ye
208.
by LLWM 12y ago
Hopefully this will finally shut up the people who complain that the NSA's behavior will damage the US tech industry. If they are interested in compromising a system, being non-American just means they will break in the hard way. At le
209.
by LLWM 12y ago
And the same will be true of all the billions of people that you think are making bad decisions today.
210.
by LLWM 12y ago
Do you really think the disagreement is because we've never heard that argument before? That all the people who think this way have just never been exposed to Brazil, or Minority Report, or any of the other thousand works of fiction in

More ›