caskance

17 ms·

151.
by caskance 11y ago
The Belgacom stuff and TAO catalog leap immediately to mind as things that went way over the line.
152.
by caskance 11y ago
He could have limited the scope of his leaks, or stayed in the US to face trial and persecution. Either would be more admirable than what he has done.
153.
by caskance 11y ago
He did actually have that option. If he had merely stolen and leaked information about two or three blatantly unconstitutional programs, which surely would have been very simple, I doubt quite so many people would be calling him a traitor.
154.
by caskance 11y ago
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Perhaps it is simply that they, unlike Snowden, don't blase-ly reveal classified information.
155.
by caskance 11y ago
Funny, I would say that the perception of this as a violation is something only felt by those who don't understand that the whole point of putting your nerves outside your body is to expose them to the world. If you wanted to keep them
156.
by caskance 11y ago
It's actually not an issue at all if, like John Oliver, you just care about making a point on a comedy program and don't care about being at all accurate. Snowden is a whistleblower who went far beyond the scope of responsible whi
157.
by caskance 11y ago
We know the employee went to the media with claims about the circumstances under which he departed that don't match the official record.
158.
by caskance 11y ago
Why would such a place exist? The more unbiased a news outlet is trusted to be, the higher the incentive to subvert them to show bias towards you.
159.
by caskance 11y ago
That sounds like an inane corporatese non-statement that everyone would immediately dismiss.
160.
by caskance 11y ago
Show not tell doesn't work. Otherwise there would be no such thing as marketing.
161.
by caskance 11y ago
If you're a quality employee that is not interested in disparaging former employers, as most people are not, I don't see why it would affect your decision. It's an appropriate response to what the employee did. If Amazon had
162.
by caskance 11y ago
Or you could simply lie and tell people it's been thoroughly and fully vetted by multiple diverse and counter-interested groups of individuals. Those claims won't undergo the same scrutiny. They can't - otherwise it'd be
163.
by caskance 11y ago
Your whole first paragraph came off as extremely luddite. Knowing that you didn't intend it as such, I'm not sure how to interpret it.
164.
by caskance 11y ago
And anyone worried about not having a good answer to that question doesn't list the job they just started last month in their employment history.
165.
by caskance 11y ago
Presumably because you can't afford to pay rent doing it for your own.
166.
by caskance 11y ago
So are we back to blaming the internet and the modern interconnected society? I can accept that.
167.
by caskance 11y ago
I have real trouble believing a competent developer can't find a job developing native iOS apps in this job market.
168.
by caskance 11y ago
It's a positive feedback loop. If it were not for pressure on applicants to find a job, any job, would every employer get bombarded by so many poorly written resumes that they would feel the need to implement such filters?
169.
by caskance 11y ago
No, of course not. Just as with the dating metaphor, there are a lot of people who will never be mature enough to accept that. But that's something they have to deal with themselves. I'm not their therapist. I can't "be
170.
by caskance 11y ago
I'm not saying that people aren't justified in fearing unemployment. I'm just saying that fear pressures them into making suboptimal decisions. It's even worse because 99% of those people immediately stop looking for wor
171.
by caskance 11y ago
What you're seeing is actually the opposite problem. That candidates aren't obsessed enough with a potential "false positive" hire where they end up working somewhere they don't actually want to work. You can't
172.
by caskance 11y ago
Or you could accept what most people learn in their first month of dating experience - that just because you're not right for each other doesn't mean there's something wrong with either of you.
173.
by caskance 11y ago
Sure, why not? It's hardly justified to deny the validity of every single step in someone's reasoning just because their conclusion was incorrect.
174.
by caskance 11y ago
Lawrence Lessig is a real person and thus my answer satisfies at least one of the criteria given.
175.
by caskance 11y ago
You're of course free to make that choice, thanks to the USA.
176.
by caskance 11y ago
From the perspective of someone who actually understands modern technology, they actually mean the EU is fucked.
177.
by caskance 11y ago
"Investigations in the EU" means jack shit. There have also been "investigations in the EU" about whether Google is an illegal monopoly and whether Facebook needs to segregate all its data on European entities into separ
178.
by caskance 11y ago
No, you repeated Coward's own assertion, stripped of its original context.
179.
by caskance 11y ago
You could support Lawrence Lessig's presidential campaign.
180.
by caskance 11y ago
I haven't seen anyone claim that Facebook is failing to pay all the tax they are legally obligated to pay. Did you mean something else by "everybody pays his taxes?"

More ›