fineman

8 ms·

31.
by fineman 11y ago
I'm pretty sure that's not in my contract with them. But yeah, if I sold them something and promised unlimited support, they would be.
32.
by fineman 11y ago
Actually, unilaterally deciding what the constitution means is actually how it works. You don't vote to see if you feel it's unfair - you feel it's fair/unfair and so you vote to express that. The constitution isn&#x27
33.
by fineman 11y ago
Stuxnet will always be possible. The vulns/trojans just replace having to get someone to knowingly install it. Or rather, will always be possible until we move to doing protocol and behavior analysis of SCADA commands (as they enter th
34.
by fineman 11y ago
Yes. Pretty much everyone I know in such an industry has tunnel-vision on their area and overestimates its importance. They'd end up plastic-wrapping(/suffocating) us to prevent [malware, terrorism, power-grid collapse, etc] if th
35.
by fineman 11y ago
I've been treated that way by police. Surrounded and backed into a corner - threatened with being beaten and having my camera broken if I "resisted arrest" by continuing to take photos - and held there with nowhere to move fo
36.
by fineman 11y ago
No, I have no need for Snowden to go to prison before I'll listen to what he has to say. You just want him to suffer for some authoritarian reason. If you think someone needs to be tortured to atone for some sin, be my guest.
37.
by fineman 11y ago
Nope, the death penalty is definitely on the table based on the charges we've heard bandied about. And the issue isn't that some evidence is classified, but that all evidence Snowden would want to present is classified. Even h
38.
by fineman 11y ago
The leak helped, how would letting himself go through the shit that Chelsea Manning is going through, help?
39.
by fineman 11y ago
That's the simplest explanation of dilution I've ever seen.
40.
by fineman 11y ago
Sorry, forgot to check this far back. Yes, though. I am sort of saying that by asking one guy out of a crowd very obvious questions you were attempting to publicly shame him or call him on something. Were you actually asking that question t
41.
by fineman 11y ago
"If and only if" sounds strange to me too. Like asking if he's a knight when Pluto is a dwarf planet. And on second reading it looks like an awkward way to say And... I think "Is one and only one of [A, B] true?"
42.
by fineman 11y ago
Why would anyone be retarded enough to intentionally stick around to be subjected to what they've proved isn't justice?
43.
by fineman 11y ago
Obvious lie is obvious. Also, if we did put his back to a wall it'd be our fault.
44.
by fineman 11y ago
Sure. But this is a great counter to the all-to-frequent dismissals framed as criticisms that Snowden should have done something more. "Sure, I support valid whistle-blowers, but what Snowden did ..." It's a simple way to s
45.
by fineman 11y ago
> I believe that some of what he leaked shouldn't have been, Then blame your (government's) employees who left Snowden with no choice but to leak. They essentially entangled classified data (their job) with unclassified data (t
46.
by fineman 11y ago
Try putting systems in place to enable whistleblowing at an earlier level. You're punishing Snowden for your government not working.
47.
by fineman 11y ago
You better than most know than you don't get heard until you release an exploit. Official channels were even more useless in Snowden's case than usual. And as a taxpayer, I want to know how we're fucking up so I can try to co
48.
by fineman 11y ago
For me the angle is accountability. Whatever your family wants, and it'll be different than you individually, they all want the elected and appointed officials of the government to carry it out honestly and without corruption. Proper s
49.
by fineman 11y ago
If he'd had a choice he wouldn't be in Russia. It was literally the last place left to go. Also, they changed the passwords when he left.
50.
by fineman 11y ago
Especially because governments don't go repressive overnight. What's perfectly reasonable today may not be in ten years. (Example, Iran.)
51.
by fineman 11y ago
The idea that you have no say, except once every few years, to pick one of the per-chosen to "respresent" you, isn't actually at-all democratic. It's more like monarchy-light.
52.
by fineman 11y ago
There are two positions, 1) punish Edward for revealing what our servants do in our name or 2) do not. Everyone is camp #1 is indistinguishable from the people who abuse our trust themseves. Criminal.
53.
by fineman 11y ago
Not all non-negotiable contacts are a a contract of adhesion. Stores will rarely negotiate (in N.A.), for example. CoAs require a weaker party, who has no leverage, and it seemingly need to be for a necessity (as part of the "no choice
54.
by fineman 11y ago
It doesn't seem to prevent other reasons for compelling source access. Simply not *as a condition ... sale in the territory". So you can't (seemingly) require FOSS to access the market at all, but you could compel someone to
55.
by fineman 11y ago
Wouldn't the authors of the software be able to sue if the licensee didn't fulfill their obligations? And wouldn't one of the civil remedies sought be to ban importation if the offending product into the country in question?
56.
by fineman 11y ago
And the Republicans never say anything more intelligent that Trump/Palin's last quote. Right? When you judge a group by the loudest, most extreme members, you get a parody of the group.
57.
by fineman 11y ago
Well, yes - better hardware is a better choice. You're in a race with an attacker trying to reverse your password hashes. You should feel safe in assuming that this algorithm will turn your CPU cycles spent into the highest attacker bu
58.
by fineman 11y ago
I meant to specifically under-tell the story. Make sure that your testimony was questioned, don't argue strongly, etc. I don't know the hand-ranking of various legal maneuvers but I am curious where a DA's eye-witness testimo
59.
by fineman 11y ago
I doubt it. Manufacturers, and especially ones like Porsche, routinely test the quality and performance of their subcomponents. If they didn't they'd be negligent. The only plausible answer is that they used the same broken metric
60.
by fineman 11y ago
I think the troll's motivation is closer to breaking a seemingly useless system to waste the time of those who think its important. You can argue against something, or show it to be unworkable.

More ›