gonvaled

89 ms·

901.
by gonvaled 13y ago
- Are the helpouts NSA approved? - Will I get in trouble depending on which people I want to help? - Will I get in trouble depending on what activities are the people I help involved into? No, thanks.
902.
by gonvaled 13y ago
Can somebodody comment on this? > I'd have added one thing to the licence: that this > licence is GPL but after three years it reverts to BSD, > then Oracle wouldn’t have bought Sun because we’d be free > within t
903.
by gonvaled 13y ago
Sarah is essentially saying: " everybody can love each other, and when there is a mistake, we will just kiss each other harder until we get the problem solved". This, in my opinion, is much too optimistic. Linus is saying: "
904.
by gonvaled 13y ago
I've said this before, but I'll repeat it here. There is zero chance that anybody will believe what the US government / US companies will say from now on. Their credibility has been fatally damaged, for years to come. The fac
905.
by gonvaled 13y ago
By that definition, and you being picky, we can safely assume than nothing can brick any device. What? Your CPU burnt during the last upgrade? Not bricked! You just need to go through the simple procedure of soldering a new CPU!
906.
by gonvaled 13y ago
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/technology/2013/06/google-wan... "The FISA requests don't already show up in Google's regular transparency reports because they are top secret, according to the l
907.
by gonvaled 13y ago
Corporations have been denying participation for years because acknowledging being part of the program was a crime.
908.
by gonvaled 13y ago
This is all nice and good. Unfortunately, it means absolutely nothing. Since we know that lying is (by law) part of what corporations are forced to do when addressing questions of "national security", no amount of denies, press re
909.
by gonvaled 13y ago
The NSA is not almighty. It has lots of resources, and the US can put lots of pressure in lots of places, but there will always be places out of reach. Thanks to whistle blowers we can get to know which places have fallen under US power, an
910.
by gonvaled 13y ago
Sure, but: a) nobody is doing this in the same scale as the US, and nobody has the means to do it (except maybe China) b) If I live in Sweden, and the Swedish government is snooping on me, I get both the good and the bad of it. If the US is
911.
by gonvaled 13y ago
We are (in most of the world) in a very unbalanced situation. Most of the state of the art technology is run by US companies. Thus the whole world (actually, those using services provided by those companies - i.e. nearly everybody) is being
912.
by gonvaled 13y ago
So you are saying that Mozilla can be a trustworthy partner in the development of Persona (since it is opensource, I guess?), but not a trustworthy Persona provider (since they are US based). That sounds reasonable, and Mozilla deserves muc
913.
by gonvaled 13y ago
Here: http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/persona/ "Many sign-in systems carry your profile data with them; some even share that info with other sites and social networks. We believe you should control how your pers
914.
by gonvaled 13y ago
Honest question: why the wishful thinking? Why not tell it like it is? What is the potential damage that Mozilla could suffer by clearly stating that it is impossible and it will be impossible to guarantee that the government will not be
915.
by gonvaled 13y ago
"It’s also worth pointing out that we do take certain technical measures to limit the data we collect. We’ve designed Persona so that the identity provider – including the fallback Identity Provider that we run – does not learn your br
916.
by gonvaled 13y ago
I know nothing about Persona. I have never used, and I have not read anything about it. But that much is clear to me: the communication between you and the Persona provider can happen very much over an encrypted channel, but the data in t
917.
by gonvaled 13y ago
Mozilla would probably die, and that would be a very bad thing. So you are right, this is not the wisest path (it is the bravest, but the graveyard is full of brave people). The other option is to contribute to educate the public by being
918.
by gonvaled 13y ago
The statement that Mozilla should have issued: "Some have claimed that we should move Mozilla out of the US. Unfortunately, for reasons of connectivity, workforce, ties to US market, legal issues and restructuring costs we are not able
919.
by gonvaled 13y ago
The US has been changing the rules since decades. The shadow government has adapted to those changes, becoming more and more powerful with each change. The US will pass a couple of "government openness" laws in the coming months (
920.
by gonvaled 13y ago
"good strong laws and privacy culture[1]" "[1] The US has a strong culture of privacy, which is what makes PRISM so surprising for their citizens. (Not for many other people who were saying it's happening, and have been
921.
by gonvaled 13y ago
You are probably right, but Mozilla should go down putting up a fight. And this is a fight worth losing.
922.
by gonvaled 13y ago
"First, it’s not clear to us that other governments have any less intrusive surveillance activities." Well, it is clear the US has it. That should be enough. There are some unknowns unknowns, but this is a known unknown. There are
923.
by gonvaled 13y ago
"No leftist, or even middle-of-the-road, government will accept that." It is funny that the author equates left-leaning with freedom limiter. In reality, a left-leaning government limits economic freedoms, and a right-leaning government lim
924.
by gonvaled 13y ago
Sorry, I am confused. You say you are atheist, and of a "fairly open religion". You probably mean that you grew up in that culture, right? Because, in my book, the set of atheists and the set of religious people (whatever the religion) ha
925.
by gonvaled 13y ago
It is more fundamental than that: religion does not offer any falsifiable claims. It is not that we do not apply the scientific method to it. It is that, by design , religion is out of bounds of the scientific method.
926.
by gonvaled 13y ago
EDIT: I read your sentence as "regardless of the fact that I am neither a theist or an atheist". So my comment here is a reply to that sentence, which is probably not what you implied. Sorry to disappoint you, but you are probably an at
927.
by gonvaled 13y ago
What is wrong about that sentence? The scientific method has to do with falsifiable theories. Religion is not falsifiable. On scientific grounds alone, religion has no place. You can believe there is a god, or that there isn't. Both belie
928.
by gonvaled 13y ago
I get my help in Polish too! (spanish citizen living in Germany, with Chrome in English)
929.
by gonvaled 14y ago
If Google is complying with the law, and if the public perception is that Google is paying too little taxes, then the public should push for a law change. It is not Google's task to pay taxes. Google's task is to comply with the law. Withou
930.
by gonvaled 14y ago
Well, that is the point. Human nature is such that population has always stabilized slightly above carrying capacity (being the amount of population that the ecosystem+technology can sustain). We always slightly overshoot (carried by tech

More ›