nonrandomstring

129 ms·

2671.
by nonrandomstring 4y ago
> And rightly so. There's a lot of things broken in the security > industry, but letting users pick: "Hmm, i want AES 256 ECB instead > of AES 128 GCM, because 256 > 128" is not the answer. Not quite the granulari
2672.
by nonrandomstring 4y ago
Wow. This is quite significant for problems in comp sci we have around group decision making. They have a representative democracy with high degrees of disputation (argument) occurring at different levels. Seems this is highly optimal, havi
2673.
by nonrandomstring 4y ago
There are different kinds of regulation. They don't necessarily need to be prescriptive or to test static quality in the same way that drugs are regulated. (But I think that some security people would like them even less than flat-out
2674.
by nonrandomstring 4y ago
> Or perhaps he was just evil and had a hatred of humanity that he was justifying with whatever reason pleased him. For me. Agent Smith isn't coded as evil. He represents the cold rationality of the scientific algorithm - "I&
2675.
by nonrandomstring 4y ago
A brilliant read from a computer science POV. An interesting theoretical problem indeed. But ultimately it feels like a rainbow solution looking for a real problem with attendant potential evil side effects.
2676.
by nonrandomstring 4y ago
As is the case for good people. You've said nothing. Having the will to stand up for what you believe in remains a human virtue regardless of the belief. Though of course we'd wish for people to have good beliefs.
2677.
by nonrandomstring 4y ago
Surely the author who is using Bear "A privacy-first, no-nonsense, super-fast blogging platform" is being a tad rhetorical with that question. S/he asks; > Did we consent to this? Yes you absolutely did. Tacitly at least.
2678.
by nonrandomstring 4y ago
Not me, no. Only a tenuous connection to the writer. Genuinely surprised by your use of the word "fear" and how that fits into our little battle pro, and anti Big Tech. You see, if you're not frightened yourself, then isn&#x2
2679.
by nonrandomstring 4y ago
The reason economics prevails over politics is not because its logic precludes public parks, healthcare or education. It's because ordinary people understand politics. Ordinary people have opinions and can give answers in the form of v
2680.
by nonrandomstring 4y ago
I'll tag this as a "positive research result".
2681.
by nonrandomstring 4y ago
It's the character the article is really about. Much like the reverence we have for Feynman or Einstein, it's not just the science they did but the stylish way they did it. The author obviously has a great fondness. But there&#x2
2682.
by nonrandomstring 4y ago
> Pure fearmongering It frightened you?
2683.
Systems Fail Our Institutions(techrights.org)
2 points by nonrandomstring 4y ago|0 comments
2684.
The Dark Side of ReCAPTCHA3(blog.edned.net)
6 points by nonrandomstring 4y ago|13 comments
2685.
by nonrandomstring 4y ago
Interesting. My own alma mater UCL was founded on openness to women and Jews and has thrived on that ticket of inclusivity. It was early to the table in admitting overseas students when most UK universities only recruited provincially. When
2686.
by nonrandomstring 4y ago
If Taiwan really sees chips as a "silicon shield" that's all the more reason to redouble efforts to diversify sources. But I'm confused, because the title is: "TSMC says efforts to rebuild US semiconductor industry
2687.
by nonrandomstring 4y ago
A lovely read. Full of old chestnuts made fresh with seasonal seasoning. Great to see Illich reconnected to some much more contemporary tags. Nice to see another technologist who laughs in the face of "inevitability", and the rele
2688.
by nonrandomstring 4y ago
National security is nothing more than the sum total of the individual securities of each citizen. If your granny cannot trust technology not to have her bank account emptied by criminals, and Bob the local businessman cannot have a convers
2689.
by nonrandomstring 4y ago
> What are these 'legitimate interest' things While some comments are saying that legislation can narrow this down, I don't think it's anything that can be agreed up front any longer. Web is heading toward a complete
2690.
by nonrandomstring 4y ago
This cookie malarkey is about a breakdown of protocol. If two entities no longer intend to cooperate and honour each others signals, all bets are off for building reliable economies on that technology. What's holding "web" t
2691.
by nonrandomstring 4y ago
> "functionality that is desired by hardware owners" We hear this all the time don't we? Claims that something is; "Because people want it". "Markets demand it". But we see absolutely no evidence of the
2692.
by nonrandomstring 4y ago
I am at a loss to understand your disapproval of my remarks. Do please have the courtesy to respond in words with constructive, challenging ideas.
2693.
by nonrandomstring 4y ago
Sounds like you're a good sysadmin and mentor. There's no possible way you should have to take on the burden of schooling everyone. You probably already go far beyond the call of duty. What we need to do with Digital Self Defence
2694.
by nonrandomstring 4y ago
> .0001% of people who choose to block javascript The measured number of browsers blocking JavaScript varies between about 0.7% and 4% with an estimated global average hovering around 1.5%. Here are some sources [1,2,3]. [1] https:&#x2F
2695.
by nonrandomstring 4y ago
It takes inner work to overcome a bleak view of people. It's too easy to eschew compassion and faith in fellow humans to improve themselves. I think the rehabilitation of our digital world asks us to give people greater "benefit o
2696.
by nonrandomstring 4y ago
Tiny changes with a smile. Now there are two of us. :) Pass it on.
2697.
by nonrandomstring 4y ago
Well done. Rude questions are good. If anything there aren't enough of them.
2698.
by nonrandomstring 4y ago
Some true words. One should generally prefer criminal gangs elected according to social contract, since they are basically "our* criminal gang. As for moral relativism - not so much. There's enough consensus for judiciaries and cr
2699.
by nonrandomstring 4y ago
Some good points. Lets see what we can do here: > The problem isn’t that you can’t trust people. Good. It's always best to have an optimistic view of our fellows, that's how we build good social structures. > The problem is
2700.
by nonrandomstring 4y ago
> If I was responsible for ... the only software that gets to run is the one I want running. Not wishing to pick on you personally, but the above paragraph is wonderful example of the sort of logic going around that bothers me. You tra

More ›