revscat

90 ms·

931.
by revscat 13y ago
I think that it is. There are limits to speech everywhere, whether it is the prototypical "fire in a theater" example, or making threats. It is simply another in that category.
932.
by revscat 13y ago
Not their strategy, but the protocols used to handle email. There is simply no way to send emails using standard protocols without leaking information.
933.
by revscat 13y ago
This is a good thing, I think. If even establishment figures are starting to realize the destructiveness of these policies then so much the better for those who are affected by them.
934.
by revscat 13y ago
I'm not sure that's correct. Phones don't talk to satellites for geolocation, they talk to towers. If they are talking to towers then they are not passive, but active. That means that even in airplane mode you are still being
935.
by revscat 13y ago
> I have to switch my iPhone to airplane mode This doesn't work. The iPhone still tracks your location even when in airplane mode. To test: 1) Turn on Airplane mode 2) Take a picture 3) Turn off Airplane mode 4) Go to Photos app, &q
936.
by revscat 13y ago
Why does that amaze you? That is a pretty trivial piece of knowledge. Interesting, though.
937.
by revscat 13y ago
That's as may be, but forcing registration goes against the spirit of the open web. I, for one, consciously avoid any sites which require registration for read-only access.
938.
by revscat 13y ago
I haven't dealt with assembly in many years, and if you don't mind my asking, what tools do you use to do this these days?
939.
by revscat 13y ago
The same could be said of Cocoa.
940.
by revscat 13y ago
A thought that is worth possibly spreading: despite protests to the contrary, terrorism does not pose an existential threat. Governments use terrorism to justify almost anything, on the basis that if they don't then the terrorists will
941.
by revscat 13y ago
> And that whole talk about GCs sound awefully familiar. Didn't we have the very same conversation in the mid-90s when Java came out? Yes, absolutely. The objections made by OP are not very different from those made in the 90s. But.
942.
by revscat 13y ago
Unfortunately, it seems that the public are the adversaries.
943.
by revscat 13y ago
Keep beating that dead horse. Most reasonable people recognize that the changer are disturbingly high that the charges are trumped up, and to distract attention away from larger, more important issues.
944.
by revscat 13y ago
Law is the codification of morality.
945.
by revscat 13y ago
The simple answer to the question is "yes". The follow-up question is "why"? The evidence seems to be pointing towards the conclusion that there is such vast institutional corruption in place that they are protecting the
946.
by revscat 13y ago
This is not a partisan issue. Bush started it, Obama continued it and amplified it. The next President will very likely do the same. The problem is with the bureaucracy, and that is almost wholly unaffected by who sits in the White House.
947.
by revscat 13y ago
> The one good thing about Windows 8 in my world is that it's forcing people to make decisions they have been putting off for years. What do you mean?
948.
by revscat 13y ago
Obivously, and I'd argue rightfully. Microsoft HAS lost market share, especially if you include tablet/smartphone OSs in the mix. I cannot seem to find it now, but not too long ago I ran across a survey which included portable dev
949.
by revscat 13y ago
I am curious to see if the business case against the NSA's power will have an effect. Right now I think things favor the bureaucracy. But if Apple, Google, Facebook, etc. make a broad push against it, we could see legislative changes w
950.
by revscat 13y ago
Again the conversation shifts away from the bureaucracy and towards those who threaten it. While TFA brings up an important and interesting subject, we would as a nation be better served by focusing energies on the NSA and the various other
951.
by revscat 13y ago
When it is discussed -- which is rare -- the American media is focusing on Snowden and his whereabouts. There is almost no discussion about what he has exposed. As it typically is, the media is aligned with the bureaucracy.
952.
by revscat 13y ago
Think about it: just today Obama said "we're following all of the appropriate legal channels" to get Snowden in US custody. Putin shoots back with "well gee shucks we can't legally turn him over. No extradition trea
953.
by revscat 13y ago
That may be part of the explanation, but I very much doubt it constitutes a significant part. Whenever the omnipotence and/or moral authority of the bureaucracy is challenged the media rushes to its defense. The typical way it does thi
954.
by revscat 13y ago
I use it both for personal projects that will never have another human look at them, as well as for large multi-user projects. In what was is it too complicated for most use cases? Most use cases involve "code being worked on by multip
955.
by revscat 13y ago
> All the evidence I've seen suggests that the programs were explicitly designed to stay within the bounds of the law (as it exists now, not as technologists wish it were). So how does that undermine the government's credibilit
956.
by revscat 13y ago
So: 1) You still have to have the Kinect, and so long as the console is on it, too, will always be on. (And apparently even when the console is off it will still be listening for the "turn on" command. This has implications I&#x27
957.
by revscat 13y ago
Sure. To start with, take a look at that first clause: "The man who admitted leaking classified documents..." The framing of this is right off the bat aggressive, casting him in the light of a criminal. Were CNN to want to cast hi
958.
by revscat 13y ago
That, and government propaganda. Look at CNN's lede: "Washington (CNN) -- The man who admitted leaking classified documents about U.S. surveillance programs purportedly went online live on Monday to declare the truth would come ou
959.
by revscat 13y ago
This comment is below HN's standards. Your vitriol and ad hominems do nothing to further the conversation and, if anything, make you look like a government apologist.
960.
by revscat 13y ago
They have very good reasons to lie if the government threatened Zuckerberg, et. al., with the Worldcom treatment.

More ›