rnovak

19 ms·

91.
by rnovak 11y ago
Have you guys tried User Scripts? I just tried this one and it seemed to work pretty well. (In chrome this can be done by saving the script as collapse.user.js and dragging into chrome://extensions). https://greasyfork.
92.
by rnovak 11y ago
Possibly, but what are the chances that the attacker trying to crack a salted/derived key from your password knows you well, instead of being someone halfway around the world? If a lot of your friends are trying to hack you ... maybe s
93.
by rnovak 11y ago
Create a single-point-of-failure for my entire digital-life? Thanks, I'll pass. People are completely free to use password managers, but that's their individual choice. Additionally: There are how many songs in existence today? Ap
94.
by rnovak 11y ago
Why not? we can remember the lyrics to every single song we like, or the dialog from some stupid show from 20 years ago, but pass-phrases are out of reach?
95.
by rnovak 11y ago
What do you mean by "take payments"? You mean you collect CC/other info and send it to a merchant like Stripe? Or do you have a merchant account (as in an ISO account), and are actually communicating with a processor directly
96.
by rnovak 11y ago
See, I'm totally okay with that explanation then. If the upper bound is insignificant, then I see no reason to worry about the health aspects.
97.
by rnovak 11y ago
My context: Person A says 1 does of product A is Amount X. What I'm saying is: That's not entirely relevant if we don't know how many doses people actually get. I agree about irrational, among other things.
98.
by rnovak 11y ago
I think the reason we're talking about the vans (at least the reason I am) is because it's directed radiation, not just an electric field that extends symmetrically in all directions. The dentist I went to (who was really great) e
99.
by rnovak 11y ago
I'm sorry, but if someone were being forced to eat thousands of bananas a day, people would be pretty outraged. I'm all for keeping this about privacy, but don't dismiss the health stuff. Dentists still give you a lead bib to
100.
by rnovak 11y ago
It wasn't thrown around to scare people, it was used because it's accurate. I fail to see how my statement is inaccurate considering by your own admission there are indeed several (3) orders of magnitude difference. The point I wa
101.
by rnovak 11y ago
Did you even read the article? can be operated remotely from more than 1,500 feet Yeah, totally dangerous for the cop </sarcasm>
102.
by rnovak 11y ago
On it's face, this may seem completely harmless, but what about when you consider how the device is going to actually be used? I imagine constant-scanning over a period of several hours would be on the order of several hundreds/th
103.
by rnovak 11y ago
Except there's nothing to support the latter statements. The statement made by the manufacturer 1) could be totally false, 2) refers to a specific single-use of the technology. They're claiming a specific output per-scan. What if
104.
by rnovak 11y ago
it's only objective in the context of people who understand the magnitude of the numbers being quoted. No data is provided as to alternate sources of radiation. An analogy is made by the manufacturer, but they have incentive to claim t
105.
by rnovak 11y ago
That's PER SCAN. Do you think the Police roll up, do a scan, and then take off? No. They're sitting there scanning constantly (most likely), so to use your analogy, that's a lot of banana eating.
106.
by rnovak 11y ago
C was offered as an alternate to people who hadn't learned FORTRAN. Say what you will, I've worked with several people who told me that was a fairly accurate depiction of the way things worked. But it's certainly not the same
107.
by rnovak 11y ago
What criteria would you use to judge whether one is better than the other? Price? Trust? Also, what kind of SSL Cert are you looking for? There's a big difference between EV certs, and say a single domain cert, wildcard, multiple-domai
108.
by rnovak 11y ago
can you watch out with the sweeping generalizations? When I studied, we had a class where we literally wrote our programs in FORTRAN/C, on punch-cards, and submitted them to one of several mainframes that my university maintained. (thi
109.
by rnovak 11y ago
Uh, he's referring to thecc[dot]bz which is a carding forum, which literally refers to credit cards (and is extremely common [1][2]). That excerpt is also nowhere near the MUXACC1 reference. [1] http://www.acronymfinder.com
110.
by rnovak 11y ago
> I know hundreds of recruiters having been at Google and Facebook and not a single one of them thinks like this at all. Congrats. That must be how the entire industry works then </sarcasm> > a process where the person will
111.
by rnovak 11y ago
Your statements literally say that. "I know hundreds of recruiters". That's literally what YOU SAID. That's not dumb, or obtuse. You also imply that just because none of those people act like that, that the ENTIRE indust
112.
by rnovak 11y ago
there are literally millions of recruiters in the world. You think knowing a couple hundred means you know how they all act, or even a majority?
113.
by rnovak 11y ago
Were you trying to run OwnCloud on your Odroid (Neat looking device BTW, I might have to try that out)? I tried running that on a 20 dollar/month VPS from Linode, and it seems to work/perform great. We can continue over email if y
114.
by rnovak 11y ago
It didn't disqualify me when I went through the process. Granted I live a pretty "straight-edge" lifestyle, but to me it seemed like they wanted honesty more than anything. But I had even been on anti-depressants some years b
115.
by rnovak 11y ago
Can you elaborate on the problems you found with those providers? I mean, I don't imagine running OwnCloud would be unfeasible on a Raspberry Pi or anything (I can't speak to the performance of that), but you'd need to set up
116.
by rnovak 11y ago
While I agree somewhat with what you're saying, I'd like to ask something about the playing card example. In a deck of cards, if you consider any ordering without any meaning added, then it is literally just 1/52!. however, w
117.
by rnovak 11y ago
First off, random !== unique, not even close, ESPECIALLY for things with discrete properties. We know from the pigeon-hole principal, that from enough instances, something will be repeated. So, unique it is not. In your card example, there
118.
by rnovak 11y ago
The dictionary definition of special is "really weird"? Literally: "better, greater, or otherwise different from what is usual." So...if a snowflake is "beautiful" and "unique", you have the necessary
119.
by rnovak 11y ago
I think it's an incredibly personal decision that you don't really have a place to criticize. I happen to agree with with that post as well, as long as it's not communicable, I'd 100% prefer not to know if I had a diseas
120.
by rnovak 11y ago
I just want to add my experience, since I was in almost the exact same situation. With the company I'm working for now, I was considering leaving the first year as well, for both pay and for the work. Six months later though, I was off

More ›