thingexplainer

11 ms·

1.
by thingexplainer 10y ago
And yet there are millions of people using the Internet and we have to protect them with the army we have. I hope we'll see something like Marlinspike's Notaries becoming widespread in our lifetime, though.
2.
by thingexplainer 10y ago
Have you considered generating these screenshots automatically? It seems like if you did, this would protect you against both typos and insiders.
3.
by thingexplainer 10y ago
When will it be?
4.
by thingexplainer 10y ago
I think the solution is to formally verify your hardware with a prover that is aware of electromagnetic forces. Software has to assume correctness of hardware (rad-hard applications have to assume ridiculous hardware faults are possible, bu
5.
by thingexplainer 10y ago
"Formal verification makes your code invulnerable against a very specific (though very powerful) attacker"
6.
by thingexplainer 10y ago
> Extortion in the form of ransom-ware, theft in the form of stealing bitcoin from exchanges. (Mt. Gox, and a more recent case.) This is exactly what I meant. I guess I could have been more clear about that. I don't have any data to
7.
by thingexplainer 10y ago
It doesn't have to become public. It probably shouldn't.
8.
by thingexplainer 10y ago
Perhaps the DNI should consider offering some form of clemency for other people who brought "homework" out of their SCIF to turn themselves in.
9.
by thingexplainer 10y ago
People are scammed out dollars, bitcoins, and iTunes gift cards. Ponzi schemes happen everywhere. The real money in bitcoin-denominated crime is in theft and extortion anyway. If people disagree, I'd love to know why.
10.
by thingexplainer 10y ago
For a sufficiently large monitor I'd expect you to generate multiple five-pointed stars on the first try.
11.
by thingexplainer 10y ago
Regarding your first point, the trouble (at least in this instance) is that this logic doesn't apply when you're looking for Roger Waters and calling everyone in the phone book with his name. Each time someone picks up the phone i
12.
by thingexplainer 10y ago
The correct answer would have been to pick a reasonable assumption (before you ask, your own judgement determines what is reasonable) for what "useful" is, and to clarify that that was the assumption you were using. We don't
13.
by thingexplainer 10y ago
Was the service you were receiving before they offered two-day shipping any better? Or just more consistent leading to less disappointment?
14.
by thingexplainer 10y ago
Saying "something is weird" certainly implies "this does not match my expectations."
15.
by thingexplainer 10y ago
This has been SOP in certain places for a long time.
16.
by thingexplainer 10y ago
Extraordinary claims don't require more evidence than other claims. A more accurate statement would be, "claims I'm skeptical of will require convincing evidence for me to be swayed." The "extraordinary" part m
17.
by thingexplainer 10y ago
Which is a pretty flimsy reason to believe an adversary might find leverage against you. But hoarding is a force multiplier in the adversary's favor.
18.
by thingexplainer 10y ago
I agree, I never meant to imply that I thought contractors were less loyal. I appreciate the depth of your responses and hope I haven't given offense. There are just so many of them that it projects the attack surface of the DoD out; n
19.
by thingexplainer 10y ago
He must've hidden it in his Rubix cube.
20.
by thingexplainer 10y ago
As an outsider looking in, it seems like there have been a lot of DLEs due to contractors though. Theres the obvious example of Snowden, but also the QinetiQ breach ( https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2013-05-
21.
by thingexplainer 10y ago
It seems like contractors are a massive attack surface for the DoD. I do wonder why they gave a clearance to someone who was apparently a hoarder. If collecting things that interest you in a compulsory manner doesn't suggest to you tha
22.
by thingexplainer 10y ago
Active publishing contemporary historical smut fiction, it would seem.
23.
by thingexplainer 10y ago
How principled of you to ruin someone's career and let them spend the rest of their life in prison.
24.
by thingexplainer 10y ago
I'd love to hear more about why.
25.
by thingexplainer 10y ago
It's tedious and repetitive even when the benefit is obvious and substantial, unfortunately.
26.
by thingexplainer 10y ago
Because they're willing to do one thing but not the other?
27.
by thingexplainer 10y ago
> ... the key (or password) is kept obscure... I often think about this, and the conclusion I've come to is secret != obscure. Obscurity describes information you do not know but can research to determine; secret describes informati
28.
by thingexplainer 10y ago
I could learn to see past an insurance file for WikiLeaks and still regard them as journalists, the idealized WikiLeaks is struggling in an asymmetric conflict with nation states and could probably use some insurance.
29.
by thingexplainer 10y ago
It'd been a while since I'd read the article, and you're right, I oversimplified in my memory. I appreciate the counterpoint (though I can't watch it at the moment).
30.
by thingexplainer 10y ago
Wikileaks should not serve the agenda of it's sources in reporting information, but of the citizens of the world who need more transparency that they claim to represent. Here you are: https://theintercept.com/2016/

More ›