zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC

12 ms·

61.
by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 7y ago
> That isn’t a simple question, is it. What about it isn't simple? > At best it is loaded What about it is loaded? > and unnecessarily complex. What about it is unnecessarily complex? > Yes, of course I have agreed to contr
62.
by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 7y ago
> Because the substantive truth of the theology isn’t dispositive of whether family members have a right (in the social, not legal, sense) to criticize each other from departing from certain norms and practices. Yes, it most definitely i
63.
by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 7y ago
I have one simple question for you: Do you always, without exception, study every single line of terms and conditions of every purchase you make and every service you use until you have completely understood the legal implications of all of
64.
by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 7y ago
Could you explain why you think that the fact that you only want to buy services from Apple (or by extension products from people who only buy services from Apple) should be a reason to force everyone else to only buy services from Apple? T
65.
by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 7y ago
That's a terrible idea. For one, RFC1918 addresses are perfectly fine IP addresses, and as such are perfectly fine to put into DNS, but also, if your security depends on this, you are not secure, because rebinding attacks work just as
66.
by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 7y ago
No, it isn't. You can't be "in on" a properly constructed election system, because all relevant steps are open to the public for any interested party to watch. Which is exactly the problem with digital voting: They can n
67.
by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 7y ago
That is not a property of paper ballots, that's just the property of a broken election system.
68.
by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 7y ago
No, we can't. The attack scenarios for all of the above are nothing like elections. Elections have to protect both against unauthorized voting (so every person has only one vote) and against determining how anyone voted, including by
69.
by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 7y ago
> That's fine. Many public policy advocates throw around the term 'settled science'. But based on what you said, is there such a thing? Yes, there is. Just because there is no absolute certainty, doesn't mean it'
70.
by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 7y ago
> Code doesn't break, overheat, or wear out, so it's not something you'd expect to see in a service manual. But the purpose of a schematic is not to identify a broken component, it's to enable you to understand the sy
71.
by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 7y ago
> Ultimately XHMTL is better suited to epub's use case, which is static documents that are written once and not dynamically generated by templating languages or libraries. That's backwards. Relying on software to assign random
72.
by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 7y ago
> It was true that management became less engineering-driven in the 1980s-1990s period, which was both unfortunate and avoidable, but it's also true that over the same timeframe he's referring to, companies like Tektronix and H
73.
by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 7y ago
> No, you're not misunderstanding. I guess I made that statement with the implicit trust of AWS so I didn't think to qualify it. But that doesn't change that you are trusting a third party?! I mean, if that were to count a
74.
by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 7y ago
> Unless you physically own a server you have to put your data somewhere, whether that somewhere is Digital Ocean, some shared hosting provider, AWS, or whatever else. You're still more in control of your data than you would be usin
75.
by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 7y ago
> With Heimdall, you completely own and manage your data and the service. No feature limitations or having to trust a third-party company with your data. > Pre-requisites: You need to own a domain and have an AWS account. For reasonab
76.
by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 7y ago
> For instance, a doctor who doesn't want to perform a sex change operation or administer hormones to young children, because they think it is harmful to them, would be considered transphobic by many advocates. You are leaving out t
77.
by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 7y ago
... or fatal if the direction is bad. And as authoritarianism tends to coincide with corruption, chances are the direction is bad quite often.
78.
by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 7y ago
Possibly, they shot themselves in the foot by creating demand for pushing everything "into the cloud"? If the telco demands monopoly prices for hooking up your servers on premise, chances are you move your servers to a datacenter
79.
by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 7y ago
> 0.1 + 0.2: Produces 0.30000000000000004 No, it doesn't. It produces 0.3000000000000000444089209850062616169452667236328125. > 1.40 * 165: produces 230.99999999999997 No, it doesn't. It produces 230.999999999999971578290569
80.
by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 7y ago
> Look at the history of things banned and tell me that that saw a reduction in crime as it don't - again....drugs. I can't see any survivorship bias at all! Also, you might want to distinguish "banning common people from
81.
by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 7y ago
How does any of that make your original statement true? Also: > If we are going to talk about government derailing and doing as they wish then no piece of paper can protect anyone. At that point it becomes about guns and blood. No, it do
82.
by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 7y ago
The point is that your original statement that these rights don't require government in order to exist ist just false. These rights require that they are taken seriously by everyone, from citizens to the heights of government in orde
83.
by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 7y ago
> No, it isn’t, in a country of laws these things have weight and meaning. What is your point? Even if noone cares about what that piece of paper says, it still has "weight and meaning"? Or are you just repeating what I said us
84.
by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 7y ago
> Rights, in the US, are not GRANTED by government, they are RECOGNIZED by the US Constitution to exist OUTSIDE OF GOVERNMENT (upper case is for emphasis only). In other words, these rights don't require government in order to exist
85.
by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 7y ago
Well, but then, you also get noise from CCD readout, so it's not like you can just take 18000 100ms exposures and stack them to get the same result as a 30 minute exposure minus the "broken frames". Stacking frames is a worka
86.
by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 7y ago
So, you clear your CCD, collect photons for 30 minutes, then some satellite sprays you with a multiple of the number of photons collected thus far, and then ... what?
87.
by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 7y ago
Based on what definition exactly?
88.
by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 7y ago
If you have a billion dollars, there is nothing irrational about spending 100k on a car you don't really need. Those 100k have barely any utility for you, so it doesn't matter that the car also has barely any utility.
89.
by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 7y ago
No, we are talking about hundreds of fires.
90.
by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 7y ago
> Is it possible some other climate factors, other than climate change, caused dry forests and fires? That's not just possible, it is obviously the case. But that's simply the wrong question. > Are you saying without climate

More ›