Comment Re:I hope the list of tricks (Score 2) 284
I stopped taking NoScript seriously when they thought it was a good idea to deliberately disable AdBlock and obfuscate the code that did so.
I stopped taking NoScript seriously when they thought it was a good idea to deliberately disable AdBlock and obfuscate the code that did so.
Of course, such a device has to be under the control of the customer. Not the ISP.
This can easily be rolled into a little box that gets updates regularly from its maker, with the current markers for bot traffic, not unlike how we deal with malware on computers already. Just that this time the box is not prone to user idiocy, clicking "yeah, go on" whenever some trojan wants a new home.
So on the one hand, you say you want to put control into the hands of the user to avoid the ISPs. Then you follow that by saying you want to put control into the hands of the maker to avoid the idiocy of the users.
This doesn't quite make sense to me. Why should we assume the makers of an anti-botnet box are any better than ISPs?
> TSA?
What about the TSA? Nobody likes it, but I don't think anyone has a better idea.
I think most people have a better idea: Do away with it.
It's a giant waste of money/time that offers only "security theater" in place of security.
the Chinese government being upfront about their censorship
You don't actually think the Chinese government goes out of their way to tell the Chinese people that they're being censored, do you? Most Chinese people don't know that they're being censored, and frankly don't care.
And it's worth noting that Texas is not a "failing Texas sized state economy," but is doing well relatively with significant economic growth compared to other large states.
Well, from my understanding of "Operation Shady RAT", they found out which organizations/gov'ts were targeted by taking over/siezing one of the info-collection and zombie-controlling computers. Much of the speculation that it was China is based on the fact that the hackings targeted the US, Taiwan, Vietnam, South Korea, etc...
For all we know, it could be North Korea or the US doing it. The fact that the controlling computer indicates only those targets could be a frame in case they get caught. I wouldn't be surprised if there are more control computers targeting other sets of countries and organizations. I also wouldn't be surprised if China really is behind it.
Oh yeah. That'll work. I'm sure I'll be able to use that for DNS just like I can use Bitcons to pay my bills.
(Oops! Did I forget the i in Bitcon?)
Names expire after 12000 blocks unless renewed with an update
So... not that it'll ever happen, but what happens when there are more than 12000 namecoin top level "domains"? That's a pretty short-sighted limit...
[citation needed]
No, seriously. I don't think you were wrong, I'd just be interested to see the changes the other admin was trying to make/prevent, and to what level they were taking it.
When I first learned about Wikipedia, I made a change here or there to improve clarity of points. They were all relatively minor grammatical fixes and kept the same idea that was already there. Almost every single one was reverted. I couldn't get more reason than that I was not logged in, and the editor didn't trust/like anyone who would edit from an "anonymous" IP address. (At the time, I was not interested in creating an account and saw no benefit to it. I still feel the same way. But now I don't even bother if the content is bad.)
Irrelevant, he wasn't in a state of mind to obey police however he was just fine a few minutes earlier while breaking into cars?
Uh... Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty? (Don't answer; I already know: It never existed.)
I've not read a single article that even claimed he was the one breaking into cars. The police were called because someone was suspected of breaking into cars. The caller didn't even know, they just suspected. And then the cops came and guessed that this shirtless, bearded dude with a backpack was the person suspected of breaking into cars.
They wanted to search him, and he resisted. They then proceeded to beat the living shit out of him until there was no living shit left. He's dead now.
How do you know that Kelly Thomas wasn't just a homeless schizo in the wrong place at the wrong time? For people who aren't schizo, it's easy enough to say "just go along with what they say or you will die", but there will always be people who are not capable of doing that. Does that mean they should die, even without proof of wrongdoing? Or are you suggesting that non-conformance to the idea of a "normal" person is enough wrongdoing to constitute death without trial? It's impossible to prove, but I bet that if he was clean-shaven and wearing a shirt, he would be alive today.
Life is a healthy respect for mother nature laced with greed.