What is there that compels your to respond, eh?
If you are referring specifically to JEs from the two who are busy talking about me in one of their own JEs, I find one of the two authors to be quite amusing, and the other author to be an unfortunate bellwether of the current state of partisanship.
What is the median age of people who are applying to Google? I suspect that many older programmers are set in their job and/or do not have the skills in the newer technology and do not apply.
I suspect this is the case. Each year Google went to my graduate department and tried to recruit everyone who was coming out. Among the foreign students in particular you could walk up to a random student, ask them when they were doing their Google interview, and you'd almost always get an answer (foreign students liked big companies because it made the H1B stuff easier)
Google is also a very young company. They're not going to have people who have been around for 20 years because they haven't been around 20 years. I know a few people who are 40+ in my company and most of them have been there 10+ years.
Moreover looking at the article I don't think he's got much of a case:
In the complaint's account, Heath was contacted by a recruiter with Google's engineering staff. The company was looking for candidates with experience in C/C++ and Java. "After reviewing your experience, I thought you would be a great candidate to come work at Google and add value," wrote the Google recruiter to Heath.
I've gotten those, hell I think RMS got one from Microsoft. The recruiter just wants to get you applying, it's no indication that you're good for the job.
There was a technical telephone interview that, as described in this lawsuit, appears to have been handled oddly. The interviewer was 10 minutes late to the call, "barely fluent in English," and "used a speaker phone that did not function well." Heath politely asked him, repeatedly, to use the phone's headset but the request was declined
Alright it was a crappy interview, does he think Google was deliberately throwing the interview? Why not just give him some really difficult problems so he fails and thinks he wasn't good enough? If they really wanted to avoid old people it would be simpler just to direct their recruiters to avoid them.
Maybe there is some age discrimination going on at Google, but if so this article is hardly evidence of that fact.
I'm tired of these security experts holding these sites hostage. They should disclose these vulnerabilities to build a safer Internet, not to line their pockets.
If they really wanted to line their pockets, they'd sell them to the black hats.
Blindly disclosing the security holes to the internet at large makes the internet less safe in the short term since the bad guys can exploit the vulnerabilities before the good guys can fix them.
Groupon could hire people themselves to find the vulnerabilities, but they chose not to, instead they offer a bounty for security bugs, which apparently is very cost effective when they don't pay up, so it's a double win - no need to pay money to hire security experts when a community of bug hunters will do the work for a token bounty, and no reason to actually pay the bounty when you can find a technicality (if one out of 30 bugs were released in violation of their guidelines, why aren't they paying their promised bounty for the others?)
I'm sure they do have their own people looking for vulnerabilities, but if outsiders also find vulnerabilities they'd like to know.
As for the non-payout I doubt Groupon's motive is financial. Far more likely they really want to discourage people from disclosing the bugs publicly before they have a chance to fix them.
Whether Groupon is being reasonable is the question here.
I'm personally skeptical that the expert found 32 separate issues but suspect he found 32 variations on the same issue (he says 32 sites affected, which leads me to believe this is the case). If so the description of one issue could give an attacker enough of a clue to find the other 31 issues.
Then again it could be 32 legitimately unique issues, and the one vague disclosure might not have been enough to help an attacker. In that case Groupon should probably pay him out.
Have you seen what the average lawyer makes? We do. The average lawyer doesn't even get a job out of law school these days.
I think that means you lost.
So everyone should stay in their homes and never travel? They should stay secluded in their cocoons and never experience life?
Or, as some on here might say, people shouldn't go to help people in other countries?
Great reasoning.
I doubt that there is anyone who regrets being separate from you.
Well of course you don't. In my world I can't just squeal and squall about "teh evul SJW". I'm sure it gives you a warm sense of purpose and the panic from seeing them lurk around every corner must make you feel alive. Plus it always gives you someone to blame for basically everything. It must be a good, almost religious like feeling to know that bad things are out of your hands and safely guided by a higher power.
I'll bet my world is grey and boring by comparison and just filled with unpleasant personal responsibility. Who'd want that eh? Not you for sure!
PS: I nearly tripped on a loose paving stone this morning. I suspect this may be the fault of a Social Justice Warrior, but I can't be sure. Perhaps you could confirm it for me.
I think the idea is that you discover a site using a search engine or articles posted by your friends and then visit the site with scripting turned off, and the site has to make a good case for turning scripting on for that site.
It's a good job no sites ever have well hidden malware.
So, apparently SJWs are evil because without them we'd have to be 100% vigilant the entire time when surfing the web and it's their fault we're not? It's amazing what people ascribe to SJWs these days!
Besides, it's not like quite a lot of sites rely on JS entirely. That's annoying enough for static sites (like Blogger) but HTML/CSS/JS is now powerful enough to essentially deliver quirky, shoddy apps of some sort.
How are you supposed to know of a random new mapping site is OK? It certainly will require JS to have a remotely modern interface.
You have a brain,
I guess that's what separates us then!
No. I'm sure that nobody ever got anything that wasn't a perfect copy of the show from the Pirate Bay. They never got viruses, malware, fakes or any other bad thing. Only perfect episodes every single time.
Viruses and malware from videos?
It's not like you get perfect copies off streaming services because they have to run at the speed of your in...buffering...ternet connection. I can leisurely download HD things from TPB overnight.
In a large number of ways TPB is better. All the shows in one place. Good search facilties. Good download speed with a choice of clients, and you can prioritise things you want sooner. No DRM so you can watch on any device or transcode. Things you download never get revoked.
The list goes on.
Only perfect episodes every single time.
Closer than any other system, yeah.
The most irritating thing to me is that the people who believe her dreck will continue to believe it even after her and every other huckster selling miracle cures are shown to be charlatans. There is a large overlap between her fans and the anti-vaxxers.
And nothing of value was lost . . .
Your computer account is overdrawn. Please reauthorize.
