Then you can't afford not to have a backup server and a development server. This point needs expansion :p

It can be disabled, but can you trust that they won't "accidentally" turn it back on with an update? If you must use Chrome, use Chromium instead. The only practical difference besides that it doesn't spy on you for Google is that you need to install a Flash player (if desired) manually.

Stupid objection the first: "This is worth a lot more than a million dollars."
Response:

Does Google own the intellectual property created during the competition?

No. Google is not requiring any IP or licenses be granted except a non-exclusive license to be used only for the purpose of testing the inverter and publicizing the prize. [...] However, in the spirit of advancing this power electronics community, Google may choose to make public some or all of the teamsâ(TM) high-level technical approach documents

Stupid objection the second: (something stupid about 12 volts)
Response:

Will be taking in 450 V DC power in series with a 10 Ω resistor
Must output 240 V, 60 Hz AC single phase power

I know that slashdotters don't RTFA, but seriously, all of you jaw-jacking about 12 volts or about how a million is chump change are a bunch of Useless McToolbags. STFU already.

There are all different flavors of fundamentalists, and while many hold to "conservative dress" as a doctrine, it's definitely not universal. The same goes for the idea of not associating with "non-believers" (bucket group, everyone that does not adhere to the set of beliefs the particular brand of fundamentalism says are required for salvation), some preach that, while others will explicitly preach evangelical immersion (go meet "non-believers" and make them want to convert by being the best friend ever!).

Always nice to hear that social mores around what "racial" couplings are allowed are loosening.

Thanks for the insult. It hardly stung.

Unless you worked at Netscape in the mid-1990s, no insult was intended.

All I meant is that by the very early 1990s, we (and by "we" I mean people smarter than me; I was clueless at the time) had a pretty good idea that CAs wouldn't work well outside of real power hierarchies (e.g. corporate intranets). But then a few years later the web browser people came along and adopted X.509's crap, blowing off the more recent PKI improvements, in spite of the fact that it looked like it wouldn't work well for situations like the WWW.

Unsurprisingly, it didn't work well. Organizing certificate trust differently than how real people handle trust, 1) allows bad CAs to do real damage, and 2) undermines peoples' confidence in the system.

A very nice way of saying this, is that in hindsight, the predicted problems are turning out to be more important than we thought most people would care about. ;-) It's almost as though now (no fair! you changed the requirements!!) people want SSL to be secure.

Keeping the same organization but with new faceless unaccountable trust-em-completely-or-not-at-all root CAs won't fix the problem. Having "root CAs" is the problem, and PRZ solved it, over 20 years ago.

I expect you to start the project shortly.

It's a little late to start, but I do happen to still be running an awful lot of applications (web browser being the most important one) which aren't using it yet.

The rent is too damned high!

He was obviously talking about building your own hardware. Did you really think his parts list of "A small controller, an LCD display and a keyboard," was in reference to writing an alternative to OpenBSD?

How does Diffie-Hellman key exchange provide identification of the other party? .. It is not possible to determine who the other party is

It's possible. It requires an extra piece beyond the DH, but that extra piece isn't PKI. The user is the trusted introducer. The user looks around and says "Yep, these are the only two devices physically here that I have ordered to peer, right now." They are identified by being in the right place at the right time, triggered by the user saying "Now." That's a pretty good way to do things unless you're just totally surrounded by spies.

You state that there is no 'center,' extreme, liberal, conservative, left, right, etc etc.

I find this odd, as 'left,' 'right,' 'liberal' and 'conservative' are political definitions. It's like saying there's no such thing as 'sweet' versus 'sour.'

The American system, of course, boils lib and con down to absurd extremes, and assumes an all-or-nothing take; pro choice? you're also pro gun control, etc etc.

Then you categorize some choices as 'evil.' Can you expound on that a bit?

It was a good place to hang a scanner, of course.

If your goal is to play games, the obvious answer is a better disk interface with some non-resetting RAM on it that you could use for a RRAD:. That's a lovely thing to have in your system.

Interrupting food shipments in order to deliberately keep an oppressed populace consistently underfed isn't just the opposite of peaceful, it's illegal.

And Israel has demonstrated that they are dedicated to control of the entire region, through border expansion. Don't really give a shit about propaganda on either side.

Yes, and the goal of Israel is to claim the entire region for the Israeli state. Two border expansions and an ongoing campaign of semi-starving the besieged populace next door suggest that this is in fact the case. And there is a sizable group of people who suggest that all Jews who do not feel the same are some sort of traitor, and that anyone who does not support Jewish dominance of the region is not just anti-Zionist, but an anti-Semite, making rational discussion impossible just as surely as invoking Godwin.

Meanwhile, this war is really not between the Jewish people and the Palestinians. The entire conflict has been reframed as a battle in the war between "The West" and Islam, or perhaps simply a shot, fired by the UK when they created the nation of Israel. You will note that the Jewish people already got kicked out of that region once. They laid claim to it, they attempted to take it away from the people who lived there already, they met with some success but were eventually ejected. The history of that region going back as long as we know about has been people killing other people for control of it, and now just look at it. Formerly lush and rich, now it's a bunch of sand and rocks over which people kill one another. It's lost all practical meaning, since it's now not particularly good for supporting human life. Of course, one meaning remains. As long as the people living there are fighting over some shitty sand in the shitty desert, they're not causing problems for anyone else.

This situation was deliberately engineered and now Israel and Palestine are playing precisely the game they were meant to play, for our benefit. Why else do you think the USA pours money into that hole? It's not because the leaders of the USA give a shit about Jews. They're largely the same camp of assholes who presided over WWII and delayed our entry into that conflict for economic reasons. Notably, we were selling Aluminum to Japan so they could make it into Zeroes, and selling fuel to Germany so they could drive across Europe — and yes, these profits were a minuscule drop in the bucket compared to the subsequent benefits of building up our manufacturing systems while our "allies" were bombed.

tl;dr: $

Hamas didn't exist on day one. Hamas wouldn't likely exist at all without the extent of the occupation.