One has to do more than your average bear to build a business from the ground up, how is that a surprise in any way? If it were easy, everybody would be doing it and it wouldn't be discussed here right now. I started up my own businesses but always self funded / got a client for the product. To do that I put 10 years of savings and years of work on the line, that is not an easy thing to do. But if I were unwilling to do it myself, how could I ever expect somebody else to do it on my behalf?

I don't believe the algorithm is impugning the humanity of my offspring, I just think it is far-from-perfect.

But is the algorithm even wrong? I think the question to the Google recognizer is "of the images in my collection which ones look most like a seal"? If the collection is mostly all pictures of your kids, it'll show you the pictures of your kids that it thinks have the most in common with what it has as an idea about what seals look like. This isn't to make fun of your kids, of course, it's just its best guess due to the nature of the question that was asked of it. A human could make a similar selection when posed with the same question.

So as to the point of TFA, the searcher asked Google for the pictures that are most likely to be pictures of a gorilla inside his photo collection. If we assume that there were not actual pictures of gorillas in the collection, then the guess might not be a bad one. If you gave any human a set of pictures of a speedboat, a skyscraper, a turtle, a box of cereal, and a woman, and asked the human which one of those things looks most like a gorilla, there's only one truthful answer. It might be an offensive one to some people but that doesn't make the guess mathematically incorrect.

Reading the Twitter stream, Google has decided to censor such results. Their first attempt was to say "if somebody searches for gorilla and it matches a picture with a face in it, don't show that". That failed on two pics where a face wasn't recognized, so they added even more filtering and now they're building an i18n wordlist of "offensive" words to restrict the algorithm's output depending on locale.

Being a for-profit company, one of Google's primary concerns is to not alienate its users, so for them I'm sure it's the right move. But we need to be aware that it is imposing censorship (on itself) and that the output of the algorithm is becoming less useful to some degree to avoid offending some people. It's their trade-off to make, for sure, but for the larger computing community it's a valuable lesson to keep in mind. Such trade-offs need to be made carefully and consciously.

You keep using the word force. There was no force involved. The publishers just set the terms of the deal to other retailers. The retailers could agree or not.

You listed a bunch of strengths:
1) she has J2EE experience
2) she lives in Spain where the developer job market sucks
3) she has the talent
4) she'd like to move up to a better job

So, how about she goes and finds un/under-employed local programmers, sets up a syndicate, and manages outsourcing jobs for enterprises in areas where the labor market is tight?

That will gain her marketable sales and management skills which she can then parlay into better career opportunities. Maybe even sell the company once it's successful.

I'm assuming she can speak English about as well as you can, which is plenty good (I can't tell if you're native or not).

Here's the thing that bothers me most about your post, though: she's of child-bearing age, so I'll assume under 40, and you say doing IT is better than picking up a new career now. Don't fool yourself - she'll be working another 40 years (unless the AI's take over) and so she's less than 1/3rd of the way into her career. If you love her, you'll want her to be happy for the next 40 years, and you'll support her in finding/creating something that supports her passions and can pay the bills. So, if she really hates IT, ignore what I wrote above and work hard to help her find her purpose.

What happens when a user wants to delete an image permanently.

What gave you the idea that's a service Facebook offers?

The bitcoin solution is to sell the space to the highest bidder

'A', not 'the'. Sidechains are a much better bitcoin approach (the blockchain need only record the entry and exit points). Marc Andresson's company has been working on just this for a year or more.

So then, aren't size comparisons between OpenSSL and s2n at best useless, and at worst intentionally misleading?

Possibly misleading, if one doesn't understand the true claims, but definitely useful.

If you're just using OpenSSL for running servers and s2n can provide all of the functions a server needs, and s2n is is 1% of openssl's size, then it's a much, much cheaper target for auditing, and so it's far more feasible to feel secure about it.

If you're doing something different with OpenSSL then the use case probably doesn't apply.

It may be that a machine analysis of the OpenSSL codebase, starting with the function calls from, say, mod_ssl, could produce a useful graph of the OpenSSL code that's actually in use by typical servers. I'm not personally aware of such an effort, but it seems obvious enough that probably somebody has done it.

Still don't see the harm if Apple and the publishers try to set prices. You. An either deal with Apple or not. It's up to the publishers if they want to make that deal.

As for oil companies they can try to set prices as well. Doesn't work too well because there are great incentives for lowering prices if it will increase total profits.

not sure if serious ... CIA people have been in the Whitehouse since 1980, out in the open (it's debatable before then). They spy on Congress, have their own secret kangaroo courts, and carry out overseas executions all admittedly. One could suppose that there's nothing worse behind closed doors but that would be generous towards spies. Who doesn't really think they're blackmailing anybody in Congress or other high elected office?

Politics remains the entertainment arm of the military-industrial complex. After all, people would be mildly non-plussed to learn that they were secretly ruled by spooks and banksters.

If someone puts something for sale at a certain price and you decide to buy it for that price how is anyone harmed? Now if it was something like health insurance that you are forced to buy under physical threat that's a different story.

Look up the history of free banking. When banks (or any business for that matter) are permitted to fail they tend to act more responsibly. Of course it is in the politicians interest to have a central bank so they don't have to limit spending to what they can tax and borrow voluntarily at market rates.

I actually just made it up. Of course it can black out a pilot. I just wanted to see what score I would get.

Doing some some PCI compliance certification stuff and a scan shows that the site is not compliant, the reason being that TLSv1 is supported. Turning TLSv1 off kills off support for a number of older browsers, all types of browsers.....

(nginx)

    server {
        ssl on;
        #ssl_protocols TLSv1 TLSv1.1 TLSv1.2;
        ssl_protocols TLSv1.1 TLSv1.2; .....
        }
    }

Now I am trying to figure out what to do about this problem, how to detect the clients that do not support TLSv1 and to redirect them to a simple html page instead of the clients pretty much receiving 'connection reset by server' error.

No dice so far, but I thought this was only supposed to happen a year from now (June 2016, not 2015), oh well.

This damned plane has been a big scam from the beginning.

But, but it's Bernie Sanders's pet project! And he's a man of the Worker, errr ... People! FREE TUTITION FOR RICH KIDS! Goddamnit, no .... F35's FOR EVERYBODY!

ah, hell, forget it - it's more rational to vote for Vermin.

The F-35's wings are too small for the mass of the plane. It can't pull enough G's to black out a pilot.