Yet again, some punk tells me how happy he is that I'm mortal.

It isn't government's job to regulate marriage. That is society's job. Society has repeatedly rejected homosexual marriages - time and time again. Remember Prop 8 in California?

But, the homos can't accept society's rule, so they get these activist judges to pretend that homo's rights are being violated. It's pretty sick. Which part of "democracy" do all the homos fail to understand? Societal norms are societal norms.

BTW - to into any chat room, anywhere. "Gay" is still a derogatory term, no matter how young the speakers.

The obligatory rebuttal is obviously to question what vulnerabilities are in closed libcs that we're simply not finding? How do you know there aren't more? Sacrificed a chicken this morning?

Yes - and THAT is what is wrong with the cloud. Unless you are encrypting it independently before uploading, your stuff is going to be scanned for various purposes. All of those purposes are detrimental to your privacy. It's great that they took down a pedo ring - IF they really took down a pedo ring. But, they are going to use this as an excuse or reason to continue spying on all honest citizens.

Your first point is laughable. Yes - insurers raised rates, every year that they could get away with it. Various groups, including the government, fought them tooth and nail over those rates. Obamacare? Who, precisely, do you think put that whole package together? Obama GAVE THE INSURANCE COMPANIES everything they wanted, on a silver platter. Obama mandates that EVERYONE MUST BUY the insurance company's products. Obama mandates that everyone must purchase packages that meet certain criteria. The mandate penalizes you if you aren't doing business with the companies that have been preying on you.

And, you don't recognize that Obama acted the willing pawn of the insurance companies?

But if you just have mobile data, you can do all that now with a typical Android phone without even installing additional software.* Just configure IPSEC to encrypt your SIP communications (you're going to need someplace for them to go, with IPSEC, that's your problem) and then configure the SIP phone to connect to your server, and finally make your calls via SIP. If you want to go WiFi-only, you can disable the cellular antenna for added security (or just buy a device without cell support in the first place, obviously.)

* My SIP settings went missing. They're not where they're supposed to be. Moto G, 5.0.2.

The UI is one of the better things about the game. The absolutely horrible performance is more what I'm talking about. Whether it can or can't be blamed on Java is academic (and thus perfect slashdot-fodder, but anyway) but the game runs like poop. There are numerous clones which don't, but ironically none of them have UI as good as minecraft. Which, I know, is shocking. But it's still true.

Contrary to what was reported from many sources, he DID go to them first, before publishing the exploit. The fault for not fixing it immediately rests on them, not him.

What he did was normal curiosity. Hell, I've done it. In fact I don't know of any web or security professionals who haven't. Got an ID in the URL? Increment it by one, see what happens. We all do it.

Granted, we don't normally explore it to the degree he did. But what he did was ridiculously simple, and hardly even deserves the term "hacking" at all. What THEY did was akin to leaving the back gate open and putting out a sign that says "Come on in!", then complaining about it when someone did.

Anyway, I'll repeat what I said about my own experience: I didn't need to go "fishing" for information in that case. It was being sent TO ME, just in a non-obvious way. I stumbled across it, I didn't go looking for it or trying to exploit it. I sure could have, though.

Why should I be insulted? You do as you please. I don't particularly care one way or the other.

Also, why should anybody else be insulted just because I don't want to use Google+??? I mean, I didn't even say why. I just didn't want to.

The point of my comment was that with IR cameras, that's probably not necessary.

If you had large, flat, regular glass lenses, IR cameras would not see your facial features behind them.

But if it's about screwing up regular cameras with IR (because most digital cameras are sensitive to IR to some degree), that's a different matter. But the idea still has problems because most "regular" digital cameras have IR filters on them anyway, for precisely the reason that IR screws up exposure. So I still don't see the point.

I'm sorry, but I agree with that. If you on the UK want us to dam up our rivers and build roads out to geothermal areas and tap into our resources, and raise our local power prices in the process, all for the benefit of the UK, our government better damn well profit as much as possible from it and reduce our taxes / improve our services in exchange for that.

Unfortunately, xB and xD do not agree.

You missed my point.

I simply meant that large glass lenses -- even those clear to visible light -- will serve to hide any facial features behind them to IR. It probably wouldn't stop recognition of a face, but it would probably be sufficient to obscure your face.

I noticed in the pictures given as illustration, that was not true. Eyes were clearly visible behind the lenses. So either the lenses are not normal glass, or those pictures weren't actually involving much in the infrared spectrum.

I have intentionally chosen not to reveal what the actual problem was. But believe me, it was worse than just lacking encryption.

Readily replaceable intakes?

Seriously, fuck the fish.

You could find fans for a plan like that...