Comment neener neener (Score 1) 550
So my question is: what is holding everyone else back from freeing themselves from contacts and glasses?
I don't need contacts or glasses, you insensitive cl...oh, wait.
So my question is: what is holding everyone else back from freeing themselves from contacts and glasses?
I don't need contacts or glasses, you insensitive cl...oh, wait.
I hope i am not making judgement calls in the JE. I just wanted to convey my state of mind.
No, didn't sound judgmental to me, just wanted to offer my view of how diverse the mores of American Evangelical Fundamentalists can be (my view from having been in a fundamentalist community for a long time).
I would have expected a high correlation between the the Conservative Dress bucket and Non-Believers bucket.
I think there is a correlation so your expectation is justified, but there are all sorts of surprises from individual sects.
I also wonder about that cursing thing. She was scared of me thinking i might curse her. Where did that even come from?
That is very strange, who knows whether it was just childish imagination, doctrine or culture from the home or the church, or what?
..the sale is criminalized in The Netherlands.
My point is that the court's recent decision suggests the above is an outdated, quaint law which no longer reflects the society that The People wish to have, nor which reflects the new way of thinking about reponsibility and the relationship between demand and the victimizing acts which serve that demand.
Thus, I'm sure the Dutch people will soon be revising their kiddie porn laws. Huh? Whaddya mean, "no?" Why not?
Look, just install the telescreens in our homes already.
Be patient. We're still in the voluntary phase of that, right now. If enough people say no to the unauditable smartphones and smart TVs, we can eventually get to compulsory installation, but for right now, what's the hurry? People are doing it without even being told to.
Though we'll face some risks from our own governments, it's a relief to know at the Dutch government would have no problem with me selling kiddie porn (as long as it was made in America) to Dutch citizens. "No crime happened here, within our jurisdiction," they'd say.
In fact, the Dutch government should tolerate our new businesses even more than this NSA thing, since the victims (whereever their rights were violated) won't even be Dutch citizens. No Netherlander will have any reason to say their government let them down.
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.
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.
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.
So, be aware of your audience?
Or, beware your audience. Though on the topic, while it's not the most concise construction, signposting something you find interesting so that the reader pays extra attention (or even just a different kind of attention) to it is certainly common. I don't know if that makes it acceptable, but I tend to think it does.
A thought that made me laugh, how does one say "Patience is a virtue" in the original Klingon?
It's a small part, but it's a part. I think Snowden has done his fair share of trying to inform laymen and stir up giving-a-fuck. If he wants to switch to working on tech, he could accomplish nothing and still come out far ahead of the rest of us.
The existence of a decent open-source router can't do much against a U.S. National Security Letter.
While we certain should care enough to force our government to stop being our adversary, there will always nevertheless be adversaries. You have to work on the tech, too. Even if you totally fixed the US government, Americans would still have to worry about other governments (and non-government parties, such as common criminals, nosey snoops, etc), where you have no vote at all. You will never, ever have a total social/civic solution which relies on, say, 4th Amendment enforcement to keep your privacy. I'm not saying your chances are slim; I'm saying they're literally 0%.
Furthermore, getting our tech more acceptable to layment acually would correct some of the problems inherent with NSLs, improving the situation even in a we-still-don't-give-a-fuck society. If you do things right, then the person they send the NSL to, is the surveillance target. The reason NSLs (coercion with silence) works is that people unnecessarily put too much trust into the wrong places.
For example, Bob sends plaintext love letters to Alice, so anyone who delivers or stores the love letters, can be coerced into giving up the contents. OTOH if they did email right, then if someone wanted to read the email Bob sent to Alice, they'd have to visit Bob or Alice. That squashes the most egregious part of NSLs, where the victim doesn't even get to know they're under attack.
That's true whether we're talking about email, or even if Bob and Alice get secure routers and VPN to each other. One of them gets the NSL ordering them to install malware on their router.
A nice step ahead would be the establishment of a new set of root certificates...
The lesson of CA failure is that there shouldn't be root authorities. Users (or the people who set things up for them, in the case of novices) should be deciding whom they trust and how much, and certificates should be signed by many different parties, in the hopes that some of them are trusted by the person who uses it.
If you want to catch up to ~1990 tech, then you need to remove the "A" in "CA."
Clicked (thought submitter screwed up the link and linked to a page that links to the article, rather than linking to the article), expecting to find a story about a forgotten A2000: maybe someone walked into an office in 2014 and saw that one was in use. Or someone knocked down a wall in 2014 and found one bricked up but still powered up. Instead, found a page telling everyone what A2000s are. Duh. Where's the "forgotten" part? All that I can tell that was forgotten, is that the writer forgot his elementary school spelling and punctuation lessons.
Users agree: adding a progress bar makes a thing faster.
Kleeneness is next to Godelness.