Comment This Globe and Mail article is excellent. (Score 1) 247
The Globe and Mail's angle is quite a bit different: How Uber is ending the dirty dealings behind Toronto's cab business
Err, in order for an SSH brute force vuln to work against a Mac, sshd has to be on (it's not - you need to go to System Preferences -> Sharing, enable Remote Login, and then include the specific users in "Allow Access For..." )
Well, that and get them to configure and launch sshd... it's off by default on OSX.
You're right
Bullshit - mopeds full of backup tapes is the new standard for that size range now.
I believe it was a joke...
Funny-but-true: A buddy I work with tried that on a developer's MacBook Pro today. He wound up munging
Overall, if you already have physical access to the box, it's game-over anyway, and given the astronomically tiny percentage of Macs running OSX 10.10, that has sshd running, and happens to be on a publicly accessible network (either public wifi or a public IP addy)? Prolly not a really big concern...
No, Bart Sibrel is just a generally offensive cock-bag. Decking his ass is reflexive and as natural as breathing.
I think you are talking about multithreading in your pigeon English.
Fuck sakes, he was most likely referring to threads.h , which is the std. C++ library for multithreading.
Strangely enough, that's why I voted "Don't care" - mostly because I can't scrape up any sympathy for the hackers, the site, or its customers... they can all die in a fire for all I care.
Man, this misanthropy really does creep up with age... scary part is, I kinda enjoy it.
I'm just hoping the NSA doesn't get any ideas.
It does lead to a question, though - could someone in North Korea (with a sufficient level of ability) remove or obfuscate those, or is the source code even available to the typical user in NoKo?
Typical slashdot geek binary thinking. Life must be so happy in your simple world.
If you cannot bring yourself to keep your dick in your pants and it didn't involve your being raped, you have no one to blame but yourself. Like I said, it's not that hard to do for someone with a sufficient level of emotional maturity.
If you want to have sex outside of a relationship so bad, then at least be man enough to either say as much to your S/O directly, and/or end the relationship first.
This isn't one of those gray-area fuzzy moral issues where circumstances could excuse the actions... it's a very simple task: Remain faithful to the person you made the commitment to, or don't enter into a commitment until you are capable.
The reasons why folks marry have changed over time, but until recently, the basic principles of it has not (even if people routinely violate said principles.)
Yes, I'm fully aware of "open" marriages - few of them last very long, at least judging from folks in my social circles. Then again, why would they be embarrassed by the revelation of their names on such a website? Are you saying that even a quorum (let alone a majority) of the folks on that site practice such relationships? If so, the revelation of their names shouldn't be a problem (though actively seeking to hook up with folks from non-open marriages is rather questionable). I'm more than willing to wager that the vast majority of the users are keeping up a façade at home while cruising for some strange on the website.
All these people are going to get painted with a really bad and really large brush no matter what the truth is now.
Sleep with dogs, wake up with fleas. There are most likely websites out there for folks in open marriages to meet up and do whatever they please... can't really bring myself to feel sorry for 'em.
There is no puritanism here, merely a respect for marital trust, and the unwillingness to violate it.
Marriage isn't a mere contract that you can seek out loopholes for, or something you do just so that you can have sex-on-demand. It's a commitment; a sacred trust between two individuals who become as one in spirit. You do this for life, and bind your lives and fortunes together.
Many things are negotiable in this world, even in marriage - but remaining faithful to someone you are married to is not something you can (or should ever) negotiate over. If you haven't the maturity to understand that, then don't get married.
The question isn't how you feel, but the level of commitment you made. If you married someone, you have made it known to one and all that you love that person (outside of countries where contractual marriage is still a thing, anyway). This carries a certain level of responsibility - unless both partners know up-front that the marriage is "open", then avoiding adultery at all costs is automatically and universally assumed to be one of those responsibilities.
On my phone? Whenever my provider pushes an update.
On my computer? Only when my current OS isn't doing something I need it to do.
Always draw your curves, then plot your reading.