Comment Re:Apple 100% renewable? (Score 1) 288
Strawman much?
Strawman much?
They used to, but the people who started it that wan't a balance forward thinking approach to moving away from coal where ousted and replace with scientifically illiterate alarmist that only want to make money for greenpeace.
"It failed to prevent a partial meltdown of the reactor core."
I succeeded on repvents a full meltdown, as designed.
"It failed to prevent a significant release of radiation to the general environment as 15 curies (560 GBq) of iodine-131 (the most concering portion due to biological uptake to the thyroid)":
According to the official figures, as compiled by the 1979 Kemeny Commission from Metropolitan Edison and NRC data, a maximum of 480 petabecquerels (13 million curies) of radioactive noble gases (primarily xenon) were released by the event.[45] However, these noble gases were considered relatively harmless,[46] and only 481–629 GBq (13–17 curies) of thyroid cancer-causing iodine-131 were released.[45] Total releases according to these figures were a relatively small proportion of the estimated 370 EBq (10 billion curies) in the reactor.[46]
i.e. Not Much.
When they lied about apples products.
The stopped being about the environment around '82.
"The former requires fundamental breakthroughs which have yet to materialize and may never arriv"
what? I thought dam technology was already here. Are you telling me I get to invent pumping water into a reservoirs to store potential energy and the release it when the is a higher demand?
Sweet.
I can think of many ways to store the surplus energy.
But if you bang a 17 year-old, you'll probably be fine. Because she's nearly a legal adult.
You won't probably be fine in Arizona, California, Delaware, Idaho, North Dakota, Oregon, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, Wisconsin,
In Florida, you can bang an eight year-old, but only if she's really hot.
Verizon market-tested the new corporate slogan of "Fuck You, That's Why". It tested very badly, but they decided to go ahead and use it because, you guessed it, "Fuck You, That's Why".
Why not take the buttloads of profit you a-holes are making an build out your network instead of coming up with this Rube Goldberg throttling crap?
When this question was put to Lowell C. McAdam, CEO of Verizon, his response was, "Because fuck you, that's why. And by the way, sign this new user agreement where you give away any rights to sue Verizon for anything ever for the rest of your life and agree to instead face arbitration by that group of Verizon lawyers, sitting right over there with the "Fuck You, That's Why" t-shirts".
Oh, plus the fact that I've successfully convinced tens of people in the past, who already have a suitable wireline connection at home, to subscribe to Verizon limited data plans because they actually do offer more data for less money than their competitors, and the service reliability and availability is second to none.
You cruel, cynical bastard. How often do you have to change your name?
I believe throttling is an appropriate response to this situation, so if you see any Verizon corporate officers, please let me know.
Here's my favorite:
"If you think "unlimited" means "unlimited", then clearly you don't understand economics."
And Science Fiction is a specialty of Fiction, which is a specialty of Language, which comes from people, who are biological creatures.
See, it all comes around full circle!
Speaking of full circle, when I was a kid, a "physic" was something to help you poop. This may have had something to do with my poor performance in Physics, which I saw as a bunch of shit.
Now, as an old man, I can see the value in physics, both the science and the laxative.
Ron Paul & his followers in the 2008 election, including Campaign for Liberty?
Tea Partiers don't tend to think so highly of Ron Paul.
then you may as well just give the server the AES key and ask it to decrypt the file
But in that model, if "the server" has the key, wouldn't Dropbox have the key? I thought that was the whole thing people were freaking out about.
No, you'd have the key. If you wanted to share the file publicly, then there's no point in keeping it encrypted, so you'd provide the server with the key and it would decrypt, saving you the cost of downloading and reencrypting.
I understand what you (and the AC) are saying about storing an encrypted key on the server, and then re-encrypting the key for each new user you'd want to share with. That's a clever arrangement and I admit that I hadn't thought of it, but it still seems like it has the potential to create more complexity than most people want to deal with. It still means you need to manage various encryption keys, and we (Internet culture) seem intent on not developing a coherent system for managing encryption keys.
The client just needs one key, the RSA (or equivalent) public key. You'd need to copy this between devices, but it's relatively small (under 1KB). It's small enough to fit in a version 40 QR code quite easily, so you could set up mobile devices by displaying the QR code on your laptop screen and point the mobile device's camera at it, if you don't have any sensible way of transferring files between devices. The client then has to download the file and the associated key, decrypt the key with the locally-stored key, and then decrypt the file, but that's not something that's exposed to the user.
If you want to put yourself on the map, publish your own map.
