My bank requires 6 numbers, no more, no less.
If you make a certain number of errors, the account will be locked. So if someone tries to brute-force your account, you have to call the bank to activate it again.
It's probably the least secure website I use.
> I mean honestly, what statement of mine do you disagree with?
"If you're against copyright, then you're against the GPL."
For the third time.
You do not understand, or do not want to understand, that a world without copyright is not close to a world with copyright + BSD.
> In my personal politics I tend more towards the libertarian than the paternalistic. I'm a live and let live type. I view most attempts to control how other people live as somewhat unsavory at best. Having said that, I appreciate both licenses for their flexibilities, use GPL programs, and have donated to both GPL and BSD projects.
Reading your comments, I don't believe a word of it.
I thought you were retarded, but I now think it is worse, you are just dishonest. There is absolutely no use talking to you.
The BSD license solely exists because of copyright law, too. You are confused about how copyright works, and what the GPL aims for.
"If you're against copyright, then you're against the GPL."
Exactly. But the GPL haters don't want you to know that.
Even if you are wholly against copyright you can still be for the GPL, because it subverts the intent of copyright to accomplish something totally different.
Exactly. It's sort of a troll license, and it fights against patents too. And BSD also needs copyright, so Idon't get that criticism.
> Apple started the Clang project
No. LLVM started in 2000, in 2005 Apple employed hired a dev to work on it. Unless you were talking only about Clang, which would be silly.
I doubt it would have been open if Apple started it.
> Libertarians hate GNU.
Libertarian here. Nope.
Against copyright, patents, etc.
They already do this. But it might be other kind of fake information (maybe give a lot of fake sources through peer exchange?). It could waste a lot of bandwith with a lot of fake clients sending fake parts.
I'm pretty sure it isn't that effective.
BitCoin is solid, however many services built around bitcoin are built by amateurs.
I heard of an evolution of the protocol, where a coin could require more than one signature to be transfered, this would work around a lot of these issues (unless the users don't do it properly, which is likely).
The Black Duck KnowledgeBase includes over 540,000 projects
Looks like you're right, they must be counting every hipster Github project.
As for projects with actual users, I've seen more migrations from GPL2 to 3
Malware has been accepted in the Apple App Store, TFA is bullshit.
The N9 is poorly distributed and very expensive, isn't advertised at all, etc. When you buy it you *know* it will be poorly supported because Nokia has abandonned Maemo.
I had no idea the sales were close to the Lumia. This is a huge FAIL for the Lumia, more than a success of the N9.
Moreover, given the huge number of IPv6 adresses, brute-forcing IPs at random isn't possible. So even if you authorized incoming packets by default in your router, you likely wouldn't be bothered by attacks.
And relying only on NAT for "security" is utterly stupid as there are many ways to traverse NATs.
And IPv6 can do better, without all the ugly side-effects of NAT: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4941.txt
Remember to say hello to your bank teller.
