If you cannot take a joke, it is you that should get on with your life. Unless you are working for them, I suggest you to be less emotionally attached to an electronics company, no matter how good their devices are.

Yes but even Larry Page knows no one uses G+, so who cares...

FWIW, she claims to have filed in the review.

She did something simpler. She did not pay the contractor, who sued her and lost in a summary judgement. At least according to her review.

She made very specific and falsifiable statements in her review, so a court should have very little trouble verifying them. And thus no one gives or should give a fuck about whether you call bullshit or not.

Unless you have already won that lawsuit in a summary judgement, which is what she claims (and it would be easy to disprove, so it is very unlikely that she is lying on that one)

Keep drinking and see if it still seems obvious to you.

If that is really the formula, corporations would work extremely hard to bring geek rage as near as possible to zero. Try again :)

If it had to observe the internationally recognized borders Israel would shrink quite a bit. They are unwilling to relinquish those lands. you can speak at length about what Hamas may want more than they are entitled to, but right now the party that is trespassing the border is Israel.

Israel hit first in 1967. They launched a sneak attack that destroyed most of the Egyptian air forces, granting them air superiority for the rest of the war. Hitting first (especially without a declaration of war) usually should not be rewarded.

If you start a reply with "no" you better include something that contradicts me. They signed with the root key and this would not let them invalidate it without breaking their own stuff. Even you admit it.

The problem is, even if you know a little of cryptography, you don't know shit about computers, or security for that matter. The public keys in the UEFI must not be updated from within the OS (even you are able to see that, right?) so in practice will not be updated, ever. No key will ever be revoked on a computer (apart from the microsoft testing machines perhaps) so the whole idea of segregating the different keys will do nothing to increase the security.

Consequently it does not really matter if Microsoft ever updates their own keys, they can just sign new bootloaders with the old one as well, since signing a legitimate package with a compromised key has really no bad effect. And anyway it is not like the bootloader is updated every second day: the next update should come around Windows 9... And they can just use the same trick LF was trying and chainload several of them. In conclusion yes, vendors can simply include a single key chain and forget about all others without any problem.

The tagline is: stop trying to explain and start to listen: you may learn something.

So, instead of signing with a scrap key that vendors will ignore they signed essentially with the original one, so that this bootloader will work on any PC that follows the standard? This is so awesome I don't even know at what to laugh first.

I wish LF just released this bootloader and defuse all this "secure boot" crap. Of course they will play nice and allow Microsoft to save their face... Microsoft incompetence is just appalling. They will probably end up signing malware by accident at some point, but at least you won't be able to run Linux on your PC, so mission accomplished.

And that is why they did not address slavery in the constitution in the first place.

He did: the primary response to criticism from those two camps is always "but the others are bad too". So I really fail to see the difference :)

Finally, a sound marketing strategy for WP8!

Of course they declared independence and they have been recognized by other countries. It's just that they lack recognition from most of the powerful countries, in particular USA, and from UN since USA has veto rights, and from the most powerful neighbour which coincidentall yalso wants those lands. Anything Israel is doing in Gaza becomes much worse/more illegal if you allow statehood, while now they are simply occupying a no-man's land in the eye of UN (still in violation of resolutions). Basically, I think we agree, I just want to make clear that the current situation is not what is meant by "two state solution".

Are you fucking kidding me? Israel attacked Egypt first in 1967. They had the gall to claim at the UN that they were attacked. Of course the lie held for a couple of days only and Israel retracted, but I see there is still some idiot that believes it.