Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Not sure how I feel about this one (Score 1) 288

I read the entire transcript but had a hard time grasping the nuances. My favorite quote, though, was this:

CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: All I'm trying to get at, and I'm not saying it's outcome determinative or necessarily bad, I'm just saying your technological model is based solely on circumventing legal prohibitions that you don't want to comply with, which is fine. I mean, that's you know, lawyers do that. But I'm just wondering why--

Comment: Re:You say tomato? (Score 1) 233

by Anonymous Psychopath (#46815801) Attached to: Intentional Backdoor In Consumer Routers Found

Except, of course, open source code also contains horrific security vulnerabilities.

Everyone raise your hand if you know the difference between proprietary software that's closed source, and open source with viewable binaries! That's right kiddies, if you have open source with viewable binaries you can even compile your own, and fix any bugs you find. You can even fork it! You can't do that with closed source, you're at their mercy for patches, fixes, and security holes.

As you seem to be unfamiliar with the difference between source code and compiled binaries, I will assume you don't yet have the required skillset to do what you're suggesting. That's ok, I don't either. I can write code, to a point, but I don't have the skills needed to audit it for security vulnerabilities.

FOSS _can_ be more secure than proprietary code, but that doesn't mean it is, or that it is not. It merely has the potential, and in that respect is superior to proprietary code. Potential isn't the same as reality, though. Perhaps in the future the EFF or something similar will come along and make its mission the independent review of source code for major projects.

Comment: Re:You say tomato? (Score 2) 233

by Anonymous Psychopath (#46815709) Attached to: Intentional Backdoor In Consumer Routers Found

Except, of course, open source code also contains horrific security vulnerabilities.

But you know about those, and can fix them if you want. That's the difference between open and closed source.

It's not that simple. My point, before it was moderated into oblivion, is that there is no implied additional security just because something is FOSS. I've contributed code to FOSS projects from time to time and I know I am not qualified to audit source for security vulnerabilities. There's appears to be an assumption that "someone" is doing this, but the reality is this doesn't happen often. TrueCrypt is an example of where this is being addressed, but how many projects have had an independant code review? Hardly any. So when you say you know about [vulnerabilities]... maybe you do, and maybe you don't. And when you say you can fix them if you want, maybe you can and maybe you can't.

Look, everyone seemed to assume I was attacking FOSS for some reason. I'm not. I like FOSS, I use it every day, and I contribute to it when I am capable of doing so. The OP's position that simply installing FOSS firmware instead of proprietary firmware somehow magically equated to a secure platform is severely flawed and should be examined critically and objectively.

Comment: Re:You say tomato? (Score -1, Troll) 233

by Anonymous Psychopath (#46811443) Attached to: Intentional Backdoor In Consumer Routers Found

I say tomato..

Just load OpenWRT or some other open source firmware, problem solved.

What do you mean there isn't a port for your hardware? Why did you buy it in the first place? Throw it away (or donate it to someone who can do the port) and buy something that has been ported.

NEVER buy hardware without a open source port at least in progress.. You have been warned!

Except, of course, open source code also contains horrific security vulnerabilities.

Comment: Re:So ... (Score 1) 91

Plus the iPad was _expensive_.

No way. I can still remember the collective gasp that echoed through cyberspace when Apple announced the price for an entry grade iPad will cost $499. People were expecting something much closer to $1000.

At the time there was no basis of comparison except for netbooks and the iPod Touch.

Comment: Re:So ... (Score 1) 91

He said he predicted failure for their SECOND tablet. Which was the iPad.

Yes, this is what I meant, and I was far from the only one saying so. Those who weren't Apple fanbois mostly predicted the iPad to be nothing more than an oversized iPod Touch filling a small niche that could only cannibalize from Apple's existing portfolio.

10" touchscreen tablets were totally unheard of, the Newton was a flop, and everyone hated laptops with touchscreens. A tablet, keyboardless computer had, in the history of mankind, never been successful. Plus the iPad was _expensive_. People would buy the cheaper Kindle or netbooks (remember those?) instead. The concept of carrying around a tablet instead of a laptop was ludicrous, because the apps that would enable you to do that did not yet exist. Four years later it's easy to look back and say "well, duh", but in 2010 it was seen as a risky move for Apple.

My point is that it's easy to be wrong about what people will buy, and it's too early to know what will happen with wearable computing. The right product at the right time could change everything.

Comment: Re:So ... (Score 4, Insightful) 91

Anything that makes "wearables" die out faster is good in my book. Keep releasing different models all running different OSes and all doing different versions of nothing useful. Manufactured product pushes are like diarrhea. The sooner all the products exit the pipeline, the sooner corporate sees that marketing was blowing smoke up their ass when they told them "wearables" were going to be hot, the sooner I don't have to hear about them and, hopefully, the sooner that marketing dipshit is fired.

The same goes for the asshole who decided that Wendy's, Carl's Jr/Hardees, and Sonic all had to jump on the non-existent pretzel bun bandwagon. Oh wait, nobody actually wanted those? Better jump on the ciabatta bandwagon! That failed too?! Well what about brioche? Still no boost in sales? Revert back to our "classic" buns to save money and leverage our brand!

Sometimes the product vision is right but the timing or state of technology is wrong. I think wearables might fall into that category but it's too soon to tell. Groundwork and thought leadership today could reap rewards later. Apple's first tablet was such a colossal failure that many, including me, predicted the same for their second attempt. I was definitely wrong.

Comment: Re:Bicycle! And motorcycle. (Score 2) 163

Because when I have to go somewhere that parking is tricky, I'm always on two wheels. And there's always somewhere to park it.
Plus it's often quicker in busy cities, cheaper, gets you fit(If you don't have an engine) and above all, is fun!

"And here's why it matters to you even if you ride a granola-powered bike to work: I think this is a confirming instance of what I've been arguing for years, that the marketplace for ideas, inventions, and intellectual property is far less efficient than most people think it is."

This isn't about parking, except as an example of the problem.

Comment: Re:Slashvertisement (Score 1) 163

Stop this.


Just stop.

I don't think you bothered to do more than skim the summary, if that. Although to be fair, the summary could have simply said that good apps are getting drowned out in white noise of not-so-good apps because the review/curation system in the app stores is completely ineffective.

Comment: Re:Bu the wasn't fired (Score 2) 1116

by Anonymous Psychopath (#46700657) Attached to: Mozilla CEO Firestorm Likely Violated California Law

A contract signed under duress and harassment is not necessarily legally binding...

It's not duress. It isn't "if you don't sign this you're fired", but instead "if you go away quietly and promise not to sue us we will give you a bunch of money, plus we'll let everyone think it's your idea so you can tell your next employer whatever you like".

Obviously you're free not to accept the deal, and often that's a tactic during negotiation of the package, and they won't fire you unless they can legally do so. At that point the writing is on the wall anyway, and sooner or later you are going to part ways. At least with a package you get money, the company avoids litigation, everyone wins.

Comment: Re:Bu the wasn't fired (Score 4, Informative) 1116

by Anonymous Psychopath (#46697991) Attached to: Mozilla CEO Firestorm Likely Violated California Law

Did you even read the summery: "'It's clear that Brendan cannot lead Mozilla in this setting,' Baker was quoted as saying."

So basically, the only reason he was not fired, was because he was given the option to resign, before they fired him. This is a quote taken directly from the mouth of the Mozilla Executive Chairman.

Generally speaking when you want someone to resign but lack the legal means to fire them, you offer them a severance package to so that they'll decide to leave on their own. The terms usually call for non-disclosure of the deal elements (or possibly that there was a deal at all), and also some kind of legal protection for the company. Nothing illegal about that.

Comment: Re:Chinese getting uncomfortable... (Score 1) 100

Or you know, a well known totalitarian government stamping out a black market currency, you know, to control their citizens, like they've been doing forever.

This move has nothing to do with controlling their citizens and has everything to do with their continued manipulation of their currency. RMB is very tightly controlled by their government and they have a model that's working for them.

Comment: Summary correction needed (Score 3, Informative) 1482

by Anonymous Psychopath (#46632399) Attached to: OKCupid Warns Off Mozilla Firefox Users Over Gay Rights

If he opposed Prop 8 he would have been in support of gay marriage, not opposed to it. Prop 8 was a California constitutional amendment to define marriage as between a man and a woman. I assume he was in support of Prop 8 and not opposed to it as indicated in the summary.

If bankers can count, how come they have eight windows and only four tellers?