Forgot your password?

Comment: No you don't (Score 1) 219

by Goonie (#47645869) Attached to: Point-and-Shoot: TrackingPoint's New Linux-Controlled AR-15s
There's virtually nothing in the populated areas of Australia, other than other humans, that attacks humans and can be usefully defended against with a firearm.

We have nasty spiders and snakes, but you don't use firearms to kill either of those. Both only strike humans defensively. Our large land animals are all herbivores; kangaroo, emus and cassowaries have a very nasty kick but they'll run away in preference to attacking you. Dingoes, despite the high-profile death of Azarea Chamberlain back in 1978, are basically wild dogs, and represent little threat to people.

We also have a collection of potentially lethal acquatic species, including the Blue-Ringed Octopus, several species of jellyfish, and some sharks. Again, guns aren't a lot of use against them.

Crocodiles, which I guess you're referring to with the giant knife reference, are the one animal that will actually try to eat an adult human. They only live in the tropical north of the country, far away from the major population centres, and any that move in near the cities in those regions are killed or relocated by professional shooters.

So, no, you don't need a gun to protect yourself from the wildlife in Australia. And despite some myths, if you want a rifle or shotgun for hunting or target shooting, or need one for farming or pest control, you can get one in Australia. You just can't walk into a gun shop and buy an AR-15 or a big-calibre handgun for "self-defence" here. And, nearly 20 years after the changes to the gun laws, that remains overwhelmingly popular here.

Comment: Failure of risk analysis by more than OpenSSL devs (Score 4, Informative) 149

by Goonie (#46732315) Attached to: NSA Allegedly Exploited Heartbleed
Just a minor correction - my piece does indeed suggest that the OpenSSL developers have some strange priorities. However, it lays the larger blame at the companies that used OpenSSL, when all the information necessary to suggest that this kind of thing could happen was already available, and the potential consequences for larger companies of a breach are easily enough to justify throwing a little money at the problem (which could have been used any number of ways to help prevent this).

+ - Heartbleed was a failure of risk analysis

Submitted by Goonie
Goonie (8651) writes "In the wake of the Heartbleed bug, there's been considerable discussion about what should be done to reduce the risks of such serious bugs in crucial pieces of software. Clearly, technologies can help. So can better software development processes. But, in a piece for The Conversation, as well as describing the bug for a lay readership (and feel free to nitpick away), I argue that the real problem is the lack of risk analysis by both those who developed OpenSSL, and those who make use of the library to build applications."

Comment: A union would be helpful in this situation (Score 3, Insightful) 310

While trade/labor unions are much maligned in the often libertarian-leaning IT community, this is the kind of situation where a bit of organization amongst colleagues - along the lines of what engineers or medical professionals have, would actually be useful.

But given that we have the IT professional community that we have:

  • Document that you've told your boss, and probably your boss's boss, and probably the legal department (perhaps informally and verbally initially). If you've told them, it's their problem, not yours
  • Start polishing your resume. Whistleblowing usually has negative consequences for the whistleblower - and, furthermore, continuing to work for an organization which has such a lax attitude to software poses a risk to your career if you stay there.

Incidentally, your case neatly demonstrates the near-uselessness of the IEEE-ACM Software Engineering Code of Ethics, which is very long on what the ethical obligations of a software engineer are, but has nothing useful to say about what you should do where others are ordering you to act unethically.

Comment: smartphone gaming sucks (Score 3, Insightful) 78

by Goonie (#45285541) Attached to: Google Nexus 5 Posts Best Gaming Benchmark Among Android Smartphones
Much and all as the 3D graphics prowess of modern smartphones is amazing, trying to do any serious gaming on them is an exercise in frustration. Touchscreens are useful for some things, but their slow response times and lack of real tactile feedback makes it impossible to play fast-action games well on them.

Comment: Re:Big Oil is Dancing (Score 1) 388

by Goonie (#45030871) Attached to: Tesla Model S Catches Fire: Is This Tesla's 'Toyota' Moment?
It's possible to build very small nuclear reactors for use in space, but you can get away without shielding those (or, at least, only shielding in the directions you need to shield to protect the electronics).

The emitted radiation is far too dangerous for on-Earth use without tons of shielding.

Comment: Try this on (Score 1) 326

by Goonie (#44976285) Attached to: Tech In the Hot Seat For Oct. 1st Obamacare Launch
Guess what, everywhere else that has implemented universal health care the local conservatives immediately tried to get rid of it. They succeeded nowhere.

To take some specific examples in the English-speaking world, in Australia, the local conservatives did manage to repeal it the first time around. The second time around, they didn't get back into government for thirteen years until they promised to keep it, and they've never seriously tried repealing it since despite long periods in power. In the UK, even that hero of the right, Margaret Thatcher, left the NHS alone. The overwhelming evidence is that once universal health care systems are introduced, they are enormously popular.

So, yeah, drag this one out into a political fight to the death. It's unlikely, but possible, you'll knock it off. But if your lot continues with this crap for too long once it's in place, you will consign yourself to electoral irrelevance; even the ridiculous malapportionment and gerrymandering that goes on in the US won't be enough to save them.

In the medium term, I won't be terribly sad at that; while sensible health care reform will ensure that millions of your fellow citizens have healthier, longer lives, it doesn't affect me directly. But a couple of your party's other insanities, particularly its delusions on climate science, do. And if you do manage to consign yourself to complete electoral irrelevance for a few terms, the United States will be able to act effectively on climate change.

Comment: Re:Only if unsuccessful (Score 1) 326

by Goonie (#44976201) Attached to: Tech In the Hot Seat For Oct. 1st Obamacare Launch
"find a way to get the patient to care about the cost of their medical services..."? Are you completely deluded? My partner had emergency surgery earlier this year. Was I really supposed to call round the hospitals in my city, weigh the experience and success rates of the surgeons and the fees they were charging, consider the various treatment options, and make a rational decision with the love of my life lying in the ER with gallons of morphine almost but not quite controlling her pain - and, heck, risk that she might suffer even more serious and permanent health implications - with more delay?

Back in the real world, the doc could have told me just about anything about the cost of the operation, and I would have agreed to it.

But, because I live in a country with universal health care, in a situation where the treatment was clearly medically justified, the docs were able to go ahead and do the surgery, and we got a bill for $0.

And your notion of an "end of year shutdown" in hospitals is complete and utter bollocks. Does not happen - if there's even a hint of this kind of thing, the relevant docs go to the media, who get the requisite photos of people who've recently been treated and interviews with the docs, and the government tips in some extra funds.

Comment: Just being legal doesn't make it right (Score 3, Insightful) 286

by Goonie (#44913983) Attached to: Letter to "Extended Family" Assures That NSA Will "Weather This Storm"
There is no legal impediment to the NSA collecting, logging, analyzing, and possibly mischaracterizing *everything* I do online, and sharing the results of that analysis with the relevant local cops. The constitutional protections extended to American citizens do not apply to foreigners, from those living in other Western democracies, to those living in countries controlled by various "our-sonnfabitches" that the USA has supported over the years. It's well documented that the CIA has, on a regular basis, interfered in the domestic politics of other countries around the world, including aiding politically convenient despots in enforcing repression. In the old days, the computational tools to surveil everyone in the world simply didn't exist, so the CIA and NSA were naturally limited in who they could bother. Now, such limits apply to a much lesser extent. In terms of the technical capability (and I'm not implying equality of motives) it's heading in the direction of what the Stasi could do - to every single person on the entire planet. And, sorry, I am *not* happy that the United States government has that kind of reach. And nor should you be.

The generation of random numbers is too important to be left to chance.