Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:all in all (Score 2) 197

by fuzzyfuzzyfungus (#47958953) Attached to: Secret Service Critics Pounce After White House Breach
Though, if memory serves, US presidents have an amazing record of not getting shot over foreign policy issues and instead being taken down by domestic opponents or just plain nutjobs.

It's honestly a bit surprising: I'm not sure if we just watch the foreigners better, or if they know that basically any failover president is going to adhere to very similar policies(only more so, because they'll have greater support for Doing Something) and so it really isn't worth the trouble, expense, or risk...

Comment: Re:Bullshit (Score 1) 197

by fuzzyfuzzyfungus (#47958925) Attached to: Secret Service Critics Pounce After White House Breach

Guy walks on White House lawn, agents take him down. Nobody was hurt, never was the president or his family in danger. The Secret Service did his job. End of story. The rest is just the usual sensational media hysteria.

But, but, what if the guy on the lawn had secretly been a super ninja assassin? Or an android from the future with a 50 kiloton nuclear failsafe embedded in its torso? Why aren't you busy hyperventilating about all the hypothetical threats that are somehow unimportant on one side of a fence but are Super Terrifying if they make it to the other side?

America's Lawn was in existential danger here, and the secret service did nothing!

(In all seriousness, if you have some sort of cool exotic agent and/or heavy weapon that would let you frag the president from the front lawn the fence around the lawn isn't going to stop it. Wind will blow right through, and it's just a fence, not some sort of 18 foot blast wall. If you don't, isn't playing the 'jump the fence and hope that nobody manages to shoot you as you cross a giant strip of grass' plan about the worst possible one? It's not as though politicians don't come out of their lairs to kiss babies, eat at America's Small Town Restaurants, and assorted other things that make it much easier to get close...)

Comment: Re:Was it really so bad? (Score 2) 364

by hey! (#47956707) Attached to: Emails Cast Unflattering Light On Internal Politics of Healthcare.gov Rollout

Imagine if a state like Mississippi or Oklahoma had to get a system made? They'd hire a guy named Jom Bob from church to do it. They'd piss away the entire budget before they even found Jim Bob. They'd run it on index cards and toilet paper in type writers with no correction ink.

Well to be fair the deep-red state Kentucky had a very successful rollout of Obamacare (rebranded as "Kynect"), including it's own health insurance exchange AND medicaid expansion -- the whole Obamacare enchilada.

Under Obamacare, the federal insurance exchange was never intended to serve the entire country. In fact ideally nobody would have to use it, because states were supposed to set up their own exchanges that would better reflect the needs of their citizens than a federal one would. If you are forced to use the federal exhange, it's because politicians who run your state made that choice for you.

Of course some states have had their own exchange rollout disasters -- including blue states like Maryland and Oregon. If you're experienced with this kind of project you'd expect that. But others have had very successful rollouts, including a handful of red states like Kentucky.

Comment: Re:Good (Score 1) 126

by Sloppy (#47945057) Attached to: Next Android To Enable Local Encryption By Default Too, Says Google

Already the industry is realizing what it needs to do.

Yep. In the wake of Snowden, people need to feel better. Performing encryption on a computer that you can't trust, is the best of both worlds and gives everyone what they need.

Users will be put at ease, manufacturers can check the "encryption" bullet point, and thanks to the computer working for someone other than the user, various other parties who "need" the data will be able to quietly get the keys without an unpleasant confrontation with the user. Everybody wins.

Comment: Re:You mean... (Score 1) 239

by Sloppy (#47938243) Attached to: AT&T Proposes Net Neutrality Compromise

Except Netflix offers to deliver an entire bakery to the the table.

Yes, one bite at a time. You're not allowed get your second bite of cake onto your fork until you have swallowed your first bite, and you're sure as hell not allowed to have your cannoli on the table until after you have finished your tiramisu.

Say you have a waiter who isn't delivering your individual bites fast enough. Maybe he's legitimately crippled, or maybe he's just a spiteful asshole, but you're stuck with that waiter. What would you do about it? I'd tell the chef wearing the Netflix apron in the kitchen, to send me a whole slice of cake, and let's forget this whole bite, ack, bite, ack, bite nonsense. I'm hungry (and this baking analogy isn't helping!) and intend to minimize the waiter's impact upon my meal.

I suppose I see how using timeshifting to make speed less relevant, has a downside: it removes our incentive to increase performance. Ok, then go ahead and remain vulnerable to networking problems (whether it's due to your ISP being assholes, or because someone else in the house is using the Internet for something else, or whatever) for political reasons, both as a protest and to keep your own passion inflamed (so that you'll stay activist). But when AT&T starts suggesting that bulk video get special QoS, the bluff is starting to get a little too real. There are people taking this idea seriously. That is bad.

It's going to increase your Netflix bills and it's going to increase your AT&T bills. So here is what I suggest instead: take the monthly amount of money that they're taling about increasing your bills by, and spend it once on SSD or spinning rust instead, and stick that storage into your player computer (since apparently it doesn't already have any?!?). Have a download process that writes to files, and a player process that reads from files. Then don't start playing a video until you're pretty sure you're not going to "catch up" to however much has downloaded so far (or if that sounds complicated, then just don't play things until you're finishing downloading them).

You just saved a shitload of money, made it so that your internet speed doesn't really have an effect on whatever video bitrate you use (if you want to use a huge high-res TV at a house with a slow connection, that'll be fine), and now you're more resistant to "weather" (kid in other room's torrents, ISP-ISP and ISP-video_provider contract disputes, etc: all that stuff fades in significance).

What's not to like? Everyone wins except the spiteful waiter, except that even he just got an easier job, even if it's instead of the raise that he wanted.

Comment: Re:Nope they are clever (Score 1) 325

by fuzzyfuzzyfungus (#47935251) Attached to: Apple Locks iPhone 6/6+ NFC To Apple Pay Only
NFC implementations (should) be interoperable unless somebody screwed up implementation to spec; but that promises nothing about compatibility for anything built on top of NFC.

Right now, ISO 7813 mag-stripe cards are nice and standardized; but that only gets you as far as having the reader hardware work. Whether your card will be accepted by a given vendor is an entirely separate matter governed by some ghastly pile of contractual arrangements.

Comment: Re:Simple set of pipelined utilties! (Score 1) 379

by hey! (#47930309) Attached to: Torvalds: No Opinion On Systemd

I don't think people understand the Unix philosophy. They think it's about limiting yourself to pipelines, but it's not. It's about writing simple robust programs that interact through a common, relatively high level interface, such as a pipeline. But that interface doesn't have to be a pipeline. It could be HTTP Requests and Responses.

The idea of increasing concurrency in a web application through small, asynchronous event handlers has a distinctly Unix flavor. After all the event handlers tend to run top to bottom and typically produce an output stream from an input stream (although it may simply modify one or the other or do something orthogonal to either like logging). The use of a standardized, high level interface allows you to keep the modules weakly coupled, and that's the real point of the Unix philosophy.

C'est magnifique, mais ce n'est pas l'Informatique. -- Bosquet [on seeing the IBM 4341]

Working...