Furthermore, why does he, in State 1, have a problem if the people and legislators of State 33 decide they want GMO to be labeled?
A law effectively limiting information disclosure is really shady, regardless of which way you feel about GMO.
Knowing something is GMO DOES tell you it tastes worse and was created by Monsanto, who I'd love to see burn. It's the food world's equivalent of "Made in China" - sure, it'll do, and it isn't always harmful - but I'd rather avoid it.
And the Federal government prohibiting any requirement by states of a statement of fact on food labels is fucked up. Sucks to your overbearing commerce clause; read the 10th amendment.
Are you saying their email should be completely isolated from the public internet? How are they supposed to... use email?
Unless you think each person should have two email addresses from two domains.
Culture and morale of the country, fostering imagination and a desire of technical pursuit for thousands if not millions of engineers, and so on. Would we have Elon Musk, Asteroid mining startups, thousands of small and misc. innovations due to zero grav, or the same knowledge of space and the moon without it?
If anything, it's sad we didn't do more with it and cancelled it after 17. We should have kept reaching, but it got too bureaucratic, and the unimpressive shuttle came into existence.
...and wonder why IBM is selling more of its lifeblood and history to an enemy of the United States.
Agreed. Dan Geer (not Greer) has a lot of great, cautionary tales to say about the security state. He has no clearance, and he describes why in his RSA talk.
Shame on the linked paper for blindly equating "works with the CIA" with "lets burn him in effigy".
Great job, we needed it. Go rot away.
You don't say that without elaborating, without coming off as an extraordinary cunt.
Because supporting prop 8 isn't "gay hating" or anything. It defines the term marriage. If gays want the same spousal privileges, fight for those. Don't call it marriage, and rename marital benefits to something that doesn't imply the blessing of God. This is not necessarily my view, but this is the issue many more moderate "God doesn't like them but the State has no place" crowds have.
You want visitation and will privileges? Ok.
You want insurance benefits and joint tax filings? Ok.
You want to consider yourself religiously equal to a heterosexual couple? No.
I've read most of your comments in this thread and the analogies and conclusions are all flawed.
1) A desert eagle is a poor home defense solution. I have locked doors, soon-to-be camera feeds with secure offline storage, and a 9mm. Defense in depth.
2) Under most circumstances, it is absolutely criminal to open my unlocked front door if I have not invited you in.
3) Passwords and usernames are for Identity and Access. In fact, the term "IAM" for Identity and Access Management is common in IT organizations. The AAA protocol for network Authorization, Authentication and Accounting exists to make sure people are who they say they are, only go where they're allowed to go, and that such accesses are properly logged.
You act as if we shouldn't even be trying to be secure in our online accounts... or are you? You then go on about how important it is that no one break your twit account.
The only part of your discussion that approaches coherence is the concept of "reasonable" security. Yes, no security is absolute; all security considerations in all facets of life are about likelihood and risk of a danger, cost, and mitigation. Sure, if someone is writing some ad-hoc utility that has minimal operational impact and no personal data, cleartext passwords probably wouldn't be a risk in itself. Its the fact that salting and hashing with proper algorithms takes almost no effort, and provides benefits, and is a universal best practice out of habit. If this technology advances to the point of being easy to deploy and easy to maintain with minimal effort, it could and should become perhaps the next password storage best practice.
>Got that? No filtering, no internet. That's just the way it is.
No internet. It's not their fucking computer, and they didn't tell people they were going to intercept any traffic the students believed would be secure. I work in financial services, and the internal, company owned equipment has big "WE CAN SEE EVERYTHING YOU DO ON THIS MACHINE" labels on the login. Want to look at porn? Hop on the guest network.
I see you don't believe in protests. Why do you hate civil rights?
Old age, time in grade, and time in rank is a mythical way to determine competence.
They are one of many ways to gauge experience. In any case, people are doing something:
(My first comment on this got deleted, I think... kind of suspicious)
>We've had only a few major redesigns since 1997; we think it's time for another.
There's the issue. Why does it need a redesign? What valid reasons can you provide us as to why the site needs a new layout? Show us the stats and the emails and the UI needs that demand this. To make it more handicap-friendly? To update the codebase with newer web standards? To placate the 5% of users who haven't destroyed you about Beta?
Almost any technical reason given for why the site needs rewritten can be fixed without completely destroying the look of the site. Answer me! Why do you think it's time?
What a silly thing to appear on slashdot.
What a silly thing to say! Most of the time, it's not the NSA I'm worried about, it's the ISP or the creeper next to me on the open wifi network. Most people don't have an ipsec tunnel to their home network for secure wifi access, so this isn't a bad thing at all.
Issues with CA's and the NSA are real, but don't get huffy-puffy about a practical addon being brought up on
Your solution is either to
a) require that "enterprise" training fall under similar regulatory schemes, or
b) restrict ALL courses ("Enterprise" training and these bootcamps) to be exempt from registration ONLY if they can prove the money for training is only coming from a corporate sponsor.
You shouldn't shoehorn laws in, even for good intentions, and not treat all businesses equally. You (and the BPPE) need to have clear lines drawn for "enterprise" vs. code camps, beyond "I'm protecting stupid people from themselves". Honestly, we need to stop living in a society where every conceivable form of fraud and danger is legislated against. It's a less dangerous, but almost equally annoying derivative of trading in liberty for "safety".