No offense to you or your coworker, but is there any reason to accept your theory just on your say so?
(And your sig is accurate, btw)
Kathleen Sebelius was put in a politically impossible position. There was zero possibility of the technology supporting the ACA ever working as originally specced. She should have recognized this instantly, but even if she did, what could she have done?
I'm sure she's in a financial position where she didn't have to have the income, and if she had any integrity, she would walk. Further, when questioned by the press, she wouldn't give the 'spend more time with my family' canned response, she would be truthful.
She wasn't placed in a position. She sought out the position. As do all politicians.
'cuz he's a MAVERICK!
He's too busy to learn to computer because he's busy playing with the boys?
So the correct answer to this question was the one ESR asked - for who and for what?
That's why I asked him to specify criteria when he answered. IMNSHO, the answer is almost entirely dependent on the criteria, as evidenced by the poster above who mentioned the FNFAL, etc.
People are attacking libertarians over it because they don't know the difference between anarchist, minarchist, and libertarian.
Because we don't care about that any more than we care about whether you are in the People's Front of Judea or the Judean People's Front.
I thought the whole system was based on the fact that most of the individuals with bitcoin holdings were criminals, so that stealing anything would get you killed.
No, you've confused BTC with USD.
I work down the street from their menlo park/willow road campus. Right now Facebook is building an apartment complex across the street from HQ. They've promised to only rent 10% of the apartments to their employees with the other 90% being offered to the general public at market rate.
Despite the nice sounding name, Menlo Park's east side is akin to East Palo Alto. Slum neighborhoods, crime, ghetto. With the influx of google/facebook employees however the neighborhood is slowly gentrifying.
I think facebook wants to turn the neighborhood into something more appealing for their employees.
It may be baseless, but it's a necessary assumption. A MITM attack means that, effectively, you are transmitting data in the clear. It is good security practice to assume that all such data is being recorded and/or logged.
Then do work at work, and non-work at home.
If they do decrypt personal traffic, would they be responsible for any medical data they intercept, thus triggering HIPAA?
Note: this is a gross oversimplification, but accurate relative to this story and what you're asking
HIPAA has to do with patient data, not medical data. If you're not a patient of the company doing the deep inspection, then there's no issue, and there's still no issue if you signed an appropriate HIPAA waiver, even if you ARE a patient and the company in question IS a hospital. If you go to HealthVault or some other site with *your* health records in it, and they are decrypting it, that's not HIPAA in the sense you're talking about.
Hell, even if they were shuffling the SSL traffic to a cloud service hosted by a 3rd party to do the scanning, AND you were a patient, AND the 3rd party was decrypting the data, that is just fine as long as the right paperwork is in place between the two companies.
I'll pay on GOG.com rather than free with DRM.
What good is it to live a long time if you can't eat what you like to eat?
The four basic food groups are good enough for me - caffeine, nicotine, bacon, and pussy. Without those, life has very little meaning.
Rinsed down with a good homebrew. Gotta get your B-complex vitamins somewhere.
Fair enough that Atkins wasn't killed by his diet, still, fact: he died young.
Seventy-two isn't young. It's rather close to the life expectancy in the US, IIRC. And more to the point: it doesn't fucking matter if he died young, considering his death had zero relation to his diet.