Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Ukraine's borders were changed by use of force (Score 1) 230

by gmhowell (#46764195) Attached to: Is Crimea In Russia? Internet Companies Have Different Answers

Honestly I don't get the stance of some ppl from the US against Russia.
Russia is the best friend and has been the most loyal, the strongest and the most valuable ally for the USA. Really. At times of apocalyptic events Russians and Americans stood together. It was before and it may be again when we have to save the Earth itself. Nobody can help the US but Russia when things get hot. Alienating Russians is what make things worse.

Those things are called movies. The space aliens didn't really invade Earth.

Idiot, he was referring to the documentary about the asteroid that they blew up with the nuke. You know, when Daredevil makes out with Arwen.

Comment: Re:Shareholders profits? (Score 1) 133

by gmhowell (#46764147) Attached to: How Amazon Keeps Cutting AWS Prices: Cheapskate Culture

Replying to myself: I assumed they would cut expenses to feed the shareholders but I was wrong. TFA explains:

Amazon generated a whopping $74.45 billion in revenue for its financial year to 31 December 2013, but just $274 million in net income, a margin of roughly 0.3 percent. It sells Kindles at cost.

Compare this with Google, which saw net income of $12.9 billion on revenues of $59.8 billion for the year to 31 December 2013, a margin on 21.6 percent; or to Microsoft, which posted revenue of $77.9 billion for the year to 30 June, with a net income $21.9 billion, a margin of 28.1 percent

Question is: how do they manage to make shareholders accept that?

I'm guessing the investors expect Amazon to become and stay the Walmart of the internet (or perhaps the Sears and Roebuck from catalog days) and be be able to either ramp up margins or pay them at that level for a LONG time.

Comment: Re:I Pay (Score 1) 313

by Arker (#46762507) Attached to: Netflix Gets What It Pays For: Comcast Streaming Speeds Skyrocket
Problem with that line of argument (besides the stupid personal attacks which do not contribute) is that this was never on Netflix's end and that has been confirmed over and over again. Problem only affects people on comcast, and only after someone at comcast got the bright idea to shake Netflix down.  Comcast customers (the few of them with the technical knowledge that is) could get around the breakage by disguising their traffic and many did so.

I hope you are getting paid well to astroturf here, enough to compensate you for your integrity.

Comment: Re:Why is this crap on the internet (Score 1) 70

by gmhowell (#46762409) Attached to: Lack of US Cybersecurity Across the Electric Grid

It was actually wishful thinking rather than faith. I've seen the same things you describe. I've also seen where things like this are swept under the rug forever. Then, the root cause analysis comes back and people flip shit because nothing was done about it in the past. Well, nothing other than ignore the recomendations of us morlocks...

Comment: Re:I Pay (Score 1) 313

by Arker (#46762211) Attached to: Netflix Gets What It Pays For: Comcast Streaming Speeds Skyrocket
"It is not Comcast's responsibility to provide enough bandwidth for you to stream a 3rd party software at maximum bandwidth"

Yes, if you paid them for that bandwidth, it is indeed their responsibility to provide it. Third party software? Everything on your computer is third party software, what else would you be using?

Your argument appears to make no sense whatsoever.

Comment: Re:Wat? (Score 3, Insightful) 368

by Arker (#46761787) Attached to: How Does Heartbleed Alter the 'Open Source Is Safer' Discussion?
"The problem here is that people have been using the argument that Open Source is better because these issues can't happen "because" of the visibility."

No, just no. No one with any sort of a clue ever argued these issues cannot happen with Free Software. It's good practice, it helps, but it's no silver bullet. That's just as true as it ever was and this news in no way contradicts that.

Comment: Re:Ex Post Facto Law (Score 1) 583

by gmhowell (#46761729) Attached to: IRS Can Now Seize Your Tax Refund To Pay a Relative's Debt

And yet Article 1, Section 9 makes no distinction between civil and criminal. How did the 'precedent' (pronounced 'bullshit') get set that this only refers to criminal issues?

If what he said is true, then this is yet another (out of many) example of the courts 'creatively interpreting' (in other words, modifying it with invisible ink) the constitution.

Sure, it's a wikipedia link, but it's trivial to verify.

Comment: Re:The whole approach is wrong (Score 1) 159

by Arker (#46761253) Attached to: The Security of Popular Programming Languages
"Or at least no such thing as a project that only employs or accepts contributions from such programmers."

You could probably find a few drawing decent salaries in less public areas, but certainly it's a skill that the tech world in general has no appreciation for at all. And even though I hate it I can understand why - if you have two companies developing a similar product, one does it quick and cheap, the other takes the time to do it right - the first one will 'own the market' before the second can get there. And with that position it has the cash flow to keep paying programmers, while the second one closes their doors.

The same dynamic still plagues non-commercial projects as well, a quick but shoddy project can gain mindshare and take off before one that does things right has a product to show at all.

There are a few places where people are willing to pay the price for secure code, and the way things are going I suspect that is increasing, but it's still a tiny minority of available positions.

No hardware designer should be allowed to produce any piece of hardware until three software guys have signed off for it. -- Andy Tanenbaum

Working...