Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:interesting times... (Score 1) 220

by alexo (#47379675) Attached to: IeSF Wants International Game Tournaments Segregated By Sex [Updated]

he says "but in reality it just hasn't happened. so we end up with segregated competitions"

My point is why is it a foregone conclusion that we end up with segregated competitions. Why can't we have integrated competitions and the woman just lose because they can't compete.

For the same reason we have weight categories in weightlifting and combat sports, the paralympics, etc.

When you were in grade school, did the 1st-graders compete against the 6th-graders?

Comment: Re:In violation of many Data Treaties (Score 1) 170

by alexo (#47378185) Attached to: Privacy Oversight Board Gives NSA Surveillance a Pass

The Canadian government has a loophole, the notwithstanding clause, to allow them to violate your constitutional rights.

Yes, they do.

However, seven of the ten provinces and two of the three territories have never used the power of override; nor has the federal parliament.
And while there have been a small number of abortive attempts to use it, all of them have either failed to materialize, were revoked, or proven to be unnecessary (as the respective laws were in line with the charter).

On the other hand, the USofA government lacks such a loophole yet continually violates the constitutional rights of the populace, with full complicity of the judiciary.

Which one do you prefer?

Comment: Re:Disclaimer? (Score 1) 346

by alexo (#47377261) Attached to: Goldman Sachs Demands Google Unsend One of Its E-mails

But if the email goes to someone who isn't a selfish, hostile asshat like you are, they will do as asked (emphasis mine) and delete the email. Don't assume that everyone is like you.

Let me answer for the OP.

When I get an email that was obviously not meant to be sent to me, and did not include any disclaimers, I will usually send a reply point out the mistake. If I'm in a good mood and have some free time, I could even try to deduce what the intended address should have been and include it in my reply.

If that email included a disclaimer, POLITELY PHRASED as a REQUEST (featuring words like "please" and "thank you"), I will usually do my best to comply because, hey, I'm a generally nice guy.

If, on the other hand, the disclaimer used DEMANDING or THREATENING language, or trying to assert non-existing legal rights, fuck them. Being a "hostile asshat" to bullies is a virtue.

Comment: Re:Priorities (Score 1) 132

by alexo (#47309995) Attached to: Mozilla Introduces Browser-Based WebIDE

Oh, lookie, an anonymous coward got her panties in a bunch.

Firstly, Mozilla's business model is not my problem. It was their decision to give out Firefox for free.

Secondly, if Mozilla apparently wants people to use their browser, they should be thanking me for pointing out how to make it more popular. If they don't, they're on the right track. Not my problem, though.

Thirdly, there are alternatives. So far I still have a slight preference for FF, but my usage of Chrome is rising and even IE11 is proving to be usable.

Fourthly, while I regularly donate to projects that I find useful, I always do it after the fact, knowing that my money will go toward making the product more useful. So far Mozilla hasn't given me any indication that that would be the case. Until that changes, Mozilla will not see a red cent from me. Aris, on the other hand...

Lastly, grow up.

Comment: Re:Some questions (Score 1) 465

by alexo (#47265175) Attached to: IRS Lost Emails of 6 More Employees Under Investigation

  • Please provide a timeline of the crash and documentation covering when it was first discovered and by whom; when, how and by whom it was learned that materials were lost; the official documentation reporting the crash and federal data loss; documentation reflecting all attempts to recover the materials; and the remediation records documenting the fix. This material should include the names of all officials and technicians involved, as well as all internal communications about the matter.
  • Please provide all documents and emails that refer to the crash from the time that it happened through the IRS’ disclosure to Congress Friday that it had occurred.
  • Please provide the documents that show the computer crash and lost data were appropriately reported to the required entities including any contractor servicing the IRS. If the incident was not reported, please explain why.
  • Please provide a list summarizing what other data was irretrievably lost in the computer crash. If the loss involved any personal data, was the loss disclosed to those impacted? If not, why?
  • Please provide documentation reflecting any security analyses done to assess the impact of the crash and lost materials. If such analyses were not performed, why not?
  • Please provide documentation showing the steps taken to recover the material, and the names of all technicians who attempted the recovery.
  • Please explain why redundancies required for federal systems were either not used or were not effective in restoring the lost materials, and provide documentation showing how this shortfall has been remediated.
  • Please provide any documents reflecting an investigation into how the crash resulted in the irretrievable loss of federal data and what factors were found to be responsible for the existence of this situation.
  • I would also ask for those who discovered and reported the crash to testify under oath, as well as any officials who reported the materials as having been irretrievably lost.

All those documents were meticulously collected but unfortunately lost in a computer crash.

Comment: Re:Massive conspiracy (Score 1) 465

by alexo (#47264913) Attached to: IRS Lost Emails of 6 More Employees Under Investigation

such as "I did not have sexual relations with that woman" while under oath? The only consequence he suffered was disbarment.

Two months after the Senate failed to convict him, President Clinton was held in civil contempt of court by Judge Susan Webber Wright. His license to practice law was suspended in Arkansas for five years and later by the United States Supreme Court. He was also fined $90,000 for allegedly giving false testimony. Clinton declined to appeal the civil contempt of court ruling, citing financial problems, but still maintained that his testimony complied with Wright's earlier definition of sexual relations.

-- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Message from Our Sponsor on ttyTV at 13:58 ...

Working...