Or you're being paid by the annoying-headphone-wire-lobby to keep sales from dropping. Or the deleterious health effects caused by headphone wires are still being suppressed for their huge impending class action suit. Wow, this is easy...
Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
Silent Circle was partially founded by Philip Zimmermann, so that's supposed to lend some credibility to the operation. The company, and PZ in general, still operate on the premise that trust in them should be enough for anybody, so the operation will be opaque and the source closed.
I really respect a lot of what Zimmermann has done, but we're finding out more and more that our trust in institutions was ill placed. I don't think his model works in our current world. Finding out in twenty years that Silent Circle was an NSA front wouldn't really surprise me that much, despite Zimmermann's involvement. "Trust me, I'm one of the good guys," doesn't fly anymore.
I really appreciate the removal of the left sidebar, actually. This new layout, as totally fucked and buggy as it is in so many ways, at least gives ample room to the comments. Deep comments are still not handled well, where after ten comments deep the nesting gets screwed up.
Bugs aside, this is a huge improvement over Beta, which basically ignored the fact that the comments are the only thing that make this site worth visiting. A little testing would help, though. This layout is broken on every browser I try. What browser are the devs testing it on?
Testing phase? That's a clever idea...
Wow... speaking of full retard.
You've clearly got some assumptions that you're basing all of your little tirades on, so why don't you just share them upfront instead of expecting us to infer them from your breathless ranting.
OK, I went back and reread the thread and see what's going on now. You're not talking about robots replacing human labor like everyone else in the comments for this article. I accidentally stepped into the present day, nothing to do with this article, libertarian/anti-libertarian thread. I'll show myself out.
They're barely even trying to hide it this time, though. I mean come on, "Spartan". Yeah right. Without the PR, their true colors show through!
So who comes and murders the hot dog vendor to death for operating a stand in his private park without giving up his cut? Where does this homeless person sleep while he's raising his capital and picking himself up by his bootstraps. Your entire argument is predicated on the existence of land that is free to use by others.
It doesn't take long for them to get enough money to build a hot dog stand.
What do you base this on? If everything is privately owned and they have nothing to offer but labor, which is devalued or valueless in our hypothetical robot-run world, where do they get this money?
If he's starting with nothing, he's only got a few weeks to build up the capital to start his hotdog stand, while diverting some of the money to food, water, and rent (there is no public land, remember). If he fails to raise the money or misjudges his market, he starves to death, right?
I assume that in a world where labor had little to no value, you'd never be that homeless man, right?
[To keep this discussion on track, I'm not some authoritarian statist or communist or anything. I'm only pointing out that your solution to this thought experiment isn't very well thought out.]
Well, it's a good thing that your opinion of the case determines its merit.
Look, I'm sure that you've done more research into this case than I have, but not siding with Pao doesn't mean that someone is motivated by all of the generalizations that your post claimed. How about you lay off attributing everything to the conspiracy of the patriarchy and actually explain the relevant facts of the case if you feel compelled to post something. What you're posting now contributes nothing positive to the conversation at all. You don't win arguments by just calling people names.
You're looking to let her off the hook based on a strawman generalization that nobody's making but you. Nobody here is talking about women sleeping their way to the top, but about Ellen Pao specifically, who seems to have a sketchy past and questionable motives.
Just because you think her case has merit doesn't mean that it's settled. Others think her case doesn't have merit and disparaging them as misogynists doesn't make you automatically win the argument. Your entire post is just one big ad hominem attack.
Civil asset forture isn't related to any of that. Parallel construction isn't either.
And why is that? I gave very real examples of what our government can and does do to its citizens. To quote the poster you originally responded to, "For my government, it's as easy as sending a patrol car or two." And I noticed that you never addressed the identity theft part...
As to "fantasyland," it's aways a pleasure to deal with the uninformed and mistaken.
Yes, I believe a newspaper article about something that hasn't happened falls squarely in the realm of fantasyland. We have contingency plans to nuke them as well.
I think it's pretty unlikely a Western government will steal the identy of one of its citizens and drain their bank account.
You mean like that recent case where the police stole a woman's identity and used it to build a cover as a prostitute?
Or are you referring to all of the people in the US who have their assets seized without trial? Now with parallel construction, it can be done with even less justification than before.
Has China ever done any of this stuff to us, ever? Because the US has done this stuff to its own citizens plenty of times. So why should I be so afraid of China, when the biggest danger my wellbeing comes from my own government?
The rest of your post is fantasyland wharrgarbl, so there's no point in addressing it.
So then you're saying that it's not a matter of actually implementing secure communications, but adjusting expectations so that whatever we have is seen as secure by the people using it.
Everyone has and uses cell phones, but the encryption is weak and the implementation isn't end-to-end. Cell phones are emphatically not a medium for secure communications. If that's the stick by which we measure successfully deployed secure communications systems, then let's just declare Facebook to be secure and move on.
It's really nice to see some amateur experimenters releasing the schematics for their designs again. Ever since I've been playing with radios, the scene has been very concerned with keeping designs secret. So much of the ham software is non-free (both libre and gratis), and the developers end up retiring, dying, or abandoning their work without ever releasing the code. Finding schematics for hardware is even more difficult and I've spent much of my time redesigning circuits (or reverse-engineering them from bought products or web pictures when I get stumped!).
Bruce, in your slides you mention that "The platform should be as close to Open Source and Open Hardware as possible without allowing Chinese cloners to eat our lunch – or we won't be motivated to make it." How much is this going to affect what is shared with the amateur community? Are you more concerned with making money off a product than pushing the state of the art in amateur radio. (Not that there's anything wrong with that, but there's a special circle of hell for people that see Open Source as a marketing term. Which doesn't seem to apply to you at all, Bruce, but it may still apply to this venture.)
One of the things that is holding back wider adoption of SDR is that SDR equipment from the new wave of manufacturers is often outrageously expensive for what is contained in the box. Will this be another $2000 SDR radio with $15 worth of parts inside it? (I know development costs money, but why must hams always charge for their hobby?)
That, in addition to Convergence being the next big thing ! ! !, followed shortly thereafter by it being completely abandoned, makes the whole thing seem amateurish.