Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:What do I think? (Score 4, Interesting) 225

by daemonhunter (#47526173) Attached to: Chromebooks Are Outselling iPads In Schools

The thing these programs [try] to bring isn't so much help with learning as much as EQUAL ACCESS to learning. It attempts to level the playing field between the kids at home with no pc for research and the more well-off kids with greater tech access.

That said, it doesn't provide in home internet access, satellite or 3g coverage, so many times it seems like a wasted effort, but it allows students greater flexibility than previous generations. They aren't tied down to a classroom, or getting shuffled out of the lab so a new class can come in. They can do their work anywhere there's free wifi. Further, it adds a value to your district in less tangible ways: showing kids you trust them with not-inexpensive hardware does interesting things to their psyche.

Comment: Re: "Immigration Reform". (Score 1) 341

by daemonhunter (#47337377) Attached to: If Immigration Reform Is Dead, So Is Raising the H-1B Cap

How is leaving Mexico because the cartel makes daily life unsafe any different than leaving Syria because radical Islamists make daily life unsafe?

When refugees show up at the Jordanian border, we all weep for their loss. When they show up at OUR border, we truck them back to the hell they came from and blame them for causing us trouble.

You tell me what's off base about having some compassion and asking intelligent questions about WHY they left.

Comment: Re:Fuck Obamacare (Score 1) 723

by daemonhunter (#46717307) Attached to: Can the ObamaCare Enrollment Numbers Be Believed?

Except I can CHOOSE to not own a car, and I don't need insurance at that point.

Call me when I can CHOOSE to not carry health insurance.

That's why so many are crying foul.

My question is why we didn't just roll this whole broken process under medicare.
It's not like the government hasn't been in the health industry for the last century anyway.
At least then it's less confusing who's robbing you. Better the devil you know.

+ - DOJ Lawyer argued that Guantanamo prisoner searches are just like TSA Screenings-> 1

Submitted by McGruber
McGruber (1417641) writes "Last Monday, Justice Department Attorney Edward Himmelfarb argued in court that searches of Guantanamo prisoners heading to meet with their attorneys were just like the searches that Transportation Security Administration performs on travelers at U.S. airports: "As a couple of spokesmen for Guantanamo said in the articles that are in the record, it's basically like a TSA search at the airport...a supplemental search," Himmelfarb told the court, according to a recording of the argument ($file/13-5218.mp3). "That's basically what it is and people fly all the time, including devout Muslims. It's not as bad as it sounds. The genital area is touched through the clothing with a flat hand, the way the TSA does," he added.

David Remes, an attorney representing Guantanamo prisoners, immediately sent the court a letter after the argument, disputing Himmelfarb's assertion that the search procedure is "not as bad as it sounds." "Clients who are willing to see me, or to have calls with me, describe a search procedure that is far more invasive and degrading than the light pat-down passengers get at airports: The guard feels the detainee’s penis, cups the detainee’s testicles, and feels inside the detainee’s crotch," Remes wrote in his letter (

DOJ Lawyer Himmelfarb then sent a letter to the court Friday afternoon (, in which he said he wished to revise his remarks. "I would like to clarify that while the search procedures employed at Guantanamo bear some general similarities to patdown procedures employed at airport security checkpoints, the two sets of procedures are not identical. Although the Transportation Security Administration's patdown procedures cannot be publicly disclosed in detail...they differ in certain key respects from the searches conducted at Guantanamo," Himmelfarb wrote. "I regret any confusion my statements may have caused.""

Link to Original Source

+ - NSA Phone Program Likely Unconstitutional, Federal Judge Rules -> 3

Submitted by schwit1
schwit1 (797399) writes "A federal judge ruled Monday that the National Security Agency's phone surveillance program is likely unconstitutional, Politico reports.

U.S. District Court Judge Richard Leon said that the agency's controversial program, first unveiled by former government contractor Edward Snowden earlier this year, appears to violate the Constitution's Fourth Amendment, which states that the "right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated."

“I cannot imagine a more ‘indiscriminate’ and ‘arbitrary invasion’ than this systematic and high-tech collection and retention of personal data on virtually every single citizen for purposes of querying it and analyzing it without judicial approval,” Leon wrote in the ruling.

The federal ruling came down after activist Larry Klayman filed a lawsuit in June over the program. The suit claimed that the NSA's surveillance “violates the U.S. Constitution and also federal laws, including, but not limited to, the outrageous breach of privacy, freedom of speech, freedom of association, and the due process rights of American citizens.""

Link to Original Source

+ - Exponential Algorithm in Windows Update Slowing XP Machines->

Submitted by jones_supa
jones_supa (887896) writes "An interesting bug regarding update dependency calculation has been found in Windows XP. By design, machines using Windows Update retrieve patch information from Microsoft's update servers (or possibly WSUS in a company setting). That patch information contains information about each patch: what software it applies to and, critically, what historic patch or patches the current patch supersedes. Unfortunately, the Windows Update client components used an algorithm with exponential scaling when processing these lists. Each additional superseded patch would double the time taken to process the list. With the operating system now very old, those lists have grown long, sometimes to 40 or more items. On a new machine, that processing appeared to be almost instantaneous. It is now very slow. After starting the system, svchost.exe is chewing up the entire processor, sometimes for an hour or more at a time. Wait long enough after booting and the machine will eventually return to normalcy. Microsoft thought that it had this problem fixed in November's Patch Tuesday update after it culled the supersedence lists. That update didn't appear to fix the problem. The company thought that its December update would also provide a solution, with even more aggressive culling. That didn't seem to help either. For one reason or another, Microsoft's test scenarios for the patches didn't reflect the experience of real Windows XP machines."
Link to Original Source

Nobody said computers were going to be polite.