Forgot your password?

Comment: The premise is idiotic. (Score 3, Informative) 247

by jcr (#48178313) Attached to: Apple's Next Hit Could Be a Microsoft Surface Pro Clone

Microsoft's "Surface" is just the latest round of their "tablet PC" debacle, which had been a continuous failure for over a decade before the iPad was introduced. iPad succeeded because Apple didn't try to shoehorn a desktop OS into a device where it clearly didn't fit.

To suggest that Apple should abandon a successful approach for a failed approach demonstrates that the author should find a different line of work, he's obviously out of his depth writing about the computer industry.


Comment: Re: Read below to see what Bennett has to say. (Score 1) 622

by ShieldW0lf (#48143697) Attached to: The Correct Response To Photo Hack Victim-Blamers

I do not agree that this is a good use of public resources, part of which are mine. That's the point of having a discussion about it.

If she wants to hire a private investigator out of her own pocket, that's all well and good.

That's the thing about a democracy... it's not based on principles, it's based on unity. If you can't convince the vast number of people who agree with me, you have no right to use our tax money to finance your investigation.

I remember when SnapChat first hit the scene, thinking that such a service shouldn't exist, that it's inherently malignant in nature. Seeing these people get burned by its failure makes me happy, and I have no interest in working extra hours so I can fund a team of people to shore up what was a bad idea in the first place.

Perhaps, if you hope to see your vision of how things ought to be realized, you should stop making authoritative statements and start providing compelling arguments that take my demographics interests into account.

Comment: Re:Competition urgently needed (Score 2) 149

by ShieldW0lf (#48142955) Attached to: ISPs Violating Net Neutrality To Block Encryption

Competition brings out the least in people.

If you measure yourself against the world, you'll always have room to improve.

If you measure yourself against other men, if you're the best, you'll never reach your potential.

And, because your peers have motivation to celebrate your failures, rather than your successes, you'll actually be fighting those who should be benefiting from your achievements.

On a personal level... dealing with competitive people is too tiresome to bear. Nothing they have to offer is worth dealing with their ego driven crap.

And, you can see the idiocy in their posts here. ISPs in the states are the most "free market" in the world, and they are also among the worst. The countries that treat ISPs as critical infrastructure like roads are the ones with the fastest infrastructure, but the "free market ra ra ra" crowd are still convinced that the way to improve the situation is to move further away from what is working better elsewhere.

Now, this isn't an academic debate. When you can look around, see that other people are getting better results, and you ignore that, that is just plain stupid.

Comment: Re: Read below to see what Bennett has to say. (Score 1) 622

by ShieldW0lf (#48136913) Attached to: The Correct Response To Photo Hack Victim-Blamers

I'm bored enough to play...

Let's accept the arguments and move past them. What is she seeking when she asks us to accept that she is the victim of a sex crime?

She is seeking for us to take responsibility for locating and punishing the people who distributed these photos at our expense.

Each of us asks ourselves: Will going along with her position protect me? Will it protect people I care about? Will it encourage society to change in ways that I prefer? Will it put me at risk by criminalizing behavior that I enjoy engaging in? Will it put me at risk by criminalizing behavior I might engage in unknowingly, and burden me with the need for increased vigilance? How much will it cost? What will we be sacrificing to pay that cost? Is it all worthwhile?

She wants to make this our responsibility. The "victim blamers" do not want to assume this responsibility. She is selling something and some of us aren't buying it.

And, in typical fashion, those who fancy themselves the Champions of Women are attempting to paint those who are unsympathetic as hateful and shame them into submission, making them angry and defensive.

Which is smart, because when you rationally consider the reward on investment involved in treating this as a serious crime, it's open and shut. Only an emotional thinker could think this is a rational response.

Comment: Re:Oh great (Score 2) 546

by ShieldW0lf (#48134555) Attached to: Password Security: Why the Horse Battery Staple Is Not Correct

I've been doing this for the better part of a decade. Except, I know I'll be repeating this phrase to myself every day, so I take it as an opportunity to engage in a little self programming. It makes the passphrase personal instead of generic, and useful instead of burdensome.

"I don't like drinking with my buddies till 3 because it makes me feel rotten the next day" = "Idldwmbt3bimmfrtnd"

Now when my buddies ask me to stay out drinking on Thursday night, I'll hear "I don't like drinking with my buddies till 3 because it makes me feel rotten the next day" in my head and make the responsible choice.

Or whatever. "I put the toilet seat down because even though it's inconvenient it's better than listening to my wife criticize me"?

You can have fun with it.

Comment: Re:Supreme Court (Score 1) 112

by jcr (#48111909) Attached to: National Security Letter Issuance Likely Headed To Supreme Court

Citizens United was not the correct ruling.

Actually, this is a rare example of something that the court got right. The government doesn't have any legal authority to infringe our freedom of speech, whether we act individually or collectively, and when acting collectively, whether that collective is a corporation, a partnership, or any other kind of organization. Opponents of the CU decision claim that the decision amounts to declaring that corporations are people, which entirely orthogonal to the question of whether the government can shut people up.

Bribes are not a protected form of speech,

Campaign contributions aren't bribes. Money given to a candidate off the books that they can use for hookers and blow are bribes.


All warranty and guarantee clauses become null and void upon payment of invoice.