Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:wouldn't matter if it weren't canned (Score 1) 387

He might not even be lying. They don't have the hard drive space or the capability to spy on everyone. Of course he doesn't want to spy on *everyone*, just suspected muslims, dissidents, homosexuals or anyone else who might not support the Kremlin.

I would remind everyone that after the Boston Bombings the Russians were very helpful in providing all of Tsarnaev's text messages. They just "happened" to have him under surveillance. What luck!

Comment: Re:Doesn't seem to be on purpose (Score 1) 445

by im_thatoneguy (#46721943) Attached to: Heartbleed Coder: Bug In OpenSSL Was an Honest Mistake

When the Boston Bomber was identified Russia was kind enough to provide investigators with all of his text messages and phone calls.

Of course they aren't surprised. They openly admitted that they were doing the same thing before Snowden was a household name. Every country is doing everything legally possible (and then some) to spy on anyone they can. That's not new. The only people surprised by Snowden's leaks were people who had a false sense of security.

Comment: Re:Help Consumers? (Score 1) 126

by im_thatoneguy (#46720893) Attached to: Photo Web Site Offers a Wall of Shame For Image Thieves

It depends on the portfolio. How am I supposed to verify a portfolio except to have the photographer shoot some new shots on a memory card I give them and supervise through the entire process of loading into the camera and handing back to me?

Lots of people don't know about reverse image searches. In fact it's a relatively new technology. And then how do I know that other people aren't ripping off *my* photographer?

So how pray tell do I verify that someone I'm about to pay is in fact as good as they claim? The only alternative I see is to have them prove their merit. But no photographer with any self worth should ever do "practice" shots to prove they can take good pictures. That would be like going to a mechanic and saying "Hey, change my tire.. and then I'll decide if you changed it well enough to get paid."

Comment: Re:What all is included? (Score 2) 722

by im_thatoneguy (#46718603) Attached to: Can the ObamaCare Enrollment Numbers Be Believed?

It does not include Medicaid.

Of the 40.7 million who were uninsured in 2013, 14.5 million gained coverage, but 5.2 million of the insured lost coverage, for a net gain in coverage of approximately 9.3 million.

This represents a drop in the share of the population that is uninsured from 20.5 percent to 15.8 percent.
The 9.3 million person increase in insurance is driven not only by enrollment in marketplace plans, but also by gains in employer-sponsored insurance (ESI) and Medicaid.

Enrollment in ESI increased by 8.2 million.

Medicaid enrollment increased by 5.9 million. New enrollees are primarily drawn from those who were uninsured in 2013, or those who had âoeotherâ forms of insurance, including Medicare, retiree health insurance, and other government plans.

Comment: Re:I May Not Agree (Score 0, Troll) 1111

by im_thatoneguy (#46699949) Attached to: Mozilla CEO Firestorm Likely Violated California Law

No you're redefining "false logic".

If we were to be pure to your theoretical frictionless-vacuum definition of equality then you would also need to be vehemently opposed to our treatment of child molesters, thieves and liars. We have plenty of targets of hate in our culture. The gay marriage debate though is tricky because a lot of people still think denying rights to gays is a 'justifiable' hate. Liberals however find it an unjustifiable hate.

It's tricky to be a hater. It's safe as long as it's a pedophile but on the contested areas it's a crapshoot of public opinion whether you're reasonably taking a different "political" position or you're a bigot.

Personally I think prop 8 voters are bigots. And I will give a rational explanation for why incest and gay marriage are different for example:

1) Gay marriage, no kids.
2) Incest, genetic mutants

1) Gay marriage, most likely minor power differences.
2) Incest with children/parents is fraught with psychological manipulation and questions of consent.

Group marriages aren't morally wrong but they would produce a completely different legal structure since they would have to be framed after a corporation. Divorce isn't the same when a fraction of the property has to be split off. It might be legal some day but it's going to have to be a separate legal framework. It would be impossible for 5 people to have the "same" rights as 2 people. They would by definition of the arrangement have to be discriminated against. Without breaking the laws of physics you can't give them the same rights.

The fact that there are perfectly sensible reasons for discrimination is the reason it's in my books 'justifiable' discrimination. The proposed justifications for gay marriage are: "It's gross."

Just saying "It's gross" isn't a reason to discriminate. Therefore it's bigotry.

Comment: Re:I think this is bullshit (Score 2, Insightful) 1746

by im_thatoneguy (#46652879) Attached to: Brendan Eich Steps Down As Mozilla CEO

And as long as they're not directly being a dick to you, you're supposed to exhibit some degree of tolerance, especially in the workplace.

I would say that if you are Gay and would like to receive the government benefits associated with a marriage then giving $1,000 to stopping you would fall into the category of "Being a dick to you".

Second, it's not like the man is a skin-head.

Skinheads think blacks are inferior and bad for society.
Homophobes think gays are inferior and bad for society.

So yes it is like he's a skin-head.

Comment: Re:Victory for the Thought Police? (Score 2, Insightful) 1746

by im_thatoneguy (#46652591) Attached to: Brendan Eich Steps Down As Mozilla CEO

The Thought Police have been around for all of time. Think it's ok to molest small children? Expect the Thought police to ostracize you. Support stripping the rights of your fellow citizens? Here comes the "thought police". Give money to the KKK, here come the "thought police".

You're free to practice your religion. Your religion is free to say that gay people are gross. Your religion is free to say that it's good to sacrifice virgins over an alter. We're all free to call you crazy wackos. Freedom goes both way bucko.

Crying "religious freedom" is like running up, kicking someone in the shins and then yelling "No backsies, religious freedom!" Believe whatever you want, but trying to strip rights from your fellow citizens isn't a "belief" that's action. That's an assault on their rights.

Comment: Re:I think this is bullshit (Score 5, Insightful) 1746

by im_thatoneguy (#46652487) Attached to: Brendan Eich Steps Down As Mozilla CEO

What about my freedom of speech to not donate to an organization headed by someone with whom I disagree?

What about the freedom of hundreds of employees to feel uncomfortable working for someone who is advocating against you? What about the freedom of workers to quit and find new companies where they are more welcome?

Freedom goes both ways. In this instance it's one CEO or thousands of users and employees.

Comment: Re:This will not end well (Score 4, Interesting) 193

Personally in our organization we like to save money but we also view buying a laptop as a very low cost expense. When an employee costs $100-$200k to employ (overhead, office space, janitorial, taxes, healthcare etc) a $1,000 system every 2 years or so is a tiny drop in the bucket.

At $150k / 40 hour weeks * 48 weeks = $79 per hour.

At that rate it only takes 10 hours of time savings before the computer (or $1,000 software) is "free". 10 hours sounds like a lot but if your employee has to wait 2 minutes a day for 2 years for a slow process you're looking at over $1,000 in wasted time. 2 minutes a day is a very very low bar for achievement.

Instead of trumpeting how much they saved on licensing fees, I would ask how much time they are saving--or are they? Is this just the IT department triumphantly cutting their budget or HR picking up the expense of extra employees to do the same work. That's the headline I would be interested in. If this saved them having 2 employees then they would save 400,000 pounds. If it meant they needed 3 more employees then they not only replaced the upgrade fees but actually increased their net budget.

I would suspect that WindowsRT like you say would probably be the easiest transition. I would argue that more than 2 minutes per day would be lost to Linux "hiccups" and confusion.

Contemptuous lights flashed flashed across the computer's console. -- Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy