Forgot your password?

Comment: Re: Well at least they saved the children! (Score 1) 790

No, it's perfectly fine. Look, Google is not the government and is under no constitutional obligation to respect your privacy. If you want to keep your photos and documents private, don't store them with a third-party service that freely admits to analysing your documents. Do not transmit them over the internet. Do store them on a non-networked device. Google did the right thing. This guy is a pervert and an idiot.

Comment: Re: No (Score 1) 180

by pchasco (#47424255) Attached to: Will Google's Dart Language Replace Javascript? (Video)
Mainly because nothing would be gained. Python and PHP are similar to JavaScript in that they are dynamic languages. The idea of dart and others is to bring static compilation and strict typing to the browser, enabling improved JIT code generation and to make code more maintainable. If you've ever worked on a large application in a dynamic language, you've experienced the pain of trying to change an API without the help of the compiler telling you what it breaks and which sources and lines have errors.

Comment: Re: No (Score 1) 180

by pchasco (#47424197) Attached to: Will Google's Dart Language Replace Javascript? (Video)
While I haven't seen any compelling reason to use a source to source compiled language (still cant change js symantics and js is expressive enough) after experimenting with TypeScript, coffeescript and dart, I can tell you haven't experimented with any of them. These compilers generate map files, which are akin to Microsoft PDB files. The JavaScript debugger (in Chrome at lease, probably FireFox too) will use this file to enable debugging in the original source that was compiled to js. If you had actual experience with these compilers instead of making uninformed assumptions, you would know this.

Comment: Re: In the US they'd have been charged (Score 2) 378

No. I'm actually not concerned about the ATM company. I'm concerned about well-meaning hackers getting thrown in jail because they got caught hacking before they could prove they were just trying to help. If hackers are always punished for hacking regardless of the motivation, then there is no risk reward to hacking into a system with good intentions. You just wouldn't do it. However if there is a chance that the risk pays off, no one goes to jail and you get your warm and fuzzy, then people will take that risk. And some will inevitably get busted. I don't want good people to get thrown into jail or otherwise hassled by the authorities. Let's remove the incentive for engaging in risky behaviour.

Comment: Re: In the US they'd have been charged (Score 2) 378

Sometimes comparing computers to physical things is apropos, sometimes not. Just because some people make these comparisons when they are not truly demonstrative of a situation does not mean that every such comparison is fallacious. I have a lock on my front door. You finding a copy of the key under a rock is not implicit permission to enter my house, no matter how stupid I may have been to leave a spare key out for anyone to find.

Comment: Re: In the US they'd have been charged (Score 2) 378

Let's use a different example. What if you came home one day from work to find a brochure on your kitchen table advertising security and lock systems along with a business card and a note informing you that your house is insecure because you left your back bedroom window unlocked. Should yoga call the cops on the guy? He didn't steal or harm the residence in any way. He is just trying to help.

Comment: Re: In the US they'd have been charged (Score 1) 378

And they should be charged. What if they were caught in the act or otherwise before they had an opportunity to report the vulnerability? "No, officer. We weren't going to do anything malicious! We were just trying to help! I swear!" is not going to get them out of trouble. So if that excuse wouldn't fly, then any white hat hacker who isn't hacking with authorization runs the risk of getting caught and getting in deep shit. There's just no way to know who's got malicious intent and letting anyone off the hook who pinky swears they were just trying to help is just daft.

Comment: Don't worry (Score 1) 274

by pchasco (#46916089) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Joining a Startup As an Older Programmer?
If you've got the coding and personal skills, don't worry about it. They will respect you for what you can do and no one will care that you have Real Life after hours. Hell, they might even respect you more for it. This isn't a team of dufus jocks; these are intelligent analytical people. They understand that in ten years they'll be you. And its OK.

Comment: Re:Not convinced (Score 1) 185

by pchasco (#44840575) Attached to: Promising Vaccine Candidate Could Lead To a Definitive Cure For HIV
Sorry. I was being facetious. One of the arguments anti-vaxxers put up is that the dramatic decline of polio, measles, etc. infections had nothing to do with the vaccines we began administering en mass, but rather because we all started washing our hands. Which is, of course, absolute hogwash.

Comment: Re: I was wondering how they were going to do it.. (Score 1) 273

by pchasco (#43773769) Attached to: Uptick In Whooping Cough Linked To Subpar Vaccines
But why vaccinations? Maybe it's tap water. Maybe it's video games. Maybe it's birth control pills. Maybe it's Flying Spaghetti Monster causing autism. All these anti vaxers are looking for a way to blame vaccines for autism. Maybe instead of looking for a link to autism which, so far, has not been established, leave it up to scientists to find a link to anything? One million concerned mommies on the internet willing it so are not going to somehow create the link to vaccines that you all have collectively decided must be the cause. Leave science to the scientists.

Biology is the only science in which multiplication means the same thing as division.