When you can't tell the difference. Looong way to go.
I must respectfully disagree. By simply campaigning against him, he may consider himself harassed. Free speech, to be really free, must have license to offend.
There is no reasonable definition of harass here, that's the real problem. It's basically what you could probably get a civil jury to agree with, and I think we've all noticed how split right down the middle this whole case is. Is it harassment if 90% of the Mozilla user base stops using the product? Is it harassment to write a letter to the board protesting their choice? Is it harassment to stand outside their offices with a placard chanting? If he feels harassed he has every right to file protective motions in a court of law, I doubt he'll be following that up though.
As for your uncivil points, a lot of people would argue that 'yes' he was being uncivil when he donated money to that cause. Other people would disagree (maybe me included). People are going to have their say, and California criminal codes don't trump the constitution of the land.
Nice post though, made me stop and think for a minute. It's a shame we have to tolerate the horrible, nasty, venom filled, bigoted, hurtful, degrading and insulting free speech to allow all the other good stuff. But it's well worth that offence and harassment.
Matrix Reloaded was merely a disappointing film. Matrix Revolutions was a shitty, nasty sorry excuse and complete waste of time for a film. Mostly because it wasn't set inside the fucking Matrix. Honestly, if you're going to have a final war between man and machine, set it up to occur inside the matrix, not just the final fight. An army of super humans against machines.... much better than that mech crap we all fell asleep watching.
Now you've got me started
As it's fairly obvious that the NSA has access to major routers at telecoms, SSL Observatory wouldn't notice a thing. The attack is trivially aimed at specific targets only. i.e. only redirect traffic from the target IP to the fake server with the real looking certificate that's recording everything.
He wasn't charged with falling to answer, nor was he beaten until he did. The court and jury were simply informed of his answering pattern and it convinced them to find him guilty.
We've got the same crap in the UK, they can now tell the jury that you remained silent and doesn't that look guilty?
The solution is now not to say 'no comment pig', but to say, 'on the advice of my lawyer, no comment pig'! This way you have an excuse in court. You point at your lawyer and claim he told you to.
I'm in the high risk card not present industry and if it wasn't so painful it'd be funny how bad it is.
3DS solves problems for Visa and nobody else. It transfers the liability from the merchant to the customer. No more 'it wasn't me'.
Only problem is, it's crap.
Bit like the chip and pin problem in the UK which is a similar joke. If I can get your card and your pin I can go shopping as you and good luck trying to explain that to the bank.
If I can fool you into giving me your 3DS password somehow, I can shop online as you with great false trust, and the merchants don't care because they're protected. Kind of.
Most merchants refuse to deploy it anyhow unless forced. It causes a 5-8% immediate drop in throughput. I wouldn't use a site that used it either.
Link to Original Source
Link to Original Source