Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:We protected 1 billion people by notifying trus (Score 1) 176

by sabri (#46788031) Attached to: Heartbleed Sparks 'Responsible' Disclosure Debate

This was handled similarly to a flaw I discovered, and I think it makes sense. Facebook, for example, has about a billion users. If you have a colleague you trust at Facebook, informing that one colleague can protect Facebook's billion users.

Ah yes, the duckface pictures of a bunch of teens are way more important than, let's say, millions of tax returns.

Comment: Re:Not getting funded. (Score 1) 157

by sabri (#46758335) Attached to: Will This Flying Car Get Crowdfunded?

I would love to do some recreational flying, but I can't afford to with a family and a mortgage and many expenses. And I couldn't justify it as an expensive hobby before then.

I totally understand. However, most flight schools will offer an introductory flight for about $150.

The point was simply that people don't fly because it isn't economically viable to do so. The number of pilot's licenses isn't an indication of people's ability to fly or their inclination to do so. It is an indication of the expense of flying which is partly the result of FAA regulations and the lack of efficient mass production of light aircraft.

Yes, you are 100% correct. The reason why flying is so expensive is because maintenance is so expensive. You can buy an aircraft for the price of a mid-size car (~$30k). However, every 100 hours and every year you'll need inspection. Every 2000 hours you'll need an engine overhaul (or a new engine). And then there is the fuel consumption: your average Cessna 172 (one of the most popular GA aircraft), slurps between 8 and 10 USG of $5/gallon gas per hour.

However, is someone is capable of producing a "flying car" which can do all of that much cheaper, I'm sure a lot of people will find the time and money to earn their pilot's license.

Comment: Re:Not getting funded. (Score 1) 157

by sabri (#46751245) Attached to: Will This Flying Car Get Crowdfunded?

Personally I don't have a pilots license because I don't have the money to waste on something that is of no economic benefit.

Well, I have been fortunate enough to be able to afford a pilot's license and I could not give a rat's ass about the economic benefit. There is nothing better than flying around in an airplane on a sunny day, at 1500ft above the Golden Gate bridge. And I will even go one step further: my first solo flight was the best day of my life. That includes losing my virginity and getting married. Check the continuous smile on this pilot's face during a first solo:

Who cares about economic benefit. If you can ever afford it, go for it! If you can't afford the license, go take an introductory flight at your local flight school and at least enjoy it for a brief moment.

Comment: Re:H1B - a path to a Tech Job (Score 1) 286

by sabri (#46750659) Attached to: Bachelor's Degree: An Unnecessary Path To a Tech Job

I was referring to H1-B visas.

I'm not an English major, but that was not very obvious.

The backlog occurs as a result of the annual limit on the H1-B

Not true as there is no backlog. Applications that are filed outside of the annual limit, or not selected when a lottery is performed, are rejected. They are not delayed for processing in the next FY, and new applications for the same beneficiary will not get any preferential treatment.

C + D both assume employment and sponsorship by a US based company. That is a given - just like it is for a TN visa.

That is perhaps a given to you, but that is not what you wrote. Remember that you, as someone who as undergone the process of immigration, may understand all the steps and requirements, but some poor schmuck in India reading your post may think that he has a chance if he files his own H1-B paperwork. Yes, the naturalization forms may not be that difficult that you'd need an attorney, but that was not clear from your post...

Comment: Re:H1B - a path to a Tech Job (Score 4, Informative) 286

by sabri (#46748945) Attached to: Bachelor's Degree: An Unnecessary Path To a Tech Job

Unlike many other countries there is no annual limit on the number of TN visas issued. Countries like India and China typically have 5-6 year backlogs (or longer) due to quotas.So as long as you're not looking for permanant residency you can get a TN and just keep renewing it. If you want to be on the path for "permanent residency" then you need to get an H1-B visa. Which, of course, is more difficult to get. But once you get it, it's good for 6 years. It can only be renewed once. But having an H1-B is a direct path to citizenship. The hard part is getting the H1-B. After that, getting citizenship is easy. You don't even need an attorney. I did mine myself.

You need to get your facts straight.

A: There is no 5-6 year backlog for TN visas for India and China. India and Chinese nationals are not eligible as primary applicant for a TN visa.

B: You could be referring to H1-B visas, but then you would still be mistaken as there is no 5-6 year backlog for those either. H1-B visas are processed on a first-come first-serve basis until the annual limit is reached or when a high number of applications is received (all applications in the first week will usually be put in a lottery system). Unlucky applicants can try again next FY.

C: H1-B is not a direct path to citizenship. The path from H1-B to citizenship requires permanent residence, which requires a sponsoring employer.

D: I suspect you are not being truthful when you say "I did mine myself". That is very difficult, as you generally need an employer to sponsor your permanent residence (form I-140), and BTW, the same goes for your H1-B (form I-129). The only exceptions to the I-140 sponsoring requirements are people who have an extraordinary ability (EB1-A category). If you are able to file all the required paperwork yourself and get it approved, then you are truly extraordinary and I humbly bow to you.

E: It is the permanent residence part that has a huge backlogs, up to 8 years for certain countries.

Comment: Re:Does this mean no more Gnome desktop? (Score 5, Interesting) 689

by sabri (#46742269) Attached to: The GNOME Foundation Is Running Out of Money

The correct term for that is "software" these days. Like it or not, that's how it is.

If only software would be the focus of the Gnome foundation. I had a look to check if it would be worth donating some of my cash to. One of the ways to see if your money is spent well, is by looking at the financial statements of the charity you're considering to donate to. I found old statements on their page ( Their last financial report goes back to 2011...

According to the financial data in their 2012 status report, 25 percent of their spending went to "Women's Outreach" ($106,741 out of $409,400). While I have no issues with programs helping women getting coding internships, I'm pretty sure the Gnome foundation would not be broke right now if they focused on their mission statement: "The GNOME Foundation will work to further the goal of the GNOME project: to create a computing platform for use by the general public that is completely free software. ", according to their website:

This looks like a self-inflicted wound, originating out of bad management and diversion from their core mission.

Comment: Re:But... (Score 4, Insightful) 78

by sabri (#46709207) Attached to: In-Flight Wi-Fi Provider Going Above and Beyond To Help Feds Spy


No, Lawful Intercept.

Don't shoot the company that is complying with government wishes. When the FBI knocks on a CEO's door and says "you need to do this and this", the CEO will have little choice but to comply. Yes, in theory he may refuse an order if it is not 100% a requirement per the law, but that will only make his own life difficult. Remember that it is the same government that hands out licenses for the CEO's business, and the same government that collects that CEO's taxes. The government can make life very, very difficult for the CEO, even while staying within the boundaries of the law (tax audits, anyone?).

When focusing on a single company, you're losing sight of the bigger picture. The problem is that the government has little regard for the end-user's privacy, and sacrifices civil liberties in the name of security. It is the government that needs a slap on the hand, not the company that has been "exposed" (but I do agree that morally, the company is on the wrong side in history).

Comment: Re:I dont get it (Score 5, Informative) 551

by sabri (#46566449) Attached to: Russians Take Ukraine's Last Land Base In Crimea

It's the same reason you give your wallet to the mugger with the gun and the crazy eyes.

And this is exactly what it is. Putin is a mugger with a gun and crazy eyes. Too bad he also has nuclear weapons so nobody can do anything about. The only thing that can be done is to isolate Russia the same way as we isolate North Korea. Nazdrovje!

Comment: Re:"Sight"? On slashdot? (Score 2) 191

by sabri (#46436445) Attached to: The Tangled Tale of Mt. Gox's Missing Millions

Eye have a spelling chequer,

When I put the sentence "the code running the sight was a mess" in MS Word, it does not show up as spelling error.

How do you call someone that speaks two languages? Bilingual.
How do you call someone that speaks three languages? Trilingual.
How do you call someone that speaks one language? American.

Moral of the story: stop complaining about people who learned English as a second language and be happy that they did.

Comment: Re:Refund on overhearing my pizza order (Score 1) 114

by sabri (#46421385) Attached to: Government Accuses Sprint of Overcharging For Wiretapping Expenses

There was no Tea Party in 2006 for Bush to appease. The Tea Party movement came into existence with Obama's election. No matter how you try to spin it, your reference to the Tea Party is gratuitous and indefensible.

Well, let's see:

References to the Boston Tea Party were part of Tax Day protests held throughout the 1990s and earlier


Comment: Re:Refund on overhearing my pizza order (Score 1) 114

by sabri (#46415165) Attached to: Government Accuses Sprint of Overcharging For Wiretapping Expenses

I think that's a ridiculous suggestion. "The Government" is currently in Democratic hands; they don't give a f*ck about annoying the Tea Party.

I think you have trouble reading. The law enacting this compliance tax was created in 2006. When Mr Bush was president. You know, the GOP one.

Comment: Re:Refund on overhearing my pizza order (Score 1) 114

by sabri (#46402195) Attached to: Government Accuses Sprint of Overcharging For Wiretapping Expenses

So you're implying it would be better if the Tea Party didn't oppose NSA wiretapping and encouraged the government to raise additional taxes for the explicit purpose of violating our privacy? Or what?

What I'm implying is that the government first collects taxes from its citizens in order to provide "law enforcement" and "protection", and then taxes the internet access industry for exactly the same thing. Which of course, in the end, gets paid by the users.

In short, the government is collecting money twice from its own citizens, to illegally spy on the same citizens that it should be protecting against illegal activities.

Never put off till run-time what you can do at compile-time. -- D. Gries