"You'll hate us less than Facebook" seems to be working for Google+.

The 'work' involves searching for a very hard to find hash. The result has to be legitimately random, in order to prevent tampering.

If you can figure out how to process 'real data' and still keep it 'random', then you can certainly raise it.

Doesn't really help for PLAIN or LOGIN methods though, does it?

Or even DIGEST, really. That stuffs simple to break.

Wow seems i"m late to this party.

All patents should be voided on the grounds that every action is simply an expression of existing physical laws. When it comes down to it, every idea is really nothing more than universal physical laws playing out in people's heads.

I got a free pizza out of the deal. I'm cool with this.

I fail to see any issue with this. The bank that owns my credit card has a list of the transactions I've made on it. And they are now going to send me spam targeting me based on those transactions. The bank has always had the information. The bank still has it. There is no privacy issue here.

What there might be is banks annoying their customers. That shouldn't be illegal. It should result in customers finding banks that don't annoy them. Or, if customers don't care, then whatever.

Another thing that puzzles me: I work in the credit union marketing industry. We sell insurance to members of credit unions. The credit unions send us a list of their members names and account numbers, we mass snail mail them enrollment forms for free offers (with potential to buy in for more.) We don't get transaction history. But that doesn't matter. We buy the user's profiles from Experian and other companies. I'd be amazed if banks didn't already do this, since we've been doing it for a decade. And we have lots of competitors. So... maybe their user profiles are going to be better and they'll not annoy people with products they definitely don't care about. Beats the status quo.

Yes. It is like that. And it's perfectly fine.

Dunno. What's the law say? Whatever that says is probably what he should get. Since ya know, that's how we work.

My personal data isn't worth a dime to me. It's data. It's not like an investment. So, yes, it's still free, and did not cost me a dime.

Bad question. Consider it "with a vmm size > 800Mb"

ps | where-object {$_.VirtualMemorySize -gt 800000000} | ForEach-Object { $_.Kill() }

Cool. So how do I kill all processes consuming more than 800MB of RAM?

I know them. I've been using Linux since the mid 90's. i write kernel drivers for fuck's sake. PowerShell commands are self discoverable. Man pages are auto generated from thedocumentation stored with the commands themselves. If anything is weak it's your argument that I don't know the commands.

Well, you just made my point for you. In that sentence you acknowledge that I'm right. Only a small set of core utilities have had non-altered output for the last 30 years. I'd like to point out that 'ps' at least has been altered a few times in the last decade. ifconfig, same. Replaced with 'ip'. So you admit, Unix utilties break when the author changes them.

My entire point about powershell was that you don't have to know what changes are in store in the future. Didn't I mention that? You can add properties without requiring downstream users to be concerned with it. That's the point I made. You missed it, I guess.

There's nothing that C can do that can't be accomplished in assembly. Really? This isn't even an argument. It's a basic fallacy.

And if your last statement is to say that object orientation is somehow inferior to an OS based on poorly defined text output, then you've just pretty much written off most of computer science since the '70s.