themartorana

Isn't this the fear, though? Once backdoored, it's not strong. Once codified into law, strong encryption is gotten rid of for law-abiding citizens

I'd also like to know where they draw the line? What's too invasive? At what point are they willing to (cringe) let pedophiles get lighter sentences, because a privacy intrusion is too extreme? As we march ever forward down the road of always-on blanket surveillance, we might need to start asking this question so we know exactly how far elected leaders are willing to go (and if they believe themselves to be exempt from such intrusions).

But there has been outrage about the effects of wealthy nations that drew the benefits of DDT before banning it (like, getting rid of malaria) and now putting pressure on poorer nations to _not_ use DDT, and suffer the consequences.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2004/04/11/magazine/what-the-world...

This isn't just TLAs, it's the entirety of government. Some bits and pieces are farther along than others, but it's all heading that way (same with local governments).

Edit: did I mention starting/conducting wars through secret re-interpretations of existing laws?

Edit 2: did I mention you can be prosecuted with secret evidence you and your lawyer aren't allowed to see?

But hey, the pill is also only 91% effective when improper use is taken into account. [1] So, really, relying on any birth control you don't control is crazy.

So your excuse for not using a condom isn't mathematically sound. Using it as the sole method is perhaps risky, but you control it. As a second-layer check against potential (unintentional) improper used contraception on the part of your partner, it still severely decreases your risk.

[0] https://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/birth-control/condom...

[1] https://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/birth-control/birth-...

Most of our laws that exist at extremes (no torture, Geneva Convention) exist as a reaction against what did happen the last time a stressful situation was lawless, and a rational check against the next time stress brings up a possible irrational reaction.

Stealing food should always be a crime - it let's us then consider the circumstances surrounding the action, and forgive the crime. (This is the basic argument against mandatory sentencing. It removes empathy, which makes us less than human.)

Conspiracy theorists might see the War on Terrorism as a premeditated concoction to justify massive state surveillance, since it's about everyone's justification. That's silly though. We all know they just took advantage of an existing situation, right?

While "voluntary", promising time reductions or other sentencing modifications for either participation directly or "good behavior" indirectly changes the meaning of "voluntary." Add the threat of solitary confinement or other unconscionable punishments for bad behavior (and capable of being used in a punitive or retaliatory fashion by guards and administrators) and "voluntary" becomes even less voluntary.

It's easy to dehumanize prisoners as "lawbreakers" or cast them as people who gave up freedom flippantly. For me, taking advantage of prisoners to bolster private corporate profits - no matter their crime - is not a justifiable thing.

Yes, some people would put humongous data structures in view state, and yes, more-better solutions have arisen, but WebForms deserves your respect!

Gross.

"That mass incarceration would create a huge captive workforce was anticipated long before the US prison population reached its peak—and at a time when the concept of “rehabilitation” was still considered part of the mission of prisons."

Are we finally admitting that that's no longer (never really was) a thing? Now maybe we can start to take responsibility for bolstering corporations that actively work to incarcerate people for profit?

How is this different than slavery? Oh, if they're paid $0.20/hr they're not slaves?

Edit: as pointed out below, the 13th Amendment says prisoners can be slaves. I hadn't considered it in that context.

And let's not forget that capitalism is people, not faceless, nameless machinery. Five people promised $82m between them had their greed overshadow anything else. This was spurred on by the greed of the board that would do anything to aggressively increase profits - but put the "how" on someone else for plausible deniability.

Greed is the part of capitalism that regulation stands in the way of. Too aggressively rid the system of regulation and greed will consume everything.

When I think of dams, I think of catastrophic failure which almost always ends in thousands of deaths. I think of how quickly untended dams will fail. I think of what kind of target a dam makes. I think of flooding and burying wilderness and wildlife and even towns like this.

I also think of hydro-electric power and water availability... but aren't there other ways to tackle those problems?

Are dams ever a good idea?

I don't know how people lose a child and come back from it. I say I can't imagine, but I do, and it terrifies me.

1. The two apps were probably reviewed by different people, and approvals from Apple have always been all over the place depending on the reviewer.

"The independent developers said getting approved with Google took less than one hour, while Apple’s denial came after an eight-hour wait."

2. 8 hour wait? Wow. I remember when the App Store had an 8 day review time. Let's keep in mind that Google rarely has a human review it's App submissions, Apple has a human review all of theirs, including updates.

In any case, the second half of this article is a Clinton hit piece, dropping all mention of apps and app stores and recounting again the Clinton emails story and focusing on negative reactions to it.

This was flagged and dead and should be again.

It's pride in work. Nothing wrong with that.

We use http://deploybot.com but there are many others.

I'm sure you meant that.

Edit: we host all our sites - main site, engineering blog, press kit, and so on using Cloudfront in front of S3, and not only is it all-the-way fast (which we get comment after comment on) but it's cheap as all getout. https://tech.flyclops.com/posts/2016-04-27-flyclops-sites-st...

So yes, he is in fact the textbook definition of a whistleblower.