Re: AKA Libertarians
thumbscrews and quick release!
188 posts • joined 6 Jul 2009
This is what's holding everything back.
The human sla is extremely low.
The error factor on teslas sla is likely higher than that figure.
So to make autom deaths + error less than human deaths requires autom deaths to be unrecognisable from zero.
AP teslas are safe enough, its a statistics problem
so if amazon are taking thier tax and using it to replace wages
eg:- anyone in the lowest bracket would cost amazon £1250 to increase thier take home pay by £1000
pay them in shares and it cost amazon £790
The top rate earners would cost £1818
they bought £17.3 million off man hours at least 63.2% the market cost.
those share purchases also put upwaard pressure on the share price, increasing thier borrowing and decreasing rate(even if minor)
forcing staff to not sell for 3 years also stablises the share price, an effective anti-short off your own stocks.
Since Amazons owners pay themself from share sales, profits is for tax paying losers.
isnt that too many black holes.
85% black holes?
You wouldn't be able to move for the buggers(in a very literal way)
Im an ocrams razor guy but i think the test-tube jugglers have missed somthing really obvious and its to do with the Lyman-alpha forest.
Good intentions, bad execution.
Im just about to exit this phone.
1)their choice off gorilla glass was great but then cutting a hole in it and leaving the burred edge exposed was ultimately going to result in a cracked screen. 3 days into ownership.
2)making the battery removable but not selling a replacement battery......What can I say!!!
3)Made worse by the fact only special deep usb connector would stay in securely. Many a late wakeup has been the result, and dieing 5 minutes before a motorway junction as the usb connector had come free was my last issue(1 hr late into a new office)
4)changing the boot screen from black to white, meaning i now needed 5% charge before I could turn on the phone as the boot process drained so much power it powered straight off again.
or part off a botnet that will never get swatted. remember this is INVISIBLE to the os.
There could be infection out there as we speak, if they keep thier cpu load low nowbody will ever know.
An undectectable, full admin,network able, reinstall proof, full access bug,
All this is missing is remote injection.......Currently...i suspect badusb will get recruited for that duty somhow,
and remember, if your machine is comprised in another way the firmware could be rolled back.
So thiers nothing three contracts here.
the GPLv2, the modified GRSEC patch contract and the Gr sec supply contract.
The issue is the supply contract is supplied with the caveat that it will end WHEN you distribute the patch.
But it cannot end before then, if you say im going to take this patch and distribute it, they STILL have to give it to you. So the patch contract does not prevent you distributing it.
If the supply contract works otherwise, it inhibits GPLv2
Of course you could argue that the fact you have a contract with and end date. that can be cancelled before hand is an inhibiting factor.
Think this may come down to what the definition of future business.
Are contracted but unfulfilled future patches classed as future business? im pretty sure its not ,being agreed in the past.
I take it nobody is distibuting these patched kernels? cant see that being possible under the two agreements.
This is a variation Of what I do, except its simpler and done in my head.
To get my (for example)Bank password the need to.
A)get my bank hash and guesstimate an apparently random 11+ digit password.
1.get at least two other sets off hashes, (they prob have my old yahoo and linked in )
2. guesstimate two different apparently random 11+ digit password,
3. take those two passwords and try and work out what my "internal algorithm"
4. Find my banking username and generate my bank password.
5. do this before my rolling password resets complete(About 2 years)
remember related but not the same is as far as hashing is concerned completely different.
The way I see it I trust NO-ONE with my hashes now and assume them all vulnerable to guestimating.
so if A) is "secure enough" for me then the B step 2 x B step 2 difficulty is secure enough for me.
Remeber you cant outrun the (fancy)bear, you just need to outrun the other internet users.
(eg your password just needs to be hard enough to take too long to guesstimate, and as your banking password only need to be twice as hard to crack just make it ONE digit longer)
Im going to have spend millions spinnning up production..are you sure?
And you will buy it?
Ok that will be £500.
Wha...I have to actully pay for it....I mean if it was free id defo have one...but PAY for it!
Thats why KS works....it full off amazing ideas that i would back...if only i didnt have to risk any money.
Couldn't you just ask the defendant after you coach them.
"What your opinion of the evidence against you."
Def:"the IPA section 55 prevents me from answering this question truthfully"
In fact you could USE this as a defence even in cases where there are no evidence collected under IPA since denial that it was collected under IPA cant be gurenteed to be true DUE TO THIS LAW.
Once somebody gets off by answering this. I could see this law being removed pretty sharpish.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020