bin0

This kind of thing sounds great on personal projects, but doesn't scale. Like many abstractions, frameworks' biggest benefit is (arguably) making it easier for teams to work together.

I'd guess this is less of a concern than the services people are accessing being slow. E.g. even though I've got FTTH, youtube is still sometimes slow to load the front page.

Cultural changes? How would you build those? The government doesn't control the culture. How would you make it unacceptable? Bureaucrats don't have direct control over that. Also, a bunch of "we need"s about the ideal situation don't do much.

The reason the China contained it is because she is an authoritarian state. While that provides certain advantages in this situation, it comes with certain drawbacks: not being able to access many websites, inability to express your political opinion, inability to own a firearm, being tossed in a concentration camp if the government doesn't like you. This isn't a question of leadership, you're asking the government to do things it literally has no power to do, things entirely outside of the constitution.

They really should have given some actual information, i.e. how the information was stored. I want to know what algorithm was used, not how "it was securely stored so people still can't take your money" or some other corporate-speak intended to mitigate the damage.

Copy-paste from another thread, cause it's still relevant.

Urban environments aren't really "nice". For all I hear about the joys of urban living, as espoused by others, I haven't enjoyed it much. Public transportation is crowded and smelly. Fat people take half of my seat (not nice to say, but I'm not sure how else to put it). Things are small, which for a taller guy like me, is pretty tough. As in, every thing is tiny. Living spaces, shops, streets. Streets often have trash strewn on them, and don't smell particularly good. I have to keep one hand on my wallet. Sometimes, hobos get aggressive. Not as much as an issue for me, but I'd hate to be a 4'9" lady. Keeping pets is hard. Cooking food is hard. I didn't have kids, but those I knew had a hard time with them. Things are very expensive. It's loud. There's a lot of traffic. Some times (all winter and some times in summer), it's bad weather for walking. I guess I shouldn't be complaining, since I at least didn't see much in the way of human feces. This is not to say there aren't up-sides. I like the food, and there are interesting people. It's also much easier to find certain things; for instance, a few major cities still have serious "maker shops" with tons of electronic components. Smaller ones or sub-urban areas often can't accommodate them, as they are in low enough demand that serious density is required.

I like sub-urban living and empty green space. I can hardly blame people for moving out, if it's viable. The above applies differently to different cities; some are better, some are worse, but all have most of these problems in the urban core. Considering how expensive it is to live in a city rather than a suburb (especially if you're talking a similar amount of land), I don't want to pay more for less.

I agree with you in principle one-hundred percent. However, at the time that was written, there was one key difference: entitlements. Once the government started taking on the burden of providing a safety net, we lost the ability to admit every one. This was somewhat mitigated in the twentieth century by the sponsor system, but this is gone now, too.

I wish we could let every one come here and make himself successful, but I don't foresee entitlement spending ever gong any where but down. I don't take the position of limiting immigration for idealistic reasons, but because there is a limit on how many resources we have.

It's my money, why do you think the gov't should get it early? You're coming at this from the wrong perspective.

DEF CON has a lot of informational talks where research is presented. Going to villages also sometimes gives you the opportunity to join a team and learn new stuff. Research is also presented at black hat (though not necessarily as much, it's more for "suits"). Shmoocon and bsides, too.

I'm not sure if this is more security-related, but many of the top security conferences have lots of useful stuff there.

Because they would have to spend years in court litigating whether or not that was slander. Consumers have also been shown to respond better to positive causes than negative ones, and a non-profit funded by these guys is better equipped to spin it as a positive "working for a better future" type thing than them all running "Amazon bad" ads.