a1a

"Tool of your trade": I have no use of python 3, nor do I have any use for Scala, Perl, or whatever. These could all be considered "tools of my trade".

I rarely write anything high language besides small scripts. Python 2 does the job. If I ever were to need functionality of another language, great, it's fun to learn something new. Our time is limited and we must prioritize. Sadly we cannot invest time to learn everything (well I guess it's possible, but I rather be awesome in four languages than mediocre in twenty).

On the other hand, if you are comfortable with Python 2, it will do the job, and you know it will be supported for a foreseeable future, why bother learning Python 3?

I assume there is a good answer for switching to Python 3, but I honestly don't know (haven't bothered to do any research though).

Harshly put: I care about getting my python script working as soon as possible and for a foreseeable future - I couldn't care less for the Python language and it's future.

"Truly unlimited number of keys"

What data type would you use to store such a key? My guess is that it wouldn't be much bigger than 2048 bits after being implemented. Besides, key length is a terrible metric for measuring security.

Indeed. Related advice, also from Schneier: "Anyone, from the most clueless amateur to the best cryptographer, can create an algorithm that he himself can't break. It's not even hard."

How do you encrypt the hard drives?

I wouldn't trust some keys that had been lying around on an unencrypted hard drive for 1,2,10 years!

The difference is that I need to trust over two billion people [1] not to disable my fire alarm. It's rather fallacious to compare this number with the number of bus drivers I interact with.

[1] http://phys.org/news/2011-01-internet-users-worldwide-billio...

This is quite beyond my knowledge, I like the Wittgenstein philosophy, but I would still argue:

You cannot calculate S^(x+1)(0) before the result of S^x(0) is known.

To calculate S^6(0) you start by calculating S(0) ----> It's not possible to "identify S^6(0) with 6" if you haven't calculated S(0) first, because you cannot know S^6(0) at this point.

Thank you, I didn't know you could prove that!

I believe my disagreement was specifically about this (quoted):

> In principle a computer can correctly recognize 2 apples as

> being 2 apples without knowing anything about addition and

> without being able to recognize 1 apple.

I have a hard time seeing this. If I am not mistaken again, there is no definition of the symbol 2 that does not include addition. The proof above doesn't really prove this either as Peano's axiom rely on the definition of "successor". Successor definition: "a+1 is the successor of a".

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/PeanosAxioms.html

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Successor.html

Can you please translate that to mathematics? My request was regarding a formal mathematical proof.

>There is no popular set of axioms where 1+1=2 is taken as an axiom - it is always proven.

I would love to see a proof of 1+1=2. For example in the case of elliptic curves, as far as I know addition is simply an axiom. E.g. A+A'=0=inf , where inf is the point at infinity and A' is the reflection of A.

Math is not related to nature. Try to reason your way to matrix multiplication with apples: A * B != B * A

Google did fuck up Android (privacy wise).

(1) Requirement of a Google account (i.e. forced correlation of your phone with youtube, google searches, google analytics, google ... ), (2) Ever checked those privileges on the default applications - that you can't disable or remove? Why are those closed-source by the way?, (3) Search the web for more examples.

Either way, I agree that I made an assumption - but - this is kinda related: http://bgr.com/2014/03/06/facebook-android-app-permissions/

Crowd funding is not only about money. Your funders also invest emotions into the project. I am mad, I think others will be as well. To quote Notch[1]: "And I did not chip in ten grand to seed a first investment round to build value for a Facebook acquisition."

[1] http://notch.net/2014/03/virtual-reality-is-going-to-change-...

Apples and oranges: Notch is made $100 million, just in 2012 [1].

That being said - I am truly thankful that he is taking a stand, I certainly hope others will follow. Either way, Zuckerberg will learn his lesson; you do not fuck up a crowd-funded project.

[1] http://venturebeat.com/2013/02/01/minecrafts-notch-on-earnin...

Nobody did. Well, besides this guy http://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/1wf6mg/so_no_way_to_...

Say that to Elon Musk. Imagine the inventors using this money in the same way Musk did. If they do (or at least try) I'd say humanity comes out on top - even though this killed our dream of VR in the near future.

The same one: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Linux_Distribution_T...

Not able to find source though. Anyone?

Edit: More info http://futurist.se/gldt/, still no source though.

Don't get me wrong, Bill is awesome, but still:

(1) Exploration of space today will some day save everybody's lives.

(2) Driving Teslas with energy from Solar city will postpone that day.

My opinion is that you forgot the biggest concern; "Google sued for data-mining students' email" is another post on HN today.

The features presented (est. time to work based on my route, etc) is not data I want to be present in googles dataset.

On the other hand these wearables are pretty great in this sense, for the first time you are the customer (usually the businesses buying ads are).

Let's try this one again, from the start:

It's sexism if a human being[1] is being mistreated, harassed, or "labeled" because of their gender[2].

It's perhaps easier to understand from analogy[3], take a look at racism[4] and see if you can find any similarities.

Feel free to ask any question if something is still unclear.

[1] https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_being

[2] https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender

[3] https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analogy

[4] https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism

I don't believe this story is on "male behavior" nor an attack on every male in the world. It's an story on predators that happen to be male (and female for that matter).

Your answer is kind of what I expected: You believe sexism is an attack on men, and therefore need to be on the defense.

This again. Every time someone speaks out about sexism there seems to be a need for some to defend the predators (directly or by declaring that "this is not sexism"). Why do you feel obligated to do so?

> all Tesla Model S vehicles are capable of over-the-air updates to upgrade the software, just like your phone or computer

It's an interesting future. We are approaching the age of malware infected cars. Does anyone have more info about what the limitations of this internet connected system is? What is possible if someone roots my car?

- Can they disable security system?

- Unlock the car? Lock me out of the car?

- Feed false data (slow destruction of car)? Feed false speed-data? False directions?

- Obtain the cars whereabouts?

- Disable breaks (would assume not)?

Some ideas from Michio Kaku: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLcEYbAdyxk (goto 5:13)

Indeed. I would like to add that the initial response was most likely automated (looks kinda generic). Kinda makes me want to send a dummy email and see if I get a similar response as fast.

But in all fairness, 7 days is still acceptable. It's far from "best ever", but compared to others it's still great.

Your entire argument is based on the false assumption that foreign aid cannot be executed correctly. I would assume we have learned a thing or two since that 50 year old example took place.

It might still make economical sense to hire a gunship to protect the "droneships" while passing high-risk areas.

Besides, take some of the money saved on salaries and use it for foreign aid to countries such as Somalia and you'd have stopped piracy before you know it.

Indeed. This is one of the big problems with today's "save-all-the-data" mentality.

The general consensus is that there's no point removing data - since disk space is basically free ($0.05/GB) [1] and hey, we might need it later on.

[1] http://www.statisticbrain.com/average-cost-of-hard-drive-sto...

1. I guess nothing is certain - but even if they are a complete hoax they still can't correlate searches with my other data (mobile, mail, documents, http header data from javascript api calls on basically every site I visit, ....). This correlation is something other search engines explicitly state that they will do.

2. You don't know that.

His foundation makes a big "profit" by getting rid of these [1] myths. By "profit" I mean lives saved and/or enhanced. What better way of getting rid of myths than publicity?

[1] http://annualletter.gatesfoundation.org/

Are they seriously recommending the usage of unsalted md5?

Edit: Oh, the article is from 2009 (I'd say it was bad practice even back then though).

I would say they lost me even before that, the website won't even load without javascript.

Besides if they can't even have a website that are not tracking me and sharing my info with 3d parties (i.e. Google-analytics, Cloudfont, and Amazon Web Services), how could I ever trust their product/app?