king_phil

With the exception that MITM between cloudflare and the origin has been seen in the wild and documented and MITM on/in the heroku network has not.

I got an 2015 X1 carbon, too (used). I have dual boot with win10 and ubuntu xenial. Win10 was just for checking it out and occasionally remote server management (Juniper VPN/Junos Pulse is a nightmare on Linux).

Ubuntu works great despite some problems with the keyboard back light turning on automatically with newer, unsupported kernels.

I love how light the laptop is and the display (got the high res) is great.

Another thing that is just beautiful: the support. I got a pixel error on the display, opened a ticket with lenovo support and two days later a technician showed up at my place and changed the display (worth a few hundred bucks) in 10 minutes, let me verify that it was fixed and took off. And I was in a foreign country at that time. I loved it and tell everybody about this great experience. I don't think the apple store can even remotely compare to that.

edit: Oh, and the quick charge. THE QUICK CHARGE!! Only 10% battery left (still >1.5 hours) and 10 minutes near a power point? It will charge up to maybe 70-80% in that few minutes. If you travel a lot this is fantastic. Combined with deep sleep (laptop goes from standby to hibernate after a set amount of time, 3 hours for me, great if you don't know how much time before using the computer again) the battery was never a problem.

That means if I am a pastafarian (Google it if you don't know it - and yes, at least in Germany it is a approved religion) I can't put a noodle riddle on my head (because it is religious clothing for pastafarians) - or can NOBODY, just because it is religious clothing? And yes, you might not believe it, but in Germany there is a ruling that you are allowed to take your passport photo with a noodle riddle on your head because it is your religious headwear...

I think we should throw all this religion in the toilet and flush.

Siemens. They are building the plants, too.

I worry about TCP window scaling (and full TCP windows) when only using one TCP connection. There is a good reason download managers use multiple connections to download one file, because depending on the latency the maximum transfer rate is capped because only so many TCP packets can be in flight simultaneously. I wonder if nobody ever thought about that... HTTP1/x solved that (more by chance) with multiple connections...

I was thinking the same. Not only that, if you would add multiple networks that, for example, weigh the possibility that a full line is "good" code, and another that evaluates a whole block (like google deep mind did with AlphaGo) so it looks like dense and complex code this could be a nice program trolling with pull requests on github :-D

Seems to work great: https://theintercept.com/2016/07/12/after-dallas-shootings-p...

The definition of thoughtcrime is that it is punishable to think something. There is not a single German law that punishes a thought (if you found one, please cite immediately because every German citizen can appeal in the Federal Constitutional Court against it). There is one thing that you as a US citizen might never have heard of but is essential to German law: the "Erheblichkeitsschwelle" - meaning that a crime is only punishable if it has an significant effect (e.g. damage). A thoughtcrime can by definition not have an significant effect because it does not realize an action or forbearance.

Most people in this discussion seem not to know this, so you see that what these people (whose homes got raided) must have had a effect on the real world to be punishable.

Furthermore, in Germany if you get charged with something at first there is an investigation by the police. The result is handed over to the prosecutor who decides if there is going to be prosecution (first hurdle), then it is going to court. The judge first decides if the prosecution is even accepted(!!!) (second hurdle) and THEN there is a trial (third hurdle). So it is not like these people are put in jail just because there is an investigation.

I am seriously baffled by the comments that lack significant knowledge of that the hell this news mean.

"The German state" is a construct in form of a organization. The people who decide are forming the structure of this organization. The concrete people who are deciding who is punished are judges. As I already stated in this discussion, we employ "Gewaltenteilung" to separate judiciary, execute and legislative. So "the state" is not able to punish anybody, it is people who punish. And they do by the rules that are set for the judiciary, which are made by the legislative and carried out by the executive. The executive has a different set of rules than the legislative and they have a different set then the judiciary. These different sets of rules are each a corrective for potential abuse of power. There is no "state" punishing anybody, it is a set of rules made by people, carried out by people, watched by people. For somebody who broadcasts that free speech is the Holy grail you act like you don't tolerate no opinion besides your own. You're basically a fanatic and revealed your own colors.

I can't follow. How is this incident related to any genocide, dictatorship, erdogan... what?

I have the feeling you are just cherry picking this to troll on and not interested in talking about the different dogmatics of legal systems. I didn't want to personalize the discussion, just replace "you" and "me" with "any person from your belief system" and "any person from my belief system". It looks to me that you are not interested in thinking about other people's opinion and/or belief system. Now THAT was a personal remark.

I think a very important nuance here is that it is not enough to just tell other people to commit crimes against people from a religion/race/color/gender/..., it must be suitable (I have trouble translating here) to be effective in that matter. The reason is explicitly the human rights, because nobody should fear to be harmed because somebody told other people to harm people from a certain gender/race etc.

There are BTW other "Äußerungsdelikte" (statement offenses, free translation), like slander and deformation. All these are based on the human right that no harm should be inflicted on you because somebody says something wrong about you (in a very simplistic way, you normally would have a lots of hours of law lectures just on this offenses, their reasoning and distinction).

I don't necessarily argue that everything is right because it is the law, I argue that THIS exact law is right. It might not be for you, but it is for me. And seemingly not only for.me, but for a lot of people in this country. Otherwise there would be a (stronger) opposition to this law. I think we might have to recognize that the German culture is different from yours (US I suppose it is) and that we simply cannot expect to agree on everything. This might be because we are grown up in the system that protects us both adequately and we therefore think it is the best one, only because it is a adequate one. This goes both ways, e.g. you are right to think your system is better while I am right to think ours is. And exactly that tolerance is what I would like to not only see but DEMAND from other people. And I believe this exact law is right in a way that it makes it harder for people that don't recognize that all people are created and to be treated equal to express and propagate their beliefs. I think you could even find a similar or maybe exact same argument for your position. I respect that but hope you have other ways to ensure no one creates a climate of fear, hatred and violence (physical and non-physical) against people that are different. This law will not be everything the German culture sets against that climate but is one piece of our puzzle.

@frabbit exactly, but they did NOT yell "fire" but "open fire on the immigrants" (literally: in one instance the comment was posted beneath a picture of a immigrant child "you need a flamethrower to get rid of these bugs", with bugs might not be the best translation here) posted besides Nazi symbols.

At least for me, this makes a difference.

edit: I am going out on a limb here, but I thought exactly this was one of the purposes of RICO. Telling someone to commit a crime in a formed group is a crime and not free speech. I am a total amateur in US criminal code, is this understanding correct?

If you could indicate using Nazi symbols and calling to arms and self justice is free speech I would be happy to discuss further. I have a bit of a doubt that you grasp what the charge is.

I don't really think that calling to arms (in this case as self justice in combination with using Nazi symbols) is expression of free speech. It is totally okay that our understanding of free speech differs, but I just don't count that as free speech. And sympathizing with Nazis by using their symbols is not okay for me, too. I might be wrong, but in a lot of countries it might not be legal to call for self justice on a whole race.

You forget that in Germany we have "Gewaltenteilung", meaning that legislation, judiciary and executive are separated. This is a concept that is fundamental to our country and culture. If the law is not okay it is not in the power of the executive to change, not enforce or bend it. There is a separate process for it that must be invoked. (In this case) there seems to be no critical mass that calls for changing this particular law. And you can rest assured that we have a very active public discussion about changes to the criminal code right now, with thousands of people actively participating. As you might be better informed the me, could you please cite at least one instance of what these people or people in similar cases said/wrote that should NOT the punishable, but is under current law?

edit: citing the decision to allow prosecution of Böhmermann reveals how little you understand the German legal system. The article is misleading at best and not covering the legal grounds and background correctly at all.

It is more than stupid shit, it is illegal stupid shit. Please read (edit: replaced, was "the") the German legal code. From your argument it would be better not to pursue crime just because you might "(to) get more physical radicalism"? That is clearly not justice.

I am pro EU AND pro Brexit, the latter from rational analysis. It will be a net win for me. My company does export telco services to the UK. After the UK leaving the EU the VAT will not apply any longer, so basically I net 20% more after taxes that go straight out of the pocket of the UK government into mine (btw: there is no competitor right now and none in sight...). Even if the UK is imposing the 4% max tariff I would net a 16% plus.

A lot of the UK government's money is spent on stupid stuff, too. And big businesses. Badum tzzz...

I hear a voice when I read, and I just need a few seconds of concentration to change it to another voice. I can choose voices that seem to fit the content in energy level, general way of speaking and accent and do that a lot. But they never speak to me when I am not reading.

I realized just now that it is my brain reading me a story and I listen to the voice that reads it to me like a fascinated kid.

Anyone with an idea how well Google Cloud DNS handles DDoS? I would image it just sucks it up, because they already saw any DDoS volume (would it be any or every, I'm not a native speaker?) before.

The responsible server administrator who stole the data from the bank has been sentenced to prison in Switzerland and fled. The second crime was committed by the German officials, but none of both has anything to do with swiss legal standards.

As a german I can say that "Stoff" has different meanings. It can be used like cloth, but in other contexts it is used like material. For example there is "Stoffkunde" which it the study (Kunde) of materials (Stoffe). "Lesestoff" is reading (lesen) material.

Why would one use "git add -p" instead of "git add -i"?

Some people realized that years ago, others still don't. It is a shame but Merkel is very popular, especially with older people that don't understand the implications of the NSA scandal.

I always wonder how easily scientists (and journalists) fall for the correlation vs. causality trap. It looks like that scientific community lost the critical thinking. I always think the other way around when I read a "scientific" study and ask (in this case): "Do people with higher life satisfaction earn more money?" (=the cause of the better earnings is the satisfaction, not the other way around). Without reading the study it's impossible to tell that the researchers ruled this out, but it is imaginable that this is the case, too.

And it could be that there is a factor that is invisible to the study (maybe... IQ, height of the person, shoe size, ...?) that influences BOTH.