patzerhacker

Because of injury or potential for injury. The team wants Kobe Bryant healthy and on the court, so wants to limit excessive practice to avoid reinjury or new injury.

>But claiming someone has privilege isn't a value judgement on the person, or a sin...Saying someone has privilege is just pointing out the state of the world, it isn't a judgment.

That is exactly the same argument that bigots use when they talk about {minorities, poor people, immigrants, LGBT people}. "That person fits into category X, and everyone in category X shares some characteristic Y because they're in that category. I'm just saying that because it's true!" It doesn't matter who that generalization is made about, whether they're the dominant group in society or not. It's still a terrible generalization and an intellectually lazy argument and in and of itself carries a judgement. If you grant that something like "white privilege" or "male privilege" exists (and most people that buy into the concept do) then by that logic a homeless, illiterate white man has more privilege than a black woman millionaire CEO.

>People without food allergies have privilege in that they don't have to constantly worry whether what they eat will kill them.

That's absolute nonsense as well. There exist people without food allergies that have other conditions where they constantly have to worry about what they eat, diabetes being an example. So check your cis-gylcemic privilege you fascist!/s Do you see how ridiculous and divisive that sounds?

Privilege is just secular "original sin".

An idea for NetFlix would be to have a higher tier package that has access to content for longer. So if the average agreement for access to material is six months, people with the higher tier package have access to it for six months and people without it have access for four months. Higher tier customers get it a month early and a month after it rotates out for lower tier customers.

>Piracy fails the "what if everyone was doing it?" test.

Yup, which is why TV didn't exist before pay TV, because if everyone viewed content for free over the air then it would be massively unprofitable. Oh, wait...

The UK also has iPlayer, which is worth the VPN subscription fee I pay every month to use it.

He's gonna take you back to the past....(NSFW links ahead)

TNMT: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XjUz8IT0CYg Double Dragon 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMg6_IXCjo4 Silver Surfer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvnRBywkUZ0

>if only Nintendo would allow it

You could easily teach a course on it. Have the students purchase a GBA flash linker and GBA and then teach the course. The students can flash their GBA games into the flash linkers, and you make the term project a completed game.

Unless you're white and male, and then you'll be accused by the radical fringe as wanting to rape everything you come across and kill everyone not like you.

Better be careful posting this. You don't want to be labeled by Matthew Garrett as a rape apologist[0].

[0] http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/18505.html?thread=693321

>Do you really think Google or Yahoo would just say, "No, we don't care about being in Firefox/Iceweasel's default search list"?

Given that they haven't freely licensed their images and this has been an issue for some time I'm going to have to say the answer is "yes" because Firefox/Iceweasel download the missing images on startup.

>Even satellite links can be altered, either you hack the satellite system or you intercept the signal at a higher altitude than the receiver is operating in.

Or, if the case of total war, you blow the freaking satellites out of space with missiles. Yes, I know space weapons systems are technically banned, but how long do you think a nation like the US, Russia, India, or China would put up with satellite controlled autonomous drones running roughshod over their sovereign territory before they just blow the satellites out of space?

>There is zero reason for a search engine to restrict such use (and distribution).

Because these logos depict their trademarked images, and the licensing that they'd offer would likely not allow use for any purpose. Debian's social policy requires that everything included in their distribution be freely licensed for any use.

>copyright and trademark are poor excuses - if the search engine wants to be in the default set of search tools provided by the browser, they can trivially authorize the redistribution of a a simple icon

Debian's policy does not allow them to accept "special dispensation" for copyright and trademark permission - either everyone has to get it or Debian can't accept. This is part of why Iceweasel was split from Firefox in the first place:

Per the Debian social contract:

>License Must Not Be Specific to Debian

>_The rights attached to the program must not depend on the program's being part of a Debian system._ If the program is extracted from Debian and used or distributed without Debian but otherwise within the terms of the program's license, all parties to whom the program is redistributed should have the same rights as those that are granted in conjunction with the Debian system.

That's not entirely accurate. You do get updates, they're just on the patch branch. See http://www.openbsd.org/errata57.html.

Running -stable is fairly simple. If you don't want to rebuild on your DigitalOcean VPS, cut a new release after an update locally, and then apply it on your VPS. See http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq5.html#Release. This should be fairly simple to automate (and you could even write a script that only packages up changed files if you were so inclined).

That's unlikely given that Saint Reagan was a movie star.

In my undergrad CS class we had to write a small RDBMS using the techniques learned in class and then had to dive into the internals of Postgres. It remains my favorite class taken during my undergrad, followed closely by the graduate level computer graphics course I was able to take.

This is what happens when you try to make art as games instead of games as art. Art doesn't have to be fun. Games do.

>Neither of which are skills that have anything to do with language.

Because nothing says "monoculture" and "single language" like scientists from all over the world converging outside Geneva to build the world's biggest atom smasher!

I would rather they raise the price of the service than have them add ads. Is that what you mean?

I also wouldn't have a problem with it if they made these optional to help you "find" new Netflix content. It was already bad enough they were splashing their series at the top of my list, and now they want to add ads for it?

What's to stop your card being intercepted and replaced by a three letter agency when it's shipped. That's why a physical store with tamper seals is useful, or better yet when something is manufactured locally - then you can check before you buy.

It's a good thing. If the take-away from my post was that it wasn't then I'm sorry for not conveying that more up front.

Again, I'm responding to the grand-parent post that said this would be good for abuse victims. It's not all that great, but that doesn't mean it's useless.

Again, the big problem for abuse victims is getting the shellac beat out of them for disobeying their abuser. This encryption does nothing to enable an abuse victim to switch on notifications as the (now grand-)parent post I was responding to was insinuating - abusers on that level don't care what the message says. They are going to interpret any message they can't read as a message that goes against 'their rules'.

That's not really what I'm taking issue with.

The parent to my post mentioned that this was a win for people with "overbearing parents" or an "abusive spouse". My response is that the message From field still says that this message is from Facebook, and the subject line apparently says "Encrypted Notification from Facebook". So this is not really a win for someone with overbearing parents or abusive spouses because sufficiently overbearing or abusive people will be on the lookout for any communication from Facebook and will assume the mere fact that the message is encrypted is a sign that it's something they would disapprove of.

That is no way meant to say that the feature is useless, rather that the parent to my post is mistaken about who this feature is useful for. More useful would be an option to have the notification message come from somewhere innocuous - to otherwise make it look like spam. If it did, the PGP encryption would allow the recipient to pick it out of the spam and make sense of it while not alerting others to the fact that it's a message from Facebook.

If someone is suffiently abusive and paranoid then the distinction is meaningless - they will assume that any notification they can't read is one they don't approve of, and somebody in that situation wouldn't benefit from encrypted notifications. They likely wouldn't have notifications on at all, so encrypting them doesn't make them safe to use in this situation.

That doesn't make encrypted notifications useless in general or otherwise bad, but it's an oversell to say this makes them useful for abuse victims. In fact, selling it that way is dangerous given a sufficiently abusive and motivated adversary as it's false security.

But it does nothing to hide that it is a facebook notification or that it is from facebook because the envelope information is still unencrypted. So the 'From' address and subject are still in the clear, which doesn't prevent overbearing parents and abusive spouses from knowing you received a notification - only from reading the contents of that notification.

Why are we arguing about whether the author is feminist when we really should be arguing if she's a true Scotsman.

Prosecutors have wide discretion in whether or not to charge people. Perhaps they should exercise that discretion.

Or even when the answer is going to be yes? Snowden shouldn't need a pardon for what he's done. Any federal prosecutor that would even consider laying charges should be removed from office immediately.

It's times like this that really make me miss Groklaw.