rdxm

Privacy is a much larger topic than Google. The point I am making is that it's a bit past disingenuous to hold forth on a topic when you are not an honest broker in the overall topic itself..

Find the down votes interesting though...heh...

Sorry, but who can take The Guardian, and by extension the NYT seriously while they are sitting on a bunch of the Snowden material? Whining about Google when you are withholding the stuff on privacy that really matters due to a lack of moral courage is weak-sauce...

Does anyone honestly believe that the current administration which has: 1) doubled down on the Bush admins attack on the Fourth Amendment; 2) attacked the 1st Amendment directly (something even Bush/Ashcroft didn't do..) and 3) run what is an arguably similar program in its moral and ethical ambiguity(Drone strikes) to the interrogation techniques; would even think about going after the previous administration!?!? Give me a break, that's beyond laughable.

This piece by the Times is about what you'd expect from an organization that has lost its grip on reality. What's worse is that people actually pay attention to the Times at this point. Sadly, what we lack in this country is an honest journalistic broker that can objectively communicate about the political realities we have in front of us and our shortcomings as a nation and an electorate.

Here's the thing, all of us that vote (and those that don't), are responsible for the mess in D.C.. The people that inhabit the beltway are simply taking advantage of our apathy and incompetence as an electorate..nothing more, nothing less...it's up to us, as the electorate, to purge our government of the latent corruption and decay that has come to permeate that town. Until we take up that charge in a meaningful way, we can't even have a discussion about topics such as this, it's just a waste of time..

Seems to me ingesting any chemical compound cooked up in an unknown/uncontrolled environment, whether that enviro is the design or manufacturing side of things makes you an active seeker of the Darwin Award.

What's irritating is the expense of public resources bailing people out of the pursuit of the Darwin Award. Of course the same could be said for smoking, consumption driven obesity, excessive alcohol intake, etc.

The comment here regarding personal accountability sums it. I suspect if the financial disincentive is high enough on any one of these topics, people will deselect participation in said activity. Otherwise society will (or should) deselect them as beneficiaries of resources, etc..harsh, but what other practical course of action is there?

yes, there are scenarios where you are limited by the terrain, bad guys, etc w.r.t. routes from the IP to target, and the only way to get suppression onto the necessary locations is shooting over the IP to target route.

A10 pilots are bit of a different breed and I didn't have to ask twice to get them to do it they were pretty game.

granted this was right after we got back from first gulf-war and so for those of us that had been there this was just run of the mill stuff. i don't know if things are more safety focused now, probably are...

it comes down to this: you should be training like you are gonna have to fight (i.e. in real world you won't always have the luxury of having suppression assets perfectly positioned.

and yes, I am blowing a little shit at my brothers in the air wing side of the house but, everything in the Marine Corps exists to support the infantry (that's why MC pilots wear cammo covers on their helmets), and frankly I was disappointed at the time they didn't have a go at it...

as an Infantry Marine, I can tell you unequivocally that when it comes to fast movers, the A10 is the only platform you really want covering your ass in a tight situation.

It is mind blowing to many of us that the USMC didn't buy up all of these things when the Air Force wanted to dump them. Yeah, yeah they can't fly off a carrier. So what. What they can do is hang in there when bullets are flying, loiter for a fairly long time and fly low and slow enough to actually see what's going on on the ground...(yeah, that 30MM gatling gun is pretty handy too..heh)

Side note: the only pilots that ever allowed us to shoot 81mm suppression over the top of the ingress routes to target when training to run CAS were the ANG A10 guys. All the active duty fast movers weren't game, and that included the MC Harrier pilots....

Here's the 64k dollar question. If Snowden hadn't dropped the dime on the douchebaggery going on not just at NSA, but also w.r.t. the complicity/cooperation by all the biggies(Google, FB, MS, etc), would MS be doing this?

I assert that the answer is clearly a big No....anyone else agree with me??

One can only hope our friends at UHC are undergoing a proper procto-scoping by the regulators at this point.

As for the reporting side of this (note I did not use the word 'Journalism'...)..this is the quality level that has become the standard in the world of junk news. One must have the sensationalism in the title to get the click...that's it. The actual quality of the content is pretty much irrelevant..

every now and then i go into the library and read a chapter out of my hardcover set of these. my kids do the "geeez dad" thing when i make them sit with me and look at them.

classics.. to be sure....

edit: i almost feel like these shouldn't be something that gets digitized.....this knowledge and its presentation belongs in a tactile medium...

holy crap...before everyone spooges all over themselves and this guy mike. might it not be a good idea to step back and understand what it means to turn the ship at the federal level!?!?!?!

it's embarrassing enough that someone in the HHS thought they had even a remote clue about delivering technology at scale, but seriously, does anyone really think that much has changed!?!?

it's super cool that a few more than 10 or 15 folks can sign up for a federal service at one time, but does that have any relevance at all to real change?

short answer: no. as in hell no....as in fuck no....

if you vote for someone with an R or a D after their name you are a part of the problem not a part of the solution...in particular, if you bail out an empty suit like obama or bush, you are also a part of the problem, not a part of the solution...

yes, i know what the acronym is, that was a typo.

even if they only are going to function as what's referred to in HIPAA as the "Business Associate" standard, if you really dig into it they'll essentially need the same level(s) of control as a straight-up HIPAA compliant business would. that is if they want to be in a defensible position when they get breached...

additionally, the reason that I mentioned ISO 27001, is that it's not just HIPAA, it's also all of the other controls both internal and external you must have in place. if your assertion is that they have sec dialed because their site is SSL enabled, well, that's frankly a little scary and somewhat naive.

how can you even consider launching a service like this without being fully audited for HIPPA and ISO 27001. all i see on their site is boiler plate sec that in no way addresses the reality of the business domain they want to operate in.

you'd be insane to put your data into something like this without those controls in place. moreover, they are asking for serious regulatory trouble launching without it.

this one business challenge that will not be solved in the valley. this problem will eventually be solved by the large industry players in insurance and hospital management in a model similar to that of the DTCC..

Sorry, but I don't see how yet another attempt at an abstraction layer on top of the existing protocol is even remotely interesting.

It's time to move on from email as it exists in its current form, and towards a new fundamentally secure persistent messaging model(whatever that ends up being).

Ever wonder why there are not 100 different exchanges out there providing services to the equities/options/bond markets??? Simple, it's fairly costly and complicated to 1) meet regulatory requirements, 2) achieve a level of liquidity/transaction volume to make the exchange viable, and 3) take business away from the incumbents...

moreover, as soon as you attach the word 'exchange' to your service you immediately set an expectation in the consumers mind that you will provide a similar level of service/liquidity as that which they would receive if they were working with a real exchange operator.

coinbase currently lists a team which has zero experience in the exchange operations world. the closest they come is a guy who did some foreign exchange trading at GS.

net-net they have a looooooong way to go to get to being a viable exchange in the traditional sense of the word. and that's before you get to the whole topic of whether or not bitcoin is really something that will be a viable exchange model asset. that has yet to be tested outside of a very, very small base (relatively) of ecosystem participants..

too true. i'm being forced to do this to my team at another very large tech company. the large data-set curve approach is completely toxic in small teams that are destroying themselves to meet crazy goals.

The average user has no idea just how broken email is w.r.t. the concept of secure and private communication. Google's entire business is built on this broad ignorance. So for that matter is the the internet ecosystem in general if you expand the concept of use of data to include tracking of site access patterns, etc.

Moreover, it's certainly not in SV's vested interests (regardless of recent protestations to the contrary by google, facebook, etc) to see secure mail become the standard, and by extension to broadly educate and move the consuming public to a mindset of security first.

All of that said, the average end-user is/would be befuddled figuring out the use of shared pub keys, the web of trust concept, and in moreover, PKI in the bigger picture.

And even if you could get broad use of pgp going for message payload privacy/security, you don't solve the problem of metadata if you are using the current email protocol.

It's long past time for a new persistent messaging protocol that addresses metadata leakage and payload security comprehensively. There are people working on this now. Hopefully that will drive some positive steps forward on this issue.

when you run over a pedestrian or cyclist because you are distracted, I suspect the outcome will be significantly more costly, like life-altering. The data on distracted driving is incontrovertible. If you can't bear to be without your g-glass, take the bus...

i like this post/article/statement. it reminds me that as technologists we tend to want to reduce things to algorithms.

that just doesn't work when you get to aesthetics and the human side of the equation.