crumblan

6 ms·

1.
by crumblan 13y ago
Surely the TOR protocol is equivalent encryption to SSL/TLS and thus only the exit node or one with the exit node's private key can read any traffic for the hidden service?
2.
by crumblan 13y ago
It body snatched the octopus and is now wearing it like a skin in search of more prey.
3.
by crumblan 13y ago
I thought the purpose of TechCrunch was content farming and search engine spamming for startups they have a vested interest in.
4.
by crumblan 13y ago
> didn't want to rely on anyone except ourselves. And the remarkably secure telecom system, of course. Google's style of 2FA is IMO technologically superior in that there is no communication after the initial seed. It also appe
5.
by crumblan 13y ago
Arbitrary changes? But then how can we ensure that you are charged the proper price for tethering bandwidth versus phone bandwidth? How can we ensure you are paying the right price to blacklist phone numbers? My goodness what if you remove
6.
by crumblan 13y ago
The rest of the magazine would be like, "patio11's dos and don'ts of summer SEO", "can lisp trim your application's waistline?", and "infosec schadenfreude! how to protect your app". viz., HN.
7.
by crumblan 13y ago
My favorite title of all time is Tim Ferriss's "How to Learn but not Master any Language in 1 Hour". All others are merely vying for disingenuous second place. I guess it is all about marketing your blog posts.
8.
by crumblan 13y ago
That's not what you asked, you asked "would you be happy".
9.
by crumblan 13y ago
You are not correct on this one. Intent is greatly meaningful in life and under the law. Commercial intent with a derivative work is not inevitable, nor is their growth inevitable.
10.
by crumblan 13y ago
They define terrorist pretty loosely anyway, so it'd be hard for all "terrorists" to be totally unaffected by the leaks, thus making their statement "true" or, rather, least untrue.
11.
by crumblan 13y ago
It's infringement and it's fine that the content owners send out their C&D's. I doubt there is any malice, though. I seems more like they just loved the game and want it to continue in some form than they are trying to ge
12.
by crumblan 14y ago
I think you meant to write > Unless you're interested in startups (that Arrington has a personal stake in) generally. > Or if you want to learn about new companies (that Arrington has a personal stake in). et cetera.
13.
by crumblan 14y ago
Unless I am mistaken, they won't let you do two-factor auth at all unless you put a phone number first.
14.
by crumblan 14y ago
As you say, I did mean preferred stock. You caught me before my edit :) I still stand by the assertion that investors are looking for something different than the typical employee. It seems to be a large risk for a large reward; I don't wan
15.
by crumblan 14y ago
Mark each arena with the last time something was collected from it and just skip sweeping old pages until X cycles have passed? Just thinking out loud... that check wouldn't save time for half-pages of old objects.
16.
by crumblan 14y ago
Unless the OP will be getting a significant portion of preferred stock (viz. it won't be clawed back and it will receive money in the exit), I doubt that evaluating the company as an investor would is a good idea. Piggybacking on the YC fil
17.
by crumblan 14y ago
Brilliant, I'll have to look at it again.
18.
by crumblan 14y ago
I use neither Windows nor IE, but I am assuming it's set as a preference and not installed as an extension.
19.
by crumblan 14y ago
Fair enough, but I had an edge case where I wanted to use Pentadactyl, and it kept using the branded search as default no matter how I tried to tweak the settings. I eventually got rid of it, but it was infuriating for me that there was no
20.
by crumblan 14y ago
I eventually got it, but I did end up doing the registry and mucking out some bits in /etc. Then I figured, "hey, I haven't tried Debian yet." So that's probably my next step... but it's looking like if you want it done right you're going t
21.
by crumblan 14y ago
I know, but I wanted Google, and I found it difficult to remove the branded search and switch to basic Google. It's not a ridiculous complaint, I just think if they are willing to treat their users like that it will only get worse in the fu
22.
by crumblan 14y ago
It is a source of funding, which would be fine with me, but it was also basically unusable, and it would give me weird results that I didn't get on regular Google. I also had a bit of trouble removing it. So bad experience for me overall. E
23.
by crumblan 14y ago
I tried Mint for the same reason, and this search default really soured me on it. I didn't find it easy to remove, either. Just wanted to warn others.
24.
by crumblan 14y ago
I did not find it trivial to remove the package, and changing my default provider didn't work for whatever reason.
25.
by crumblan 14y ago
For anyone thinking of trying Mint; they will install customized search engines in your Firefox and Chromium, it is a shit experience, and it is irritating to remove or avoid. I would suggest you do not use Mint if you plan on doing any
26.
by crumblan 14y ago
In the US it is not against the law (yet) to download but it is a copyright violation to share.
27.
by crumblan 14y ago
This should not be a tax. The industries involved are already buying unjust laws from Congress, none of us needs Congress giving them more money to do so.
28.
by crumblan 14y ago
Well done, lads, you've brought invasion of privacy to a whole new level.
29.
by crumblan 14y ago
Yeah, there's a continuum of don't want > I'll take it > I'd pay for it
30.
by crumblan 14y ago
I came here to post this. The only way you could possibly have anonymous visual interactions on the internet without penises would probably be to create a "show us your penis" website, it would get trolled by people posting cats or somethin

More ›