Oh I see. I don't disagree with you point then, but the context here is 'immortal works' and that's definitely strongly correlated with the popularity of the work. 'Immortal work' ~= 'still popular long in the future'
Huh? If you're going to write a book, for other people to read, you ultimately want people to understand and recognize your ideas/the point of your work. It has nothing to do with morality.
It's not going to be linear though. 1750 cal per day ~= 73 cal per hour. If, for example, you're already in a calorie deficit for the day, and then do a nice hour long workout (or demanding mental work), you're going to…
100%
Because the body can only extract so much energy per minute from all of the fat in your body. If that's not enough, muscle is used, etc.
You do you champ.
> You are so sure you’re right that you are not really thinking about what I am saying, and how it applies to real world situations- especially things like real life high stakes life or death situations. Nah, you're…
> They are absolutely complementary, and implementing a real world secure system will layer both- one starts with a mathematically secure heavily publicly audited system, and adds obscurity in their real world…
> Instead of, for example in your last example simply labeling something you seem to not like as "laughably weak"- do you have any specific reasoning? 'without security updates for a decade or longer' - do I really need…
> You're mis-representing my examples by shifting the context, Specific example of where I did this? > literally gives the same examples to two of the main ones I mentioned at the very top of the article as key examples…
Nah, you have no idea what you're talking about.
> where secrecy and marketing hype is used to attempt to conceal the flaws. That's literally the practical basis of security through obscurity. > Others, like my comment above, are talking about systems carefully…
> Security though obscurity is highly effective. If you say so. > Think of some common sense physical analogies: a hidden underground bunker is much less likely to be robbed than a safe full of valuables in your front…
Security by insecurity is also 'widely deployed and often effective'.
> to a large extent, it's directly because of hardware based privacy features. First, this is 100% false. Second, security through obscurity is almost universally discouraged and considered bad practice.
> even with open-source, you're never going to sit and read the code (of the program AND its dependency tree) You don't have to. The fact that it's possible for you to do so, and the fact that there are many other…
> Apple has full-disk encryption backed by the secure enclave so its not by-passable. Any claims about security of apple hardware or software are meaningless. If you actually need a secure device, apple is not an option.
> And for me, the idea that they might replace my aging phone with a newer unit, is a big plus. It's called a warranty and not at all exclusive to apple whatsoever? > Those people should stick to Linux, so that they can…
> I am thrilled to shell out thousands and thousands of dollars to purchase a machine that feels like it really belongs to me, from a company that respects my data and has aligned incentives. You either have have very…
What happens when country A can't pay?
You're ignoring interest. If there is 100T of outstanding debt at 3% annual interest, that's 3T in interest per year. At a certain point it may be impossible to keep the overall interest payments going and the debt…
> Why not build own version? Probably because it costs like 10k per line of code for apple to implement anything decent. (not claiming that magnet is decent)
Finally the UX on mac is almost half as good as a 15 year old linux window manager.
[flagged]
That's what happens when you take your most productive/creative minds, thrown them in the trash, and replace them with greedy MBA drones.
Oh I see. I don't disagree with you point then, but the context here is 'immortal works' and that's definitely strongly correlated with the popularity of the work. 'Immortal work' ~= 'still popular long in the future'
Huh? If you're going to write a book, for other people to read, you ultimately want people to understand and recognize your ideas/the point of your work. It has nothing to do with morality.
It's not going to be linear though. 1750 cal per day ~= 73 cal per hour. If, for example, you're already in a calorie deficit for the day, and then do a nice hour long workout (or demanding mental work), you're going to…
100%
Because the body can only extract so much energy per minute from all of the fat in your body. If that's not enough, muscle is used, etc.
You do you champ.
> You are so sure you’re right that you are not really thinking about what I am saying, and how it applies to real world situations- especially things like real life high stakes life or death situations. Nah, you're…
> They are absolutely complementary, and implementing a real world secure system will layer both- one starts with a mathematically secure heavily publicly audited system, and adds obscurity in their real world…
> Instead of, for example in your last example simply labeling something you seem to not like as "laughably weak"- do you have any specific reasoning? 'without security updates for a decade or longer' - do I really need…
> You're mis-representing my examples by shifting the context, Specific example of where I did this? > literally gives the same examples to two of the main ones I mentioned at the very top of the article as key examples…
Nah, you have no idea what you're talking about.
> where secrecy and marketing hype is used to attempt to conceal the flaws. That's literally the practical basis of security through obscurity. > Others, like my comment above, are talking about systems carefully…
> Security though obscurity is highly effective. If you say so. > Think of some common sense physical analogies: a hidden underground bunker is much less likely to be robbed than a safe full of valuables in your front…
Security by insecurity is also 'widely deployed and often effective'.
> to a large extent, it's directly because of hardware based privacy features. First, this is 100% false. Second, security through obscurity is almost universally discouraged and considered bad practice.
> even with open-source, you're never going to sit and read the code (of the program AND its dependency tree) You don't have to. The fact that it's possible for you to do so, and the fact that there are many other…
> Apple has full-disk encryption backed by the secure enclave so its not by-passable. Any claims about security of apple hardware or software are meaningless. If you actually need a secure device, apple is not an option.
> And for me, the idea that they might replace my aging phone with a newer unit, is a big plus. It's called a warranty and not at all exclusive to apple whatsoever? > Those people should stick to Linux, so that they can…
> I am thrilled to shell out thousands and thousands of dollars to purchase a machine that feels like it really belongs to me, from a company that respects my data and has aligned incentives. You either have have very…
What happens when country A can't pay?
You're ignoring interest. If there is 100T of outstanding debt at 3% annual interest, that's 3T in interest per year. At a certain point it may be impossible to keep the overall interest payments going and the debt…
> Why not build own version? Probably because it costs like 10k per line of code for apple to implement anything decent. (not claiming that magnet is decent)
Finally the UX on mac is almost half as good as a 15 year old linux window manager.
[flagged]
That's what happens when you take your most productive/creative minds, thrown them in the trash, and replace them with greedy MBA drones.