@afaIk What about it is senseless. Try to use full sentences.

@badger

They don't care about it because they aren't hit by it. And they shouldn't care about hashing, they should care about unique passwords. If they did, we didn't have to hash. (Or only to avoid timing attacks.)

But make those breaches painful and their understanding will develop.

@badger Of course there is an xkcd :)

Not going to lie, I expected more attacks on this one.

@lorentz

I love the "I am not even engaging" argument. That is why there is an hitchen's defense. But yea, the second one is an assertion without argument as well. What do I not understand?

@afaIk Weak

@NotJeckel

Alright, I thought your comment about codified way of ordering society was agreeing to that. I take it back. Otherwise, your assertion is weak. The best argument you found is the pertinence is that it is different? Well, that's a fucking weak stance to counter an argument that they are the same.

@Lensflare

They are no difference between morals are proto law and laws are morals solidified. Hence, they are the same. That's my argument that I am making.

I am still at my same claim. I point out how I derived at it. I did not retreat. I still think that a) laws are morals. A subset of morals that we negotiated as a society but morals. And b) it is immoral to try to sneak your personal morals past the negotiation process of our society morals.

@afaIk

What the fuck are you talking about? Which experts? Where? Are you pulling that out of your ass?

@YourMom

But it also implies that the pertinent difference is in what cannot be expressed by the other media. E.g. the moans you mentioned. Not that the pertinence is in what they share, i.e. the communication.

@NotJeckel Since you agree it is a codified version of morality, riddle me this, how much codification would you have to add to remove it from being moral?

That's again just as nit picky. In the end, morality is not morality for being chaotic. That's now what makes it moral.

@Lensflare

And most people do assume that defense is moral. You oversimplify to killing is immoral. Which it is not. Unjustified killing is. People always thought that killing in self-defense is moral. Or defense of our way of life. Executions are just a solidified version of this moral codex. In which we do it to people we are convinced we need to defend ourselves against.

But honestly, come on, your whole point can only stand when being pedantic and nit-picky. That would require me to define the borders as clearly as I'd do in a thesis. Even though we both know the core of my statement is clear and obviously true.

And no, it is no coincident that morality and law align so very often.

@Lensflare That's the very reason we developed morality in the first place. An evolutionary adjustment as a form of proto-law to make society function.

@Lensflare

I mean, I argued why I think that is wrong. And all you can do is just reassert in a lecturing tone?

Laws are born out of morality. They are the moral values frozen in time. We think stealing is bad, therefore we froze that morality into our laws. And now our laws are obviously exactly that. Morality solidified.

@BordedDev

I think that they make a mistake. They often take outcomes differences and then assert that these differences are proof of discrimination. Then they assert further, that if the outcome is corrected, discrimination could be defeated or at least reduced.

I think this is a highly moral and highly stupid take on how the world works.

@YourMom

I can see a moral argument for not regulating a company. It is de facto punishing a company for being too successful. Success comes with benefits, like market hegemony and cash flow, which grants powers. Punishing success seems immoral and counter-productive.

However, since those powers influence people negatively, limiting the very same company seems also to be moral.

Again, we have to decide for a baseline of morality and put it in law. Personally, I agree with your morality and would support it being put into law.

@BordedDev

I don't like quotas. I have good arguments against it. But are you really trying to tell me that you believe that these ideas are not held by many for moral reason? That's my exact point, that my morality is your immorality. And laws are our baseline negotiated morality, to which we can return and reverse it if we aren't happy with it.

@retoor And you know have my login and password, because I use it, too. Keep my name a secret, okay?

@Lensflare

I am saying that laws by their very nature are negotiated, frozen pieces of morality and therefore morals.

@retoor

But is it amoral or just competing stances of morality. Not being allowed to annoy a person limits someone's freedom. Not drinking alcohol does so, too. But allowing them to drink alcohol will lead to health issues and is therefore not moral as well. And annoying people leads to them being annoyed. D'uh.

We have two different sets or moral rules and as a society, we need to decide which one to follow. I might personally disagree with whatever we negotiate, but if I wouldn't hire a person for their stance that alcohol should be forbidden, I'd be an intolerant asshole.

@YourMom

Of course you do. That's the democratic power. We both agree apparently that forced arbitration is bullshit, even more if it is hidden in a EULA. And in a different product. Disney Plus subscription? Really? For a Disney World restaurant?

So, we lobby for a new law, don't we? We tell others, write our representatives, donate money. At least a small subset of whatever we could do.

Those are all things we can do, that is just the renegotiation. But if you said if the Disney lawyer was a personal friend of yours and you're now cancelling the friendship, then I think you an intolerant asshole who tries to force her moral code on others without doing the required work of solidifying it as law.

@Lensflare

Nothing sexual. Perfect children book material. Just like: "The anal researcher noted that Uranus smells like eggs."

Yea, my repository is both self-hosted and private.

Funny thing, just be a company and nobody cares about your portfolio.

Not surprised.
Nobody speaks like that.
It is grammatically correct.

@retoor NIce, didn't know caddy. But the workflow is pretty much the same with certbot. At least with the nginx plugin.

Add new subdomain, run certbot --nginx and it gets a cert.

@afaIk Bullshit. It is all about the amount of possible passwords.

A password that only has two options, 1 and 0, repeatedly, is just as secure as a password that has 64 or 2000 decisions. It just has to be longer.

A password with 8 characters out of a pool of 2000 characters is just as secure or even less secure than a password only consisting of 0 and 1 of the length of ceil(log2(2000^8))

I'm still not over the fact that it is normal to send out a CV with your whole life story. Not just relevant information like degrees in the field and prior experience.

It's why I became a freelancer.

@afaIk I wasn't toying. That's just how I get my passwords out normally. Or my secrets. Guess this xkcd fits here as well: https://xkcd.com/2501/

Obligatory Gilbert comic, image upload is broken again, here is a link: https://reddit.com/media/...

@D-4got10-01

Except it is not the dog stole my homework. More like, the dog vomited on my homework, actually the page was blank before the dog vomited, the vomit is the homework, but if you look, the vomit seems to make sense and after all, the dog is a lot smarter than you, so please listen to my dog's vomit.