#facestab chump Archives for 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009RSS

last updated at 2010-02-03 15:59

<@jillzilla> EVERYBODY WANK NOW || <kandinski> douchebag || <drPoggs> rik: is this a geek channel? <-- see topic for answer

Oral conception. Impregnation via the proximal gastrointestinal tract in a patient with an aplastic distal vagina. Case report.

Oliber: Whoakay
seti: stabbings, too
Oliber: and from the 80s, discovermagaZZZZZine failure

duplicate from earlier HipHop story

Family: Funeral home sent brain home in bag

nene: Zombie family?

Facebook introduces HipHop, a compiler for PHP to C++

seti: makes it only twice as fast though
seti: Facebook link

Long Island Congressional Candidate Cited for Giving Up JPMorgan Whistleblower

seti: hypocrisy, thy name is republican.

Kulula-air tries not to take itself too seriously

seti: also delivers what it says on the tin.

Most amazing political ad ever

seti: delivers what it says on the tin.

Raising Ronnie

SSL keys generated on Debian systems for the 18 months to May 2008 are totally compromised, due to a flaw in the random number generator

thelink: in other news root CA certs are inferior: "Chained certs mean that the CA does not use their embedded root certificate directly for signing, which means they can have it locked up somewhere safe and inaccessible. Therefore, certs which are chained are, if anything, safer."
thelink: which is to interpret a logistical argument as a purely technical one. yes, chained certs are superior. no, non-root CAs are not superior to root CAs.
thelink: for some values of root and non-root CA. YMMV.
thelink: in other news: I CAN HAZ CA?
thelink: remember kids, "Certificates are about identity, not virtue."

antipiracy measures such as encryption in DVD are basically ineffective, but are considered an essential decoration for any commercial artform. welcome to virtual feudalism.


The argument that open source is inherently more secure propels a corresponding argument for focusing developer effort on fewer projects, rather than more

thelink: the supposed security being derived from scrutiny, all that is needed to subvert this process is to encourage developers to widen the number of projects beyond the point where any reasonable assessment of security of those projects can take place, since software security is a specialisation, compared with development in general
thelink: there is a further argument that this is what has happened
thelink: following this corresponding second argument, it may be possible to conjecture as to whom such subversion is being performed by, through objective examination of evidence in terms of sources of publicity which encourages development of wider range of software over higher quality software
thelink: for extra points, correlate this with known motivators and special interest affiliations
thelink: or just start using openbsd
thelink: and STFU

Angry Ginger Kid


Run by the Daily Chump bot.