12 Matching Annotations
  1. Mar 2021
  2. Dec 2020
  3. Jun 2020
    1. Some large tech behemoths could hypothetically shoulder the enormous financial burden of handling hundreds of new lawsuits if they suddenly became responsible for the random things their users say, but it would not be possible for a small nonprofit like Signal to continue to operate within the United States. Tech companies and organizations may be forced to relocate, and new startups may choose to begin in other countries instead.
  4. Apr 2020
    1. Other sites could absolutely spend time crawling for new lists of breached passwords and then hashing and comparing against their own. However this is an intensive process and I'm sure both Facebook and Google have a team dedicated to account security with functions like this.
    2. Ultimately it comes down to how much time and money you can dedicate to keeping your users' accounts secure versus how important it is to do so. Google and Facebook accounts sit at the centre of many users' internet lives and would be devastating to use. Same for most email accounts.
  5. Mar 2020
    1. Furthermore, one should also consider that **publishers – a category including natural persons and SMEs – are often the “weaker” party in this context.** Conversely, third parties are usually large companies of substantial economic import that work as a rule with several publishers, so that one publisher may often have to do with a considerable number of third parties.
    1. I would like to make an appeal to core developers: all design decisions involving involuntary session creation MUST be made with a great caution. In case of a high-load project, avoiding to create a session for non-authenticated users is a vital strategy with a critical influence on application performance. It doesn't really make a big difference, whether you use a database backend, or Redis, or whatever else; eventually, your load would be high enough, and scaling further would not help anymore, so that either network access to the session backend or its “INSERT” performance would become a bottleneck. In my case, it's an application with 20-25 ms response time under a 20000-30000 RPM load. Having to create a session for an each session-less request would be critical enough to decide not to upgrade Django, or to fork and rewrite the corresponding components.
  6. Jun 2017
    1. We all stand up against the spirit of Caesar; And in the spirit of men there is no blood: O, that we then could come by Caesar’s spirit, And not dismember Caesar! But, alas, Caesar must bleed for it! And, gentle friends, Let’s kill him boldly, but not wrathfully; Let’s carve him as a dish fit for the gods, Not hew him as a carcass fit for hounds;

      In this scene, Brutus is introduced to his fellow conspirators for the first time. Cassius suggests in this scene for the conspirators to all swear oath to kill Caesar, but Brutus rejects it, convinced that their murder of Caesar was honourable and just, and that an oath would lessen their standing and decorum. In truth, Brutus was the only conspirator who acted for the greater good of the Roman Republic, yet in his naivety, believed that all the conspirators did so to “stand up against the spirit of Caesar”.

      Brutus maintained that since they were doing the right thing, that meant that “there was no blood” on the conspirators’ hands. This raises a question that Shakespeare clearly intended for the audience to consider; One that was relevant during the Roman times, one that was relevant during the Elizabethan era, and one that is still relevant today:

      Is it ever okay to pre-emptively murder someone?

      This question has had many forms and variations throughout the eras, with the most well known being: Would you go back in time to kill Hitler?

      Would it ever be appropriate to murder someone? In this case, Caesar had the potential to be dictator, but was that enough for the conspirators to murder him? Under what circumstances would pre-emptive murder be okay, if ever?

  7. Dec 2016
  8. Sep 2013
    1. The acquisition of a greater in place of a lesser good, or of a lesser in place of a greater evil, is also good, [1362b] for in proportion as the greater exceeds the lesser there is acquisition of good or removal of evil.

      Regarding Goodness and Utility: All things being in proportion to greater and lesser Good or Evil.