Hiring a war criminal and domestic-spying person may not change Dropbox's stance on privacy, but it shows another darker side of DB, it's business-at-the-expense-of-morality side.

Did they really think, "She approved the mass snooping of private data saved online, which certainly included targeting our infrastructure to breach our customers' privacy. Oh, we won't worry about that, we need her expertise, we'll hire her!".

Then again, writing the above paragraph, what the fuck was their stance on privacy then, if hiring her didn't make them ask themselves whether they're doing the right thing?

And how exactly will Dropbox succeed in the international scene, when all the foreign companies fucking realize that they're basically in-bed with the Washington "Elite", the same people that created and supported PRISM?!?

And yet, the Newsweek "journalist" thought "Oh my god, this guy's name matches the pseudonym, it must be him!"

How dense do you have to be!?! I'd like to give her one of those "how to occupy a blonde" birthday cards that tell you to flip it over and over...

The way I see it, the men in black pointed the gun at him and said "Take those drugs! Now!"...

Android 4.3 now has multiple user capabilities, where features can be disabled: http://www.howtogeek.com/170191/share-your-android-tablet-and-keep-your-privacy-with-a-guest-account/

I'd say have 3 accounts: Admin, for Kindergarten use (no games), and for play time (Kiddie has to ask a parent for the password)...

Being scared of potential stuff ultimately leads to mental illness.

Guess who spent trillions of dollars to spy on everybody because they're scared of potential threats.

He talked to the civilian Chinese newspaper about the US government hacking Chinese civilian servers.

I trust him, if his motive was really to sell those secrets for money to the Chinese, he would've done it covertly. He wants everyone, not just the Chinese, to have information about what the US Secret Police is doing. Want to bet that there are backups of ALL the files on NSA's illegal activities in the hands of Guardian reporters too? Snowden can disappear at any moment, he'll have trusted someone like Greenwald/a Guardian IT person to take care of his secrets, maybe as an insurance policy as well.

Just like we get pissed if the Chinese hacked Google, the Chinese are pissed that the US hacked into university servers. If it were military targets like the Pentagon, we would think it's fair game...

It'd be more interesting to send parts of the password to different people. So for example 3 people out of a group of 7 would have to join their parts to get the whole password. Redundancies are there in case some of the people fall off the face of the planet. Ideally you'd find 7 people where no three of them would join up to conspire against you -- that is admittedly very hard.

I'm sure there's a mathematical function to split up a piece of information so that 3 out of 7 pieces is enough to restore it. How to do it is an exercise left for the reader.

I played with a BlackBerry in 2008, and they already had/have this. If an app doesn't have a particular permission, it would get a SecurityException. It's supposed to keep functioning (e.g. a chat app might not be able to read your contacts, so it would have to have its own contacts database that you'd manage manually).

But of course Google apps just say "I have to have all permissions or I won't install myself" :(

Was going to say, why not just put stickers with plain-text info? This is a solution looking for a problem, and there are network latency issues, etc etc.

Of course the benefit of having it on a site is that it is instantly modifiable, if the patient's medication changes...

Except that if you're serving content using a standard home connection, the upload bandwidth is a fraction of download bandwidth, and those pics will take forever to load compared to pics served by Facebook...

Overuse of smileys detected... God damnit, wie alt seid ihr, 16?

Second Life and MySpace says hi!

Actually, you're still right. A few years ago people were saying these 2 will be the future of the internet. So, "future of the internet" = don't invest! "passing fad!" = invest all the money!

Ah crap, hit the wrong button, sorry!