It's paramaunt to keep spin doctors out
the rest are acceptable casualties.
199 posts • joined 20 Oct 2007
the rest are acceptable casualties.
Insurance market in not competitive, and as a result, those who own an insurance company have "free money" to invest. OK, I got it.
But Buffett's not the only insurance company in existence. Why aren't the owners of other insurance companies making the same crazy profit as Buffett?
The point of the tech in question here is that Alice can prove to Bob that The Man guarantees that she is above 18 yo, and that The Cashier received payment from her. So now Bob can send a p0rn flick to her but neither The Man nor The Cashier are wiser about her taste of movies.
Of course Bob has to trust The Man and The Cashier.
The service is hosted on IBM cloud only for demo purposes. It can be run on one's personal hardware (notebook or smartphone) and then the person will be in full control. It's also open source and thus auditable.
I am trying to image this.
Seems both obscene and hazardous.
I believe that many, if not most, "pirates" are willing to pay fair price for the content they consume. I for one certainly am. The problem is, in many if not most cases, that the consumer is denied access altogether. Such as, in order to watch "Citizen Four" I would need to request visa to the US, buy a $1000 air ticket, and go to a movie theatre there for $10.
Copyright regulation that is fair to both creators and consumers should disallow creation of artificial barriers, such as geographic restrictions or lock-in on particular technological solution (implied by DRM). The only legal reason to deny the consumer access should be their refusal to pay the price.
I don't want "product of human creativity" to be "free as beer". But I do want it to be "free as speech".
(Yes, I know that it is hard.)
I hate these pictures with two big celestial bodies in the sky. It's impossible. You can have two suns, but either one or both will look like very bright star, not a disk. Otherwise the system will be unstable. Same for two big moons.
you have to provide the service across the country
How this is going to work now for the ISPs, and, even more interesting, how could it work in the olden days of railways, steamers and coaches?
I am not familiar with truecrypt, but I assume that it does not let an observer see "a blob of random data" precisely because it would be pretty convincing evidence of "hidden volume". If my assumption is true, then the mere fact that truecrypt can have hidden volume is no better proof than the fact that a bikini picture can have hidden information.
I am not sure how this kind of possibility is realized in real life (and IANAL), but surely, even if you don't have TrueCrypt in plain view, a prosecutor can argue that you have data steganographically hidden in your holiday photos (or free sectors on the disk) and demand that you decrypt it. There is no difference in the possibility of a hidden truecrypt volume and the possibility of secrets hidden in plain view without truecrypt.
That's right, but auction on spectrum does not help it a little bit, does it?
(I specifically underlined "when there is competition". That's the key, obviously.)
Whatever their cost base, they're going to charge us consumers the maximum they can get away with. So increasing the spectrum price doesn't change what we pay.
Err... I am not so sure about the logical relation between these statements.
When there is competition, every player wants to cover costs plus get as much profit as they can without losing their customers to competition. When the cost base is the same for all competitors, they all end up adding some "average" profit margin on top, and this results in the "average market price" that the consumers pay.
When cost rises for all the competitors, they all do the only possible thing, and raise prices simultaneously, preserving the margin. If any of them don't, it starts losing money and go out of business. If any of them rises prices too high, it loses customers and go out of business.
In a sense, auction on "natural resource" is anticompetitive, because it raises the barrier of entry, while doing nothing to impose "fairness".
What does exist in the way of hardware monitoring
Most virtualized environments these days are hardware-assisted (on mainframe, for a long time; on x86 - for a few years now). Even so it is tricky to hide the fact that a program is running in a VM from that program. It is possible, but in most real-life scenarios it is better to let it know, so the fact is rarely being hidden well enough to fool sufficiently sophisticated malware.
Running the program in a VM allows the researcher to observe "from the outside" (i.e. from the hypervisor) what the program is doing, down to one instruction at a time when necessary. On bare metal, the malware will just do its deed without giving the researcher any insight about how it works.
"Unfortunately you get no benefit from the traffic and its costing you money"
Consumer ISPs have paying customers. The more service (i.e. data transferred to customers), the more revenue (at least, that is how it should be - service must be paid for). For the customers to want the service, there must be people whose data the customers want to get. I.e. Netflixes etc.
ISPs should praise those data producers, buy them flowers, and maybe even share some of their revenue with them. Not demand money from them.
This is how it is when there is no monopoly.
the correct fingerprint is stored on the card and it is likely a canny thief could reprogram the card, or take a copy of the data stored on it.
This particular attack is very unlikely. EMV cards are quite good at preventing the leak of data stored in the chip (otherwise it would be easy to clone, and we don't hear much about that).
Making a gelatine "fake finger" from a fingerprint is relatively easy, and will defeat best mass market readers. It is easier than chopping off fingers. But still more difficult than simply eavesdropping on the pin entry.
Assuming the "remote kill" functionality is set up, the phone needs to be (1) FDE encrypted, (2) not rooted, and (3) have a system app that simply turns power down if it cannot connect to the "remote kill" server for a long enough period of time.
- they usually run busybox(/ash) or some other "lesser" shell.
"Real" servers, and especially hosted VMs that boot from pre-built system images are probably more lucrative.
Let me get it straight.
on utopic, is apparently available in the 'universe', i.e. it is again a part of official Ubuntu.
(mate vs. cinnamon is a matter of personal preference, mate being a "resurrected gnome 2", and cinnamon - "reversed gnome 3".)
Meeting the goal with just two days margin is very... precise! Cheers!
Right! I mean, do we have to wait FIVE YEARS for this bore to be killed at last?
I'm not convinced about NFC payments though (via card or mobile) how is this safer than Chip and PIN?
NFC payments are not safer than EMV (known in Britain as "chip and pin"). Cards use basically the same messaging protocol over the wires and over radio. NFC is equally safe, but more convenient.
"The mobile payments world has hailed Apple Pay as the start of the mobile payments revolution, something which happens about as often as Voyager 1 “leaves the solar system”, but it could be the death of the technology. Apple Pay is (surprise!) an Apple-only system and doesn’t offer any way in for the operators.
On the NFC side, Apple Pay is standard EMV over NFC, like the bank-issued contactless cards. And like Google Wallet. If proliferation of Apple Pay makes the merchants rise their collective back-side from the chair and upgrade POS terminals, that will be a boost for all other NFC payment systems.
I will concede that revenge porn is new
The idea is not: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nunc_Dimittis_%28short_story%29
... Not that I disagree with the rest
Well, it is much easier to protect IMEI against reflashing than the OS image.
Exactly. Why force vendors to install software feature that is difficult to use and easy to abuse when you can force operators to keep track of IMEI last used by a customer, and if the customer reports theft to police, add it to public blacklist?
Both the argument and counterargument in this debate are just stupid.
Just a nitpick: it says "Ad Adstra Tabernamque" near the bottom of the kickstarter page.
Even if you where able to get to 160 km altitude by balloon you'd only save 20% in delta-v. 7.8×10³ m/s is quite a lot to gain...
But, hell, that would be something!
I guess it was (semi?)deliberate. But I wish they hadn't done it. It's pain enough to see in reddit comments.
Yubikey is much more convenient to use than traditional TOTP tokens (or google authenticator on the phone) where you have to type in the the code from the token's display. Good publicity for Yubico, too.
The stance "if you are a target then this technology won't help you" is red herring.
Of course it will not. If you are targeted then (presumably) you know what you are doing, and know how to protect yourself.
The point of technology similar to this is to thwart NSA-style opportunistic eavesdropping rather than CIA-style targeted operations. As long as it works - job done.
OpenWRT has native ipv6 support, as well as support for a number of tunnel brokers, for I don't remember since when. I have ipv6 on my home system with Kamikaze up and running for several years.
unduly prejudicing GPNE or confusing the jury.”
Otherwise, I agree with those who pointed out that "patent troll"/"nonpracticing entity" is a distraction. "Real" company using patents to prevent competition is no lesser evil than a troll collecting patent rent.
Thanks Mr. Worstall for spelling the word of reason! Data gathering in the interest of commerce has indeed quite different implications from data gathering in the interest of the state.
But, monopolization of commercial data gathering greatly simplifies state data gathering, and for this reason is dangerous. I share the view that we'd be better off if more of our Net life happened in distributed systems (similar to email) and less - in centralized (similar to Facebook).
is to my experience the best in the class that you describe. I've been using IXUS 80is for several years, recently replaced by Powershot SX280hs. The picture quality is quite good for the size/price, looks very decent on a 30x40 cm print. And especially ixus is quite sturdy.
or its knockoffs? They've been here, like, forever. I remember playing on Palm Tungsten. Admittedly, the ribbon that you had to direct through the tunnel did not flap its wings, though. Sunflat is still alive, though I am not sure that there weren't any earlier versions.
(I want an icon of a man with long grey beard)
That's right, paying per Gb (or having capped tiers, like I have from my provider) is the way. The consumer should pay fair price for the service. That is capitalism.
By the way, the top tier, 100Mbit symmetric without caps costs under $30/mo where I live. Admittedly, we have multi-story buildings, so providing the last mile is cheaper per user than in the US.
Suppose I am a customer of Comcast's rival, let's call it "YMission". And I pay subscription to Netflix. It means that part of my money goes to help the rival of my provider, who does nothing for me. Why is it legal?
That is not to say, the content providers create the market for the ISPs, making the customers want to have Internet access. If anything, its the ISPs who owe to the Netflixes.
This does not look like capitalism at all.
and most of them know each other, I think. Their effort just might be sponsored by an organisation for which some of them work, but I think it's more likely that they decided to do it for fun, to amuse themselves and to recruit like-minded people into their circle.
do you mean that on Windows, you allow some third party application to delete your files without asking your permission?!
An that application is closed source, developed by a Russian company owned by a guy alleged to have ties with Russian secret service? And famous for advocating for compulsory real identity on the Internet?
goes to fetch popcorn
"the NSA probably are after something is flagged it will inevitably end up at the hands of another person who has not been given explicit permission to read your email"
Just as a thought experiment, imagine that NSA establishes an automated system that scans emails, searches for specific signals, and notifies human operators that the people involved are suspect. Without presenting actual emails to the human operators. According to your line of thought, that would be acceptable, no? Human-free system at Google learns something from users' email and make decisions about advertising tactics. Human-free system at NSA learns something from users' email and makes decisions about investigatory tactics. I don't see much difference.