Not a chance. Those maintenance agreements are a one way street to but lots and lots of Benjamins in Larry's bank account. Actual customer support? They've never heard of it.
6291 posts • joined 10 Jun 2009
Not a chance. Those maintenance agreements are a one way street to but lots and lots of Benjamins in Larry's bank account. Actual customer support? They've never heard of it.
At best you have precedent for the US or EU, not worldwide, and I don't think the precedent has reached that level for either entity.
Enterprise SSL monitoring is not part of this equation. It's consumer grade equipment connected to the internet.
Despite claims to the contrary and lawyers who will argue the point, click through agreements can't have unusual or unexpected clauses that indemnify either party against certain rights. The right to be secure in your financial transactions would be one of those rights. SuperFish breaks that.
You pretend that the FCC is an independent agency now that it's under The Big 0, but before it was Bush's stooge. Newsflash: All three FCC members voting for this travesty ARE BIG 0 appointees. That means it IS his change, and at his direct ORDER.
No they don't deserve to be regulated. They BUILT the internet, the government is stealing it from them.
While it changes the order of magnitude, the point still stands. You don't lose 15 pages by deleting a couple of words here and there. I've spent more hours of my life than I care to admit to trying to figure out a way to edit a document to bring a single word up one line to save a page before going to print. Sometimes it's simple, but it's just as often a royal PITA. And yes, it was worth it to the publisher because that one word was going to save one page which in turn was going to save a four page folio in a 3000 scientific publication print run.
As my first job was working in precisely that environment, I call you on your BS deflection.
While it is technically true that you don't publish the daily drafts, it is standard practice to:
1. Establish the draft version.
2. Distribute amongst ALL stakeholders with suitable period for comment.
3. Receive all comments, debate them, resolve them.
4. Incorporate the changes into the document, update the revision level.
5. Distribute the update amongst ALL stake holders with suitable period for comment.
6. Go to step 3 and repeat until the number of changes is suitably low to go to Final Draft for approval.
After approval, only editing changes to correct spelling or grammar are permitted, no substantive changes.
None of this was done with the FCC regs. Hell, they didn't even include all the major telcos in the consultations let alone all the stakeholders. Of which the US public is most certainly the most important.
Where I work the employer is willing to pay for the phones. It's the employees who don't want to be issued the phone because they're already carrying around one they like. Same for most of the people I know. Only the Dilberts carry three cell phones, two fondle slabs, and a laptop.
That is afterall how RSA and others ship physical keys. And if you're building that sort of structure, you buy your PCs and servers, build them out in an isolated secure room, never connect them to the internet, and only use the system to generate the keys which are then carried out of the room on whatever media they use. So long as the only thing touching the isolated networks is the media receiving the keys, you have a reasonable level of confidence it wasn't breached.
I'll second that advice.
Got a call last night from the Lenovo owner whose laptop I cleaned before the MITM malware news broke. I subsequently sent her the direct link to Lenovo's page for checking if your laptop is vulnerable. Apparently she got reinfected as soon as she attempted to use their tool to check on it. So the laptop is headed back to me this weekend.
But a security audit was the first thing the marketing guy recommended!
Never got any of the stuff I ordered with it, couldn't make a claim against them.
So I personally regard Google Wallet as different sort of SuperFish.
As always, YMMV.
Remember, the telephone droids only read the scripts put in front of them, and rarely have any actual technical knowledge for problem solving.
Oh, and the real kick in the teeth on that one is, the only reason they use fleshbags instead of automated systems is that the fleshbags cost less than the automated systems.
Irrelevant in this case I think. Because it's the consumer division, their margins are thin, even for the Chinese. So they're inclined to put crapware on kit. Such decisions are usually made by marketing droids not techs. So I think it could have happened even if the laptops were coming from IBM. Probably a bit more likely in China since there you can get shot for disagreeing with the boss, but possible elsewhere too.
It wouldn't surprise me. And I think I've come across something in the last week or so that shows an emerging meme for yoga pr0n, so she could have been dead center in the middle of it.
Meh. Chicken and egg problem on whether the corruption begins on its own or is inherent in the institution.
Of course, once it's started the problem is, it's one massive multiplicative (exponential?) feedback loop. Which is why all to frequently the only way these things end is a return to violence and anarchy.
That and given "the total bill could be more than $5m, it's claimed," the company has an incentive to NOT make it an open and shut case. Even though they'll eventually lose, the total on the settlement isn't likely to rise, until the case is settled, they still get to make interest on the money they are setting aside to pay for the lawsuit.
I'm familiar with those places as well as the ones where there is competition. The simple fact of the matter is, the people living there voted for it to be that way. They elected the corrupt LOCAL government which used its power to create a local monopoly.
Furthermore, monopoly issues are not the purview of the FCC, they fall under either the FTC (Federal Trade Commission) or the (Interstate Commerce Commission). You'll find all kinds of conservative support for breaking up government created monopolies. You just won't find any for the Executive branch corruptly seizing legislative powers.
Furthermore, while you are certainly entitled to continue pushing the Progressive/Democrat agenda under the guise of unvarnished journalism here at El Reg, you aren't entitled to your own facts.
Ultimately, the FEC decides not to extend rules, and from that Pai draws his connection.
The FEC decided no such thing. They were deadlocked on the vote so the 0bama appointed commissioner was not able to change them at the time.
And it's not like they abandoned the attempt:
While Karen Getman's (Democrat) testimony in front of the FEC should frighten anyone, it's chilling effect ought to scare the crap out of anybody whose livelihood depends on freedom of speech:
It's okay to get it wrong and do it again. It's okay to be brave. It is okay to push the limit.
That's the kind of lie every dictator since time began has used to silence their opponents.
No, because MS have to offer OEMs a way to differentiate themselves. When I first entered the IT repair arena I worked for a small screwdriver shop. We never had more than 10 employees, but we were incorporate and had a brand name. We were a licensed MS OEM vendor. One of the things MS allowed us to do was embed our company information on the System Information screen, including a bit-mapped image if we were inclined to create one. So this is embedded in their DNA. Changing it is on the order of mutating a blue whale into a toadstool.
What will happen is that vendors who hawk sufficiently onerous crapware will go out of business while those that don't survive. If any of them actually pre-package decent stuff they could actually thrive.
That's actually the absolute BEST ad a company can have.
Many CEOs would be well served to remember that.
I've worked in IT repair for more than 15 years now. I'm not a sales guy, but I sold a fair bit of kit in my day. I could sell it because it was always an honest technical solution to the problem, not what I was pushing that day because of a SPIF.
No. Truth be told, I don't even really trust the ones I have to.
More truthful answer:
No. But it's such a PITA keeping track of who is trustworthy and who isn't that I mostly accept the defaults. The good news is the desktop I rolled myself, so minimal exposure there. But it's really hard to roll your own laptop, even if you're in the biz. And cleaning out the crap is nearly impossible.
Whether or not the OEM install devalues the install is entirely up to the OEM.
Granted in the current incarnation of Windows, it's a bit hard to get the drivers wrong. But that hasn't always been the case. I recall plenty of builds requiring me to hit F4 at just the right point to add a third party driver or the OS install would fail.
I even recall one particularly odious problem where a new motherboard wouldn't accept a reliable, known working device after we upgraded a MB. Apparently Intel made a change to the ATA channel and it wasn't backward compatible. Spent three days working on that one before our chief tech called the device vendor and found there was a driver problem they weren't planning to fix. For those situations the OEM build is preferable. The device was actually pretty handy. It was a CD jukebox that would let you load 5 CDs and access any one of them. Had to replace it with a SCSI controller and device that cost the client almost as much as they originally paid for the PC. Took a serious loss on that one because we obviously couldn't charge them for 3 days of tech time.
I can definitively say the answer to that question is 'Yes!'
I barely missed those days and I'm glad of it. It was enough of a bitch troubleshooting that shit when one of those damn ring connectors got itself just a little bit loose. When I came aboard I think we only had 3 customers left using it. But that was more than enough to leave a bad impression that will last a lifetime.
But I thought ALL super Cxx's used UltraTrojan brand condoms to protect themselves.
“But hey, I asked, so I'll honor the votes.”
Having seen far too many execs put forth surveys expecting results that would back their pre-determined decision only to get flustered when they didn't agree, this is something which I heartily applaud.
Always look on the bright side. This may be the occasion on which Linux will go Forth and conquer.
Well, he was okay until he got to:
If you are lucky they might have white listed major financial institutions.
At which point its obvious he's just taking a piss.
As such, the odds of them running an unbiased poll are similar to the odds of the Tobacco Institute producing an unbiased scientific study.
That the poll came back as lopsided as it did against Net Neutrality is a sign of the complete failure of The Big 0's power grab.
Me too. I don't care one way or the other for either party in this dispute, but that process is so corrupt it needs to go.
I'm not so sure the judge's ruling that phones and the search market are sufficiently separated to avoid Sherman stands. It seems to me that in the current phone market they sort of are inseparable, no matter how it looks on paper.
I've generally had good luck with Malware Bytes Anti-Malware.
Just this week I had to clean up a Lenovo consumer laptop that was malware infested and used it. I think the source was Tovi (Trovi?) Toolbar*, but hadn't seen the news about SuperFish at the time. So I don't know if the bad cert was on it. Unfortunately I already returned it to the owner so I can't check the cert list. I did notify the user when I saw the Reg article about the problematic cert.
*Nasty little bugger. Kept popping up ads no matter which installed browser I used. Couldn't get to the malware byte site. Downloaded on a different computer, copied to USB, infected PC wouldn't read the drive. Finally burned it to a CD and installed it that way. The scan found 400+ instances of questionable stuff. Deleted it all. System was returned fully patched, malware bytes installed, Secunia PSI installed to make sure her other software is updated. And I suggested she stop by at least once a quarter to make sure the patches have been installed. She uses her cell for internet connectivity while I have broadband.
In the US, if you could serve as an expert on the subject, you will be excluded from the jury pool.
What a ridiculously stupid post!
The agreement was only formalized in May of 2014. Even two data points is reaching for it.
As for the data for 2014 not being available, I find nothing unusual about that. We've only just concluded the year and it is not uncommon for government agencies to take a year or two to release such statistics let alone release them in under a quarter.
Given that a sprinter can outrun a formula one car if the race is only 25 feet, I expect the bicycle will also do it easily.
So Rip, you say you just crawled out from under your rock yesterday after 20 years?
I have no idea what you've been smoking, but it has obviously rotted your brain. If Congress were willing to use that play, The Big 0 wouldn't be issuing executive amnesty to all illegal aliens. The rest of your tripe is just as boggle minded.
But, on the other hand, it is quite clear that the proposed net neutrality rules do NOT include content
If for no other reason than the proposed rules have not been published and therefore NO ONE besides the commissioners knows what's in the actual proposal.
But fascists have never get facts get in the way of their propaganda, so I suppose that's to be expected.
While politicians are indeed a cowardly lot, I'm not sure this particular criticism is deserved. Certainly they do currently benefit from the complexity of the system as they can hand out favors to preferred constituents.
Can you point to some general point of agreement in the general population about how best to reform the situation? I can't. Even if I choose the relatively small subset of conservative Republicans within the US there isn't agreement on how to reform the system. About 40% want a flat tax (one tax rate for everybody optional exclusion on some base amount of income) and about 40% want a sales tax which they call the Fair Tax. One thing both groups tend to overlook in their rhetoric promoting their cause is that even if the whole country (less chance of that then the Flat vs Fair people agreeing) suddenly agreed on one of these two choices, you'd still need an IRS-like agency that defines what actually gets taxed, collects it, and enforces the rules about collection.
My own position on the issue is that while the Fair Tax is economically more efficient, if we are to maintain a just society we need to use the Flat Tax. Only if each citizen is equally at risk to damage from the government will each protect the others as he would protect himself.
So you haven't been paying any attention at all.
The proposed rules WON'T BE PUBLISHED before they are adopted. That was the first criticism out of the gate from the Republican commissioners.
The Washington Post's function was never to disseminate news. Like many papers in the UK, it was founded with the express purpose of advocating for the advancement of a particular political party. In this case it happened to be the Democrats. Which means that if the Post is coming out against this FCC rule grab, the details are worse than the FCC's Republican members have said they are.
how come the Washington Post is able to opine on a set of regulatory proposals which haven't even been made public yet.
That's easy. As THE go to source for leaks in DC, the FCC Democrats have already passed them a copy of the proposals on the assumption the Post would flack for them. That the Post isn't is seriously bad news.
In itself, this is an extraordinary turnaround given that no one seriously considered Congressional legislation as even a remote possibility just a few weeks ago.
Because I made exactly these points 7 days ago here on El Reg, and collected the obligatory 4 downvotes from the freetards and fascists who want their will imposed on everyone without even a basic check on reality:
They were even posted in another Kieren McCarthy hit piece. I guess the somewhat more conciliatory tone of this article means truth is finally beginning to penetrate the zone of propaganda.
Personally I think electric cars are a joke and I expect him to lose his shirt on this particular venture. Fortunately for him, he has several so he can afford to lose a few.
I don't begrudge him the effort to make it work. It's HIS money, not mine. He earned it. Who knows, he might be right, I might be wrong. If he is, and he makes it truly economical (not workable because politicians have fiddled with electric car economics) we all win.
It's nice that you feel that way, but let's take a look what it actually says:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
The key phrase in here is "...no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation..." Now we've grown accustomed to a certain process in common law where we get to see the warrants and the claims made in the warrant. But that doesn't actually prevent Congress from making explicit laws regarding how some warrants are issued for a particular set of codified offenses. Which is what Congress did with the various laws usually lumped under Patriot Act. They've specified what constitutes probable cause, someone is affirming the accusation, and a court consisting of Presidential appointees who are approved by Congress is overseeing it. The only difference between it and another court is that because it deals with national security, Congress has deemed it appropriate to keep the proceedings secret. From a purely legal standpoint where you can't assume guilt, it therefore conforms to the law. From a practical standpoint it can be corrupt as all hell. That doesn't change the legality of it.
Ought to, yes. Does is a whole other issue. Even when they do, there's a lot of leeway in the system. That's one of the ways you get rulings from different judges that conflict so that an appellate court has to decide which of the conflicting decisions is correct. The other way of course is the judge ignores his responsibility and rules as he pleases. You see a lot of that in Cali and Mass.
Regardless of what the judge does, plaintiff has to start at the lowest level and work his way up the system.
The reasons have been publicly and clearly stated. Only the mechanisms are being kept secret. Claims to the contrary are only because you disagree with the reason, not the mechanism.
Not anymore. The exact date of its death is in question. Some trace it to Roe v Wade, some to Miranda v Arizonna, others to Brown v Board of Education, still others to Plessy v Ferguson. A few people even trace it back to Marbury v Madison. But which ever case you want to pick, how SCOTUS votes is now more important the actual words of the Constitution itself.
You can't figure it out because you and the rest of your liberal ilk threw out the Constitution a long time ago. Held to it's proper small sphere the federal government wouldn't be a problem. When we started out the feds handled national defense, interstate trade disputes and a few other things. Law enforcement was strictly from States, counties, and cities. If that were still the case, even TPP as passed wouldn't be the problem it is, because 95% of law enforcement activity would not be impacted by it. It's only the total integration, of the federal government into every other level of government that yields the danger.
The EFF is splitting hairs to save face. El Reg got it right.
The law takes effect once passed by Congress and is either signed by the President or Congress overrides his veto. It is in effect until such time as it is repealed or overturned by the courts. So a failure to rule upholds the law.
Not making a moral judgement, this is how law is reasoned.
You've only seen their installed kit. I use to do IT support work for the offices from which they dispatch their contractors to install those security systems. If I had a son or a daughter, I would not let them work in such a place. Those places were downright scary. When I got back from one of them I told my boss "I'd rather you sent me to southeast DC to yell N****er at the top of my lungs than go back to that place." And that's something every white boy knows to never, ever do.
No they don't. If they did they wouldn't walk away, they'd run.
Back in the pre-internet days I worked for a firm that wanted to make your house SMART. They developed a controller for it, wiring, and a number of devices that would let you program control of just about everything in your house. They even included specs for natural gas appliances in your house. Some of the ideas were completely daft, like using your phone to call your house to program your VCR to record a program (what's the point if you forgot to put a bank tape in the VCR?). One of the ideas the market droid threw out was integrating home security systems into the mix. The IT people had all kinds of ideas for ways to connect things up. Fortunately the boffin in charge of the IT development also had an eye on the legal. All of the proposed solutions opened the company up to entirely too much liability. So the security systems were never integrated into the system. Given they needed to know who you were, what your phone number was, and where your house was it was a hell of a lot easier to secure that than it is with world + dog knocking on your IoT security system.
Absolutely false. Liberals are the utopian optimists who think nothing can ever go wrong with their plans to improve people other than themselves. We conservatives take quite a dim view of that because we've had to clean up so many of their utopian failures. Hitler for instance, even though you keep trying to fob him off on us. He had a utopian vision for the future of his people. And of course Mao with the Great Leap Forward. Then there were Lenin and Stalin. I could go on, but there's really no need.