442 posts • joined 19 May 2010
"Hik"vision - I think I see the problem already. Maybe Uncle Jed is too busy drinking moonshine and shooting at trees to rustle up better code.
A few weeks ago I noticed that browsing to https://google.com was being redirect to the non SSL site and a little message was showing up saying the network had turned off SSL search. As I'm the network guy I tried different browsers and different computers. Same problem.
So I called google and asked them what was going on. At first they said my company turned off that setting in the admin panel for google. I assured them the only person capable of doing that was me and that I had the admin panel up showing that ssl search was enabled.
Then they said time warner ( our ISP ) had turned it off. I hung up and called time warner. After asking why they would have ssl search turned off the csr put me on hold. He came back a few minutes later and insisted that they did no such thing. Interestingly, ssl search immediately started working again.
I don't know wtf is going on, but I've configured all of our desktops to point to encrypted.google.com.
You don't pay for your cell phone do you? Hidden crap like that all over the place.
Re: Boohoo @AC
Down voting. Because I can and it costs me absolutely nothing. Which, ironically, is your point.
If you don't know what that means then you'll always be taken advantage of.
All the more reason for google to hurry up with the driverless cars.
Here's a clue about the free market: no one is a slave to their employer. You are free to change jobs if you feel that the conditions and/or pay aren't what you want. If very few people are willing to work for the offered rate and conditions then the company will increase the pay or change the conditions to attract workers.
I truly don't understand those that complain about their job while staying in it. You can move. Heck if they can't afford housing they could *gasp* even move to a different state.
Re: Simple Really!
Probably all of them
I for one look forward to seeing companies like google beat the crap out of the current ISPs in the marketplace.
Of course, give google about 10 years and they'll be pulling the same crap as AT&T.
Re: Obama Plan for Internet?? - Nooooo!
Your first mistake is in thinking that ObamaCare was about making sure everyone had access to healthcare. It wasn't. Everyone already had access if you were willing to pay for it.
It also wasn't about making sure everyone had "affordable" healthcare coverage. I know many people in the lower income area that had to stop paying for any type of insurance because the rates skyrocketed AND they don't qualify for any type of assistance. I'm talking about people who make $35k or less a year.
Instead it was about making young, healthy people pay for the healthcare of older, unhealthy people. In other words it was entirely about redistribution of wealth. Which is why everyone's rates have gone up *on average* 40% since it was introduced.
In short, ObamaCare has done nothing but increase the costs of insurance while doing nothing about the costs of healthcare itself and certainly did NOTHING about fixing the problems. If they really wanted to fix things then insurance for everything but catastrophic would be banned outright and the market would self adjust.
I truly don't understand the FCCs problem of classifying them in the same way as phone lines. Nobody really gives a damn about these so called "services" that ISPs have. Just the lines thank you very much.
Hell I have FIOS and I'd be hard pressed to tell you what services, if any, Verizon has beyond getting the fibre to my house. I think they forced me to create an email address on their system, but I'm not entirely sure as it's been 5+ years since inven had to deal with them directly.
Also all that crap about how it's data being transferred instead of a voice is just dumb. To the ISP it should be no different. I pay them so I can have a conversation with google, Dropbox, Netflix or whatever. The contents of that conversation isn't their concern. If they can't support all these "conversations" going on at once then that's their problem to add capacity or to sell services at reduced rates.
I used to wonder if we (the US) would be better off if the internet companies were treated just like the water/electric utilities and highways.
Then I remembered deregulation in which several (many?) states started privatizing electric utilities because government service was spotty and pricing was crap. Then I also remembered that, at least in my state, there are several large highways that are converting (or have converted) over to Toll Roads owned by foreign agencies because the states can't figure out how to maintain them. - This stuff happens when taxes originally marked for highway construction/maintenance are funneled into other services.
I know that Internet service needs packet prioritization for proper functioning. However I also know that the US telcos are horribly opaque to the point that normal people consider ads with pricing to be outright lies; their "contracts" seem to say "we'll give you whatever service we want and will change it whenever we want, but if you leave then you will be ripped a new one."
The right answer would be that ISPs do what they can to ensure that traffic is properly delivered at the speeds they advertise. However that seems to be near impossible to legislate. So a better answer would be: force the bastards to compete with each other.
The fact that most areas of the US only have a single choice in ISP is problematic. The top action item should be for the FCC to come up with whatever rules are necessary to force competition. My business is paying around $500/month for 20Mb service. I pay $100/month for 100Mb service at my house. The difference? I have a choice of 3 providers at my home and there is only 1 provider at my business. If there was competition, I guarantee the pricing would change.
That's how I rate this current season: Meh.
The "story arc", if you want to call it that, wasn't exactly thrilling. During every single episode I was hoping they'd just go ahead and "regenerate" him. Capaldi and Coleman are good actors however I think the writing this season has been positively atrocious and I have very little expectations for the Christmas episode.
This season has simply meandered all over the place. Pulling book characters like Robin Hood and tying that to concepts of Heaven had the possibility of saying that this Dr has moved into some weird alternate universe timeline based on fairy tales... Kind of like the reveal around the crack in the universe and Amy. Yet, this hasn't materialized.
The draw to the Dr. Who reboot is that it is smart and funny along with presenting solid ethical dilemmas intelligently with the Dr leading the way. This entire season felt as if he was just a little raft on a big ocean being thrown about with little ability to direct things no matter how much running around he's done or pretty speeches he might give.
The Oswald character had a tremendous amount going for her. Although I really believe that she should have exited as soon as she stepped into the Dr.'s time stream. Everything that's happened since then just doesn't make any real sense. What could she have possibly wanted to tell Danny that was so important that she didn't want to tell him to his face? And, no, I don't buy that a woman would NOT want to see a man's face when she told him she was pregnant so it wasn't that.
All in all, this season of Who feels like the authors are trying to be smarter than they really are and are utterly failing in the process.
Couldn't the NSA just underwrite this and make it free?
I get something and in return they get a lot of voice files to process in order to justify the costs of their huge data centers?
Let's see. I have an iphone and ipad. But I don't have a Mac and my Windows machine doesn't download crap from China.
Sounds like the best plan here is to just not buy a Mac.
Re: Hold the presses...
So, you prefer to be with a bunch of freeloaders that couldn't make it in the real world? ;)
Re: Total nightmare!
"One of the reasons I chose Drupal was that it's what the Whitehouse uses."
Yet another reason that you shouldn't let famous people tell you what to use.
The answer is that they don't do much themselves except "manage". DHS subcontracts a lot more than what most people think. Although you would have *thought* that using the FBI to conduct background checks would have been a core part of their operations.
Internet Usage Tips
Pro Tip #1:
If you don't want naked pictures of yourself to end up on the internet, then don't take them. If someone else takes them without permission, make sure to sue them so that the rest of the world will be made aware of the indiscretion and search for them.
Pro Tip #2:
If you aren't sure if what you are saying is dumb or not, then by default it is dumb. Don't post it. Actually, most of what you say is dumb and of no merit to the wider world, so you're likely better off just keeping those thoughts to yourself. Abstinence - from the internet anyway - is likely the best policy for those too immature to understand the ramifications of their actions.
Pro Tip #3:
Whatever you say, type, upload a video/photo of doesn't magically go away after some amount of time. Someone, somewhere will have saved it only to reveal at the worst possible moment in your life. Even if Google does let you "be forgotten", you won't be. Those images, text and videos will still be out there just waiting for those in control of them to turn the spotlight back on.
Pro Tip #4:
There is no such thing as "anonymity" on the Internet. You can be identified and found by someone willing to spend the time to do the research. If hackers - the real ones, not the kiddies - are routinely found and arrested what chance do you think you have?
Total of fees should be capped to like 10% of the bounty whenever a lawsuit reaches class action status.
If the manufacturers want to "win" they need to get out of the mindset of selling to people that replace their phones every year and instead build some longevity into the offer.
I don't trust samsung, LG or any of the other manufacturers to keep updating my phone as security issues and bugs are found for 3 to 4 years. Apple? They do plain and simple.
My wife and I were walking through a store the other day and she saw a slick new washing machine. The claims on it sounded great, price seemed reasonable and she was just about to grab a salesperson when I said "honey, it's a samsung. That's the same company that made our TV and blueray player". Her response, "screw that. I don't need another problem."
Everything about these manufacturers is build it cheap, throw some gloss on it and completely forget about the customers that buy. The only thing droid has going for it is "cheap" but when you need to replace that phone every single year, well, it is far more expensive than the "good stuff"
Re: Think of the spies
Of course he talked to people that used the internet. Did it himself on the elevator ride that morning by asking his new lackeys if they thought it was a good idea or not. They are "Internet users" too you know.
Re: Easy Solution
The right to bear arms was put in place for a few reasons. First, it meant the new government could count on the populace to be able to repel invaders - a distinct possibility at the time. Second it meant that the government would be highly unlikely to engage its own citizens.
The latter part was important in order to gain the trust of the citizenry.
In other words, it was put in place as a safety check and deterrent; not to kill. This really isn't that much different from the US having enough nukes to take out the planet several times over. Sure, a nuke will kill a lo of people. However it's purpose is to deter others from direct assaults.
In today's world, I'd argue that the right to bear arms is just as necessary as before as a potential deterrent. The US government is proving on an almost daily basis that it no longer deserves the trust placed in it. As such I'm all for a person being able to own anything from a pistol right up to parking an M1 Abrams tank on their lawn. Now, if they decide to go shoot someone there had better be a pretty damn good reason for it or they should be put against a wall.
“I would feel that a company that attempted to pay me less based on this idea didn’t really value me. It implies that I am no more than a replaceable part in a machine, rather than being a unique fit to a role in the organisation"
That's...just funny. A business is a machine. A business has jobs which are made up of tasks that need to be performed. Very very few businesses can survive when built around a unique snowflake which might call in sick or decide it's changed it's mind and wants to go do something else or is simply no longer available. Therefore each person filling a job has to be a replaceable machine part. That's just the way it works.
This doesn't mean that your personal experience while fulfilling that role needs to be dreary. It can be fun, upbeat and exciting! However, just recognize that if you are no longer there that the Business will continue. Everyone in this capacity is ultimately replaceable from the CEO on down to the cleaning crew. They can each contribute their own spin to the position, but if they were to no longer be there someone else would fill those shoes.
Now there are certain businesses that are built around a special snowflake. They are called Artists, and if they don't produce something that someone else is willing to buy, well, they starve. Good luck with that.
I'm like several others here. There is literally nothing a theater offers that I don't have a better solution for at home. I don't need to see a movie the moment it comes out. Actually, I rather like te ability to watch 5 or 10 minutes of something and simply shut it off if I don't like it.
I value my time on this planet and there is just no point wasting it watching a poor movie or even a good movie ( rare, I know ) under poor conditions.
Re: Twitter Joke
After reading the article I'm trying to understand how any twit could possibly feel like someone is stalking them by reading what they wrote.
Guess what, if you don't want someone to pay attention to what you say, then don't say it on the internet. How stupid are these people?
Re: for the more popular networks to subsidize the less popular channels
Of course it's going to cause some channels to die. That's the point, people are tired of paying for 99% crap just to get a show every so often that's worth the time.
A lot of these channels really should have just been a 1 year series. They simply don't have enough content to run 24x7. Others exist solely for reruns. In today's world there is just no reason to bother with that. Put it on amazon or netflix and if people want to see it then they'll hit play.
I see a bloodbath in the tv industry brewing that will make the newspaper consolidation look like a tea party.
Re: from stats, it's actually quite nippy
iOS 8 is not a"device", it's an operating system. Are you saying that an iphone 6 is faster or are you saying an iphone 5 running ios 8 is faster than an iphone 5 running an older ios?
Lack of detail doesn't help.
Personally, I haven't upgraded because I'm not sure why I even need to bother. Nevermind all those people that got burned with bricked devices...
First off, This is what Journalism is actuay about. The author took what was said, parsed out the nonsense and we are left with obvious truths. Good job.
Now, what I find increasingly hard to believe is that people are so dumb as to believe that whatever they post can't be absolutely tracked back to them. You'd think that by now everyone would realize that there is no such thing as being anonymous, especially on the internet.
Then again, probably the best comparison to make is to snake oil salesmen from 100 years ago. Medicine was a relatively new industry with little to no control or oversight. The difference here being that government has zero reason to put companies like whisper out of business for false claims and every reason to prop them up.
The current generation of kids won't fix this, but the next one might.
I hope the try to put a rail gun on that platform. Not because I think it will actually be used ( it won't ), rather id like to see a rather obscene amount of money put into two avenues of research: nuclear reactors and electro magnetics. If we can get reactor sizes down and safer then everyone benefits from decreased costs.
Nuke reactors are incredibly expensive right now. To put one in a tank, would mean it has to get cheaper and be very safe. Sure, we will spend $400m on a plane, but I no one would consider that amount of money for a single tank. As far as safety, we wouldn't want a shell to turn one into a mini sun, so they'd have to withstand battlefield conditions (be blown to hell) without going critical.
So, please make this. I'd like a mini-nuke powering my house or flying car.
If I'm reading this right, Russia is outsourcing its hacker group to china?
It's funny, these countries with such a communist / socialist bent are really just capitalists at heart.
So a company which purposefully used phrases like "infinite" has decided that customers who take them at their word are "abusing" the system. That's almost funny.
I wish we (the US) had some sort of real truth in advertising. When companies use terms like "unlimited" and sign contracts to that effect then they should absolutely be held to it.
I'm grandfathered in an "unlimited" data plan with my phone provider. Of course, to them, unlimited means up to 5GB of data transfer and if I go over then they purposefully slow me down.
My internet provider says I have a 1Gb/s always on connection to the internet. However, I can only reach that for a short amount of time before they start rate limiting it.
Yeah, companies that use terms like "unlimited", "infinite" etc need to be sued into oblivion.
It's not just Adobe
This happens with a lot of companies.
TV manufacturers send your details across the wire as well.
The .1 to .2% variation over 2000 years is far from surprising. If you take any system that oscilates and pick two peaks then you should see a minor variance between those peaks.
That's not the issue. The variance between the peaks and valleys is quite a bit more important with regards to it's effect on temperature. Note that within the link you provided it even states "variations corresponding to solar changes with period of 9-13, 18-25 and >100 years have been detected in sea-surface temperatures."
Ergo, it has an impact. Solar irradiance is just one part of the puzzle that is contributing to the "pause" currently being experienced. But that's only of minor importance. What I'm worried about is the situation that will occur when the oceans start emitting their stored heat (which they will) and the sun returns to maximum irradiance (which it also will). Combine that with other factors and we could very well be cooking soon.
>>But I have another question would the change in the sun effect the earth's climate to increase the temperature?
When the sun, as our primary warming mechanism, experiences changes then those changes obviously show up on Earth.
In the case of reduced sun spot activity then we are talking about a long term *decrease* in Earth temperatures. Each of the known low sunspot activity events (Sporer, Maunder and Dalton) coincide with colder periods.
That said, climate is extremely complex. We are receiving less energy from the sun, which results in cooler temps. We are also seeing the oceans absorb quite a bit of energy, again, reducing the temps. Meanwhile our ability to retain the energy that does get here is increasing, which raises the temp. I'm not sure what the net result is going to be over the short term - my guess is fairly static temps.
However, at some point the oceans will start emitting that stored heat and sunspots will show up again. If we haven't solved the heat retention problem at that point then we'll cook.
>>Last week the FBI director said mobile encryption threatened to "lead all of us to a very dark place".
By "all of us" he means the TLAs (FBI/NSA/CIA/???). Which is the entire point of mobile encryption being always on. We are FED up with the spying.
I struggled to find a reason to put something like this on my wrist. The problem is I haven't worn a watch or bracelet or whatever since I picked up my first phone in '97.
It's one more thing to lose that doesn't offer ANY additional benefits. Heart rate monitor? That would be cool for like 3.4 seconds. Text on my wrist? Already on the phone that I'm going to carry anyhow. Take calls on it? I really never felt the need to be like dick tracy and I don't feel the need for everyone to hear my conversations anyway. Mail? Again, on the phone.
Note to MS: It's a fad. Apple will dominate the market and then the whole thing will crater in about 12 months. Skip this fight and try and think of something useful in the long term.
Re: Honey Pot
The sad thing is, this doesn't appear to be an age related problem.
It's more a confluence of "humanity is mostly stupid" and "tech doesn't do exactly what we want" problem.
Yes, that is true. It's also true that such things come out as soon as a trial starts giving the accused a chance to review whether the warrant was legally issued and that the police properly executed it while restricting themselves to the items contained within it. This is to prevent fishing expeditions. (" Well Judge, we thought there was kiddie porn but it turns out that we found a spoon with spaghetti sauce on it that we think might be meth instead...")
The problem comes in from the FISC and FISA court's. They have no oversight. Worse they can do things such as force companies to provide any and all information they have for any and all of their clients. Apparently this is a common occurrence. For example, in 2013 FISC forced Verizon to provide all call detail records to the NSA on an ongoing and daily basis. Although believed to be true for a long time, we only know the details because of Snowden.
These courts commonly exceed what is normally allowed by the law. Further the various agencies such as the FBI routinely hide, or even flat out lie about where and how they came by their information, sealing it behind words such as "State Secrets" so that the accused has zero ability to mount a defense.
Besides calling attention to the daily spying on citizens whose only "crime" is to be alive, the only other thing a regular citizen can do is to ensure such spying isn't effective. Which means, at the very least, encrypted communications where possible. Because such things are usually beyond an average citizens ability to set up, encryption by default has to be the way to go.
The problem isn't those who are guilty. The problem is that the term "guilty" can (and does) change just as easily as the political landscape. The current administration has pursued political targets using the IRS, which is doing a bang up job trying to avoid congress. Meanwhile prior administrations have take similar actions or worse.
I do not want to be in a position where I wake up one day and am jailed for political reasons. That is the province of 3rd world countries and banana republics. It is not what the Land of the Free is founded on.
Disparate home automation systems talking to each other? Lol
I'd be happy if my samsung tv remote could control my samsung DVD player. Or if the DVD player remote could control the tv. Or if my samsung tv remote could control the volume on the samsung speaker. Three products from the same company, all bought at the same time and none of them work well together. Heck just playing DVDs often results in sound that is completely out of sync with the video whose only resolution is to unplug everything and hope it works on the next try. My wife has asked multiple times if we could just bring the old crap back: at least it generall worked well.
So dealing with home automation incompatibilities? No thank you. Let's stick with just gettin the simple crap working together. I swear I'd buy a tv and DVD player made by apple even at their high prices just because I'd know it would work right.
Which leads me to this: let's stop using the word "standard". None of those things mentioned are real standards. They are specifications. Of which various companies pick and choose which ones to use and what parts to implement. A standard would be something like the nozzle used to out gas in your car. Pick a gas station they're all the same because it's standardized.
Microsoft is laughing
You just know that the Microsoft CEO is quite literally rolling on the floor and laughing his head off about now.
Unix/Linux more secure? ha!
Re: The hammers are hitting the fan.. or are about to.
"Did the CIO know?"
It's the CIO's job to know about things like this. Specifically he should know who his company has contracts with, what they cost, etc. If he didn't then he is too dumb to continue in a job at that level. If he did, but did nothing about it, then he is too dumb to continue in a job at that level....
Point is: Incompetence indicated either way so his head should roll.
Re: I repeat my comment from the last article on this subject:
No. That's just how the blame game works.
An interesting twist would have been those same "security bods" going to media outlets, twitter, etc to tell the world how HomeDepot was a ticking time bomb and was not interested in fixing it.
So because he wants to sell more 4k and, eventually 8k televisions he thinks we ought to pay more for our internet.
Don't worry. The models will be retroactively changed to fit the picture.
Heck, I'd be happy if they got some better picture of those "rocks". Like the one that looks like a skull or the engine looking thing from the initial landing.
Bad Virus Updates vs Viruses
Isn't it time for someone to do a study that shows the number of computers killed by bad virus scanner updates vs the things they are supposed to be protecting us from?
It seems to me that we see more articles talking about virus scanners killing computers than we do viruses causing issues.
Re: Unexpected consequences...?
Somehow I think carrying out an effective DDOS against Google and FB would be a tad difficult.
Also, I get the feeling that tools like this could be used for FAR more than just seeing if a group is considering performing a DDOS. Corporate people could use it just to monitor how they, or their products, are being spoken about...
Security by Obscurity...
Security by Obscurity fails again.
Shouldn't they have a training class on this by now?
I don't think the researchers went quite far enough in their "research". Counting google hits for search terms isn't good enough.
First up: not everyone updates their iOS immediately upon release. I don't have exact numbers but I don't know a single person who does it within the first month.
That said everyone I know experiences this slow down. It happens shorty after a new iphone is released and lasts for a few weeks. Then everything goes back to normal. This is without upgrading the apps or iOS on the afflicted devices. I think apple ( or the providers ) slows some services down, whether intentionally or not remains to be seen. Honestly, as I don't watch ads and never visit the apple site the way I know a new iphone is being released is when my phone starts slowing down.
As far as how they do it: these phones communicate with iCloud a LOT; far more than you would guess - and that doesn't show up on your phone usage bill. It would be trivial for someone like AT&T or Apple to slow down the traffic to those service points. Not enough to piss people off, but certainly enough to make them wonder if it isn't time to upgrade the phone....
I propose that the PCI group just go ahead and disband. It's pretty worthless as it stands.
- Comment Renewable energy 'simply WON'T WORK': Top Google engineers
- Leaked screenshots show next Windows kernel to be a perfect 10
- Amazon warming up 'cheapo web vid' cannon to SINK Netflix
- Windows Phone will snatch biz No 2 spot from Android – analyst
- Something for the Weekend, Sir? I need a password to BRAKE? What? No! STOP! Aaaargh!