just think about it
In a couple of million years you will have to worry about our spiders, snakes and drop bears.
1351 posts • joined 7 May 2012
In a couple of million years you will have to worry about our spiders, snakes and drop bears.
Sometimes things are convenient coincidences.
Other times, it looks more like this
> In Australia, for example, the company claims different NOx emission standards mean the engines didn't breach regulations. ®
“You can ask for a replacement or refund if the problem with the product is major.
Replaced products must be of an identical type to the product originally supplied. Refunds should be the same amount you have already paid, provided in the same form as your original payment..”
A product or good has a major problem when:
* it has a problem that would have stopped someone from buying it if they’d known about it
* it is unsafe
* it is significantly different from the sample or description
* it doesn’t do what the business said it would, or what you asked for and can’t easily be fixed.”
If I were VW, I would be avoiding the trying a bit more mea culpa in my response rather than try to argue that line, irrespective of whether it is legally the case.
I seriously doubt that is a better idea. Unless lastpass are idiots, they aren't going to be able to decrypt your database because they won't know your master password. I'll be interested to see what the flaw is, but my guess is that it relates to a mechanism to trick it into auto populating the form on an imposter form delivered over an ad network, XCS or MitM attack.
> allow owners who so desire to disable some or all of those options if they don't like the idea that their smartphone could be remotely tracked or accessed.Accessed? OK, I grant you that this is at least technically possible. There is that tiny problem of about 2/3s of active phones can be pwned by a malicious MMS, and let's not even get into the vulnerabilities inside the baseband chips. But is at least on paper achievable if security is taken seriously.Remote tracking though? Uh do they know how a mobile phone network operates? The operator knows damn well where your phone is because your phone talks to its towers, negotiates handovers and so on. That is why your phone actually rings when your number is called. The network isn't blindly broadcasting to every tower around the world to make your phone ring on the off chance that you are there. They actively track you (technically you dob yourself in). So you can't opt out of tracking. You can minimise the number of parties who track you but not opt out totally. Oh and if the tracking worries you, it might be an idea to switch off your WiFi. Even if your iPhone randomises your MAC address, you can still be tracked by your ssid hello messages.
Be honest now. You just couldn't remember the adnim password.
Ah, my coat, thanks.
> nbn™ has also blogged that it's already considering future upgrades to Full Duplex DOCSIS
Does one perform this upgrade by starting up some new SDN appliance at the exchange or have we got some poor sod driving a Hiace and opening a cabinet every 200m?
That reminds me; my VPN subscription renewal is due.
> Since when did state regulation ever improve anything for the people? You have quite a strong hidden assumption there,
Your implied assumption that it never improves anything for the people is much stronger than the OPs assumption.
I think my life is improved by the regulations that prevent people dumping nasty chemicals into our rivers. I think my life is improved by regulations about how much NOx your diesel can spit out. Same for labeling of ingredients on food packaging. Same for the qualifications required to give medical advice or treatments. Same for building codes that guarantee the floor won't collapse if more than 3 people enter a room.
For sure the governments can overstep and create unnecessary red tape, but there is no sensible argument to say they don't improve anything at all.
They really didn't think this through. Those bombers just outside the immediate death threshold would evolve mutant superpowers. Then you really would be screwed.
> But might it be a good idea to have a "known good" or "gold" copy of the download held in a secure non-web-facing store
Except if your site got pwned then they would just return true inside the isequal method it uses compromising the entire model.
You don't really need the whole file btw. You just need to store its hash and compare that. Where your idea does have merit would be to deploy to a web job to aws/azure that downloads the files and does the comparison once an hour, broadcasting to predetermined mailboxes when there is a mismatch. Just don't use the same credentials or server for that web job and remember to update your build system to push the new hash to the guardian web job.
Next, figure out some way to protect your build server/repository/compiler/meatbags involved in pushing out a release.
I signed up for the new "unlimited" priority routing package. It entitles me to up to 6 priority trips of no more than 30Km per trip every calendar month.
If it hands over control, it would more likely be in the situation where it detected a fault with one of its sensors, or mutually exclusive measurements between say the radar and camera data.
It's got a long way to go, but the benefits are pretty obvious to me. A mesh network that allows following cars to know the very moment your emergency braking manoeuvre occurs so they can avoid you is a pretty big one. Think a broadcast to the other cars of "this is my planned way of avoiding obstacle"
... packaging up dodgy loans in CDS and on-selling them to pension funds as AAA.
> That's be one way to salt the password hashes
Icy what you did there.
iPhone isn't even in the top 10 when it comes to running the latest patch on marshmallow.
Defendants are also granted the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. Splashing someone's mugshot across twit face could mean that a "probably guilty" person gets acquitted because their chance of a fair trial is compromised.
I assume that there must be so many low lying fruits that they will be paying people out at an unaffordable rate. Wouldn't consider one of their cars after this*
*Disclaimer: wouldn't have considered one before this either, because I know where they and their stablemates sit in the reliability and customer satisfaction surveys.
A man who coincidentally had multiple firearms and drugs selflessly assisted a "volunteer" who couldn't afford to seek treatment in the free (as in beer) public hospital system but instead opted for a motel room (whose reputation for cleanliness is beaten only by a CPU fab I'm sure).
It smells quite strongly like a message was sent. That message was heard, so they are chasing him via that technically that even with consent, that procedure was illegally performed.
Their openness on their port forward vulnerability last December was also refreshing.
Ah, all of those criteria are mapped to a particular activity like 100m or hurdles or javelin. The programs can then score and rank themselves to find the winner.
> Did your car manufacturer advertise the car as "drives itself" and "has an autopilot"? Do not think so.
You are confusing marketing bs with rights and responsibilities of operating a motor vehicle on public roads. For all it matters, the manufacturer could claim that they're AI is good enough that the driver could be drunk, asleep or even a minor. Your responsibility is to be in control of your vehicle at all times. Until the law permits self driving cars, that is where it starts and ends.
Why sometimes my comments end up awaiting moderator approval.
You were waiting for the BBFC!
So I guess they won't mind putting it back for a day or two to prove it?
Er, unless you bought a Surface then your vendor is not likely to be Microsoft. If you bought your system as a whole then demand your patch from HP/Lenovo/Dell/whomever.
.... if Apple had just unlocked that iPhone. It is encrypted phones that cause risk to all, definitely not classified information being stored on unsecured servers. Definitely not opm databases going walkabouts to China. Nope. iPhone encryption is where it's at.
/at least I am guessing that's where Coomey surveys his threat model.
// Fast forward to next iPhone-gate-gate. So POTUS H, remember when we made that email server case disappear? There's another box of stuff we didn't bother reading inside a filling cabinet in a disused lavatory with a leopard warning. Be a real shame to have to clean that out. Sorry, got sidetracked. Where was I. Oh, that's right. Can we talk about banning mathematics, sorry, I mean encryption?
I'm genuinely disgusted at the behaviour of whoever did this, but it's arguably a bit rich to be pulling out the victim card when your own players have been implicated.
Not really a TITSUP moment when you think about what "UP" is for Telstra. The expression "on par" is probably more fitting.
Perhaps they need to bring back a former exec to sort their mess out. Depending on which way the election goes, there would have to be a reasonable prospect of a certain former exec who loves mixed technology networks becoming available...
I think the longer life for XP worked against them. There were plenty of netbook era and earlier machines that couldn't run vista/7 so the argument they were basically mounting was to throw that old box in the bin. A lot of people who do upgrade then pass that box into their kids/parents/uncle's neighbour's grandson's half sister, which doesn't remove it from the XP column in those Gartner reports.
As much as I personally prefer 7, and my media centre PC won't ever be upgraded until it dies beyond repair, come 2020 I will need to air gap it, throw it on its own subnet and only whitelist version traffic. Or find a new media centre that I'm happy with.
No, but at some point after replacing the handle on occasions and the blade on other occasions it stops being your grandfather's axe.People update for various reasons. Sometimes they need a laptop for their kids so they but a new shiny for themselves. In other occasions they want warranty coverage. In other occasions, people and businesses do unnecessary spending at tax time. Some people don't want USB devices to get the latest WiFi standard.
Your argument seems to be that because performance improvements are incremental, people won't but new shiny things. What that doesn't take into account is how much hardware has dropped in price* for the equivalent model. When you are forking out a few hundred instead of a few thousand, the incremental improvements can be much smaller than 15 years ago to be worth it.
If you are predicting a slowing in the market, well that is already happening for a few years as people consume their twit face on phones and tablets and stretch out their previous PC spend, buying maybe every 5 - 7 years instead of 3 - 5. That will continue to be the case without some killer use case that needs new hardware, but you would have to be brave to predict it going to 0. People sell perfectly good cars after 3 years for equally limited improvements.
* Unless your paying in £ I guess
For one, multi TB SSD drives should be sensibly priced by then. Also possibly have commercialised mram or whatever it's called by then. Plus your li ion battery from 2010 may struggle to be useful in 2020. It's not only CPU performance that drives upgrades.
> "mores law!!" -> Moore's Law
He was thinking of your data charges and saving you two bytes worth.
But it is him. He just can't bring himself to prove it.
Since when does prior art stop anyone getting a patent approved?
/Mutters to himself as he walks towards his shed, sliding the bolt to unlock the door.
You are confusing VPN with region shifting. Netflix know who I am. They require me to authenticate. They have my credit card number and would be able to determine its country of issue. They have my mobile phone number and could validate with 2FA. I am not asking them to let me watch the US library.
So do you think that Temkin is being altruistic here? Or is he complaining about how some not for profit is costing him another 5c per subscriber that he would prefer on his bottom line...
Can these organisations be more efficiently run? Probably, I'm yet to see any organisation without some form of waste, but your wallet doesn't care whether the money in it came from an extra sale or a reduced overhead. Their VPN block is both an overhead to maintain and a real customer pain point as paying customers hey caught up in the collateral. If you want a bigger bottom line, stop making your customers choose between privacy and your product.
Pot meet kettle
How much are Netflix wasting in VPN blocking? I'm not even referring to region shifting here. They can at least blame rights holders on that one. Why can't I, an Aussie, with a service paid for on an Australian credit card stream the Australian Netflix library whilst connected to an Australian VPN gateway.
I get the choice of my browsing being slurped by every man and his local library debt recovery department secured by a bunch of muppets who couldn't organise a pissup in a brewery, or watching Netflix, or saying stuff this, it is to hard to buy content safely and otherwise acquire it.
> aimed at trying to stop criminals from anonymously accessing their services
If that is the yardstick that we should measure this by then it is a terrible idea on 2 accounts.
1. It is ineffective. It doesn't stop access from desktop environments, and let's be honest, cyber crooks are hardly going to bother fiddling around on phone swipes unless it makes their job easier. It also cannot detect whether the traffic has been transparently routed through tor between the phone and the net, so fails it's goal even if that was a good approach in the first place. Even VPNs would easily defeat the ability to track the true location of the client.
2. There does exist a simple to implement and much more effective approach in the server detecting and refusing to deal with communications arriving from tor exit nodes. This could then display a simple message in the app to say. Sorry, you can't use this service via tor. Please disable it and try again. Oh, and that works on desktops and transparent tor routing too. It also works with public VPNs (hey, we are concerned with being able to identify the actual client ip right?)
Just tried kmacs suggestion but got
Screw this. Going to stackoverflow to get a proper answer.
That query isn't very helpful
Or automatically applied to any post with exactly 55 votes.
The algorithm you describe is for the house of representatives vote, but the Senate works differently because there are multiple "winners".
The way it works is that a quota is established by determining the number of voters divided by the number of positions+1. In say NSW, there are just shy of 5 million voters and there are 12 senators in this election. Therefore the quota in NSW is going to be (5M/13) + 1 ~384616
In the first pass, everyone's first preference is counted.
For those people/parties that exceed that magic number, they get a seat (or 2 or 3 or whatever until the remaining are below that magic number). Say a party got 500,000 votes. They would pick up a seat, and 115,384 votes would be transferred at a weighting of 115,384/500000 = ~23% to the second pick of all of those 500,000 people.
That action itself may even allow another person/party to reach quota and give them a seat. Once all the "transfers" are done, the candidate with the lowest count is eliminated ("excluded"), and their votes are transferred to the next preference of the voter.
If this causes someone else to reach quota, the transfer happens again (recursively if that causes another to reach quota too).
If no-one else can reach quota, the next lowest is eliminated and their votes head down to the next preference.
And round the circle we go again.
At the end of this process, all positions will be filled.
The process is complicated, but does hopefully provide a representative result. The big complaint (apart from a sore head trying to take all that in) is that those preference flows for the majority of people who vote "above the line" are opaque as a result of the horse trading that goes on between the parties.
The basic reason for this process though is that similar leaning parties would otherwise end up splitting the vote.