* Posts by h4rm0ny

4544 posts • joined 26 Jul 2008

So what would the economic effect of leaving the EU be?

h4rm0ny
Silver badge
Joke

Re: Why don't we...

Tony Blair, is that you?

8
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: "how stupid will British economic policy be if it does leave the EU?"

>>"So why are banks so different?"

I'll take a stab at this one otherwise Tim Worstall might reply with something I actually agree with and that would make me feel a little sick in my mouth.

There are two reasons that "banks" are different. Possibly three though the last is more arguable. The first and clearest distinction is that it is our money in there. I don't think anyone in living memory in the UK recalls a proper banking collapse. I'll put it succinctly: imagine going to your bank or cashpoint today and seeing a message saying "this bank cannot afford to give you your money. Your savings are lost". Literally, you cannot access your money because it no longer exists. And to those reading this who have debts, keep in mind that those wont be gone - they are assets that will be seized by the banks creditors and you'll now owe your money to some other entity.

Once you've got your head around the idea that your high-street bank simply vanishes with all your savings and what that would mean for many people, there's item number two.

Now purely investment banks don't necessarily tie into the first reason; that only ties into some of the banks. Reason number two applies to all and it is that the banks were viable businesses. What do you do when you see a viable business that is suddenly in crisis and available super-cheap? Yep, you buy it. At least you do if you have lots of money or credit. This is what the UK government did with those they bailed out (Northern Rock being an exception and an older case). The UK government is actually profiting from the RBS bailout. Effectively, they bought low and sold high. And that's because the nature of the banking crisis was not one of a business that was no longer viable, but one that had gotten itself into a crisis situation.

Now whether the bankers running those companies should have got bonuses is a whole different question and one which I imagine most people here can answer quite succinctly. But the principle of bank bailouts itself has sound underpinnings.

The third argument is the more arguable. "Too big to fail" is a dangerous phrase and as a capitalist, one that makes my skin crawl. But there is an element of truth there. The West's economy was teetering on the brink of a major slide. Worst case scenario, a catastrophic one. The banks that we're talking about, are a large part of the economy and if they collapsed it would certainly result in big repurcussions. Now I'm not going to strongly argue this one - look at Iceland. They let things collapse and have rebuilt. I'm inclined to attribute a big part of that to the fact that they have a small and very educated population which gives them strong foundations on which to rebuild. I'm not sure the UK would be so fortunate. However, there are good arguments for letting markets correct themselves and I'm kind of in favour of that generally. Otherwise there's a risk that you're merely delaying the problem and making it worse when it does happen. But I do acknowledge that there impact of their collapse would have been huge and resulted in a lot of economic suffering.

So to conclude, those are the principle reasons why the banks were different to other companies and why (imo) bail outs were justified.

8
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: information free

>>two pages to say "we don't really know" and "it all depends".

Actually, I read it more as

1. "economists say that we'd be poorer out of the UK".

2. "but they concede that it's not a 100% certainty"

3. Therefore ignore it and leave the EU.

It's amusingly similar to climate change arguments a lá "they think a bad thing will happen", "they don't have precise and concrete predictions," "therefore ignore it".

Which is amusing because I'm actually a semi-skeptic of AGW so it's instructive to see myself from the outside for once. :D I guess it *is* possible to learn something from a Worstall article after all!

15
3
h4rm0ny
Silver badge
Headmaster

Re: The UK can leave

>>the EU, I will be glad in many ways. It will be more easier imposing barriers to nice practices like the ones that give us the "mad cows"

Incorrect. It is easier to carry out trade barriers when you're a big entity with a lot of leverage than when you're a small one. How many small countries do you recall negotiating on an equal footing with the USA, recently? Bargaining power is why the nations of the world have banded together into trade blocs. In a world where nearly everyone whose anybody has joined a gang, you want to be the only person in the prison without a group of friends.

Also - sorry - because I cannot help the grammar correction: "more easier" should be just "easier".

7
2
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: Economist's predictions

>>"When was the last time that an economist's predictions for fifteen years in the future were correct?"

Economists make accurate predictions often (though precise is a different matter). However, for every economist there is an equal and opposite economist and they are selected by governments (and journalists) on the basis of which tells you what you want to hear.

5
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: Human rights aren't EU

>>"The Human Rights Act, the European Court of Human Rights, this is nothing to do with the EU. Or at best, something only partially. They actually come from the Council of Europe (which is not the same thing as the European Council)."

This is sophistry. They are intimately tied together and either you have a very superficial understanding of this or you are deliberately misdirecting.

The European Council and the European Union are separate bodies, which is as you have stated. But the EU court (part of the EU) is expected to accede to the Convention on Human Rights (what we're talking about) and the Treaty of Lisbon includes binding by the European Council's court. They are meant to work together and this is explicit in the treaty. Signing the European Convention on Human Rights is now a condition of membership to the EU, even though they are separate bodies. One can sign up to the act without being a member of the EU, but the reverse is not the case anymore and has not been for some time.

All of the above is verifiable fact and your attempting to portray them as distinct is dishonest. They are not the same thing, but they are tied together very closely. And UKIP (your party) has a stated goal of withdrawing from the Convention on Human Rights as well. You're posting things that are factually true but grossly misleading and stripped of context. Which is an increasing occurrence with you.

24
11

No, really, that 12.9-inch MaxiPad is totally on the way now

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

This format makes sense with a stylus. A digital clipboard, a tool for rapid diagramming, a presentational tool for meetings / lectures (tablet and stylus with projector or large screen are far better than a digital whiteboard for a number of reasons not least of which that everyone at the table can write on it by either just handing the tablet round or each having their own). All these uses make a large format tablet pretty useful if it's light.

Such a tablet without stylus - no.

1
0

NetSuite's leap over to Azure cloud - a shot to the pills for AWS?

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

I know El Reg. love their photos, but do I really need to see a 650x430 face-shot of a beaten up man?

Other than that mysterious unsettling filling of my monitor, good article.

4
0

Phablet for the biz fleet with easy typing: Microsoft Lumia 640 XL

h4rm0ny
Silver badge
Pint

Re: NOT suitable for enterprise.

Thank you, hugely, to both you and Fungi. This has been a huge lack on WP for a long time. You've just made my day if this works as promised. I'm downloading to try it out now. And XML export format is fine by me. Obviously wont be ideal for the less technical users, but there are people around to help with that and ultimately it's actually even better as XML.

THANK YOU! :D

1
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge
Mushroom

NOT suitable for enterprise.

I like WP generally, but unfortunately I have found it unsuitable for enterprise use (and personal) for one simple reason: It is incapable of exporting SMS messages. There is no way, short of selecting each one individually, hitting copy and pasting it into a text editor, of getting them out. And even then it would just be raw text with no timestamps or sender information.

This is basic functionality available on even simple phones for well over a decade and easily possible on rival systems. But it cannot be done by WP. It's been raised with MS by many people but has not been addressed and the reply keeps coming back that you can "backup" your txt messages which misses the point by a staggering degree. We're not talking about restoring them to your next phone, we're talking about export. I know of one case where someone had to individually copy some thousand or so messages because they had to hand over records as part of a court case. And even without such cases, you still want to be able to have a searchable record of your messages or be sure that they are safe.

We can save emails, keep letters but as far as MS are concerned, txt messages are designed to be thrown away. It is a dumbfounding lack that basically excludes WP from consideration for many.

5
9

Ex-Goldman Sachs programmer found guilty of code theft … again

h4rm0ny
Silver badge
Headmaster

Re: *Whose* code? @ David Dawson

>>"irrelevant - the only definition worth considering is that in law,"

Well no, it isn't. Legal terminology is a specialized sub-set of language. We are not confined to only use definitions given by a particular country's legal system. The OP didn't say that they had been charged with "theft" in court, they called the action of taking something you didn't have a right to, to be theft. Which is in accord with the way pretty much everyone uses it.

I mean you can declare it "irrelevant" how most people use a word and insist that only legal definitions of a particular country is allowed, but you have no such authority to set those definitions above everyone else. When someone says the charge in court was "Theft" you can leap in and say it was technically "contract violation" or whatever, but that's not what anyone did.

0
1
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: *Whose* code? @ David Dawson

>>"I don't know what the definition of "theft" is where you are, but it certainly wouldn't pass muster here in the UK"

Most people's definition of theft is taking something that doesn't belong to them without permission.

--someone in the UK.

0
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Stealing from Goldman-Sachs?

That's like Bilbo Baggins stealing the gold cup from Smaug.

13
2

French MPs say Oui to Le Charteur des Snoopeurs

h4rm0ny
Silver badge
Big Brother

Je suis Winston Smith.

27
0

Word to your mother: Office 2016 preview flung at world + dog

h4rm0ny
Silver badge
Pint

Re: Office 2007 is fine

No problem. And for all that I know, it's true for them, but I can't check because my version of Office isn't eight years old. Maybe Office 2007 isn't fine. ;) Anyway, cheers for posting a response. Most people wouldn't.

1
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: Office 2007 is fine

>>"First, this is wrong, as I'm pretty sure the numbers after "row" and "col" are variable (one entry for each combination)"

True, but modern compression techniques handle that. If you have a sequence like the following:

<row 1><col 1>{empty}</col 1></row 1>

<row 2><col 1>{empty}</col 1></row 2>

<row 3><col 1>{empty}</col 1></row 3>

...

<row 999999><col 1>{empty}</col 1></row 999999>

Then compression will pull out the like parts and just preserve the sequence of the row numbers and how they fit into it. But it will actually go further. If it recognizes a simple sequence (e.g. incrementing by 1 each time), then it will codify that sequence instead.

The people who write compression algorithms are very, very smart. Both you and I could probably write something that does what I just described. So why expect someone who does it professionally not to? It takes a modern processor almost no time at all to expand a compression technique such as I just described. Compared to image compression, it's child's play.

The OP was very wrong to suggest that this was "bloated" because they'd completely forgotten that docx is a container format that is compressed as standard.

>>"Second, compression is not an excuse for something that could be solved by a less crappy format (Keeping the XML and adding a simple rule like "Saving : Empty cells are not be saved. Loading : If a cell is not defined in the file then it's considered empty" would do the trick)"

Have you actually tried this? I just created an workbook in Excel 2013. I put data in rows 1,2,3 and 5 and saved it. I then unpacked the file using 7zip and had a look.

Within the <sheetData> element are <row> elements each with an "r" attribute which is clearly the row number. I have enties for 1,2,3 and 5 but no row element for 4. So it seems it actually does do what you suggest. Probably there is something that the OP omitted to mention such as special formatting or references or similar. Or come to think of it, they're talking about Office 2007 which is eight years old and uses the very crap version of .docx that was rushed through ISO for marketing reasons. At any rate, modern versions of .docx omit the elements where possible - I've just checked.

But that "where possible" is important. If you add custom rules as you suggest, then you can quickly reach the point that it is no longer valid XML and then you create interoperability problems for third parties. And one of the big deals with .docx unlike their old proprietary formats, is that it is a standard that is open and can be used by third parties. Having your formats be valid XML is a MAJOR boost to that. You can't just decide you don't want to represent some of the XML elements because you feel like it. And as pointed out, they have minimal effect on file size due to modern compression techniques.

4
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: Office 2007 is fine

>>"I checked out the XML behind a bloated xlsx and I shit you not, in 2 sheets there were a million+ rows all coded a bit like this "<row 5><col 1>{empty}</col 1></row 5>""

The thing is, that's uncompressed. Once you zip that up, it's no longer a pile of characters, it's (in simple terms) one instance of that string with an integer saying repeat one million times. So what you're going "LOL" at is very far from what is actually being passed around as an actual .docx file being passed around. Remember that a .docx file is a compressed archive.

This sort of thing also is part of the reason you can have this as Open Standard. If it was pure binary, as the old proprietary Office formats were, that would be a lot harder.

1
2

Round Two in Sky vs Skype trademark scrap goes to Murdoch's men

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

The world should not be optimized for idiots but for intelligent people.

Even if the former would be more democratic.

1
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: Someone won against Microsoft

Yes, but if someone comes along and tells you that you have to change the name of one of your most recognized brands just because, you're kind of put in the position of having to defend that. People don't invest in brand names just because they like to waste money - it can result in very material gain or loss. Let's face it, Kraft could produce generic knock-offs of most of Cadbury's line-up, but they were still willing to throw lots of money their way because that name guarantees them sales.

Anyway, this case isn't really about MS vs. Murdoch. It's really a judgement on how stupid we think people are. Confusing Skype and Sky because the first three letters are the same? I'm never letting anyone cook me Shitake Mushrooms if the verdict comes back that the humanity really has become that stupid.

33
0

New Windows 10 will STAGGER to its feet, says Microsoft OS veep

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

You can't turn Cortana off?

Surely this must be possible. It would be insane not to be able to. I'll be back on Gentoo if that's the case. But I can't believe they would do something this stupid.

2
0

Google Password Alert could be foiled with just 7 lines of JavaScript

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

How did they fix it?

It was my understanding that the Chrome extensions could only act within the DOM thus making any approach defeatable in theory. I'm envisaging this fix they've just released changing the id of the element from "browser_warning" to "browser_warning2"!

Now I'm sure that's not the case, but I am interested to know how one could actually get around this. Generate random ids for the DIV? Give the DIV no id at all? What did they actually do to fix this because if it's in the DOM there should be a way to defeat it.

0
0

Apple Watch HATES tattoos: Inky pink sinks rinky-dink sensor

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

For the snobs...

Art

Art

Art

Art

Art

Art

Art

Tattoos are art.

0
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge
Thumb Down

Re: "just have ones service number tattooed on each limb"

>>"But full-sleeve decorative tats on someone I might be evaluating for a financial-services position? The person has proved that at some point in their life, they had more regard for show and fashion than for money, and don't mind advertising that fact."

I would bet cold, hard cash that if someone turned up in an expensive suit and shoes, that you wouldn't hold it against them that they were showing more regard for "show and fashion" than for money. In fact, do you drive a car that is more expensive and stylish than you actually need? Because the differential between some cheap but perfectly adequate Nissan and some slicker looking Audi is far more than the average tattoo costs.

And as to "at some point in their life". Heaven forbid that people have different values at stages of their life! Aren't you finance types always big on telling me that "past performance is no indication of future performance?"

You're just prejudiced, basically. And illogical, as it happens: You don't know how much impact the cost has on them. You see two people with tattoos that might have cost a few hundred pounds. One of those people might have spent that money on the tattoos in place of something essential whilst the other person spent it out of what is petty cash to them and it's a complete non-issue. But you calculate based on your own preconceptions (because that's all that you have) the same reaction - they have wasted money. Completely irrational response to judging someone's priorities because you don't distinguish at all. Like I said: prejudice.

>>"As a driver or as a laborer, maybe"

You're just dripping with snobbery, aren't you. I know builders and plumbers who earn significantly more than the average IT bod. And who work harder, too. But neither earning nor work ethic are what you assess people's right to express themselves, are they? It's just social class.

I hope your eyes are opened some day to what an obnoxious, prejudiced snob you are.

0
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: Hardly a bug, is it...

>>Now he regrets not listening to me because there are still people that think less of him and he has not gotten the promotions and respect he deserves."

The blame should lie with prejudiced people, not with the victim.

1
1
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

I would not have thought of it myself. But if I were an engineer working on this aspect of the watch and considering test cases, I think it would be entirely reasonable to have criticized me for not considering this. Tattoos are pretty common things, even on wrists.

1
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: Hardly a bug, is it...

>>"Tattoos are just a naff fashion statement for trend sheep"

Oddly enough, I have never heard anyone judge a person they don't know for not having tattoos. It seems to be the preserve of a certain sub-set without who get to pontificate on the moral / intellectual / social status of others based on this.

And on principle, I tend to reserve my contempt for those that stereotype and judge others, not those who don't.

8
4
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: Hardly a bug, is it...

It's like the Daily Mail in here, some days. They might as well have thrown in a reference to hoodies or that terrible music kids listen to, today.

Seriously - you're prejudiced against people with tattoos? Why?

8
6

Airbus to sue NSA, German spies accused of swiping tech secrets

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

>>"Good. It can wait. It's up to the government elected by the people of the UK to decide the UK's foreign policy."

Well yes, but there's the problem. The European government actually does a better job protecting us than our own. It's not because it doesn't go far enough that the UK wants to pull out of the Human Rights Act, after all. And I think everyone here knows that if the USA asks the UK government for some information, the UK government will just roll over and share anything they're told to.

17
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Has happened before.

I recall a case, I think around twelve years ago, when US intelligence agencies had obtained confidential business information on a German plane manufacturer and then passed that information on to either Boeing or Lockheed-Martin allowing the US company to out-manoeuvre their European competitor in a very big deal at the time. Unfortunately I don't recall the exact year or company though I could dig out the reference given time.

Anyway, Germany and France were deeply unimpressed. It does not seem that a great deal has changed.

2
0

Top Spanish minister shows citizens are thick as tortillas de ballenas

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

>>A carpenter, just to pick an example, does need to know science but they don't need to know if the earth goes around the sun

Your value of need is quite different to my value of need.

0
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: Pedanting...

>>"just as humans are different enough to be considered distinct from apes"

When did that happen? I was always taught (and considered) humans to be part of the group named "apes". Is that no longer accepted as standard view?

2
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: You need to see the questions for context

Am I the only one who read the question and thought: "But humans are animals" ?

9
0

We'll buy patents for cash, says Google – just don't feed the trolls

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Not optimistic about this. I remember with the Rockstar Consortium which held many valuable mobile patents, Google was invited to be part of the group to buy the shares - the intent being that this would neutralize them all as a weapon that the various players could use against each other. Google instead chose to try and bid for them all themselves so that they could charge other people for the use.

Additionally, Google has historically tried to present themselves as "only using patents defensively", i.e. they'll only use them if someone uses them against them first and suggest this makes them a Good Guy. But if Google infringe on someone else's IP and that person seeks licence fees, is it really correct to say that Google is being "defensive"? It's more just that Google was presenting patents as the only weapon when in fact infringement can be just as much an aggressive move.

The logical thing to do with these patents if they wanted to ensure they were never used against people, would be to buy them and then legally declare them open for all use. But their investors would never stand for that, just as their investors wont stand for Google buying assets uselessly. Investors want to see value for their money and Google will only be spending money on these to accumulate value. They may not immediately use some of them but if the situation changes so that it becomes profitable to do so, they will. Big corporations seek profit - that's built into the system.

1
1

C++ Daddy Bjarne Stroustrup outlines directions for v17

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: New Keywords

>>"Anyone have any others?!"

Manifesto - This block of code is omitted at compile time.

3
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

D

I wish D had achieved greater uptake. It was (is?) essentially C++ done again but "knowing what we know now".

6
1

Debian ships new 'Jessie' release with systemd AND sysvinit

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

>>"The "self-censorship" (and liberal use of NSFW in other articles) is a courtesy to those employees of corporations with a puritanical view of appropriate reading."

Such corporations can go fuck themselves, imo. It's perfectly good and old English. It just happens to originate from before the Normans invaded and convinced everyone that if you wanted to be upper class, you had to speak French, not use Anglo-Saxon words, I've never had time for snobs, personally.

6
1
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

>>"On the other hand, considering the reach Debian and its derivatives has into the overall Linux user-base, they could have simply informed the relevant developers that systemd would not be supported so either the apps work without a systemd dependency or they don't work."

That's not really how Linux distros work. Whether they include it by default or not, systemd will be available as a package to install. They can't and wouldn't stop that. I mean they could do a sort of soft block by not including it themselves, but it would be trivial for someone to create a .deb package and share it. All that would be accomplished by that approach would be mildly poorer security (have to trust an extra unofficial repo). And like I said, it's not really the Open Source way to stop people installing software if they want it.

So systemd is available for Debian regardless. In which case, how exactly are they going to go round all those projects using it and tell them not to use it?

Yes, I agree that Debian was the last sane person in the kingdom and now they've thrown in their lot with the lunatics because it was increasingly impossible to fight them. But I'm not sure, without major and dedicated resource, they could have.

Unfortunately.

9
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Poettering got tired of Microsoft copying UNIX, and decided to seek justice by copying them for once.

Unfortunately, he started with their business model. :/

13
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Um, I actually did read it as fsck at first glance. :o :(

But then El Reg hasn't been bought out by Americans or something has it? Why the fuck would we need words censored? Self-censorship is the saddest censorship. :(

6
1
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: Choice during install

I haven't tried this yet, but I understand the new Gnome has dependencies on systemd so unless you remove that, you're stuck with systemd. And I wouldn't be at all surprised if there are others in there that depend on it. So someone can correct me if I'm wrong but I believe you're basically stuck with Wheezy until Devuan is available.

1
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge
Devil

All hail Systemd.

And he causes all distros, the small and the great, the funded by Shuttleworth and the funded by none, and the personal distros and the enterprise-ready, to be given a package in their binary repository or in their source code, and he provides that no one will be able to boot or to start a daemon, except the one who has the package, either the name of the package or the number of his process. Here is wisdom. Let him who has understanding calculate the id of the process, for the number is that of a man called Poettering; and his process id is six hundred and sixty-six.

45
1

Celebrated Pakistani female online activist Sabeen Mahmud dies in shooting

h4rm0ny
Silver badge
Angel

>>"Religion + anything = bad news"

Religion + Humour = Hail Eris!

3
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

From a friend:

Reading the comments on this on the linked story, there was this one from a friend of hers:

"Two summers ago in london i told @sabeen to be careful and she said, 'someone has to fight.' "

A brave person.

29
0

Dev gives HBO free math tips to nail Game of Thrones pirate leakers

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

>>"What about the matter that making all those encodes will take time since they're HD and each forensically unique meaning they can't be shortcutted? Plus the fact that a one-off is not worth making a ROM-Marked pressed copy?"

That's up to the distributors in each case if it's worth their time or not. Which I guess would depend on how many recipients they had (ten, a hundred, two-thousand?). It wouldn't be worth pressing these discs en masse - you'd churn them out individually. My educated guesstimate for encoding, assuming you had semi-professional hardware, would be about an hour and a half to two hours per hour of actual program / movie. But if you wrote encoding software specifically with this in mind you could do multiple files in parallel introducing the custom markers to each as you went. You'd still need to burn those files to disc individually of course, but the encoding could, if you were serious about this, be done in about five hours for a hundred or so variations. Hardware would run you somewhere around the £3,000+ level, in large part enterprise / custom NAS. I could probably modify libav to actually do this and I'm almost tempted to go and give it a go. I wonder if anyone would actually be interested in a working version of this...? I wouldn't want to be the low-paid workers who sat there burning two-hundred blu-rays in a row, however. Though on the other hand - lots of time for reading The Register. ;)

But anyway, I can't answer this last question of yours - it's a value judgement of the distributor based on how much time they want / can afford to spend doing this stuff and how much of a concern tracking leaks actually is to them. These are things I don't know. I just do maths and software. ;) But I hope this was interesting at least.

0
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

>>"That depends on how they're forensically identified and how one goes about removing the traces"

No it doesn't. You should really read some of the previous comments here. It doesn't matter how you remove the frames or pad them out, it only matters that you can only do this for the cases you are aware that they are different. And you can only do that between the compromised copies you have available. If you have two copies, you can see the differences between those two. You wont know about the differences between them and a third copy that you do not have. Because you do not know about those differences you cannot obfuscate them. Therefore your "merged" version clearly indicates that you had access to copies A and B but not C. Therefore the distributor knows which two studios were compromised.

>>which would basically whittle down the forensic tagging to the point the studio won't be able to tell which studio got raided

It doesn't work like that with them unable to work out "which" single studio got raided (or sold them out). They get a list of all the ones that did and by doing the exercises you are talking about all you are doing is ensuring that list is complete.

>>"Oh, speaking of third copies, if the pirates obtain a third copy, they can probably defeat the signature reliably by using a "two-out-of-three" rule, keeping the clip length that appears in two of the three copies (and in the event of a three-way-tie between cut, extend, and nothing, keep the nothing)."

Again, no. You are assuming that the copies do not have markers in common. That's not how this works. The pool of possible markers is huge (derived from the number of frames in the movie) and all copies will have markers in common with all but one other meaning only a complete compromise of all recipients allows one to complete obscure / remove all markers and all that tells the studio anyway is that all parties were compromised.

PLEASE, read the other comments first before responding with confidence that you know better how this works. You actually don't get this. And if I sound a little short with you it's because whenever something like this is touted there are a half-dozen or so people who all just assume that they all have spotted a flaw in this that the mathematicians haven't and rather than ask if it is one, they confidently make assertions about their way of beating this as if the creators had never considered it. It's frustrating.

0
0

Windows 10 Device Guard: Microsoft's effort to keep malware off PCs

h4rm0ny
Silver badge
Facepalm

Re: Well it's "Trusted Computing" all over again

I don't know what is worse some days. The people who post confident assertions when they clearly don't know what they're talking about, or the people who mod them up because the poster speaks authoritatively.

There are basic errors in your post.

>>1. It will bring _no_ benefit to security, as it'll be working in the wrong places. For example you will still be able to exploit a browser to steal cookies and such or install any form of spyware/adware

It is a tool that verifies the software you have installed matches an approved version. Do you also object to signed packages on GNU/Linux? Someone who doesn't understand that there is a security benefit to being able to verify software has no business talking on the subject of security. And your operating principle of 'unless something solves all types of security problems then it provides no benefit' is stunningly flawed.

Also, the browser steals cookies? Okay. :D

>>"In fact certain players in the field will probably even get their malware propperly signed"

Modern malware goes through huge numbers of variations for all sorts of reasons, including getting past anti-virus scanners. If you have to get something signed for every small variation of your malware, that's a staggering limitation. In fact, just getting one version of your malware through instantly becomes much harder as you have to have an account to register it with. Once something you submit is flagged as malware that entire account and every other piece of malware you used it for is effectively scorched. Good luck routinely creating thousands of accounts, getting them approved and then passing off tiny variations in malware with each of them.

And it's fairly easy to recognize malware. Or rather I should say that there are groups that are extremely good at this. Most malware gets about because it's not picked up as malware by people's systems. You can put it up on some compromised site and trick people into installing it because they're ignorant of what it is. But with this turned on, you have to trick Microsoft's QC team into believing it's innocent. And that's a lot harder than tricking some average end-user.

And then of course there's the fact that once something is recognized as malware, its signature gets revoked. This process can happen extremely quickly meaning it's perfectly likely that by the time the malware actually reaches you personally, it's already reached someone else and it got flagged.

>>"No malware today actually accesses the hardware since that would be rather stupi"

Cough Stuxnet Cough. Plus there are entire families of trojans that infect the bootstack which, whether you call it accessing the hardware or not, is happening below the level of the OS which is what is relevant. Anyway, this is another of your basic errors. This security measure isn't protecting the hardware, it is hardware-based. A fundamental difference you have not grasped.

>>"2. As a side effect it'll limit the software you can run on those machines"

That's not a side-effect. That's what the technology does.

>>"For example FOSS will probably not run on such a machine as it will eventually not run any unsigned code"

FOSS software can be signed just the same as proprietary or closed source software. The process is no different. And for the minority who actually compile it themself rather than download a binary (kids today!), this doesn't affect that as the very fact that you're compiling your own code means you have a bypass on this system.

>>"There should be laws against this sort of thing"

Against what? Having an optional whitelist of software you can turn on?

>>"and actually in Germany that would clash with your basic right of "Integrity and Confidality of Information Processing Equipment"."

Complete and utter rubbish.

1
2
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: not addressing the Core Problem

>>"That would do away with the need for admin rights for installers (which is IMHO one of the biggest problems in keeping things secure as you give far too much in the way of rights to an app that should not need it), and it would contain issues with the app to that one user environment. Adobe, for instance, should be be allowed to go near any admin rights."

This is not invalid, it's a common security principle in many areas. The problem with it though, is you end up with your user space starting to become a de facto admin space. There are so many things that software needs to do that can be harmful if subverted that you can only go so far down that road before you find it's not having much affect in terms of securing you. Userspace is not the panacea some people are starting to treat it as.

I agree about Adobe, however, and would actually extend that to not being allowed to go near a computer in the first place.

1
0

Microsoft vs AWS: If you can't bark with the BIG DOGS get off the PORCH

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: Azure is not easier to use that AWS; it's not true.

>>"As an IaaS platform, AWS is easier to understand and use"

This is true (though I would argue once you've got past the learning curve, neither is difficult). But Azure is more focused to PaaS and here it excels, imo. I don't have as much experience as you sound like you do with these, but I have used both professionally and this is how I personally have found it. And increasingly I find myself wanting PaaS more than IaaS for my needs.

5
0

China tackles vital strippers-at-funeral problem

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

>>"So the Arabs gave us numeracy and the cradle of civilisation, and in return we gave them the barbarity that is now so popular in Northern Iraq and Syria?"

I have never heard Arab or Muslim culture referred to as The Cradle of Civilization. That usually refers to the Fertile Crescent, Mesopotamia, et al. Whilst geographically the regions overlap with the modern day Middle East, you're out by a couple of thousand years. Numeracy is also very distinct from mathematics - the West (and the East) both had numeracy. We (the West) did get several mathematical concepts from the Islamic world of the time. Though it should also be mentioned that the off-quoted concept of zero actually pre-existed in India and appears to have made its way from there originally and then VIA the Islamic world.

Anyway, much like Rome and some other successful empires, significant causes of the collapse of the Islamic "Golden Age" came from internal stagnation. There was a significant external factor but it wasn't us (speaking as a Westerner). It was the mongols who inflicted debilitating military defeats upon the Islamic world. The various Crusades - whilst not insignificant - had nowhere the effect that Ghengis did. So in so far as barbarity had to be imported, you can look Eastwards for that.

Of course if you're looking at the current situation, then yes - Western propping up of various convenient dictators and dynasties has badly held back equality and progress in the Middle East.

EDIT: I'd be fascinated to know why two people felt the need to mod down my original post about Viking funerals. Surely it can't be because it's "off-topic" given the story.

4
1

>Ring, ring< Hey Wall St. Yeah, it's Google. Yeah, bad news again, fellas

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

...and then blamed Google for it just to pile some insult on the injury.

Analysts always annoy me. They're like that person in your company who doesn't actually do much useful but takes it upon themselves to thank you / blame you even though you couldn't care less about their opinion.

4
0

Forums

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018