Re: "a great experiment to analyze the adversary's moral limits"
But what happens when a type of incident becomes SO common it's no longer newsworthy?
10425 posts • joined 10 Jun 2009
But what happens when a type of incident becomes SO common it's no longer newsworthy?
"Frand should apply and no limitation on retail."
FRAND only applies to PATENTS, and usually only standard-essential patents (SEPs) at that. Otherwise, you're interfering with free commerce.
But none of the networks want to give money to the enemy. They don't want to cooperate. They want to conquer. Plus they don't trust third parties to not go into the business themselves and try to usurp (like Apple, Amazon, and Netflix).
Besides, I don't think Sky or any other TV provider has much of a choice in the matter. Take the US. Most of the channels available today are owned by one of a few media conglomerates. For example, the premiere sports channel in the US (ESPN) is owned by Disney, which in turn owns multiple channels AND the major broadcaster ABC. In America, if you're a TV provider and you don't pack ESPN in your basic package, you're basically not a TV provider, and Disney knows this, so they always make it a Hobson's Choice. In order to get ESPN, they have to buy rights to the entire block: take it or leave it. And since they basically dare TV companies to Walk on the Sun, guess what the TV providers do in turn.
Actually, grocery shops CAN stock exclusive stuff if they wish. That's how boutique shops work. It's just not the basic model for supermarkets which depend more on location than selection.
Exclusives are tricky to regulate because it boils down to a simple matter of commerce, and commerce tends to flow better when it's not as fettered.
"Digital content should be available to purchase on media (or download to storage) and stream, forever once published. No distribution platform should have any exclusivity (Sky was forced to allow Virgin cable to buy re-distribution rights). Content should be universally available simultaneously, the cost of film prints for cinema should no longer apply."
But copyright still applies, and copyright licensing CAN (and is legally allowed, thus why rental houses could exist at all) impose terms. It's a Hobson's Choice, basically: Take It Or Leave It. You either plunk down or Walk on the Sun.
What could a fiver buy you back when an album was a fiver? Always consider inflation when comparing prices.
"Please note also that West Midlands police shut down (permanently) pretty much every hydroponics shop in the area in the last couple of years."
Just curious. Why? Marijuana concerns?
"And THAT is why they invented percussive education.."
And then they discovered masochists...
It would not only have to be much thicker but also contain lots of greenhouse gases (in order to take the surface temperature above freezing of 273K, a very consistent quality concerning ice). Catch is, most greenhouse gases we know like carbon dioxide and methane contain carbon in them, which would then be dissolved in the water to produce carbonates, which as the article notes are conspicuously missing. There aren't that many alternatives, perhaps ozone and dinitrogen monoxide. There's also the question of what happened to...whatever they were.
The catch is that the air pressure on the surface of Mars is only around 600 Pa. That's near water's Triple Point of 273K & 611Pa. And since the surface temperature of Mars right now is well below 273K, and that the surface temperature has mostly gone UP over history, this would suggest no possibility of liquid water being on Mars (below the Triple Point pressure-wise, a substance would sublimate and deposit directly between solid and vapor as temperature varied). This isn't just a matter of temperature but of pressure as well. In order for liquid water to have existed on the surface of Mars, the atmospheric pressure down there MUST have exceeded 611 Pa at some point. When if ever was it that way, and what were the component gasses that weighed down and provided that pressure?
"Just don't use bloody Windows. it's not difficult to do. If you're serious, don't use it."
Unless you're a serious gamer who happens to do some serious WoW and/or Overwatch or other PC-exclusive top-end game that simply won't run on Linux. So if you're serious about security AND gaming, you can only pick one or the other.
Not if it's same-domained and the site requires a script to run. Part and parcel problem.
What about a secret iframe?
Yes, it'll give an error on a protected asf or wmv file.
"Actually, if the judge is accused of malpractice in some manner the the Bar Association takes exception to, and they elected to pull the judge's license to practice law, that judge can be removed from the bench without Congressional action."
I believe licenses are a state thing, and since these judges are federal, different rules apply, thus the confirmation process. A confirmed judge basically has been granted the authority to adjudicate on the federal level since IIRC there is no federal licensing process. Ask yourself: from which state must a judge obtain a license in order to be able to be a federal judge. Besides, since when can the ABA overrule Congress? IOW, the only legal body with the authority to "pull" a judge's "license" to practice federal law is Congress: via the impeachment process.
"Sure, there are people who survive by stamping into a bloody pulp with bones sticking out of it the hands of others trying to climb up onto their lifeboat. They usually end up in a gutter with a 9 inch blade between their shoulders and nobody testifying who did it. It is well deserved too."
No, because these people are the ones who know how to command fear. Anyone who dares will likely be given an acid bath while everyone else is forced to watch. But not before his/her family is given the same. That's why sociopaths make the most dangerous people. They can play people like puppets. Funny thing is that the most ruthless people in the world usually don't get offed internally. They either had outside help (Hitler, Hussein) or are able to live out their reigns (Castro, the Kim dynasty to date).
Oh, and that nine-inch knife? Deflects off the knife-proof armor under my clothes.
"They subsidize the hell out of the tech education resulting in jobs STAYING locally and not going out."
And now Europe's all ruffled up because of refugees. That's the same problem from another angle. Australia has the problem, too, as does the US. How good is a bleeding heart when it bleeds OUT?
"A rising tide lifts all boats" - Ronald Reagan
Oh? A LEAKY boat sinks.
But the problem is that you can't expect that from people. People CHEAT, it's part of the human condition to get one up on the other man. Put up an obstacle and people find ways to get past it, guaranteed.
"No one should starve to death because they can't find a job."
There are twelve starving people on the island but only six coconuts. The spaceship has fuel to get one person to safety but not two. Trying to save everyone just ends up killing everyone. So at some point a decision must be made: you or someone else? Who gets to live, because if you don't decide, the world will simply answer, "none of you."
One, there may be nothing left with which to build AND no means to go elsewhere.
Two, YOU may be among the things swept away.
"If you don't give poor people any chance to get a decent job and then pay for themselves (including taxes), you're just dooming them to perpetual slavery - and then you will start to pay them subsidies to keep them quiet and avoid revolts.... what is better than? Free education and healthcare, or subsidies to keep the "proles" calm?"
The hardcore would propose the third option: let them starve, and if they rise up, nuke 'em. After all, who needs all the excess baggage? Close the walled garden!
PS. Not my personal sentiment.
Yes it does matter. Because if there's someone worse than Trump, then the preference would be to stick to the evil you know. Transmetropolitan springs to mind. No one realized there was someone worse than the Beast until the Smiler came along. This seems to echo that situation pretty well: people voting against the known evil and now we have a worse evil.
IOW, there's a douche, and then there's an enema.
Is there any trend then for people being likely or unlikely to control bias? Or is it simply inherent to the human condition?
Problem is, that runs the risk of YOU not being among the ones still standing, so you're instinctively going to fight it.
"Can't be done... perhaps it is time for the C-level to cinch up the belt and invest in the infrastructure."
"Software and hardware out there using this plugin could be patched by the manufacturers to use the modern prefered webstart method or simply take the browser out of the mix and create your own network socket and do what you want."
Manufacturers don't have the motivation to do so. They already have the money and have their own investors to please (who would probably prefer they jump country than answer to regulations), the costs are sunk in the enterprise and won't come back, and replacing it means explaining to the investors who expect a return.
So what if if BOTH the developer AND the board say NO (which is extremely likely)?
If they can be controlled by a java app (a JAR), then that's exempt from the apocalypse. They just want to get rid of Java in the browser.
It's simply that a lot of enterprise stuff won't run without Flash and can't be replaced.
Why not try Klingon? I think it's possible to actually give all your responses in Klingon.
"I am considering getting her to change the name she uses to Lancelot Link"
Well, that's something to try, though I happen to recall it. I wonder if I could take a swing with Claude Dibbler.
Just reply you're with BT or a third phone company. Or say they've called a cell phone so wouldn't have wiring issues. See how long they play phone runaround with you.
Why not just simplify it to a, "Sorry, but I've been declared persona non grata over there."?
But now try remembering 20 of them. Or perhaps 50. WITHOUT a password manager because you don't actually OWN a computer.
Has anyone tried a system where you pretend to be a robot with an old 80's voice?
"Robot caller detected. Robot responder online and operational."
In America we tend to get cold calls by robot. Since they'll persist in spite of anything you do, all you can do is hang up and see if you can block the number in future (at least I haven't yet been cold called from a hidden number, probably because those that do tend to end up being police traced).
Plus, what if your multinational isn't based in the US but DOES have a branch in it? Or what if your recipient simply is unavoidably American? Plus for all the US-dissing that's en vogue right now, what's to say any other country isn't doing the same thing, only on the sly? After all, laws are just ink on a page.
Which would usually then be replied with, "The one whose families face the consequences if they don't do what I say." There are usually other ways to do it as well. Plus as always there's the matter of nukes. No one's had the cojones to actively use them, particularly on their own people, but if Saddam could willing use chemical weapons in his own borders, what's to say?
But what happens when you have to communicate OUTSIDE your domain? Then all bets are off regardless of the method.
As I understand it, the Constitution is still just a document: Ink on a page, literally. Someone with enough cojones and enough backing could just push that document aside and rule autocratically. That's what a lot of coups are about.
"Store your data on kit which is under your control."
Unless you build your own kit from scratch including the chips, there's now way to ensure your data is really under your control. Just ONE is enough to break everything wider than open.
Now who own their own personal chip foundry, eh?
"One problem with this model is that, as businesses will do whatever makes the most profit, they have no incentive to benefit society as a whole and any benefit that does arrive is really a side-effect. Another problem is that a truly free market - where the government does not interfere at all - can end up destroying one of the foundational assumptions of capitalism: competition. With no restriction or regulations or interference, monopolies can and will arise, reducing competition and thus crippling one of the main reasons capitalism works in the first place."
As far as the monopoly is concerned, though, it's working just fine. In fact, one of the goals of these monopolies is to transcend government and become sovereign unto themselves (think William Gibson's Sprawl) since the best way to beat regulation is to rise above the ability to be regulated. Thus transnational companies that can play sovereign states against each other (why ships don't flag in a first-world nation and why small countries like Ireland seem to get a lot of transnational business because their operating costs--and thus taxes--are low enough to undercut). Even the "nuclear option", denying them business in a country, can be met with a, "Your funeral."
Governments likely control or pwn most of the END nodes, meaning they can probably track you anyway. Remember, they took down Silk Road, an Onion site, so it shows what they can do when they REALLY hate you.
Wouldn't that also play into malware's hands since they could get the jump on a realtor and post bogus-signed drivers, giving them kernel-level pwnage with a strong look of authenticity?
And sometimes the process gets too irksome. If you have to reach for and unlock three different doors just to get in and out of a place you frequently come and go every day, you'd start to consider that excessive, wouldn't you? Especially when you frequently do so with your hands full (where in the job description did it require such people to be jugglers). Security may be a process, but it has to compete with ease of use. Make things too difficult and people are going to go, "Screw this! My livelihood ain't worth this much hoop-jumping!"
One nasty one was signed with Realtek's driver key. Guess what else uses that key? The bulk of computer sound drivers today. Revoke that key and users suddenly lose their sound. That's probably why it was used: too much collateral damage to revoke.
Now imagine if a total own age malware was signed with the same key used to sign the Windows kernel...
The problem is identity theft can use the "low-risk" sites to glean enough information to use social engineering to get access to the higher-risk sites. Even if you use fake information, unavoidable traces like your IP address can be sufficient.
The best code is no code...ONLY if you want to do NOTHING.
If nothing is not an option, then to turn a phrase, you better start coding.
"Write you own if you have time, money, and the skills."
But that's the problem I'm describing. When it comes to cryptography, few people really DO have the skills. Problem is, those that DO could really be double agents. So you're caught between Scylla and Charybdis.
But like I said, that's not an option anymore. Now it's ALL or NOTHING.
But sometimes, you're not even allowed the ounce. What then?
That's if you can afford an instance or some other fallover. Many CAN'T. Yes, it's stupid, but if you're stuck in the middle of the ocean with nothing but a piece of flotsam, what options do you have besides exhausting yourself treading water?
As said, breaking even is priority one because you're obligated to your investors first. If they don't agree with you about long-term investments, than again you're stuck because they can pull out, killing you BEFORE the disaster hits.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017