"BitLocker DOES allow you to CHOOSE whether or not to use the drive's own on-board encryption. "
No it doesn't, that's false. Actually you can't even see what encryption it is using, if any.
And of course defaults to one drive offers.
35 posts • joined 10 Sep 2007
"From a statistical probability perspective, my reasoning stands."
False. It doesn't as a company is not only likely to offer BS, it's economically bound to offer BS as it's the cheapest they can get.
"(b) the customer base to make them care"
Semi-false: Customers are other companies buying the details of the users, i.e. cannon food. They care only about if users have too much privacy (or sacurity) and the users themselves are totally irrelevant: They aren't customers but the product for sale.
Case in hand: Windows 10.
[UPNP]" It allows an attacker to open up arbitrary listening ports through a firewall."
Yup. To me it's a tool specifially designed to make firewall totally useless. Only a total idiot would create such a tool and protocol it uses.
"Ease of use" isn't an argument when firewall is full of holes every time you surf 10 minutes without user's knowledge as of course upnp "service" doesn't even log the changes it has done to anywhere.
"THAT is how i know that salaries are based on social expectations and Empire stroking their technokrats, NOT some sort of meritocracy..."
Banksters, who are getting paid most for least value, aren't technokrats at all, but 'economists'. That's as far as you can get from technology. These people live in a fantasy world where money rains from the sky and there are hundreds of conflicting theories, none of which can ever be proven. It's not even science by any sensible measurement.
"... as an aside, regarding men vs woman pay; excepting a -literal- percent or two of knuckledraggers, WHO disagrees that woman and men shouldn't get equal pay for equal work ? ? ?"
Not many ... but claiming that your job is the same as someone elses ("equal") and they are getting paid better because they are men, is just greedyness when it isn't the same work.
Men doing actually equal work are getting paid the same, so no problem here.
"and PREVENTING independent providers from offering competitive services for an extra fee (as one example)."
I call bullshit on this. It exists solely to guarantee that everyone gets what they paid for and if you claim otherwise, you haven't even read the damn paper.
Yet another paid shill, I see.
".. not only does it have neither wireless connectivity nor a USB socket,"
Remote locking is enough: Radio/infra access point and those listen to commands. If it doesn't even those then it's getting difficult, I admit that.
But even a RDS radio receiver is enough if and when it's connected to CAN, like it is in modern cars.
"The old suicide by car exhaust is extremely unlikely these days. "
Just old plain CO2 is plenty enough.
" Pre 1975 cars emitted about 100,000ppm CO, modern cars about 1,000."
You mean 10% and that's bullshit. Any even remotely modern car emitting that much CO is broken.
A -66 VW Bus emits about 1% and that's adjustable: Best performance is at that 1% CO. Anything over 2% and it's either adjusted wrong or broken.
This is what happens when the project size exceeds the capability of the company/management to manage a project.
Add some random cost cutting within company to increase profits (competent people tend to be expensive) and you'll get the picture.
But one thing is sure: LM is making record profits from this project. In the end, that's the only thing that matters for LM.
"No, I think everyone should pay the amount of tax that they are due to pay, "
Yes, but this is only small part of the whole truth: When you have a lot of money you buy laws which guarantee that you don't have to pay anything at all.
Much cheaper than actually paying taxes. And that is the norm, not an exception nowadays.
When bribery on top (EU Commission/US Congress) is legal, only those who bribe the most, are successful.
"a) Security (ability to use deniable, authenticated, end-to-end encryption with forward secrecy)"
And SMS doesn't provide all of those?
Without everything going to a) free to sell by FB (read the EULA sometime, will you?) and b) to NSA, directly.
No, there is absolutely _no_ security in anything related to Zuckenberg-mafia. None at all: Everything you do or send, is sold to anyone who bothers to ask and has money.
"How about automated algorithms that automatically tax all vehicles based on use, to the penny/km/mile?"
We already have that, it's called fuel tax. And at least here in Europe it's not a penny but several pennies per km, related directly to fuel consumption.
It also has the benefit of not having to track every car, all the time: Freedom of movement.
Tracked movement isn't free, it's a prison sentence.
"...but auto updates are necessary to protect us from the internet nasties."
The law of numbers: Few unpatched machines are always better than _all the rest_ broken. And it's not a question about if, but when that will happen.
Regardless of the necessity the choise taken now is even worse. And those aren't even excluding choises as we already know from windows 7 or 8.
"that these laws become quite overbearing and fascist when they can just be applied to all and sundry."
You are missing the point of these laws: They exist solely for enforcing fascism: Everyone is a terrorist if the powers that be say so. And the laws are written to support that, on purpose.
I find it correct then to label _literally anything_ as 'terrorism' as the laws make that kind of interpretetation not only possible, but totally legal and fitting into legal definition.
It is not an accident or 'poor decision' that anything can and will be 'terrorism', by law.
A point of view shared with some other commenters too. Unless they change the law, almost everything _is_ terrorism, by legal definition.
Just because terrorism laws let the authorities do anything they want, legally, and the suspect has no rights at all. That's why these laws exist and that's why they are used every day.
Fascist authorities wanted fascism written into law and they got it. Label is irrelevant at this point: Fascism is here as much as it was in Germany in early 30s.
"It's not too far removed from the old(er) US model on the CDMA(?) networks, where they didn't have SIMs and handsets were locked to a carrier. Great for carriers, crap for consumers."
This is a good point and reminds us again how some people _forget everything_ they've learned from the past as soon as something new and shiny is presented.
Soft-SIM is basically hard carrier lock which can't be removed. Ever. Want to change operator? Buy a new phone _and pay the old operator_ while doing so.
That's the way it's planned.
"2. If the phone doesn't have a physical SIM card, there's nothing to take out and switch
3. Therefore, I won't be able to switch carriers"
Strawman argument, thus void.
You can't change carrier because the current carrier doesn't permit it. And that is what _will happen_ when you have to have permission _from your current carrier_ to change soft-SIM carrier. When, not if.
Which part of this is too complicated to understand?
This is a total lock-in tool, nothing else and you'll _never_ get anything you don't already have.
Only function it has, is to _prevent carrier changes_. Carriers love that kind of lock-in.
You haven't learned that yet?
"... and WHY that might fail in the future."
This is an easy one: There's nothing extraordinary offered for the high price.
Every feature iphone now has, including slick UI, will be incorporated in a $100 model and even brand following has its limits: $600 phone won't sell if it doesn't have anything the 1/6 priced phone has.
Not imagination either, that's exactly what happened to Nokia when they started to re-release old stuff in different package again, again and again: Nothing actually new but premium prices led to falling sales globally.
Management problem, all the way, basically. And Apple is obviously in similar limbo now: CEO can't decide and/or has no visions of what next.
Apple without visionaries is quite dead, internally. With their pile of cash they may run a long time as company, but that's only a shell. Just like Nokia did, almost 10 years, until Elop butchered it.
"given that's the only thing they *actually* do"
So you have a whole TPM chip and you _know_ what it *actually* does, despite half of the functions being officially not documented and who knows how many functions totally secret, the NSA segment?
Nice idea, borders to being gullible.
"But the idea that any change in a computer desktop paradigm is automatically bad seems a little extreme."
Yes. But we are not talking about "any change", we are talking about totally new paradigm, like changing the car controls to ones taken directly from a submarine: Not many of those would make any sense to a car driver. Let's see:
"Depth" ... WTF is this? "Speed" .. OK, I know this ... "Direction: 330" ... WTF?... "Flaps: 33" ... "WTF?"
And this, this is the issue here: Throwing every familiar element there was, away, and replacing those with _no elements at all_. You basically have some tiles and no (visible) controls at all.
UI with swipes is quite absurd on a PC when you have mouse and keyboard and huge amount of screen space. Add injury to insult when you try to swish your hand around 24" touch screen whole day.
“The effect, cynically, is that if I want to catch you, I will be able to find a law somewhere that I can do it with.”
And how does this differ from anything that is going on in so called "free countries"?
From my point of view, China is at least 40 years behind in this kind of legislative dictatorship and in EU/US everyone already is a criminal, you just need to find a correct law. EU alone introduces 10 000 new laws _every year_.
"The European Commission proposed the Directive, which would have harmonised many aspects of consumer law."
Yes and we all know what "harmonisation" means to Commission: Lowest protection is made mandatory and maximum allowed to everyone. Even the word "consumer" implies that there shall be no rights whatsoever for those: "Citizens" have rights, "consumers" don't have.
" It was opposed in countries, including the UK, where it would have reduced consumer protection."
And what happened? Commission made some pretty rewording without changing the contents at all and ordered Parliament to accept it or even worse will happen.
Just like Central Committee in USSR.
"Miscavige described Anonymous as a group of "mask-wearing subversive and anarchistic internet denizens"."
Maybe, but that's not a crime. Stealing money and property from people is.
And that's the major function of scientology, everything else is an excuse for primary function.
"The Information Commissioner plans to appoint a panel of experts to advise his office on new technologies, following criticism it has been caught off-guard by emerging privacy threats."
And very convinietly _all_ of these "experts" are police officers or corporate spies, ie. the people _directly causing most of the privacy threats_.
By the best practices of the ICO.
I trust that ICO will do whatever they can to remove the last pieces of privacy anyone may have and this is just political newspeak to hide that fact.
"Heating water is extremely expensive energy-wise and the fact that most washers do it several times. After all, what's the point of washing clothing in dirty water."
No, they don't and it's _not_ a fact, but a blatant lie.
Why would they when one washing cycle is definitely enough.
There are several rinsing cycles but those are done with cold water.
As mentioned above: 0.94kWh/washing@60C. That's quite far from "extremely expensive" as you put it, your PC (or mine) will use that amount of energy in the same time you've used to read all the comments.
Would you call that "extremely expensive"? I wouldn't, unless I got paid for it.
Why people who have no idea how their washing machines work insist of throwing a lot of BS into discussion, tell us?
"Although they are far too lenient (amber means stop, idiots)"
No, it doesnt'. It means, literally "Be prepared to stop (if you can do it safely)."
Thus making yourself an idiot.
Red light means stop, but even that is conditional: If there are one traffic light post before crossing and the other after it, _you may leave the crossing against red light_.
So even red light doesn't _always_ mean stop.
Another example: There's an ambulance approaching and you stand at red lights. You are obliged to make way to ambulance (or fire truck or police) and again red light means nothing.
No doubt a camera will fine you in both cases, money must flow (from your pocket to government coffers).
"...shows that the vast majority of 16 popular utilities analysed fail to support either DEP or ASLR."
It costs money and needs a NDA to MS. Labour and design costs of course on top of those.
MS can't design anything which isn't a cash cow for them so no-one is willing to pay.
"They tend to email you, letting you know about changes so you don't need "constant monitoring".
"They're also unlikely to let too much private information slip out incase they get legally screwed... "
"Unlikely"? In what reality?
Any company can sell whatever they want and not even get a slap on the wrist for doing that. _If_ they get caught.
That's current reality and it's called capitalism: "If there's profit in there, do it and don't get caught."
"The thing that most idiots don't get is that each camera costs the safety partnership a fortune to run and they don't make a penny from it. So they must think they work."
Every camera pays itself back in three _months_. If the operator is not getting their share, too bad.
No sympathy for them from me, I'd say just: Hang them high.
Because cameras create more accidents than they prevent, as they prevent none and increase (fatal) rear end collisions by 22%.
Highway safety independent study, quite valid and also fits in the reality.
"I can't help thinking that it was in the main interest of Microsoft to demonstrate that an OS's consistency and reliability are more important than innovation, especially after the headaches of Vista."
Well, no: They hadn't any choice but sell yet another repackaged version of NT. Vista was and is a nightmare, so you sell yet another vesion of XP with DRM-kernel from Vista. That's Windows 8: Old pieces, new version. Not really innovation, but repackaging. An art by itself, I'll admit.
If you rip off unnecessary cruft and eye candy (=classic look), what is the fundamental difference between 7 and NT, besides DRM and some drivers (easy to write to any OS) ? Yet another version of ActiveX?
I'd say there aren't any, except 64-bit version. But even NT had it (not on intel-platform, but that's another story).
"Because there was no such thing as an "mp3" format 10 years ago!"
Winplay3 v2.0 is dated 28.10.1996. How do I know? I have that and there was a lot of mp3's available then. Format itself is older.
" And cellphones were, well, cellphones. Even stuff like "digital cellphones", "SMS" and even "Caller ID" were either premiums or nonexistant.""
Really? Nokia 3110 was released 1997 and it's a GSM (=digital) phone with SMS-capability and Caller-ID display as standard, at least here in Finland. 2110 is even older.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019