Slashdot Mirror

In Finland Internet access indeed is a human right.

But of course, in some 3rd world countries such as the USA, even universal healthcare isn't a human right.

Seems the Roku is now the size of a USB dongle.

Recall hiding your face with large sunglasses and hair with a hood - commented on with end user facial recognition back in 2009.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-27076_3-10363727-248.html
Useful in winter/spring/fall and large sunglasses are easy to find.
"We threw in more than 50 shots that included large sunglasses--none of which were picked up as recognisable."
Anyone into todays Local Feature Analysis (LFA) vs the hinted at speed of nodal point databases like to comment on eye distance detection vs lens color and hood cover needed?

And then you proceed to talk about app profits, not app usage (also note, that Flurry is an analytics toolkit to be built in your apps.

Let's talk about web usage: Google has said under oath that 66% of it's mobile traffic comes from iOS devices even though Android devices out number iOS devices by at least 50%,

http://news.cnet.com/8301-33200_3-57323943-290/ios-vs-android-lots-of-stats-little-clarity/

Even general web usage is 58.5% iOS devices versus Android devices for non-computer devices.

The same link shows that on average, an iOS user downloads 2 apps for every one that an Android user downloads.

"

Yes, courts currently have to rule the website is immune from legal consequences of non-moderated posts, because that's what the current law (DMCA) says.

Which is exactly why the current Congress is working to pass SOPA, which would criminalize those posts, and give the government the power to shut it down.

This is the same government that is now killing American citizens who haven't been proven to have committed any crime or offense, but have been only accused by someone in the bureaucracy. The same government that just gave itself the power to kidnap American citizens even inside the US and imprison them forever, in secret, without even charging them with a crime, let alone proving anything about them.

And if they pass SOPA, they will have the power to shut down any website where anyone posts a complaint about it. Accusations of copyright violation, accusations of terrorism, whatever is convenient to the law without any proof required will get it shut down. Your rights are nothing; government power and its corporate sponsors' money is everything.

That's why you should do something to stop SOPA (and its Senate partner PIPA). Before it's too late, and SOPA deletes any website where you might even try.

...I guess.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-57349913-281/godaddy-bows-to-boycott-now-opposes-sopa-copyright-bill/

Doesn't matter. They made their intentions clear and they deserve to suffer for them.

What makes you think they reversed their stance?

Presumably, the news reports of their explicit statement that they now oppose SOPA (as well as the SOPA-alternative, PIPA, being advanced in the Senate.)

GoDaddy did NOT reverse their stance on SOPA. They only removed the publication on their supporting stance of SOPA. So they still support it, they just don't say it out loud.

Wrong.

GoDaddy, the domain register targeted by online activists in response to its enthusiasm for a pair of Hollywood-backed copyright bills, has finally denounced the legislation in response to a boycott scheduled for today.

Warren Adelman, the company's chief executive, said today that "GoDaddy opposes SOPA," meaning the Stop Online Piracy Act, which is facing a House of Representatives committee vote next month.

A GoDaddy spokeswoman confirmed to CNET this afternoon that "we oppose PIPA, as well." That's the Senate bill known as Protect IP, which will be debated on the Senate floor January 24. (See CNET's SOPA FAQ.)

...I guess. http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-57349913-281/godaddy-bows-to-boycott-now-opposes-sopa-copyright-bill/

Re "If it's phoning home, we can detect it."
The problem is not so much what is "phoning home" everyday but the carrieriq like layer between any shipped phone in parts of the world wrt https and all input.
From 2006 "FBI taps cell phone mic as eavesdropping tool" http://news.cnet.com/2100-1029-6140191.html
Before that you had the fun of the safe 56 bits and the Data Encryption Standard.
More at http://cryptome.org/nsa-v-all.htm
Products have shipped for generations before smart people began to discover what they had really installed and recommended beyond the accepted public math and low price.

Yep, don't let facts get in the way of your bias. Come on and tell us how you was blinded, but now suddenly had an epiphany and see all the copying vile Motorola does.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-57348511-281/godaddy-accused-of-interfering-with-anti-sopa-exodus/?tag=mncol;mlt_related

There's 33++ other ANDROID security issues I posted you avoid like the plague & we KNOW why, lol!

In fact? Here's some more, "continuing the trend", 8 at a time (since /. won't let me post more than that in a single thread):

---

http://news.cnet.com/8301-27080_3-20087265-245/android-users-twice-as-likely-to-see-malware-than-six-months-ago/

http://mobile.slashdot.org/story/11/08/01/2242233/Android-Trojan-Records-Phone-Calls

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/08/12/defcon_handsets/

http://mobile.slashdot.org/story/11/07/24/1715232/Android-Password-Data-Stored-In-Plain-Text

http://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2011/07/09/android-malware-spies-sms-messages-zeus-family/

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/06/01/android_trojan_rash/

http://mobile.slashdot.org/story/10/12/21/1849243/The-Smartphone-That-Spies-and-Other-Surprises

http://it.slashdot.org/story/11/05/17/1538226/Swiped-Tokens-Expose-Android-Devices-To-Data-Theft

---

* Once again, for the 4th o4 5th time now: Would you like more? I have PLENTY MORE where that came from!

APK

P.S.=> CarrierIQ running on ANDROID (a Linux variant) is indeed a problem for it, no matter what kind of "spin" you attempt to put on things I post - no questions asked, & it's only a SMALL FRACTION of the exploits "exploding" on the Linux variant called ANDROID!

So - do I "hate Linux or Android"? No, far from it - they're just operating systems after all!

(They both do the job & are pretty ok (I used both here over time))

HOWEVER, what I do dislike?

Well... the "std. 'FUD' b.s." I heard here on /. for YEARS (coming up on a decade now) of:

"Linux = secure, Windows != secure"

That has been disproven by security issues popping up on Linux (since it can no longer hide via "security-by-obscurity") OR ANDROID (a widely used Linux variant on smartphones, that TRULY illustrates that Linux was indeed, hiding behind lack of usage & thus, not a good target with enough users for justifying an "ROI" on time spent creating exploits for it... this is no longer the case on smartphones @ least))...

... apk

Try reading the reviews for this one as well, just as mocking. And while they may list it for $10,000 on Amazon (at one place only, no ratings, just launched with Amazon so likely a test product), the actual review for the cable http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-9967991-1.html and they also mocked it as nothing more than an overpriced ethernet cable. And show it priced at $500. The Amazon price is not authentic, just as the Best Buy price likely isn't, although they would likely be happy to take your money.

From the comments I've seen so far, nobody is reading the actual article. Quoting from the article:

"While 21,054 domains transferred out Friday of Domaincontrol.com--which is managed by Go Daddy--it is only fair to note that 20,034 transferred in the same day, according to domain tracker Dailychanges.com"

Thus the actual decline on Friday was just 980 domains.

How did this get missed when the article was submitted to /.? Who vets these submissions before posting? Aren't you supposed to read the whole (source) article, and not just the headline?

Actually, Microsoft is against it. http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-57330078-281/surprise-microsoft-quietly-opposes-sopa-copyright-bill/ And the BSA is backing off fast... http://venturebeat.com/2011/11/21/bsa-sopa-response/

Look at this chart, tiny bit longer doesn't quite cover it. Though of course for some this will be a completely acceptable trade-off it'd be better if most people were on a recent version of the OS just from the security standpoint. We've already seen with Windows XP what having a large group of outdated computers on a public network does and it's not pretty.

Well, it may be the first time APPLE is doing it, but others have been there, done that ...

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Panasonic-Fuel-Cell-Prototype,6516.html (2008)
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/09/29/lg_chem_fuel_cell/ (2005)
http://news.cnet.com/2100-1008_3-1022130.html (2003)

If any patent office employee granted a patent on the idea of using a fuel cell in notebooks, they are obviously incapable of doing a simple google search and should therefore be fired for being unfit to do their job ...

How SOPA's 'circumvention' ban could put a target on Tor

BearShare, Limewire, Kazaa, and even Usenet.

They even use companies like MediaDefender to disrupt P2P networks.

Revisionist much?

First iPhone 2007
First Android, 2008
And in case you meant smartphones or touchscreen phones in general, here's a couple more for you.

If that was too subtle for you, there were no Android phones before the iPhone, but the smartphones we have today are a natural evolution of smartphones that existed before the iPhone. You, sir, FAIL.

Remember that TMobile is a PROFITABLE company. They are actively making money. If DT would just cut them lose and give them the freedom to succeed or fail, I am willing to bet that they would do pretty well.

Profitable is an elusive beast. Its doubtful T-Mobile alone would survive.

During the first quarter of 2011, T-Mobile saw its revenue hit $4.63 billion, putting it in line with the first quarter of 2010. However, the company's profit fell over $200 million year over year from $362 million last year to $135 million in the first quarter of 2011.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-20060353-17.html

They can see the writing on the wall, as their small market area makes it hard for them to compete.

In addition DT has problems elsewhere, parts of their Euro market are also tanking. In fact the German market sees to be the only place they are making a good profit margin. They were counting on the now-defunct sale as a source of income.

I just don't understand where this misconception that Firefox uses a lot of memory comes from. Firefox is the leanest of the three major browsers in all test that I have seen, while Chrome is usually the worst offender. Here is comparison of memory usage from CNet: http://download.cnet.com/8301-2007_4-20047314-12.html
When comparing memory usage results are the following:
Chrome 10: 390 532
IE9: 205 616
FF 4: 148 020

There are other test with similar results. Also note that, since then, Firefox 7 supposedly reduced the memory footprint by 20 - 30%.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-57333084-54/military-deploys-distributed-solar-en-masse/?tag=mncol;posts
Is the way to go.

Notably, four representatives on the committee—Darrell Issa (R-CA), Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) and Jared Polis (D-CO)—are fighting against SOPA all the way. Issa proposed an amendment yesterday that would have gutted the worst parts of SOPA out of the bill, though it unfortunately failed. Chaffetz's appeals to the potential compromise of DNSSEC finally got the thing shelved until real Internet experts can testify before the committee.

As the chief opponents of the bill are equally split, it shows this isn't a partisan issue (for once) but largely a who-is-bought-and-paid-for issue. I've watched a fair amount of the committee's meetings. The actions and attitudes of the bill's proponents has been shameful. Lamar Smith (R-TX), SOPA's sponsor, appeared determined to railroad the thing through the committee as-is no matter what. That he accepted a temporary end to discussion on the bill is a minor miracle. Smith basically lives in Hollywood's back pocket.

You left out shutting down the cell phone system: http://news.cnet.com/8301-27080_3-20091822-245/s.f-subway-muzzles-cell-service-during-protest/

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety". Benjamin Franklin

"Jesus Wept"

you can simply avoid a certain brand.

There are both Ds and Rs in favor of the bill, too.

Meet SOPA author Lamar Smith, Hollywood's favorite Republican.

He may be a Tea Partier from rural Texas with an "A+" rating from the National Rifle Association," but the TV, movie, and music industries are the top donors to Smith's 2012 campaign committee, according to data complied by the Center for Responsive Politics.

The Tea Party are marks. His donors are his real constituency.

The 1st of the new line of 4k TVs goes on sale this month:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-20116433-1/toshibas-$12000-55-inch-4k-3d-tv-dazzling/

and there's lots more in the pipeline. We're on the edge of another jump in resolution for home media. (I hope.)

I don't know if Blu-Ray media has the bandwidth/throughput to stream 4k.... if not, we could be in for another format war again. (Or media would come on a disk, and have to be transferred to hard drive before it could be played.) Remember, both MS and Sony consoles were keen on being movie playing devices as well as gaming devices.... I doubt they will move away from that position.

What Microsoft needs to do is look at the upcoming tech and plan for it. If they make a device that's only capable of 1080p, and a year or two later Sony comes out with something that will do 4k.... it'll be ugly for Microsoft.

The UK police are testing something that came out some time ago. http://news.cnet.com/8301-17852_3-20011548-71.html

Way to stay on top of things!

As for police forces having another tool in their arsenals, that's fine. Far too often police in the US are hamstrung by being under-funded, under-manned, out-gunned, etc. In all honesty, if you've done nothing wrong you should have no reason to fear any police force operating in the bounds of law so long as they remain within there. The problem lies not in the power but in the abuses. Far too often governments, police, and military misuse and abuse the power they are given by the people. This device could help if used rightly to avoid the use of 'deadly force' - but like any tool, the misapplication can have significant impact.

People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.

Except that studies show that driving while using one's cell phone are as dangerous as DUI:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-6090342-7.html

Another "iPad killer" in the dustbin. You are not going to compete with Apple with some cobbled together piece of junk

Fire = $199 is a "cobbled together" piece of junk only because the goodness of the OS has been hobbled by Amazon so that you're tied to Amazon for all your shopping needs, much like the much more expensive iPad ties you to Apple. The day is coming, very soon I might add, that a $100 Ice Cream Sandwich may show them all who's boss.

Moreover, it is not about religion. No one thinks their neighboring country has the best religion just because of a Christmas tree.

It's about light. Look at the North Korean night sky. The North Koreans don't have much light at night, so that Christmas tree just became the brightest object around, even if you're standing in the middle of a North Korean city.

They announced in July that downloads would include an installer, and that such installer was going to include "offers for other software" (i.e. Ads)
https://upload.cnet.com/8301-21_5-20084419-9978525.html?part=rss&tag=feed&subj=DownloadProductReview
The next time I downloaded something I noticed such thing and decided to stop downloading anything from Cnet (and I guess a lot of people did too), so I think this is hardly something to be called "they got caught" as it was in the plain view of everybody.
 

It's quite clear from the picture that it is in fact CNET's installer and the Nmap text is just the title to install. There is no trademark issue either, it's perfectly fine to tell user the name of the program he is about to install. Otherwise we would have to shut down all download sites on the internet, and probably slashdot too because /. mentions names of products in their summaries. Oh the horror.

Besides, Nmap author probably has given CNET permission to distribute the program at one point or another. Download sites rarely hunt for programs from the internet. Instead it works by authors either submitting their programs directly to CNET (in this case via https://upload.cnet.com/ ) or by using PAD files and distribution services that were specifically created for distributing software among websites and other services (see http://pad.asp-software.org/ ). In both cases the software authors also give full rights to distribute his software, so even if there would be trademark issues (there isn't), the authors would have given permission to use their softwares name.

Actually, there is a product like this for retailers which basically involves a robot modeling clothes. An interesting idea that I hope catches on.

But they didn't do anything illegal. They're basically just using their own download application that comes with extra stuff.

Yes, but Download.com still assures users that they will never bundle that "extra stuff". Their Adware & Spyware Notice says:

In your letters, user reviews, and polls, you told us bundled adware was unacceptable--no matter how harmless it might be. We want you to know what you're getting when you download from CNET Download.com, and no other download site can promise that.

Also, they make it look like a download link for the real installer (which it used to be), and then the user gets this CNET crap. But they still used our name liberally in the trojan installer as if we were somehow responsible for or involved in this abomination. I've got screen shots on my Download.com fiasco page.

Also, this "apology" rings hollow because they aren't fixing the problem along with it. In particular:

1) He claims that bundling malware with Nmap was a “mistake on our part” and “we reviewed all open source files in our catalog to ensure none are being bundled.” Either that is a lie, or they are totally incompetent, because tons of open source software is still being bundled. You can read the comments below his post for many examples.

2) Even if they had removed the malware bundling from open source software, what about all of the other free (but not open source) Windows software out there? They shouldn't infect any 3rd party software with sketchy toolbars, search engine redirectors, etc.

3) At the same time that Sean sent the “apology” to users, he sent this very different note to developers. He says they are working on a new expanded version of the rogue installer and “initial feedback from developers on our new model has been very positive and we are excited to bring this to the broader community as soon as possible”. He tries to mollify developers by promising to give them a cut (“revenue share”) of the proceeds from infecting their users.

4) You no longer need to register and log in to get the small (non-trojan) “direct download” link, but the giant green download button still exposes users to malware.

5) The Download.Com Adware & Spyware Notice still says “every time you download software from Download.com, you can trust that we've tested it and found it to be adware-free.” How can they say that while they are still adding their own adware? At least they removed the statement from their trojan installer that it is “SAFE, TRUSTED, AND SPYWARE FREE”.

But they didn't do anything illegal. They're basically just using their own download application that comes with extra stuff.

Yes, but Download.com still assures users that they will never bundle that "extra stuff". Their Adware & Spyware Notice says:

In your letters, user reviews, and polls, you told us bundled adware was unacceptable--no matter how harmless it might be. We want you to know what you're getting when you download from CNET Download.com, and no other download site can promise that.

Also, they make it look like a download link for the real installer (which it used to be), and then the user gets this CNET crap. But they still used our name liberally in the trojan installer as if we were somehow responsible for or involved in this abomination. I've got screen shots on my Download.com fiasco page.

Also, this "apology" rings hollow because they aren't fixing the problem along with it. In particular:

1) He claims that bundling malware with Nmap was a “mistake on our part” and “we reviewed all open source files in our catalog to ensure none are being bundled.” Either that is a lie, or they are totally incompetent, because tons of open source software is still being bundled. You can read the comments below his post for many examples.

2) Even if they had removed the malware bundling from open source software, what about all of the other free (but not open source) Windows software out there? They shouldn't infect any 3rd party software with sketchy toolbars, search engine redirectors, etc.

3) At the same time that Sean sent the “apology” to users, he sent this very different note to developers. He says they are working on a new expanded version of the rogue installer and “initial feedback from developers on our new model has been very positive and we are excited to bring this to the broader community as soon as possible”. He tries to mollify developers by promising to give them a cut (“revenue share”) of the proceeds from infecting their users.

4) You no longer need to register and log in to get the small (non-trojan) “direct download” link, but the giant green download button still exposes users to malware.

5) The Download.Com Adware & Spyware Notice still says “every time you download software from Download.com, you can trust that we've tested it and found it to be adware-free.” How can they say that while they are still adding their own adware? At least they removed the statement from their trojan installer that it is “SAFE, TRUSTED, AND SPYWARE FREE”.

I wish I could be smug just laugh at India and its stupid corrupt politicians.

Unfortunately this kind of hare brained ideas aren't limited to the third world.

In Australia the filtering plan seems to be on hold for now, but you don't even need a slippery slope argument to know how batshit insane and scary the idea of a secret internet censorship blacklist is: http://nocleanfeed.com/

Or have we already forgotten the UK plan to censor social media during times of social unrest: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/blog/2011/aug/11/uk-riots-day-five-aftermath-live#block-33

Think of how easily that could be used in the style of the Arab governments to cripple organised protests against the government.

Or we can mock India for wanting to intercept and read Blackberry messages, and ignore the implications of legislation like the Patriot Act: http://politics.slashdot.org/story/11/12/02/1923207/patriot-act-clouds-picture-for-tech

Or have we forgotten the domain seizures to try to block pirated content with no due legal process: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/07/domain-seizures-defended/

Even extending to attempts to block a Firefox add on: http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-20060636-281.html

Blocking sports streams when they still cannot find a way of offering pay per view streaming of major sports events over the internet, where your only way of viewing a couple of hours of sports content a week is to sign up for an expensive cable package that gives lots of stuff you will never watch and THEN purchase an extra expensive add on for the sports content. And the US government is protecting that business model by seizing domains with no legal notice or court enforced legal process.

I would love to be able to just mock India, if we could afford to be that complacent...

On a side-note: The current BB OS 7 based phones are good, but I would rather wait till the QNX based phones come out and then start tinkering around with them

I hope Michael Dell take his own advice..

What would I do? I'd shut it down and give the money back to the shareholders"

For those of us who didn't catch the article when it was going on: http://news.cnet.com/2008-1082_3-5065859.html?tag=lh

I have no idea why people say that Firefox memory usage is poor, when all test that I have seen come to the conclusion that it is pretty good, and Chrome in particular uses a lot of memory.

Here for example is one article on CNet http://download.cnet.com/8301-2007_4-20047314-12.html

Here are the measurements of memory usage in kb for the three major browsers from that article.
Chrome 10: 390,532
IE 9: 205,616
Firefox 4: 148,020

Here is a slightly older article coming to the same conclusion on Tom's Hardware: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/firefox-chrome-opera,2558-4.html and there are other articles.

Please also note that Mozilla claims to have reduced memory usage by 20-30% with the Firefox 7 release.

The problem is ultimately that Firefox was out-Firefoxed. Chrome is what Firefox was in its beginning

No. Chrome can't out-Firefox Firefox because it never has been and never will be what Firefox is. Firefox exists to promote the interests of Web users. Chrome, in contrast, exists to promote the interests of Google.

Corporations are only useful insofar as their interests coincide with your own. With Chrome, Google will decide that its interests trump the end user's. A simple example is Chrome's new in-browser advertising. In-browser advertising is only useful to Google and is utterly useless to me as a Web user. I prefer not to use adware so I don't use Chrome.

The summary states as a fact that the Mozilla-Google deal is ending, based on a blog post that inferred that the deal was apparently ending based on Mozilla continuing to make the same kind of vague statements about deals with search engine providers that they have for most of the last several years without any specific updates on the Google deal, which is a pretty flimsy basis for the inferrence, but at least that source (unlike TFS) only stated that the deal had "apparently" ended, not stating that it was ending as a fact.

But, Google has since explicitly denied that their agreement with Mozilla has ended. (See, for instance, this CNET article.)

"The device ends up storing about 200 kilobytes of data," he says. "That's typical upload size. When it gets to the point that it's full, it'll do an upload or it'll drop data and start wrapping and store summary information." (Customers aren't charged for the upload, and it's disabled when the phone is roaming.)" How Carrier IQ was wrongly accused of keylogging

How Carrier IQ was wrongly accused of keylogging

Agreed, but be sure you understand who is doing the data mining and "psych profiles".
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-57318396-17/cias-vengeful-librarians-track-twitter-facebook/

Once you have CHOSEN to go to the Google webspace then yes, you will see the whole Google portfolio; nothing wrong with that, you would not expect to see Macy's products advertised on Sears would you?

Just like people CHOOSE to buy windows machines instead of Mac or Linux desktops? Ofcource thats why Windows rocks. Right? You wouldn't expect Microsoft to bundle Firefox instead of IE right? Ooops.. except thats what the EU wanted. They forced them to promote other browsers in various ways.

. If you install windows and select the default/first option everywhere you end up with bing/MS on everything. and yet: PEOPLE ACTIVELY CHOOSE GOOGLE.

Oh really? You mean how Google pays money to Dell to make google.com the default search engine?

http://news.cnet.com/2100-1032_3-6077051.html

How they pay Mozilla to make Google.com the default search engine? It just goes on and on. If everyone was going to use google anyway.. why waste money? LOL You are a fucking google shill. I hope they pay you well.