Slashdot Mirror

...You might wonder why:

That's because an IP address is not a human being when it comes to matters of law.

This is what our friendly folks in Germany will find out sooner or later. The trouble is that they'll have wasted so much time. Sad indeed.

Surface could be a failure like Xbox or it could be a complete disaster like the Kin.

FTFY. There is no call to try to paint the Xbox as anything other than a money-loser. It has lost money in recent quarters to add to the historical losses. It may be the darling of advertisers and M$ boosters, but was only in the black a short part of its life and has now returned to being in the red.

Moving into hardware is a bold move for M$, but it's an area that the have not proven themselves in. It's also an area where the are as likely to anger partners as not.

Considering the apparent increased awareness on cyberthreats (i.e. Huawei, or Stuxnet), how you think it could affect Linux development and evolution?

I would have to agree. It also doesn't hurt that you can tether on their network for free, and there's really not a whole hell of a lot they can do about it.

If you are talking about t-mobile, that used to be true with my LG Optimus T phone (and various Nokia non-smartphones before that), but I just upgraded to a Galaxy S II, and they now hit me with a $5/month tethering fee.

I would have to agree. It also doesn't hurt that you can tether on their network for free, and there's really not a whole hell of a lot they can do about it.

Maybe Firefox of 7 versions ago...
http://www.itworld.com/sites/default/files/figure2_browserfootprint.jpg

Or maybe you had a badly behaving addon, but Firefox 15 fixed almost all the addon memory leaks too.

http://blog.mozilla.org/nnethercote/2012/09/05/memshrink-progress-week-63-64/

These days, Chrome is the hog, hands down. I've tested on OX, Windows and Linux.

why is Kevin Purdy such a goddamned retard?

You can see a video of Gates's presentation and an up-close video of toilet 2.0 here: http://www.itworld.com/windows/289818/bill-gates-wants-better-toilet-insert-joke-here

True, but as ITWorld's Kevin Fogarty says;

Still, the assumption seems to be true metaphorically, if not physically, so it's safer to assume Microsoft and its software have both been compromised. Given the track record of Stuxnet, Duqu and Flame for compromising everything they're aimed at, that assumption isn't even much of a stretch.

http://www.itworld.com/security/281553/researcher-warns-stuxnet-flame-show-microsoft-may-have-been-infiltrated-nsa-cia

Personally, I use Linux because it's lower maintenance and less overhead, and gets out of my way when I'm working, but if I was a business lead, I'd certainly be avoiding Windows for anything requiring data security. The wonder is that we're not seeing users suing over compromised data/systems.

However, probably many of the same people would not object to shutting off a command/control site for malware that was bringing down millions of PCs at a staggering economic cost, or to isolating a group who really were trading child porn.

The problem isn't the "censorship" per se (at least, not in my opinion), it's the ridiculous lack of probable cause and due process surrounding this shit. The Jotform takedown was a perfect example of how all of our fears regarding SOPA were completely justifiable. There should be public hearings before the government is able to declare something a "danger" and knock it off the 'net. The way it's handled now is totally against the spirit of the law and the concept of innocence until proven guilt. Outside of Freedom of Speech (which this SOPA shit directly undermined), and the guarantee of security of our person and property (which the TSA is doing everything it can to eliminate), that's probably one of the most sacred foundations of our entire fucking existence as a nation.

Kind of undermines all of our posturing about security and freedom while we're bombing villages in the middle east back into the stone age when we're playing the same fucking games we bitch about with our own citizens here at home. What I want to know is if the people condoning this bullshit are evil or just plain ignorant...it would save me the time trying to logically converse with them, at the very least.

If GeekNet does opt to sell SourceForge (and /. and Freecode), then ultimately this would be a good move to keep the Allura code out in the open. In that sense, I think this is a very good plan to protect the code.

tickets.domain.com

Next?

I could see, maybe, why some people would want this, but $100,000,000 worth? No, never happen, this will never make $100,000,000 in profits.

And it's owned by Paul Stahura who started eNom in 1997, so why did he need $100 million? Is eNom not going that great?

Ultimately it does not matter your domain, what matters is if people can find your website when they search for it, so really Google, Bing and Yahoo are important, not the domain name. It's not 1997 anymore, you don't need to say "go to blahblahjunkwebsite.com", you can say "google "best page in the universe" to find me"

direct link to the single-page print version to avoid idiotic goddamned clickbait.
Because the submitter is a nimrod.

Yes, it couldn't possibly be adversaries, and people want to do harm to the United States, in an environment where people like you firmly believe that everything must be a "false flag" operation designed to somehow take away your rights.

...

Or, it could be this:

Capability of the People’s Republic of China to Conduct Cyber Warfare and Computer Network Exploitation
http://www.uscc.gov/researchpapers/2009/NorthropGrumman_PRC_Cyber_Paper_FINAL_Approved%20Report_16Oct2009.pdf

Occupying the Information High Ground: Chinese Capabilities for Computer Network Operations and Cyber Espionage
http://www.uscc.gov/RFP/2012/USCC%20Report_Chinese_CapabilitiesforComputer_NetworkOperationsandCyberEspionage.pdf

How China Steals Our Secrets
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/03/opinion/how-china-steals-our-secrets.html

China's Cyber Thievery Is National Policy—And Must Be Challenged
http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB10001424052970203718504577178832338032176-lMyQjAxMTAyMDAwOTEwNDkyWj.html

FBI Traces Trail of Spy Ring to China
http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB10001424052970203961204577266892884130620-lMyQjAxMTAyMDAwNzEwNDcyWj.html

NSA: China is Destroying U.S. Economy Via Security Hacks
http://www.dailytech.com/NSA+China+is+Destroying+US+Economy+Via+Security+Hacks/article24328.htm

Chinese Espionage Campaign Targets U.S. Space Technology
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-04-18/chinese-espionage-campaign-targets-u-dot-s-dot-space-technology

Report: Hackers Seized Control of Computers in NASA’s Jet Propulsion Lab
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/03/jet-propulsion-lab-hacked/
http://oig.nasa.gov/congressional/FINAL_written_statement_for_%20IT_%20hearing_February_26_edit_v2.pdf

Chinese hackers took control of NASA satellite for 11 minutes
http://www.geek.com/articles/geek-pick/chinese-hackers-took-control-of-nasa-satellite-for-11-minutes-20111119/

Chinese hackers suspected of interfering with US satellites
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/oct/27/chinese-hacking-us-satellites-suspected

Former cybersecurity czar: Every major U.S. company has been hacked by China
http://www.itworld.com/security/262616/former-cybersecurity-czar-every-major-us-company-has-been-hacked-china

China Attacked Internet Security Company RSA, Cyber Commander Tells SASC
http://defense.aol.com/2012/03/27/china-attacked-internet-security-company-rsa-cyber-commander-te/

Chinese Counterfeit Parts Keep Flowing

How about something more realistic: one of the numerous computers connected to your LAN might have been infected with malware, and a remote attacker used your connection to break the law. It has happened in the past:

http://www.itworld.com/security/84077/child-porn-malwares-ultimate-evil

Citation needed.

Citation 1

Citation 2

First, a backdrop, beginning with the fact that China is on track to exceed US military spending by 2025:

Chinese Insider Offers Rare Glimpse of U.S.-China Frictions
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/03/world/asia/chinese-insider-offers-rare-glimpse-of-us-china-frictions.html

"The senior leadership of the Chinese government increasingly views the competition between the United States and China as a zero-sum game, with China the likely long-range winner if the American economy and domestic political system continue to stumble, according to an influential Chinese policy analyst. China views the United States as a declining power, but at the same time believes that Washington is trying to fight back to undermine, and even disrupt, the economic and military growth that point to China’s becoming the world’s most powerful country."

Asia's balance of power: China’s military rise
http://www.economist.com/node/21552212

"NO MATTER how often China has emphasised the idea of a peaceful rise, the pace and nature of its military modernisation inevitably cause alarm. As America and the big European powers reduce their defence spending, China looks likely to maintain the past decade’s increases of about 12% a year. Even though its defence budget is less than a quarter the size of America’s today, China’s generals are ambitious. The country is on course to become the world’s largest military spender in just 20 years or so."

China’s military rise: The dragon’s new teeth
http://www.economist.com/node/21552193

And now on to what's happening every day in US academic and business environments:

How China Steals Our Secrets
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/03/opinion/how-china-steals-our-secrets.html

China's Cyber Thievery Is National Policy—And Must Be Challenged
http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB10001424052970203718504577178832338032176-lMyQjAxMTAyMDAwOTEwNDkyWj.html

FBI Traces Trail of Spy Ring to China
http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB10001424052970203961204577266892884130620-lMyQjAxMTAyMDAwNzEwNDcyWj.html

NSA: China is Destroying U.S. Economy Via Security Hacks
http://www.dailytech.com/NSA+China+is+Destroying+US+Economy+Via+Security+Hacks/article24328.htm

Former cybersecurity czar: Every major U.S. company has been hacked by China
http://www.itworld.com/security/262616/former-cybersecurity-czar-every-major-us-company-has-been-hacked-china

China Attacked Internet Security Company RSA, Cyber Commander Tells SASC
http://defense.aol.com/2012/03/27/china-attacked-internet-security-company-rsa-cyber-commander-te/

Chinese Counterfeit Parts Keep Flowing
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=defense&id=news%2Fasd%2F2012%2F03%2F27%2F04.xml&headline=Chinese+Counterfeit+Parts+Keep+Flowing

China Corporate

after GPL V3 the numbers were flat for the first quarter (as businesses looked it over) and then it has been a straight down curve ever since. look up the numbers yourself, it makes a pretty little bell curve.

OK, let's see: in december GPL+LGPL+AGPL were at 57% according to the Black Duck report on the decline of the GPL. Now, according to the daily updated data by Black Duck, GPL2/3+LGPL2.1/3 are at 56.33%, put in AGPL and older GPL lincences and you get to 57%.

OMG!!111!! That's the flattest bell curve I've ever seen!

What they really meant is what 'they' printed.

For all of 2011, Apple shipped 40.49 million iPads, up from 15.1 million in 2010 and good for a market share of 62%. Runner-up for the year was Samsung, which shipped 6.11 million Galaxy Tabs, or 9% of the total 65.19 million tablets shipped last year.

The Kindle Fire, out for less than two months last year, still shipped 6% of all tablets in 2010, finishing third overall.

What seems readily apparent to me that there is no "Android market." Buyers reward the perception of functionality, they don't care what OS the device runs as long as fulfills their desire for functionality. At the end of the day, I know of not one buyer who really took the time to understand nuanced differences between Android based tablets, and it's not so amazing that Apple, with its superior understanding of user expectations and experience rules the tablet market.

After all, it matters not whether you buy a Kindle or iPad if you want to surf the web, shop online, listen to music watch a video or read a book. But it does matter to the ecosystem of sellers which device you bought.

The real question is, why do people continue to buy the iPad at 10:1 over the Kindle? Are they knowingly paying for superior, trouble free use, has Apple's dominance in creative media translated into better sales for media consumption, or is the fact that they've won the hearts and minds of youth through their success in the educational market translating into success in the tablet market.

Geeks may think that hackability is cool, but most consumers I know want a tool to work as advertised, and Apple actually makes the interface kind of fun in ways their competition has never fully grasped. I think the chickens are coming home to Cupertino because Apples HIG and focus on usability have proven to be the right way.

Android is still a baby compared to Macintosh.

Do any of your IT people in the US have sysadmin access to the Canadian data center? Are any Canadian operators directly answerable to your company's US management or executive staff?

If so, I'm not sure simply physically having DCs in Canada or the UK is sufficient protection against attacks by the US government.

We've already seem the US wildly overstepping its bounds by "[shutting] down online-gambling site Bodog.com, and indicted its three top execs, despite their non-U.S. citizenships, residence outside the U.S. and the fact that the company is based in Vancouver, has no physical presence in the U.S. and its gambling business is legal in the country in which the company operates". Their justification was that it had a .com registration, and they claim all sites using .com and .org are subject to US jurisdiction.

Your last comment comment about China is interesting:

The villain in the remake of Red Dawn was actually switched from China (realistic) to North Korea (ridiculous) in order to not upset China (and its movie audiences). I guess the producers figured that "vaguely Asian-looking" actors could just as easily be viewed by American audiences as Korean.

There is "sand" involved here, though: heads are nestled deeply in it.

It's interesting that you and the parent AC believe this is somehow a "war on the academic sector". There is indeed a war, but it's not coming from within. First, a backdrop, beginning with the fact that China is on track to exceed US military spending by 2025:

Chinese Insider Offers Rare Glimpse of U.S.-China Frictions
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/03/world/asia/chinese-insider-offers-rare-glimpse-of-us-china-frictions.html

"The senior leadership of the Chinese government increasingly views the competition between the United States and China as a zero-sum game, with China the likely long-range winner if the American economy and domestic political system continue to stumble, according to an influential Chinese policy analyst. China views the United States as a declining power, but at the same time believes that Washington is trying to fight back to undermine, and even disrupt, the economic and military growth that point to China’s becoming the world’s most powerful country."

Asia's balance of power: China’s military rise
http://www.economist.com/node/21552212

"NO MATTER how often China has emphasised the idea of a peaceful rise, the pace and nature of its military modernisation inevitably cause alarm. As America and the big European powers reduce their defence spending, China looks likely to maintain the past decade’s increases of about 12% a year. Even though its defence budget is less than a quarter the size of America’s today, China’s generals are ambitious. The country is on course to become the world’s largest military spender in just 20 years or so."

China’s military rise: The dragon’s new teeth
http://www.economist.com/node/21552193

And now on to what's happening every day in US academic and business environments:

How China Steals Our Secrets
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/03/opinion/how-china-steals-our-secrets.html

China's Cyber Thievery Is National Policy—And Must Be Challenged
http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB10001424052970203718504577178832338032176-lMyQjAxMTAyMDAwOTEwNDkyWj.html

FBI Traces Trail of Spy Ring to China
http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB10001424052970203961204577266892884130620-lMyQjAxMTAyMDAwNzEwNDcyWj.html

NSA: China is Destroying U.S. Economy Via Security Hacks
http://www.dailytech.com/NSA+China+is+Destroying+US+Economy+Via+Security+Hacks/article24328.htm

Former cybersecurity czar: Every major U.S. company has been hacked by China
http://www.itworld.com/security/262616/former-cybersecurity-czar-every-major-us-company-has-been-hacked-china

China Att

Lots of people believe they are trolls.The appellation is generally applied to non-practicing holders who sue infringers, especially if they try to get a permanent injunction to cease practicing the invention, or if the patent covers an implementation standard.

In this case CSIRO is suing people who implement IEEE 802.11a and 802.11g and go after permanent injunctions. This is poor behavior.

http://www.itworld.com/mobile-amp-wireless/58796/court-puts-csiro-wi-fi-injunction-hold

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/networking/australian-government-patent-troll-collects-from-wi-fi-vendors/2187

http://apcmag.com/wi-fi-patent-has-turned-csiro-money-mad.htm

http://legalpad.typepad.com/my_weblog/2009/10/patent-troll-throws-party-to-celebrate-its-huge-pots-of-money.html

http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=900005557448&slreturn=1

http://www.ipfrontline.com/depts/article.aspx?id=15866&deptid=7

http://www.itworld.com/print/264694

http://www.itworld.com/print/260490 :P

If the maximum ad viewing bothers you, you should know by now you can always try the print version.

Print link for your convenience.

Here: http://www.itworld.com/print/260490

Single-page version.

Here, take this (print version)

Or, if they could be updated like the Kindle (3G or WiFi), Ford could handle them all without the owner getting involved. And they wouldn't need to mail out 30,000 USB sticks or CDs.

Plus, Ford could then get real feedback from how the car is performing.

Because no one ever took advantage of short-sighted manufacturers that aren't security-conscious to do anything malicious to a car. Oh, wait...
Also, awesome insurance scam in the works if you can do a hostile takeover of a rich guy's car (the ones that will probably have cars with Wi-Fi) and make him get into a rear-end accident. BAM! Sweet-ass cash truck from his rich guy insurance agency. No cop will believe "My car got hacked."

A USB stick that arrives through the mail is hardly more secure than a Wifi update. It could even be less secure since an attacker could drop 10,000 of them in the mail anonymously without having to risk physical proximity to the car he's trying to hack.

Hopefully Ford uses digital signatures to validate the integrity of an update before the car will accept it, but signature validation works equally well (or poorly) whether its a USB Flash update or Wifi update.

Or, if they could be updated like the Kindle (3G or WiFi), Ford could handle them all without the owner getting involved. And they wouldn't need to mail out 30,000 USB sticks or CDs.

Plus, Ford could then get real feedback from how the car is performing.

Because no one ever took advantage of short-sighted manufacturers that aren't security-conscious to do anything malicious to a car. Oh, wait... Also, awesome insurance scam in the works if you can do a hostile takeover of a rich guy's car (the ones that will probably have cars with Wi-Fi) and make him get into a rear-end accident. BAM! Sweet-ass cash truck from his rich guy insurance agency. No cop will believe "My car got hacked."

So he is not under arrest, he has not been found guitly of a crime...but the state can prevent him from being alone with his own daughter? Let us spend some time thinking about how many things are wrong here.

Sorry, I was too busy thinking about a proposed law that divides the American public into two groups: registered sex offenders and unregistered sex offenders.

Actually, we haven't stopped SOPA. SOPA is being recycled under different names, with different advertising soundbytes. Lamar Smith is authoring another SOPA already. http://www.itworld.com/security/251584/sopa-replacement-uses-child-porn-excuse-spy-997-percent-americans

http://www.gamermc.com/2012/03/02/tired-of-internet-censorship-bills-join-the-black-march/

Our friends in Europe are waging a war against ACTA that we Americans were to stupid and/or to lazy to wage for ourselves. TPP is being negotiated in the same secrecy with which ACTA was.

I wouldn't worry so much about that, since autopilot systems are relatively simple and don't necessarily involve general purpose computers at all.

But the engines, on the other hand...

John Resig of jQuery fame outlines why Khan Academy decided to offer JavaScript as their first computer language. With video, of course.

From http://www.khanacademy.org/ :

• Computer Science
• Introduction to programming and computer science
• Python Lists
• For Loops in Python
• While Loops in Python
• ...

How is Javascript the first language if they are already teaching Python?

Unless you want to use another term, a $40k bill to get it running again is fairly bricked.

The original blog poster has a $40,000 quote, and the Tesla manual clearly states that the battery system will require replacement if depleted and not immediately recharged after entering range mode or running to 0% in reserve. They're worried enough about this that they instruct you to contact them immediately if you cannot charge your car.

Read the comments at ITWorld.

This should surprise just about no one, but, frankly, Tesla should have a low-charge relay pull or a manual lever for battery disconnect. Tesla doesn't appear to be arguing the point that their systems can fail in certain conditions, requiring costly replacement. Heck, they put it in the manual.

Simple answer: plug in your car.

And, yes, I still want one.

They're just trying to get our guard down, as any sinister anti-American organization would. Just watch: the minute the WSJ stops running editorials like this, the UN will take over! ;-)

Ah, yes, you so right: WSJ - Alert on Hacker Power Play. Among other things hackers will do:

* Hackers are the reason I have to get up for work.
* Hackers are the reason that the newest tweetdeck sucks.
* Hackers stole my bike!
* Hackers are the reason i lose my car keys all the time.
* Hackers are the cause of Global Warming.
* Hackers are the reason I need to pee while standing in line.
* Hackers Are The Reson No One Gets The Truffles.
* Hackers are the reason why NSA director General Keith Alexander is so ugly.
* Hackers is the reason Brady Quinn is a bad guy for speaking out against the patron saint of football.
* Hackers are the reason why my girlfriend is pregnant.
* Hackers are the reason why John McCain leaves his first alert medical bracelet on his nightstand
* Hackers are the reason I can't ever fold those stupid bedsheets with the elastic corners.

Funny. Chris Dodd (MPAA) and Cary Sherman (RIAA) also twist the truth and distort reality. Shoud Apple hire these guys?

Then in his opinion, wouldn't email be the same? It's stored on some 3rd party mail server somewhere... and for that matter, wouldn't all form of electronic communication that gets copied/stored somewhere not under your personal control also be classified as a "man in the middle attack"?

The difference is, as I'm sure you are aware, that Email isn't shared with everyone. Even Google will only mine your Gmail to select which ads it will foist on your screen. It won't publish them or let some third (fourth?) party publish them.

That it might be possible to see an email flowing thru an ISP's mail server or that your ISP might be served a warrant to deliver your email to the authorities does not come near to what happens on Facebook. Facebook it by its very nature a public posting, from which you have no recourse, even if you never sign up for facebook you can be damaged by its mere existence.

Imagine if you will, a web based email service where only you could send from your account, (as usual) but everyone could browse your email, both outgoing, and incoming (even from normal private email accounts), and you could never delete anything, even years after requesting to opt out.

Do you think it would sell?

Sadly, I suspect there are a large number of people who would be all in on such a scheme. I should patent it. But then I'd have to deal with the Winklevoss twins.

Let me cite things that Samsung might have done differently not to infringe upon Apple's "community design" according to Apple's lawyer (it might sound like a joke, but it IS NOT A JOKE): For the iPhone design, alternative smartphone designs include: front surfaces that are not black or clear; front surfaces that are not rectangular, not flat, and without rounded corners; display screens that are more square than rectangular or not rectangular at all; display screens that are not centered on the front surface of the phone and that have substantial lateral borders; speaker openings that are not horizontal slots with rounded ends and that are not centered above the display screen; front surfaces that contain substantial adornment; and phones without bezels at all or very different looking bezels that are not thin, uniform, and with an inwardly sloping profile. [A]lternate tablet computer designs include: overall shapes that are not rectangular with four flat sides or that do not have four rounded corners; front surfaces that are not completely flat or clear and that have substantial adornment; thick frames rather than a thin rim around the front surface; and profiles that are not thin relative to the D’889 or that have a cluttered appearance. http://www.itworld.com/mobile-wireless/230535/apples-helpful-guidelines-competitors-avoid-patent-infringement

Yes, exactly. Doing any one of those would have had them avoid infringement. Say, an identical Tab 10.1, but the speaker opening is two slots with square ends, or a bunch of pinholes. Or an identical Tab 10.1, with the Samsung logo on the front. Or a Tab 10.1 with two rounded corners and two squared corners. Or, the 10.1N, which is identical to the 10.1 except that the metal bezel wraps around two of the front sides.

Honestly, design patents are narrow. It's easier to not infringe one than it is to infringe.

Let me cite things that Samsung might have done differently not to infringe upon Apple's "community design" according to Apple's lawyer (it might sound like a joke, but it IS NOT A JOKE): For the iPhone design, alternative smartphone designs include: front surfaces that are not black or clear; front surfaces that are not rectangular, not flat, and without rounded corners; display screens that are more square than rectangular or not rectangular at all; display screens that are not centered on the front surface of the phone and that have substantial lateral borders; speaker openings that are not horizontal slots with rounded ends and that are not centered above the display screen; front surfaces that contain substantial adornment; and phones without bezels at all or very different looking bezels that are not thin, uniform, and with an inwardly sloping profile. [A]lternate tablet computer designs include: overall shapes that are not rectangular with four flat sides or that do not have four rounded corners; front surfaces that are not completely flat or clear and that have substantial adornment; thick frames rather than a thin rim around the front surface; and profiles that are not thin relative to the D’889 or that have a cluttered appearance. http://www.itworld.com/mobile-wireless/230535/apples-helpful-guidelines-competitors-avoid-patent-infringement

But as it keeps trying, it may find competition on its home turf: Qualcomm, which makes many of the ARM-based chips in those smartphones and tablets, wants to make PCs, too.

The article linked to says

The company is talking with PC makers about building thin and light computers based on its Snapdragon chips, Jacobs said during a keynote address at the Consumer Electronics Show.

which isn't quite the same as "Qualcomm ... wants to make PCs".

Okay, I'll admit that the article is very high in troll content but, as someone who has spent plenty of money on Apple products over the last 6 years, let me add that I'm getting more and more disgusted with their behaviour and I won't buy anything else from them for the foreseeable future.

That said, let me add more reasons to strongly dislike (if not boycott, let alone hate) Apple :

All apps on the Mac App Store will be required to run in the so-called App Sandbox

Apple sues but loses design lawsuit against Spanish tablet maker (producing a tablet nothing like the iPad)

Apple is using patents to undermine the development of Web standards and block their finalization

Apple has given valuable patents to a patent troll (which is using them to sue top technology companies)

And, last but not least, I don't know whether to laugh or cringe about this one:

Apple threatens 20-seat restaurant that sells only drinks, sandwiches and desserts because it's called AppleADay

RT.

Look on the bright side: with all of those LEDs in the tie[1], you might be able to get away with syncing it to Die Roboter[2].

[1] TFA, p. 3.
[2] Kraftwerk, 1977.

Ah, so, the iPad doesn't have a bezel, it just has something exactly like a bezel? And to claim that device is "curved" is ridiculous. Are you talking about the protrusion of the bezel? We obviously need to talk about technology.

See, there were two companies. One innovated a product over the course of years with public prototypes culminating in a release. The other company demoed a derivative product two months before the first one's launch. Yet you seem to think it's more likely that the first company, after years of development, suddenly completely redid it's supply, production, and assembly in two months, not counting auxiliary materials, because you have blind (or purchased) loyalty to a company that is attempting to abuse the patent system worldwide. The overwhelmingly more likely explanation is that they were both using the technology and materials available. Apple was no doubt 'inspired' by the Crunch Tablet, but that's how business works.

Oh, and regarding Apple's falsification of legal documents:
Here, and here.

I'm not even going to address the absurdity of your contention that MS didn't copy Google's results. There is evidence. I'm sorry it doesn't fit into your little world-view. However...

have a chip on your shoulder against Microsoft.

The fact that a mere description of MS' behavior is indicative of "having a chip" is more damning than anything I could ever say.

There is evidence that Google manage (in just a few of many attempts) to poison one of Microsoft search signals (an opt-in toolbar that tracked user behaviour, not Google). This was in many ways a form of Google bomb. http://www.itworld.com/internet/136002/googles-copying-accusation-called-silly (if you don't bother to read - it's called silly not by Microsoft, but by search industry experts)

The last time I asked you how long a fully patched Windows 7 machine without a firewall or AV software would last before it was compromised, you said that was immaterial -- but that is my whole point. To me, if Windows can never last long like that, that would be what I call intrinsically insecure. My idea of an intrinsically secure OS is one that, under the same circumstances, can almost always be relied upon to survive uncompromised up to the next security update. An OS like that has to be designed from the ground up with security in mind. Somehow, though, I don't think it would be accurate to describe Windows that way.

You're effectively adjusting your definition for your own convenience -- you still cannot point out a design flaw. You need to point out a design flaw/architectural flaw to say that it's intrinsically insecure.

Regarding your links:

Security-focused operating system

This is just a random list, compiled by someone on Wikipedia. From the article itself: In our context , "Security-focused" means that the project is devoted to increasing the security as a major goal. As such, something can be secure without being "security-focused." For example, almost all of the operating systems mentioned here are faced with security bug fixes in their lifetime. Regarding the highlighted part above: In who's content?

Security-evaluated operating system

Again -- just a random list of OSes with certain certifications. What random criteria are you using when selecting these silly links??

Why Windows security is awful

And this is an example of the blind leading the blind. You're willfully misinforming yourself by listening to people who know nothing. The guy calls DLLs insecure. Are you familiar with a .so in unix? Do you know the difference between a .so and a .dll? Answer -- there is none. The guy calls Active-X insecure -- (this is repeated ad-infinitum by people who basically know nothing about security). First -- Active-X itself was not the problem -- the problem was that it was enabled by default, which enabled sites use it to load malicious plugins. Problem fixed a very long time ago. In addition there are active-x killbits updates pushed out regularly (no other browser's gets these updates for their respective plugin technology, fyi). There is no material difference between active-x and any plugin technology for any other browser (for example look up mozilla's npapi -- they are equivalent, and do the same thing, and you can write malicious plugins using either one). Lastly, there are even more nasty things in the pipeline (look up NACL from Google) -- if you don't fear that one, and you fear Active-X, you've really outsourced all your thinking to slashdot, and decided not to do any of it yourself. Not to mention sandboxing for active-x again -- so again, your link is outdated and wrong, and your objection is outdated.

Next, the guy objects to OLE. Again -- do you think the equivalent technology does not exist in unix? The guy complains about macros -- yes, any time you have a parser, it is a security risk. This is well-known. This is one of the reasons browsers are such a huge target -- because they are parsers first and foremost, and what they parse is untrusted. Do you still never use a browser?? It goes back to what I told you earlier -- the only way to stay 100% uncompromised is to never use a computer at all. Is your goal to actually get some work done? If yes -- select the best tool for the job, and then secure the tool as best you can. That tool could very well be os-x, unix, linux, whatever. But you're fooling yourself if you think that

The last time I asked you how long a fully patched Windows 7 machine without a firewall or AV software would last before it was compromised, you said that was immaterial -- but that is my whole point. To me, if Windows can never last long like that, that would be what I call intrinsically insecure.

My idea of an intrinsically secure OS is one that, under the same circumstances, can almost always be relied upon to survive uncompromised up to the next security update. An OS like that has to be designed from the ground up with security in mind. Somehow, though, I don't think it would be accurate to describe Windows that way.

On the other hand, if under these circumstances you would still define Windows as an intrinsically secure OS, what, according to you, would be the definition and/or characteristics of an OS that is not intrinsically secure? (and I don't mean ones with obvious administrative flaws, like root/admin accounts that have stupid passwords).

You may also find these two articles interesting: Security-focused operating system and Security-evaluated operating system. Oh, and here's another, more recent, critique of Windows security: Why Windows security is awful.

I see plenty of comments on how reasonable or unreasonable the price is, and they are interesting. I generally agree it doesn't seem that out of whack price wise for a working application supported for some time period.

What I find more interesting is this story is being posted all over the web all of the sudden:

• IT World
• Free Republic
• Human Events
• Business Insider
• Gizmodo
• Big Government
• TPM

And of course here on /.

Hitting that range of sites (and more) with this sort of non-story story trying to push a narrative of the government is wasting your money? Someone behind the scenes is pushing this narrative, I suspect. Not news for nerds, but manufactured political outrage.

Calm down. The first link which was titled "how not to get heatstroke" takes you to a very useless page:
http://www.itworld.com/cloud-computing/227687/worthless-osha-app-federal-government-costs-200000 I read through the whole page, thank you very much. So I did read the fucking article.

The other link was "Rich Jones of GUN.IO", I didn't know that a link about the person would have more information about the subject than the linked article would.