My point is that the obvious advantages of "web-based" email isn't really being delivered if you have to limit it to specific hardware in order to securely use it. Two factor lets you use webmail to it's potential (ie hardware agnostic) with some of the security assurances that hardware-specific solutions (like yours) can achieve.
In general, I think security systems that require users to act against the implied promises of the UI are crappy systems, so I'm glad to see two factor auth - a partial solutions to keyloggers and whatnot - being promoted.
Oh great. SEO has always been a magnet for black hat web spammers. But that was always, always traceable back to the black hat site in question. Call it "defensive SEO". But now? The actions of unknown third parties can trash a sites ratings -- offensive SEO. And how long will it be before botnet for hire offers to destroy your competitors in way which is essentially impossible to trace. Because SEO is absolutely that petty and specific. The opportunity to harm a competitors Google rating is, for many, too good to pass up.
Fuck fuck fuck fuck I do not want to have to deal with that.
The purpose of the Tobin Tax is generally not revenue. HFT groups run a gain of.001% per trade. So a tax of, say,.01% would shut them down entirely. They'd just quit.
Good one. However, I know it's not supposed to be hard SF, but I just couldn't get around a near-future in which we can accelerate planetoids at 1g for as long as we need. Must be some big honkin engines.
The middle section, in which the soldier returns home to find the planet he gave up his soul for is now a wretched cesspit of crime and misery that can't even remember his war, was omitted from the original publishing, because "Shit, man, we can't print that."
It's depressing because it's a just a retelling of the author's experience fighting the Vietnam War.
Option A) Yes, they could just pick a Linux distro and run with it. But now they're a software company, and they don't want that. Most of these things are publicly traded, and they don't have margin to do a year of no profits while they spin up of a new division without getting killed in the markets.
Or option B) they bitch a little and keep selling Windows.
Not sufficient, true. But the thing a new CEO needs most of all is time, and making some trivial but highly visible and generally popular changes that can be implemented in hours will buy her the time to actually address real problems, while giving the press something to talk about besides her uterus. The lady ain't dumb.
Some of those 'house of the future' articles are right. Behold the flatscreens, the fax machine, the roomba, the digital camera, Skype, telecommuting. The only real miss is in describing a neighborhood intranet instead of a globally connected on.
The cognitive dissonance occurs when people realize that the world's premier global festival is a "private" event in which the incredibly rich can exclude citizen participation for no better reason than it does not make them more rich.
Only Apple could get away with calling the decades-old progression towards more pixels per inch as "innovation" by giving it a fucking brand name. That fact that the displays are made by Samsung is just icing.
Apple doesn't innovate. They tinker with existing forms and make them more pleasing. It's not a bad thing, it's incredibly profitable, but don't pretend that Apple is actually trying stuff that might not work. Apple's patent stuff campaign, you will note, is not aimed at innovators, but at companies that execute well at scale. In other words, companies like themselves.
The uncritical consumer joy from an incremental change ("Retina!") that adds exactly zero functionality -- that's an innovation. Not one I particularly want to buy, though.
If Netflix is hacking together a site, why is their HD streaming more reliably pleasing than any other online service, including places like Comcast, which presumably has 100x the engineers on hand? Maybe they are good at teh hacking?
Slashdot Mirror
My point is that the obvious advantages of "web-based" email isn't really being delivered if you have to limit it to specific hardware in order to securely use it. Two factor lets you use webmail to it's potential (ie hardware agnostic) with some of the security assurances that hardware-specific solutions (like yours) can achieve.
In general, I think security systems that require users to act against the implied promises of the UI are crappy systems, so I'm glad to see two factor auth - a partial solutions to keyloggers and whatnot - being promoted.
"Any computer I use to check gmail is fully under my control."
That's not really webmail then, is it? Most products are more secure when you don't use them.
+1 to evidence based paranoia. Google IS my phone number, and whatever their faults, they don't call me and don't appear to share that number.
Can I add -bullshit to my query and let Google take them all out for me? Because it might be a long query otherwise.
Oh great. SEO has always been a magnet for black hat web spammers. But that was always, always traceable back to the black hat site in question. Call it "defensive SEO". But now? The actions of unknown third parties can trash a sites ratings -- offensive SEO. And how long will it be before botnet for hire offers to destroy your competitors in way which is essentially impossible to trace. Because SEO is absolutely that petty and specific. The opportunity to harm a competitors Google rating is, for many, too good to pass up.
Fuck fuck fuck fuck I do not want to have to deal with that.
The "homolife stuff", I believe, happens in the 3rd act and stayed in.
The purpose of the Tobin Tax is generally not revenue. HFT groups run a gain of .001% per trade. So a tax of, say, .01% would shut them down entirely. They'd just quit.
Good one. However, I know it's not supposed to be hard SF, but I just couldn't get around a near-future in which we can accelerate planetoids at 1g for as long as we need. Must be some big honkin engines.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Forever_War
The middle section, in which the soldier returns home to find the planet he gave up his soul for is now a wretched cesspit of crime and misery that can't even remember his war, was omitted from the original publishing, because "Shit, man, we can't print that."
It's depressing because it's a just a retelling of the author's experience fighting the Vietnam War.
"I have no loyalty to any specific vendor, indeed, why would anyone show brand loyalty?"
In related news, Apple Inc. PR released the following statement: "BWAHAHAHAHAHA BWAAAAHAHAHAAA BWAHAHAHA"
Where are they going to go?
Option A) Yes, they could just pick a Linux distro and run with it. But now they're a software company, and they don't want that. Most of these things are publicly traded, and they don't have margin to do a year of no profits while they spin up of a new division without getting killed in the markets.
Or option B) they bitch a little and keep selling Windows.
How is this different from Bittorrent? Isn't this the same principal, in a more router-oriented way?
Not sufficient, true. But the thing a new CEO needs most of all is time, and making some trivial but highly visible and generally popular changes that can be implemented in hours will buy her the time to actually address real problems, while giving the press something to talk about besides her uterus. The lady ain't dumb.
Your snark would be more compelling if THIS VERY DISCUSSION weren't a top five result for the search in question.
Try it. Warez sites tend to crush useful stuff from the results.
Some of those 'house of the future' articles are right. Behold the flatscreens, the fax machine, the roomba, the digital camera, Skype, telecommuting. The only real miss is in describing a neighborhood intranet instead of a globally connected on.
http://boingboing.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/COMPUTERS2.jpg
Via boingboing.net
I'd mod this up if you had a link.
The cognitive dissonance occurs when people realize that the world's premier global festival is a "private" event in which the incredibly rich can exclude citizen participation for no better reason than it does not make them more rich.
When exactly did we sign up for that?
Make it a tax instead of a fee, and then you're talking.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobin_tax
Only Apple could get away with calling the decades-old progression towards more pixels per inch as "innovation" by giving it a fucking brand name. That fact that the displays are made by Samsung is just icing.
Apple doesn't innovate. They tinker with existing forms and make them more pleasing. It's not a bad thing, it's incredibly profitable, but don't pretend that Apple is actually trying stuff that might not work. Apple's patent stuff campaign, you will note, is not aimed at innovators, but at companies that execute well at scale. In other words, companies like themselves.
The uncritical consumer joy from an incremental change ("Retina!") that adds exactly zero functionality -- that's an innovation. Not one I particularly want to buy, though.
Slashdot, why u no mod this funny?
Because it's less fun to watch? I mean, we could just give a medal to the lady with the highest VO2 Max, but that's not much of a sport.
As a counterpoint: Nuclear Deterrence.
Something having is the thing.
Well, that and it's not bounded on three sides by water.
If Netflix is hacking together a site, why is their HD streaming more reliably pleasing than any other online service, including places like Comcast, which presumably has 100x the engineers on hand? Maybe they are good at teh hacking?