But if the PKI infrastructure makes it really hard to manage certificates, there's not a lot the mail user agent can do about that!
I've been using PKI infrastructure for about as long, and my experience has been very different, even with non-technical users.
I'm curious what issues you're running into that makes it "really hard to manage certificates." Perhaps your definition of difficult differs greatly from mine..
So it wouldn't surprise me at all that the banks want to negotiate a lower service fee (much like the UK and Russia have done).
I have zero sympathy for the stores, however, whose motivation is clearly to track their consumers, and sell the invormation. You know, little things like tracking what we spend, what we buy, how much we spend, where, what time, and so on. Very much like how in the days before EMV, the magstripe on a credit/debit card was (and still is) used to track consumers in the US.
It's shockingly invasive (and creepy) to start getting advertisements for baby needs the same week I bought my first Baby bottles in anticipation of my firstborn. My transaction information was clearly bought and sold. Who needs Big Brother to watch when every major store and payment provider is just as invasive.
Google was a company run by techies. Techies haven't been making the calls for quite some time now - Google's advertising clients do. Or have you been willfully ignorant of the past decade?
I'm generally in the camp of "If your 2nd factor is an app you're doing it wrong".
2nd factor is pretty worthless if it doesn't require human interaction, otherwise, you get malware working with a keylogger to silently connect over Bluetooth and obtain valid 2nd factor as long as you're within range.
Rust is the only thing with a shadow of a promise to tackle either of those two problems.
The idea that Rust is the only thing with promise to address either is pure bullplop, and a lousy pretense to justify their NIH asshattery.
* Rust is not the only memory safe language. Seriously, they've been around for decades now. * Rust is not the only concurrent language. Again, concurrency isn't a new problem, and solutions have existed for decades. * Rust sure as hell isn't the first concurrent and memory safe language.
It reminds me of the first chapter of Mozilla's history: Back between 1998 and 2002, Mozilla shipped nothing. The only thing to come from them were promises and platitudes.
Instead of shipping a browser for users, and promoting an open web in the now (when it mattered), Mozilla implemented an entire cross-platform userspace, and after that, they started working on a browser. Mozilla was perpetually late, and was perpetually delayed.
By the Mozilla shipped anything, you couldn't log into most banks without IE running on Windows.
KDE's developers also know of the "promise" of Mozilla, except they saw it for the lie it was. KDE did in one year what Mozilla couldn't do in four: write a clean, lightweight W3C compliant web browser from the ground up.
History, it seems, is repeating itself. Instead of promoting an open web and shipping a modern product, Mozilla is (yet again) leaving us with a stagnant turd while it wastes time it doesn't have re-implementing the wheel again.
We'r emote or less agreeing here: Few apple watches will ever be an heirloom (and even then, purely for sentimental reasons, much like an old pair of sneakers owned by somebody).
Rolexes are an entirely different animal - they are heirlooms, and that's my entire point: It's not terribly clever to compare a Rolex, which will be around for decades against something that'll be junked in a few years.
It's not all that different from comparing a Rolex to a Garmin fnix. They both tell time, but it's a ridiculous comparison to begin with.
Even Apple realized that mistake: They don't even sell a gold version anymore.
Trying to call the Apple Watch a failure is wishful thinking for those who hate it.
I see quite a few Apple watches as I walk around my city going to/from work. I'm seeing more Apple Watches, in fact, than any other single brand of watch. It's reached the point where I'm seeing more Apple Watches than other fitness trackers (though that's due more to a decline in fitness tracker use than Apple's success).
I don't know any of those owner's use case for the Apple Watch, and they sure as hell have no obligation to justify their consumer choice to me or anyone else.
So at the end of the day, I have to go with the reality I see, instead of falling back to "alternative facts" that support the narrative I like. I'm seeing a decent number of Apple Watches, and it's effectively the only smartwatch I see.
There's certainly nothing approaching the kind of penetration we see with smartphones, but as far as I can see, the Apple Watch is effectively the only smartwatch people buy.
Let's face it, this article is effectively/. clickbait - it'll generate a lot of comments (of which I'm guilty). There's a sizable portion of the/. readership who will instantly start frothing at the mouth at the merest hint of any Apple story.
Given the cancellation of a few anticipated Android cousins, we become all the more rabid should the Apple Watch be mentioned.
A story about the Apple Watch being successful? Just post it and watch the clicks roll in.
I have to admit a certain amount of ignorance here, but is it possible to get a Rolex for $400?
I suspect that's where your argument falls down; it's as ridiculous as comparing a Bic Cristal to a Pelikan Souveraen, or a Vietnamese Moped to a Maybach.
In other words, you're comparing a mass-market product with an heirloom product. They're not even close to equivalent.
Sony bought the media businesses to force at least one major player in the respective industries to support their proprietary formats.
Long before MiniDisc was DAT, which was delayed in the US by something like 5 years because the RIAA threw a congressional-level hissy fit about home recording killing the industry. NONE of the major labels released music on the DAT because because they felt so threatened by perfect digital copies.
Sony didn't push for copy protection at the time - rather the opposite, arguing that it was unnecessary. The RIAA shitfest that followed lead to the Audio Home Recording Act of 1992, which enshrined copy protection in US federal law.
By then, DAT was deader than a can of SPAM, and Sony lost millions of R&D money, and probably billions in sales of consumer devices, had DAT not been snuffed in the cradle by the RIAA.
Still stinging from BetaMax and DAT, Sony decided "Never again", bought BMG music, fired the curmudgeons at BMG who helped kill the DAT, and released the MiniDisc with full support by Sony BMG Music -- as well as the Audio Home Recording Act's required Serial Copy Management System
It wasn't until a decade later, in the heyday of the CD-R and MP3 that Sony tried to enforce copy protection on CD's - and even then, it can be argued it was to promote Sony's proprietary formats (MiniDisc and ATRAC) over open standards like MP3. It took a ridiculously long time before Sony would support any standardized audio format.
Being tech wizards means nothing if they can't get the various pre-recorded media industries to support their tech.
I seem to recall Sony bought what became Sony Music after the music industry's campaign against the Digital Audio Tape (DAT) effectively killed the format for consumer use (and made it a multi-billion dollar loss for Sony).
Stinging from the demise of BetaMax, and DAT, the execs at Sony did the math, and realized they could buy media corporations outright, fire a few of the the curmudgeons, and force them to support Sony formats -- and it'd still be cheaper than what they lost on DAT. A few years later, Sony released the MiniDisc over the Digital Compact Cassette. As it was supported by Sony Music's offerings, the MiniDisc had a respectable amount of pre-recorded albums for sale.
It simply didn't gain enough traction before CD-R's effectively killed the MiniDisc.
Sony also used its record label status to help push the Super Audio CD over DVD Audio a few years later.
In the Movie Business, Sony bought movie studios force a level of industry support for SDDS (Sony Dynamic Digital Sound) in theatres instead of Dolby Surround and DTS.
Sony also used its studio clout to push industry adoption of the DVD, and Blu-Ray a decade later.
Dear Amazon: You support practically every major device.
The Apple TV fits my family's use case the best. I want you to take my money, but I'm only going to do it if I can actually use Amazon Video with it.
Even if it's a "crippled" version which doesn't allow on-device purchasing and rentals.
But there's no point in paying for a service I can't use on my device.
At the end of the day, I only have so many HDMI ports on my TV, and my family doesn't want to deal with the added complexity of an HDMI switch and yet another device.
All excellent points, and we could no doubt discuss how humans would fare in the midst of a Shoggoth feeding event.
Who is to say it's a feeding event that humans need to fear? We don't know a lot about Shoggoths; for all we know, they are more interested in vivisection than feeding.
Or, for that matter, they may just want to kill us and move on. We certainly have no issues with killing mice & insects, with no thought to eating them.
I think we can both agree that a human interaction with a Shoggoth will not end well for the human.
During William Dyer's expedition in 1931, the Shoggoths didn't appear to cause any injury to anybody on the expedition -- though in fairness, the survivors high-tailed it away as soon as they started hearing the Shoggoths coming. On the other hand, something even older than the Shoggoths nearly exterminated the entire expedition.
It's also not clear that Shoggoths are of extra-terrestrial origin; they may have originated on Earth.
If everyone else on the road is going 5-10 over the speed limit
What heavenly part of the world are you driving in?
My local observation is that there are always a significant minority drivers who insiste on driving 5-10 MPH below the speed limit, and get road-ragey at anybody passing them.
Slashdot Mirror
And that's why Facebook just added support for OpenPGP notifications?
You get a gold star for independently coming up with the industry standard solution!
Encrypting the attachments is exactly what PGP/MIME and S/MIME have done for at least a decade now.
But if the PKI infrastructure makes it really hard to manage certificates, there's not a lot the mail user agent can do about that!
I've been using PKI infrastructure for about as long, and my experience has been very different, even with non-technical users.
I'm curious what issues you're running into that makes it "really hard to manage certificates." Perhaps your definition of difficult differs greatly from mine..
So it wouldn't surprise me at all that the banks want to negotiate a lower service fee (much like the UK and Russia have done).
I have zero sympathy for the stores, however, whose motivation is clearly to track their consumers, and sell the invormation. You know, little things like tracking what we spend, what we buy, how much we spend, where, what time, and so on. Very much like how in the days before EMV, the magstripe on a credit/debit card was (and still is) used to track consumers in the US.
It's shockingly invasive (and creepy) to start getting advertisements for baby needs the same week I bought my first Baby bottles in anticipation of my firstborn. My transaction information was clearly bought and sold. Who needs Big Brother to watch when every major store and payment provider is just as invasive.
This is complete opposite from "Don't be evil". This is outright intrusive and evil.
Big brother is real... he's just not a government employee, nor does he work for Apple or Microsoft.
When Google does absolutely anything that's pro-user and pro-privacy at the cost of advertiser intrusiveness, I'll re-evaluate that statement.
Google was a company run by techies. Techies haven't been making the calls for quite some time now - Google's advertising clients do. Or have you been willfully ignorant of the past decade?
The difference being that filesystem access is still gated by the OS.
I'm generally in the camp of "If your 2nd factor is an app you're doing it wrong".
2nd factor is pretty worthless if it doesn't require human interaction, otherwise, you get malware working with a keylogger to silently connect over Bluetooth and obtain valid 2nd factor as long as you're within range.
Not intending to buy such appliances is only an option right now.
We don't know if that option will remain open in the future.
Personally, I think it's good to call out the bullshit now before it gains any momentum.
Rust is the only thing with a shadow of a promise to tackle either of those two problems.
The idea that Rust is the only thing with promise to address either is pure bullplop, and a lousy pretense to justify their NIH asshattery.
* Rust is not the only memory safe language. Seriously, they've been around for decades now.
* Rust is not the only concurrent language. Again, concurrency isn't a new problem, and solutions have existed for decades.
* Rust sure as hell isn't the first concurrent and memory safe language.
It reminds me of the first chapter of Mozilla's history: Back between 1998 and 2002, Mozilla shipped nothing. The only thing to come from them were promises and platitudes.
Instead of shipping a browser for users, and promoting an open web in the now (when it mattered), Mozilla implemented an entire cross-platform userspace, and after that, they started working on a browser. Mozilla was perpetually late, and was perpetually delayed.
By the Mozilla shipped anything, you couldn't log into most banks without IE running on Windows.
KDE's developers also know of the "promise" of Mozilla, except they saw it for the lie it was. KDE did in one year what Mozilla couldn't do in four: write a clean, lightweight W3C compliant web browser from the ground up.
The rest is history...
History, it seems, is repeating itself. Instead of promoting an open web and shipping a modern product, Mozilla is (yet again) leaving us with a stagnant turd while it wastes time it doesn't have re-implementing the wheel again.
We'r emote or less agreeing here: Few apple watches will ever be an heirloom (and even then, purely for sentimental reasons, much like an old pair of sneakers owned by somebody).
Rolexes are an entirely different animal - they are heirlooms, and that's my entire point: It's not terribly clever to compare a Rolex, which will be around for decades against something that'll be junked in a few years.
It's not all that different from comparing a Rolex to a Garmin fnix. They both tell time, but it's a ridiculous comparison to begin with.
Even Apple realized that mistake: They don't even sell a gold version anymore.
Not even in the same time zone.
Is there a tune that's supposed to be sung to?
Trying to call the Apple Watch a failure is wishful thinking for those who hate it.
I see quite a few Apple watches as I walk around my city going to/from work. I'm seeing more Apple Watches, in fact, than any other single brand of watch. It's reached the point where I'm seeing more Apple Watches than other fitness trackers (though that's due more to a decline in fitness tracker use than Apple's success).
I don't know any of those owner's use case for the Apple Watch, and they sure as hell have no obligation to justify their consumer choice to me or anyone else.
So at the end of the day, I have to go with the reality I see, instead of falling back to "alternative facts" that support the narrative I like. I'm seeing a decent number of Apple Watches, and it's effectively the only smartwatch I see.
There's certainly nothing approaching the kind of penetration we see with smartphones, but as far as I can see, the Apple Watch is effectively the only smartwatch people buy.
Let's face it, this article is effectively /. clickbait - it'll generate a lot of comments (of which I'm guilty). There's a sizable portion of the /. readership who will instantly start frothing at the mouth at the merest hint of any Apple story.
Given the cancellation of a few anticipated Android cousins, we become all the more rabid should the Apple Watch be mentioned.
A story about the Apple Watch being successful? Just post it and watch the clicks roll in.
I have to admit a certain amount of ignorance here, but is it possible to get a Rolex for $400?
I suspect that's where your argument falls down; it's as ridiculous as comparing a Bic Cristal to a Pelikan Souveraen, or a Vietnamese Moped to a Maybach.
In other words, you're comparing a mass-market product with an heirloom product. They're not even close to equivalent.
You forgot the flying cars we were promised.
You have the order wrong...
Sony bought the media businesses to force at least one major player in the respective industries to support their proprietary formats.
Long before MiniDisc was DAT, which was delayed in the US by something like 5 years because the RIAA threw a congressional-level hissy fit about home recording killing the industry. NONE of the major labels released music on the DAT because because they felt so threatened by perfect digital copies.
Sony didn't push for copy protection at the time - rather the opposite, arguing that it was unnecessary. The RIAA shitfest that followed lead to the Audio Home Recording Act of 1992, which enshrined copy protection in US federal law.
By then, DAT was deader than a can of SPAM, and Sony lost millions of R&D money, and probably billions in sales of consumer devices, had DAT not been snuffed in the cradle by the RIAA.
Still stinging from BetaMax and DAT, Sony decided "Never again", bought BMG music, fired the curmudgeons at BMG who helped kill the DAT, and released the MiniDisc with full support by Sony BMG Music -- as well as the Audio Home Recording Act's required Serial Copy Management System
It wasn't until a decade later, in the heyday of the CD-R and MP3 that Sony tried to enforce copy protection on CD's - and even then, it can be argued it was to promote Sony's proprietary formats (MiniDisc and ATRAC) over open standards like MP3. It took a ridiculously long time before Sony would support any standardized audio format.
Being tech wizards means nothing if they can't get the various pre-recorded media industries to support their tech.
I seem to recall Sony bought what became Sony Music after the music industry's campaign against the Digital Audio Tape (DAT) effectively killed the format for consumer use (and made it a multi-billion dollar loss for Sony).
Stinging from the demise of BetaMax, and DAT, the execs at Sony did the math, and realized they could buy media corporations outright, fire a few of the the curmudgeons, and force them to support Sony formats -- and it'd still be cheaper than what they lost on DAT. A few years later, Sony released the MiniDisc over the Digital Compact Cassette.
As it was supported by Sony Music's offerings, the MiniDisc had a respectable amount of pre-recorded albums for sale.
It simply didn't gain enough traction before CD-R's effectively killed the MiniDisc.
Sony also used its record label status to help push the Super Audio CD over DVD Audio a few years later.
In the Movie Business, Sony bought movie studios force a level of industry support for SDDS (Sony Dynamic Digital Sound) in theatres instead of Dolby Surround and DTS.
Sony also used its studio clout to push industry adoption of the DVD, and Blu-Ray a decade later.
The story may be different if Signal was a federated protocol with entirely decentralized servers (like email).
However, it's not, and there's a single point of failure that can be blocked.
WhatsApp became popular and widespread before many repressive governments realized what it could do, so they can't block it without widespread outcry.
Not so with Signal, which is blocked, and therefore not an option.
Dear Amazon: You support practically every major device.
The Apple TV fits my family's use case the best. I want you to take my money, but I'm only going to do it if I can actually use Amazon Video with it.
Even if it's a "crippled" version which doesn't allow on-device purchasing and rentals.
But there's no point in paying for a service I can't use on my device.
At the end of the day, I only have so many HDMI ports on my TV, and my family doesn't want to deal with the added complexity of an HDMI switch and yet another device.
All excellent points, and we could no doubt discuss how humans would fare in the midst of a Shoggoth feeding event.
Who is to say it's a feeding event that humans need to fear? We don't know a lot about Shoggoths; for all we know, they are more interested in vivisection than feeding.
Or, for that matter, they may just want to kill us and move on. We certainly have no issues with killing mice & insects, with no thought to eating them.
I think we can both agree that a human interaction with a Shoggoth will not end well for the human.
The question is: How big will the mess be?
Screw Ron Perlman. He's too good looking.
We need Clint Howard as the lead role.
Cthulhu wasn't really involved in the Mountains of Madness.
I'm not sure I agree.
During William Dyer's expedition in 1931, the Shoggoths didn't appear to cause any injury to anybody on the expedition -- though in fairness, the survivors high-tailed it away as soon as they started hearing the Shoggoths coming. On the other hand, something even older than the Shoggoths nearly exterminated the entire expedition.
It's also not clear that Shoggoths are of extra-terrestrial origin; they may have originated on Earth.
If everyone else on the road is going 5-10 over the speed limit
What heavenly part of the world are you driving in?
My local observation is that there are always a significant minority drivers who insiste on driving 5-10 MPH below the speed limit, and get road-ragey at anybody passing them.