You still have no freedom to code or install a better OS. People dont "hate Apple" they are just aware Google, MS, Apple ect are building some very thick and high walls around mobile computing.
Which is the number one thing a consumer considers when buying a phone...
Why should we not get the same freedoms we enjoy on most desktops?
For what percentage of desktops purchased do you think this freedom was even in the top 100 reasons for purchase?
USERS paid developers over $1 billion, and Apple snatched over $300,000. Saying Apple has paid $1 billion to developers is like saying VISA has paid companies $1 zillion dollars.
Nice try, Steve Jobs!
No, users paid Apple and then Apple paid the developers. It's fundamental to how the App Store works.
Your post is like saying you directly paid MS for the Xbox 360 you bought at Fry's.
Fact: you don't know that the iOS hole hasn't been exploited by others.
This isn't a pertinent point, however. I can't defend against imaginary exploits. You might as well make me defend the statement that there are no polka dotted orangutans. Until you can demonstrate a reason to believe otherwise, the only rational stance to hold is that they don't exist.
This story is about a local root hole. Apple has them, Linux has them, Windows has them, OpenBSD has them.
Correct. The difference is, as I've stated more than once, this one is being actively used to compromise Linux computers, while the PDF exploit has not been used to compromise iOS devices. Also, there has been no other exploit by third parties (i.e., not the user jailbreaking their own phone) except for one that targeted jailbroken iPhones that had ssh set up with a default password (there may have been others, but I don't think they've been actually exploited, and all of them that I'm aware of targeted jailbroken devices).
I don't disagree with the rest of your post (also notable is the lack of calling me giant retarded fanboy this time). But it's not really pertinent to the point I was making. Someone said that iPhones were being exploited by the PDF flaw, and I stated that they weren't. You're right that I can't *prove* this, but it's not a position that is supposed to be proven. What's supposed to be proven is that it *has* been exploited. You can't generally prove a negative. If it makes you feel better, you can interpret what I wrote as, "there's no reason to believe that it has been used in an actual exploit", but it's really just a more verbose way of saying the same thing.
On the one hand, I do like the way phrasing like that does away with ambiguity (at least, there is less ambiguity than the original phrasing), but one can't go around writing/talking like that. It's annoying and adds little value to a conversation.
OK, I know you're a giant fanboy, but the jailbreak hack is in fact an exploit. You're the one with the notion that OS X is superior and that there's no exploit out there, you're simply projecting your own retardedness over on me.
What are you talking about? This Linux kernel exploit is something that's *real* and is *actively being used* to exploit *actual* Linux boxes. The PDF exploit is only being used by people who want to jailbreak their own iPhones. They're not the same thing.
If there were PDFs out that that hacked into people's iPhones, that would be something different entirely. But you can't wish away facts just by calling me a "giant fanboy" or "retarded". That's not how reality works.
I'll restate my facts from above:
Fact: Linux has been exploited. Many times. There is plenty of evidence for this. Fact: There is no evidence that the PDF security flaw has ever been exploited outside of the deliberate jailbreak community. There has only ever been one other exploit for iOS, and that was for jailbroken iPhones.
The only thing I'll add, which is for clarity and doesn't change what I meant by it, is that when I say "exploit", I mean something that's actually being used to attack the devices outside of the owner's intentions, and not a tool to otherwise compromise the device. This should be clear from the context, but you're prone to deliberately misinterpreting things in order to rip on Apple.
I see. So imaginary exploits are on equal footing with actual exploits now? "Oh no! Linux has actually been exploited, so in order to maintain my notion that it is superior to anything Apple could possibly create, I'll have to just pretend that iOS has been exploited!"
That's the problem with tying ideology with real-world things (like the Free Software ideology with Linux). There is no ideology that coincides with reality, so the only way one can maintain their ideology is to lie about reality.
Fact: Linux has been exploited. Many times. There is plenty of evidence for this. Fact: There is no evidence that the PDF security flaw has ever been exploited outside of the deliberate jailbreak community. There has only ever been one other exploit for iOS, and that was for jailbroken iPhones.
In absence of evidence, the only rational position to take is that it hasn't been. Had an exploit ever made it into the wild, it would have made the news, and would have definitely found its way onto the various anti-virus makers' sites.
You can't prove a negative, so sure, it might have been exploited. But that's not how it works. If you want to make the claim that is has been, you'll need some evidence. Evidence, by the way, which would not be difficult to come by at all were it to be the case.
The way you mask something is to put it out in the open?
There are actually instances where that can happen.
I realize there's a notion of "hiding out in the open", but mask is a very different word. Pretty much by definition you can't mask something and still keep it open. Maybe it was poorly translated, who knows. I'm just going by what the story said.
Now can you indicate how widespread a problem this is? Because the whole point of this subthread is that it has had a minimal, if any, impact on adoption of HDCP enabled devices.
A DVD is a tangible good, no different than a book.
Um... HDCP has nothing to do with stealing the tangible, physical DVD. No one here is saying that taking a physical DVD without permission from the owner isn't stealing. We're saying that copying a DVD isn't stealing.
And it's not. Just like a book, when you copy it you are potentially engaging in copyright infringement. Copyright infringement is not stealing. Pretending that it is has led to making the wrong laws that protect the wrong things in the wrong ways.
And things using it kept selling quite well in the interim?
Things using it will keep selling exactly as well as they did before. Maybe even better, now that people will be able to use them with Linux or other non-supported
Can you cite any problems Linux has had due to HDCP?
configurations.
This is not about HD movies being available on BitTorrent (they always were), but about people who actually bought them being able to do whatever they want with them.
Which is exactly his point. People have been able to do whatever they want with them for the most part. Very few people have encountered problems caused by HDCP.
How many years of being obscure overpriced early adopter stuff
If you think HDMI and DVI have been overpriced, maybe you should stop shopping at Best Buy.
or how many years of actually being relevant to most consumers?
What are you trying to say here? That HDMI and DVI are some sort of obscure connector that is rarely used? Or are you trying to say that if people are now having problems with those connectors?
Your questions just don't seem to have any point to them. I'm glad to see HDCP go down, but it was never much of a problem, and even had it lasted for decades to come, it would not have likely become one.
I listed reasons. That you chose not to quote them doesn't mean you get to completely ignore them.
And only in America is saying, "hey, a little bit of socialism ain't so bad" is equated with "DOWN WITH CAPITALISM FASCIST ILLUMINATI!"
Really? I've been there lots of times, and never gotten that reaction. Are we talking about the same America here? Northern Hemisphere? Just south of Canada?
Yes, the one I live in. I guess you don't get Fox News or Rush Limbaugh where you live. You should be thankful. But do let's make it clear that *you* are the one arguing from a position of ignorance here. A patronizing tone is not a proper substitute for facts.
As for your reasoning, no. The very fact that PayPal even exists shows that there is demand for something like this.
Bud, if the banks thought they could put paypal out of business and rake in those kinds of profits themselves, they'd be all over it. I've yet to meet a banker who isn't interest in increasing revenues by $3 billion per year.
Well, looks like you did quote it (part of it at least) after all. You've countered an actual fact, that Americans use PayPal, with a musing, "bankers like money!", as though they are on equal footing.
You made the claim that there is no market for inexpensive wire transfers in the US, but PayPal's very existence proves otherwise. As does our Bill Pay system. As does just the simple fact that people write checks to each other.
Make no mistake, there is demand that is not being met.
Not really. Not so much as to equate to "FALSE FALSE FALSE!" (AC's wording), nor are they "very different concepts" (your wording).
In the context of the discussion at hand, you are required to use PayPal if the buyer wants to use it. That's why "required to accept" and "required to use" are not so very different. Also, the fact that most buyers will want to use PayPal makes it a practical requirement, even if it's not an absolute requirement.
And only in America is saying, "hey, a little bit of socialism ain't so bad" is equated with "DOWN WITH CAPITALISM FASCIST ILLUMINATI!" Things don't have to be so black and white. I promise you, in "socialist" Europe, capitalism is doing just fine. That's also why I put socialism in quotes in my initial post.
As for your reasoning, no. The very fact that PayPal even exists shows that there is demand for something like this. As does online bill pay (which actually sends paper checks if the recipient isn't part of the bill pay system). And don't for a moment think that there's no demand for the ability to send, electronically, cheaply and quickly, money between individuals.
ALSO: Those comments that say Paypal is not regulated are flat wrong. ALSO: Those comments that say Paypal is not regulated are flat wrong.
*NOBODY* is saying that PayPal is not subject to laws. What they are saying is they aren't regulated like a bank, where you can have some reasonable level of confidence that your money is safe.
Slashdot Mirror
The developers are treated a lot better than the customers.
I don't know about a *lot* better, but you're right that Apple does treat developers pretty well. It's hard to compete with this though.
You still have no freedom to code or install a better OS. People dont "hate Apple" they are just aware Google, MS, Apple ect are building some very thick and high walls around mobile computing.
Which is the number one thing a consumer considers when buying a phone...
Why should we not get the same freedoms we enjoy on most desktops?
For what percentage of desktops purchased do you think this freedom was even in the top 100 reasons for purchase?
USERS paid developers over $1 billion, and Apple snatched over $300,000. Saying Apple has paid $1 billion to developers is like saying VISA has paid companies $1 zillion dollars.
Nice try, Steve Jobs!
No, users paid Apple and then Apple paid the developers. It's fundamental to how the App Store works.
Your post is like saying you directly paid MS for the Xbox 360 you bought at Fry's.
Fact: you don't know that the iOS hole hasn't been exploited by others.
This isn't a pertinent point, however. I can't defend against imaginary exploits. You might as well make me defend the statement that there are no polka dotted orangutans. Until you can demonstrate a reason to believe otherwise, the only rational stance to hold is that they don't exist.
This story is about a local root hole. Apple has them, Linux has them, Windows has them, OpenBSD has them.
Correct. The difference is, as I've stated more than once, this one is being actively used to compromise Linux computers, while the PDF exploit has not been used to compromise iOS devices. Also, there has been no other exploit by third parties (i.e., not the user jailbreaking their own phone) except for one that targeted jailbroken iPhones that had ssh set up with a default password (there may have been others, but I don't think they've been actually exploited, and all of them that I'm aware of targeted jailbroken devices).
I don't disagree with the rest of your post (also notable is the lack of calling me giant retarded fanboy this time). But it's not really pertinent to the point I was making. Someone said that iPhones were being exploited by the PDF flaw, and I stated that they weren't. You're right that I can't *prove* this, but it's not a position that is supposed to be proven. What's supposed to be proven is that it *has* been exploited. You can't generally prove a negative. If it makes you feel better, you can interpret what I wrote as, "there's no reason to believe that it has been used in an actual exploit", but it's really just a more verbose way of saying the same thing.
On the one hand, I do like the way phrasing like that does away with ambiguity (at least, there is less ambiguity than the original phrasing), but one can't go around writing/talking like that. It's annoying and adds little value to a conversation.
OK, I know you're a giant fanboy, but the jailbreak hack is in fact an exploit. You're the one with the notion that OS X is superior and that there's no exploit out there, you're simply projecting your own retardedness over on me.
What are you talking about? This Linux kernel exploit is something that's *real* and is *actively being used* to exploit *actual* Linux boxes. The PDF exploit is only being used by people who want to jailbreak their own iPhones. They're not the same thing.
If there were PDFs out that that hacked into people's iPhones, that would be something different entirely. But you can't wish away facts just by calling me a "giant fanboy" or "retarded". That's not how reality works.
I'll restate my facts from above:
Fact: Linux has been exploited. Many times. There is plenty of evidence for this.
Fact: There is no evidence that the PDF security flaw has ever been exploited outside of the deliberate jailbreak community. There has only ever been one other exploit for iOS, and that was for jailbroken iPhones.
The only thing I'll add, which is for clarity and doesn't change what I meant by it, is that when I say "exploit", I mean something that's actually being used to attack the devices outside of the owner's intentions, and not a tool to otherwise compromise the device. This should be clear from the context, but you're prone to deliberately misinterpreting things in order to rip on Apple.
Except that was never actually reported.
Fixed that for you.
I see. So imaginary exploits are on equal footing with actual exploits now? "Oh no! Linux has actually been exploited, so in order to maintain my notion that it is superior to anything Apple could possibly create, I'll have to just pretend that iOS has been exploited!"
That's the problem with tying ideology with real-world things (like the Free Software ideology with Linux). There is no ideology that coincides with reality, so the only way one can maintain their ideology is to lie about reality.
Fact: Linux has been exploited. Many times. There is plenty of evidence for this.
Fact: There is no evidence that the PDF security flaw has ever been exploited outside of the deliberate jailbreak community. There has only ever been one other exploit for iOS, and that was for jailbroken iPhones.
But don't let reality get in the way of theory!
How exactly do you know it was never exploited
In absence of evidence, the only rational position to take is that it hasn't been. Had an exploit ever made it into the wild, it would have made the news, and would have definitely found its way onto the various anti-virus makers' sites.
You can't prove a negative, so sure, it might have been exploited. But that's not how it works. If you want to make the claim that is has been, you'll need some evidence. Evidence, by the way, which would not be difficult to come by at all were it to be the case.
Ah yes, so since the iPhone has never been exploited (except for the one that targeted jailbroken iPhones), you have to imagine exploits. Bravo.
And you claim I'm the ignorant one...
Except it was never actually exploited. Everything out in the wild that used this did it in order to aid the user's intentions.
Not that this has any bearing on this whole thread of nonsense, just clarifying a point.
Yes, FOSS is so awesome, the only way it can possibly fail is due to human stupidity! \o/
There are actually instances where that can happen.
I realize there's a notion of "hiding out in the open", but mask is a very different word. Pretty much by definition you can't mask something and still keep it open. Maybe it was poorly translated, who knows. I'm just going by what the story said.
I don't know if it'll lose him his job but yeah, this isn't even within the realms of MS's PR strategy, this is just some exec talking like an idiot.
Now that I think about it, he may very well lose his job over this. If Microsoft is good at one thing, it's hiding incompetency.
He's giving away trade secrets...
The way you mask something is to put it out in the open?
Now can you indicate how widespread a problem this is? Because the whole point of this subthread is that it has had a minimal, if any, impact on adoption of HDCP enabled devices.
A DVD is a tangible good, no different than a book.
Um... HDCP has nothing to do with stealing the tangible, physical DVD. No one here is saying that taking a physical DVD without permission from the owner isn't stealing. We're saying that copying a DVD isn't stealing.
And it's not. Just like a book, when you copy it you are potentially engaging in copyright infringement. Copyright infringement is not stealing. Pretending that it is has led to making the wrong laws that protect the wrong things in the wrong ways.
And things using it kept selling quite well in the interim?
Things using it will keep selling exactly as well as they did before. Maybe even better, now that people will be able to use them with Linux or other non-supported
Can you cite any problems Linux has had due to HDCP?
configurations.
This is not about HD movies being available on BitTorrent (they always were), but about people who actually bought them being able to do whatever they want with them.
Which is exactly his point. People have been able to do whatever they want with them for the most part. Very few people have encountered problems caused by HDCP.
How many years of being obscure overpriced early adopter stuff
If you think HDMI and DVI have been overpriced, maybe you should stop shopping at Best Buy.
or how many years of actually being relevant to most consumers?
What are you trying to say here? That HDMI and DVI are some sort of obscure connector that is rarely used? Or are you trying to say that if people are now having problems with those connectors?
Your questions just don't seem to have any point to them. I'm glad to see HDCP go down, but it was never much of a problem, and even had it lasted for decades to come, it would not have likely become one.
Um, no. Americans would be all over that shit.
[citation needed]
I listed reasons. That you chose not to quote them doesn't mean you get to completely ignore them.
And only in America is saying, "hey, a little bit of socialism ain't so bad" is equated with "DOWN WITH CAPITALISM FASCIST ILLUMINATI!"
Really? I've been there lots of times, and never gotten that reaction. Are we talking about the same America here? Northern Hemisphere? Just south of Canada?
Yes, the one I live in. I guess you don't get Fox News or Rush Limbaugh where you live. You should be thankful. But do let's make it clear that *you* are the one arguing from a position of ignorance here. A patronizing tone is not a proper substitute for facts.
As for your reasoning, no. The very fact that PayPal even exists shows that there is demand for something like this.
Bud, if the banks thought they could put paypal out of business and rake in those kinds of profits themselves, they'd be all over it. I've yet to meet a banker who isn't interest in increasing revenues by $3 billion per year.
Well, looks like you did quote it (part of it at least) after all. You've countered an actual fact, that Americans use PayPal, with a musing, "bankers like money!", as though they are on equal footing.
You made the claim that there is no market for inexpensive wire transfers in the US, but PayPal's very existence proves otherwise. As does our Bill Pay system. As does just the simple fact that people write checks to each other.
Make no mistake, there is demand that is not being met.
Dude, stop getting your opinions about a nation of three hundred million people from Slashdot.
Please quote where I said anything about all 300+ million Americans.
Not really. Not so much as to equate to "FALSE FALSE FALSE!" (AC's wording), nor are they "very different concepts" (your wording).
In the context of the discussion at hand, you are required to use PayPal if the buyer wants to use it. That's why "required to accept" and "required to use" are not so very different. Also, the fact that most buyers will want to use PayPal makes it a practical requirement, even if it's not an absolute requirement.
Um, no. Americans would be all over that shit.
And only in America is saying, "hey, a little bit of socialism ain't so bad" is equated with "DOWN WITH CAPITALISM FASCIST ILLUMINATI!" Things don't have to be so black and white. I promise you, in "socialist" Europe, capitalism is doing just fine. That's also why I put socialism in quotes in my initial post.
As for your reasoning, no. The very fact that PayPal even exists shows that there is demand for something like this. As does online bill pay (which actually sends paper checks if the recipient isn't part of the bill pay system). And don't for a moment think that there's no demand for the ability to send, electronically, cheaply and quickly, money between individuals.
eBay is not a monopoly. If you want an auction, go to Craigslist. For cheap Buy it Now, go to Amazon.
I'm not sure you understand the meanings of the words "monopoly" and "auction".
Yes, the best thing to do for a company that pulls shit like this is give them direct access to your bank account...
How is that "FALSE FALSE FALSE!"? They require you to accept PayPal for auctions in the US.
ALSO: Those comments that say Paypal is not regulated are flat wrong. ALSO: Those comments that say Paypal is not regulated are flat wrong.
*NOBODY* is saying that PayPal is not subject to laws. What they are saying is they aren't regulated like a bank, where you can have some reasonable level of confidence that your money is safe.