Sorry, but Samsung proved people want big phones with the original Galaxy Note. The success caused every other major manufacturer to offer jumbo versions in the coming years. Even Apple followed suit. Even the non-jumbo phones have been growing in size. The Galaxy S has grown in size and also has a + variant now.
Your stats come from 3rd world / ghetto budget phones and old devices. Which ties in precisely to your stat about old versions of Android.
I'm sorry, but I completely disagree. Compliance is the enemy of security. I've spent too much time in companies that fall under various compliance requirements (PCI-DSS, NISPOM, SOX) and in my opinion the only thing these things do is cause a company to become lazy. The number of times I have seen obviously insecure practices defended by "It meets PCI..." could make me scream. I don't understand how any intelligent somewhat tech savvy individual could ever fall under the impression that a small, rarely updated policy written mostly by bureaucrats could ever hope to adequately define the necessary security requirements to protect data for all organizations. It is ludicrous, yet I see it all the time.
These compliance requirements cause organizations to stop thinking, stop being creative, and to just start checking boxes. And to reply directly to your call out of PCI, all I can say is TARGET WAS PCI COMPLIANT.
If you think these sorts of regulations are the solution, then I'd argue that you are applying to the wrong side. Find a way to make attackers have to meet some brain dead, one size fits none set of regulations then you'll be on to something.
The worst part is that the compliant shit is often older and known to be weaker but because validation takes time and is expensive, the newer, stronger shit isn't certified as being compliant. So you can do your job and select the FIPS 140-2 profile in whatever software you're using, or you can break the law and use better encryption.
Completely prevent it? No. But make the people who handle such data take it seriously? Absolutely. Mandatory life in prison without the possibility of parole as well as the unconditional forfeiture of all assets (properties, money, stocks and options, etc.), public and private, for all who handle such data improperly, explicitly extending all the way up the chain of any company having access to the data and any company providing the software or hardware for the data, with no exception for assets handed to spouses, family members, trusts, foundations, etc., and the immediate dissolution of the companies at fault. Annual (at least) audits for all institutions handling such data and a standing $10,000,000 bounty for anyone demonstrating a successful attack that leads to inappropriate access to protected data.
Now, who wants to run a credit bureau?
You want security against identity theft? Here it is: hardware identification. U2F devices--I hate them, rant in a minute--can identify a user without relinquishing a key. You want to know I'm who I say I am? Then I register with Equifax, I give them an identifying key, I authorize your credit check with my key. You can't hack that. It's unhackable, or else somebody has figured out how to break encryption that should not be breakable yet--in which case nothing is safe.
How do you initially verify someone is who they say they are to assign them a hardware device? Who holds the database of keys to know that public key X ties to individual X? Who generates the secret key? How is it loaded onto the device? What happens when someone steals your device? What happens when someone X-Rays your device or dumps it in liquid nitrogen or otherwise takes a really close look to extract your key or Oprah's key or Bill Gates's key? What happens when the factory making the device is infiltrated and the device has a backdoor put in, or the device you or your bank or whoever receives is intercepted by the NSA first, under the cover of a national security letter or simply an MIB with a gun? So fuck off with your "unhackable" claim.
I would not be above passing legislation specifying that a person's credit history cannot be impacted by non-challenge-response, user-presence-based authentication in line with modern standards. That is: you have to have something that can be handled entirely in the open and still not allow impersonation, such as RSA or Ed25519 challenge-response exchange with a secure hardware device. These devices cost all of $20 at the lowest end.
You keep relying on that "secure hardware token". There is no such thing. "Secure hardware tokens" are simply computers that run a deterministic algorithm based on a secret key and time. Extract the secret key and you win. Further, the devices that cost $20 are made in China. In fact, nearly all of them are. (And being made elsewhere wouldn't help much.) And you THINK RSA and other algorithms can't be broken. We've seen secure algorithms come and go as weaknesses are discovered, backdoors are discovered, computational power increases, etc.
Lost your key? Call your bank; all banks are required to file a Lost Key hold for anyone with a credit account with them, which freezes all your credit. You have to show up to a bank, present valid ID (e.g. a real Driver's ID), and then prove you still have your key or provide a new key to re-establish a trust relationship between you and the CRA. No verbal verification; you physically come here and show me your ID, or you're full of shit and have a print-out of stolen Social Security numbers at your desk.
Ah yes, easy denial of service. Hello, Shit Ass Bank? This is bluefoxlucid, I've lost my key. I have a new one, and I'm coming down next week to prove it. Until then, please freeze everything. Kthx. Other than that it's air tight. I mean, ID checks really stop teens from
If you have credit card debt or auto loan debt, or student debt, or basically anything other than a proper mortgage or business debt (tied to an LLC, not you individually), you're seen as a leech.
None of that means they were proficient athletes or intelligent. The fact that you didn't understand the 3 key points of my post really undermine your claims, since you're including yourself in the set you claim to represent athletic and intelligent people. I'll list them out and simplify them for you.
1: Playing a sport doesn't mean you're any good at it. Schools are set up such that the "smart" kids will go into a sport because it's expected of them to pad their resumes, not because they like the sport or are good at it.
2: Similarly, getting good grades doesn't mean you're intelligent. Token jocks are often lauded for the academic accomplishment of getting a B in remedial math. Typically, they're simply cheating / being given better grades because they're jocks, in order to maintain eligibility for the sports programs.
3: School's aren't set up to educate or even give a shit about intelligence. Even the "smart" kids who achieve great academic success without cheating aren't any more intelligent than a random person off the street. American public schools are about indoctrination, control, and standards testing. The Simpsons covered this well with the "independent thought alarm" decades ago.
As a bonus, you don't seem to understand that however much your anecdote may be true, and even if we assume the standards are your school to be high and actually indicative of intelligence / athletic ability, it is not evidence against the claim that it's rare for a person to be intelligent and athletic. The fact that a thing happened does not mean it is not rare.
You assume either Germany or France is DUMB ENOUGH to think they'd gain something from leaving a 40~ year trade settlement overnight with NOTHING TO REPLACE IT WITH? The EU is better without you, frankly. You want to rule instead of be part of a federation, old habits die hard I guess. We'll see it sooner than later, most Britons realize they made a huge mistake with Brexit even though the pain has scarcely been felt yet. There is due course ahead.
Now, continue bragging about isolationism as an economic boon, lol.
They'd gain sovereignty and security. Who says they wouldn't have anything to replace it with? They'd simply renegotiate trade at better (for them) terms. The rest of the EU is entirely dependent upon the big three, and they know it.
That doesn't scale. We tried that back in the early days where every host received every frame/packet and decided to open it or ignore it. Nor is it secure, because no one cares about the destination, they care about the source. Every router that receives a packet will simply log where it came from. Follow the chain long enough and you get to a host that generated it. Logging will be required. Passing along encrypted data you didn't decrypt and inspect first will be verboten. Install our spyware and certs if you want to remain secure, citizen.
Sources on the internet are always traceable. That's how packets get delivered to and from their ultimate destination. This is how Ethernet and IP works, Yes, you can encrypt shit, add layers of hosts acting as blind message passers, etc. But then you have to trust your nodes.
" is unfixable and unwilling to admit it could do with improvement. It must go in its entirety " = BOLLOCKS, because you have no replacement to offer and you need the functionality the EU provides, if you don't like everything that's reasonable. Running away suddenly in the middle of the night and joining the circus-economy, that's not going to crush the EU, that's going to crush the UK.
Face facts, UK cannot survive as an island apart. You are headed for decline if you wish to relive the empire of the past.
There's a reason the pound is still a thing and they never adopted the Euro. The EU is France, Germany, and the UK, plus a bunch of troublesome leeches. If the UK actually follows through and leaves, France and Germany are going to be playing chicken to see who stays in the longest. The instant one of them leaves, the EU is dead, and Europe will go back to doing what it does best - warring with itself. The scaremongering about the UK economy isn't about the UK, it's FUD meant to keep France and Germany on the hook as long as possible.
Fortunately, Android is built on open source foundations, so Google must publish the source and a build chain.
No, it isn't.
AOSP is open and free. Android is closed and not free. Further, Android being 100% secure won't fix this. This is an issue similar to Intel's fuck up with AMT. AMD uses ARM TrustZone bits in their processors as well. AMD calls it the PSP.
As an end user, the only thing you should trust is the fact that your device is vulnerable and the powers that be know about it (and likely put the vulnerabilities there in the first place). Because fuck you.
In my graduating class (a little over 300 kids), I'd say at least 75% of the top 30 students also played at least one sport. Of course they were sports other than American football.
It is possible to be smart and physically coordinated.
Possible, but extremely unlikely. Your 75% of the top 30 doesn't mean shit. Not only does it not prove they were smart, it doesn't prove they played the sport to any degree of competency. All the "smart" kids go into a sport, marching band, and other "extra curricular" shit in order to fluff out a college application. It doesn't mean they're worth shit in the sport, and excelling at school doesn't mean you've got a brain between your ears. The jocks on the other hand at least actually show their prowess and compete against each other. Of course, they must be smart, too. They're honestly getting good grades and getting scholarships to big colleges, right?
On either side of it, academic excellence for the past 30 years has meant nothing more than doing a bunch of busy work, memorizing crap for standardized tests, and parroting the guiding, feel-good principles of the day. Intelligence simply isn't an issue schools are concerned with.
Then allow illegal signaling to be used so that Dreamers can signal, then make it illegal again to stop the Nazis.
Where did this "Dreamers" shit originate? I hadn't heard it until yesterday, and suddenly every liberal mouthpiece is shouting about it in unison. I even got a got an email about the CADA caca at work that referenced "Dreamers". Illegal immigrants are illegal immigrants no matter what you try to brand them as. Having such a coordinated marketing effort come from one side makes me far less likely to support that side.
wow, prejudiced much? I grew up in Brookline, amidst Jews, Asians, Lebanese, Palestinians, Indians, and Black people. I never heard a racist remark until I moved out of that city.
Only because we vastly overpay for our over-designed bombs. Even then, bombs are cheaper in the long run. People tend to want food and water multiple times a day. How many bombs do you need to have dropped on you before you no longer need to have bombs dropped on you?
Sure, sustainable and stable infrastructure, governments, agriculture, etc. would be great. But plenty of warlords over there disagree. You're not gonna hug those regions into peace.
Hate to be devil's advocate in this one, but part of that "being the world's police" or "imperialism" thing is sticking around to rebuild after you blow everything up, while also providing stability to the region, so as to protect it's developing government from the inevitable power vacuum and anarchy that comes hand in hand with toppling regimes.
This is a very modern concept. It had it's first real trial after WWII. The goal was to prevent WWIII. It mostly worked for Japan, but it has absolutely not stabilized Europe. And when we tried in repeatedly in the middle east it's had the opposite effect.
It doesn't matter how long you stay or how much money you pour into those regions. They either want your support or they want your head. It has worked one single time in all of human history (Japan's reconstruction). The next best instance would be the Romans, but they were mainly stabilizing with the whole ""peace" through constant war and subjugation" shtick, not actual rebuilding/cooperation efforts. And we all know how that ended.
Are you retarded? It's a contract. Break it with a Congress that cares and you get the boot at the very least. The problem is we haven't had a Congress that cares in decades.
Of course it's safe. It just depends on how long you're going to be staring at it.
Have you ever seen a sunset? Ever caught a pop fly playing baseball? Risk and severity of damage is directly proportional to intensity of exposure times duration of exposure. If you use something that blocks 50% of the light, then you're doubling the amount of time you can stare at it safely (assuming you're blocking all relevant wavelengths, and not just the visible spectrum).
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry, but Samsung proved people want big phones with the original Galaxy Note.
The success caused every other major manufacturer to offer jumbo versions in the coming years. Even Apple followed suit.
Even the non-jumbo phones have been growing in size. The Galaxy S has grown in size and also has a + variant now.
Your stats come from 3rd world / ghetto budget phones and old devices. Which ties in precisely to your stat about old versions of Android.
Small phones suck.
I'm sorry, but I completely disagree. Compliance is the enemy of security. I've spent too much time in companies that fall under various compliance requirements (PCI-DSS, NISPOM, SOX) and in my opinion the only thing these things do is cause a company to become lazy. The number of times I have seen obviously insecure practices defended by "It meets PCI..." could make me scream. I don't understand how any intelligent somewhat tech savvy individual could ever fall under the impression that a small, rarely updated policy written mostly by bureaucrats could ever hope to adequately define the necessary security requirements to protect data for all organizations. It is ludicrous, yet I see it all the time.
These compliance requirements cause organizations to stop thinking, stop being creative, and to just start checking boxes. And to reply directly to your call out of PCI, all I can say is TARGET WAS PCI COMPLIANT.
If you think these sorts of regulations are the solution, then I'd argue that you are applying to the wrong side. Find a way to make attackers have to meet some brain dead, one size fits none set of regulations then you'll be on to something.
The worst part is that the compliant shit is often older and known to be weaker but because validation takes time and is expensive, the newer, stronger shit isn't certified as being compliant. So you can do your job and select the FIPS 140-2 profile in whatever software you're using, or you can break the law and use better encryption.
You're a moron.
No regulation would stop this.
Completely prevent it? No. But make the people who handle such data take it seriously? Absolutely.
Mandatory life in prison without the possibility of parole as well as the unconditional forfeiture of all assets (properties, money, stocks and options, etc.), public and private, for all who handle such data improperly, explicitly extending all the way up the chain of any company having access to the data and any company providing the software or hardware for the data, with no exception for assets handed to spouses, family members, trusts, foundations, etc., and the immediate dissolution of the companies at fault.
Annual (at least) audits for all institutions handling such data and a standing $10,000,000 bounty for anyone demonstrating a successful attack that leads to inappropriate access to protected data.
Now, who wants to run a credit bureau?
You want security against identity theft? Here it is: hardware identification. U2F devices--I hate them, rant in a minute--can identify a user without relinquishing a key. You want to know I'm who I say I am? Then I register with Equifax, I give them an identifying key, I authorize your credit check with my key. You can't hack that. It's unhackable, or else somebody has figured out how to break encryption that should not be breakable yet--in which case nothing is safe.
How do you initially verify someone is who they say they are to assign them a hardware device? Who holds the database of keys to know that public key X ties to individual X? Who generates the secret key? How is it loaded onto the device? What happens when someone steals your device? What happens when someone X-Rays your device or dumps it in liquid nitrogen or otherwise takes a really close look to extract your key or Oprah's key or Bill Gates's key? What happens when the factory making the device is infiltrated and the device has a backdoor put in, or the device you or your bank or whoever receives is intercepted by the NSA first, under the cover of a national security letter or simply an MIB with a gun?
So fuck off with your "unhackable" claim.
I would not be above passing legislation specifying that a person's credit history cannot be impacted by non-challenge-response, user-presence-based authentication in line with modern standards. That is: you have to have something that can be handled entirely in the open and still not allow impersonation, such as RSA or Ed25519 challenge-response exchange with a secure hardware device. These devices cost all of $20 at the lowest end.
You keep relying on that "secure hardware token". There is no such thing. "Secure hardware tokens" are simply computers that run a deterministic algorithm based on a secret key and time. Extract the secret key and you win. Further, the devices that cost $20 are made in China. In fact, nearly all of them are. (And being made elsewhere wouldn't help much.) And you THINK RSA and other algorithms can't be broken. We've seen secure algorithms come and go as weaknesses are discovered, backdoors are discovered, computational power increases, etc.
Lost your key? Call your bank; all banks are required to file a Lost Key hold for anyone with a credit account with them, which freezes all your credit. You have to show up to a bank, present valid ID (e.g. a real Driver's ID), and then prove you still have your key or provide a new key to re-establish a trust relationship between you and the CRA. No verbal verification; you physically come here and show me your ID, or you're full of shit and have a print-out of stolen Social Security numbers at your desk.
Ah yes, easy denial of service. Hello, Shit Ass Bank? This is bluefoxlucid, I've lost my key. I have a new one, and I'm coming down next week to prove it. Until then, please freeze everything. Kthx. Other than that it's air tight. I mean, ID checks really stop teens from
Are those police boats?
If you have credit card debt or auto loan debt, or student debt, or basically anything other than a proper mortgage or business debt (tied to an LLC, not you individually), you're seen as a leech.
None of that means they were proficient athletes or intelligent.
The fact that you didn't understand the 3 key points of my post really undermine your claims, since you're including yourself in the set you claim to represent athletic and intelligent people. I'll list them out and simplify them for you.
1: Playing a sport doesn't mean you're any good at it. Schools are set up such that the "smart" kids will go into a sport because it's expected of them to pad their resumes, not because they like the sport or are good at it.
2: Similarly, getting good grades doesn't mean you're intelligent. Token jocks are often lauded for the academic accomplishment of getting a B in remedial math. Typically, they're simply cheating / being given better grades because they're jocks, in order to maintain eligibility for the sports programs.
3: School's aren't set up to educate or even give a shit about intelligence. Even the "smart" kids who achieve great academic success without cheating aren't any more intelligent than a random person off the street. American public schools are about indoctrination, control, and standards testing. The Simpsons covered this well with the "independent thought alarm" decades ago.
As a bonus, you don't seem to understand that however much your anecdote may be true, and even if we assume the standards are your school to be high and actually indicative of intelligence / athletic ability, it is not evidence against the claim that it's rare for a person to be intelligent and athletic. The fact that a thing happened does not mean it is not rare.
Fuck Google.
Fuck Google.
Fuck Google.
You assume either Germany or France is DUMB ENOUGH to think they'd gain something from leaving a 40~ year trade settlement overnight with NOTHING TO REPLACE IT WITH? The EU is better without you, frankly. You want to rule instead of be part of a federation, old habits die hard I guess. We'll see it sooner than later, most Britons realize they made a huge mistake with Brexit even though the pain has scarcely been felt yet. There is due course ahead.
Now, continue bragging about isolationism as an economic boon, lol.
They'd gain sovereignty and security. Who says they wouldn't have anything to replace it with? They'd simply renegotiate trade at better (for them) terms. The rest of the EU is entirely dependent upon the big three, and they know it.
2/3 ain't bad. Dr. Who is awful, awful crap.
That doesn't scale. We tried that back in the early days where every host received every frame/packet and decided to open it or ignore it.
Nor is it secure, because no one cares about the destination, they care about the source. Every router that receives a packet will simply log where it came from. Follow the chain long enough and you get to a host that generated it. Logging will be required. Passing along encrypted data you didn't decrypt and inspect first will be verboten. Install our spyware and certs if you want to remain secure, citizen.
Sources on the internet are always traceable. That's how packets get delivered to and from their ultimate destination. This is how Ethernet and IP works, Yes, you can encrypt shit, add layers of hosts acting as blind message passers, etc. But then you have to trust your nodes.
" is unfixable and unwilling to admit it could do with improvement. It must go in its entirety " = BOLLOCKS, because you have no replacement to offer and you need the functionality the EU provides, if you don't like everything that's reasonable. Running away suddenly in the middle of the night and joining the circus-economy, that's not going to crush the EU, that's going to crush the UK.
Face facts, UK cannot survive as an island apart. You are headed for decline if you wish to relive the empire of the past.
There's a reason the pound is still a thing and they never adopted the Euro. The EU is France, Germany, and the UK, plus a bunch of troublesome leeches. If the UK actually follows through and leaves, France and Germany are going to be playing chicken to see who stays in the longest. The instant one of them leaves, the EU is dead, and Europe will go back to doing what it does best - warring with itself. The scaremongering about the UK economy isn't about the UK, it's FUD meant to keep France and Germany on the hook as long as possible.
Fortunately, Android is built on open source foundations, so Google must publish the source and a build chain.
No, it isn't.
AOSP is open and free. Android is closed and not free.
Further, Android being 100% secure won't fix this. This is an issue similar to Intel's fuck up with AMT. AMD uses ARM TrustZone bits in their processors as well. AMD calls it the PSP.
As an end user, the only thing you should trust is the fact that your device is vulnerable and the powers that be know about it (and likely put the vulnerabilities there in the first place). Because fuck you.
Not as good as the "my DAMN balls" guy.
In my graduating class (a little over 300 kids), I'd say at least 75% of the top 30 students also played at least one sport. Of course they were sports other than American football.
It is possible to be smart and physically coordinated.
Possible, but extremely unlikely. Your 75% of the top 30 doesn't mean shit. Not only does it not prove they were smart, it doesn't prove they played the sport to any degree of competency. All the "smart" kids go into a sport, marching band, and other "extra curricular" shit in order to fluff out a college application. It doesn't mean they're worth shit in the sport, and excelling at school doesn't mean you've got a brain between your ears. The jocks on the other hand at least actually show their prowess and compete against each other. Of course, they must be smart, too. They're honestly getting good grades and getting scholarships to big colleges, right?
On either side of it, academic excellence for the past 30 years has meant nothing more than doing a bunch of busy work, memorizing crap for standardized tests, and parroting the guiding, feel-good principles of the day. Intelligence simply isn't an issue schools are concerned with.
Then allow illegal signaling to be used so that Dreamers can signal, then make it illegal again to stop the Nazis.
Where did this "Dreamers" shit originate? I hadn't heard it until yesterday, and suddenly every liberal mouthpiece is shouting about it in unison. I even got a got an email about the CADA caca at work that referenced "Dreamers". Illegal immigrants are illegal immigrants no matter what you try to brand them as. Having such a coordinated marketing effort come from one side makes me far less likely to support that side.
wow, prejudiced much? I grew up in Brookline, amidst Jews, Asians, Lebanese, Palestinians, Indians, and Black people. I never heard a racist remark until I moved out of that city.
You are lying.
Sorry, but it's well known that the Yankees are the cheatingest team in baseball.
Anything that makes them lose is good in my book.
It's a lot cheaper to drop food than bombs.
Only because we vastly overpay for our over-designed bombs. Even then, bombs are cheaper in the long run. People tend to want food and water multiple times a day. How many bombs do you need to have dropped on you before you no longer need to have bombs dropped on you?
Sure, sustainable and stable infrastructure, governments, agriculture, etc. would be great. But plenty of warlords over there disagree. You're not gonna hug those regions into peace.
They never finished.
Hate to be devil's advocate in this one, but part of that "being the world's police" or "imperialism" thing is sticking around to rebuild after you blow everything up, while also providing stability to the region, so as to protect it's developing government from the inevitable power vacuum and anarchy that comes hand in hand with toppling regimes.
This is a very modern concept. It had it's first real trial after WWII. The goal was to prevent WWIII. It mostly worked for Japan, but it has absolutely not stabilized Europe. And when we tried in repeatedly in the middle east it's had the opposite effect.
It doesn't matter how long you stay or how much money you pour into those regions. They either want your support or they want your head. It has worked one single time in all of human history (Japan's reconstruction). The next best instance would be the Romans, but they were mainly stabilizing with the whole ""peace" through constant war and subjugation" shtick, not actual rebuilding/cooperation efforts. And we all know how that ended.
Snopes is not a reliable source for anything at all related to politics. Snopes itself admits this.
Not to mention he''s giving Trump 4 years (referencing 2020) while Obama had 8.
Saying it's impossible is stupid and shows how little people know of history.
Are you retarded? It's a contract. Break it with a Congress that cares and you get the boot at the very least. The problem is we haven't had a Congress that cares in decades.
The Executive Branch is allowed to execute Congress's laws as they see fit.
Wrong. They must be executed faithfully, fairly, and equally.
Of course it's safe. It just depends on how long you're going to be staring at it.
Have you ever seen a sunset? Ever caught a pop fly playing baseball?
Risk and severity of damage is directly proportional to intensity of exposure times duration of exposure. If you use something that blocks 50% of the light, then you're doubling the amount of time you can stare at it safely (assuming you're blocking all relevant wavelengths, and not just the visible spectrum).