if I can hide one key element in my web infrastructure by closing off the source, even if I know the code is perfect, this is a step I will take.
But you can't close off the source - you have to accept the possibility that someone to whom you've granted access to the source could be hostile to you - in which case you have this exact same situation again (only you possibly don't even know it)
It is true, however it might go against a natural reaction to keep your cards close to your chest, that if you rely on the 'bad guys' not seeing your code then you are relying on security through obscurity, and that means that outside the ring of trust, the only people who will *ever* see that code (if anyone) will be hostile
If there is such a source code breach at Google, it wouldn't be a bad idea for them to open it up for the rest to use.
Well quite - but seeing as you'll potentially never know if someone with malicious intent had already gained access, you might the best option is openness from the start...
The number is irrelevant, that wasn't my point. They're a reason to buy - or stay with Windows-based smartphones, whether they can compete in volume with the (not always high calibre) apps for the Apple.
The mere inability to write bespoke apps for Apple devices is a plus for other platforms
No it's what you get for being wrong.
Statements about associations between songs and ex-lovers, for example, are entirely irrelevant to this (now ex-)case, and to say that the LED scanner may have caused the retina to cause the optic nerve to fire the exact neuron to (somewhat indirectly) cause some damage to some other neurons is frankly absurd anyway - you're essentially waying that any minor event could have cause a mental problem. So why blame the scanner? To actually prove causation you'd need to do the equivalent of following the butterfly effect backwards from a Tsunami to the exact beating of the exact butterfly's wings. Good luck with that
Certainly in the UK, and I assume elsewhere in Europe (since half our communications industry is French, Spanish or German anyway) the ISPs have become convinced that they have a right to 'monetise' our connections beyond the monthly subscription. They all seem intent on proving pay-per-view VOD services and the like, and I think this is part of their effort to 'defend' something they have no right to, and that nobody wants
I don't think that was the OP's point.
The two WWII bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki killed more than 150,000 people, and that would make it a larger disaster, were it not for the fact that it isn't classed apparently as a disaster. Which was the OP's point.
Yes.. And no.
To a large extent that's all correct I think, but there is still the more subtle hint that someone will have to 'sync' to get the whole thing working properly - and some people who might be comfortable plugging a TV into the power and HDMI cables might be persuaded to take the $150 installation because the 'sync' part looks a little more complicated, or that possibly they won't do it well enough to get the right results.
It doesn't have to be an outright lie to scare people into paying for it...
There is NO objective measure of 'slowing down' or 'significant delays in I/O processing' in the article at all, so I question why you're so certain that any such thing was unambiguously observed?
I think, to be fair, digital signatures could just as easily be incorporated into other means of communications - they're hardly specific to email, so I don't see them as being specifically way of securing or validating email per se...
That doesn't definitively state that they observed a rise in virtual memory use - it could as easily be taken to mean that they're extrapolated the memory usage and their belief is that this leads to virtual memory usage.
For me, if they'd actually meant that it DID lead to virtual memory usage and that they'd measured such, I'd have expected to see numbers. In the absence, I'm inclined to believe that they see the memory usage and infer from that that virtual memory is the inevitable next step.
Google pretty much *is* DNS
When was the last time you instructed someone to 'open your browser, and in the address bar enter: www.xyz.com' and they actually did that, rather than entering it into one of the seven or either toolbars they have installed?
Since nobody seems to understand that concept of URLs, why bother with them? Everyone searches (usually 'googles') for damn near everything anyway, so might as well do away with DNS for websites entirely and just use google + IP addresses...
That said, this is the sort of situation that inevitably arises when violating the law. If you steal cars, and someone steals your stolen goods -- or tries to extort protection money from you, who are you going to call?
I definitely agree with the not-removing-key-from-pocket part of your point, but just how do you unlock the car without juggling your groceries if the key's in your pocket? You don't have to take the key out, but you still have to get your hand into your pocket (or manipulate the key through your trousers, but either way...)
Slashdot Mirror
if I can hide one key element in my web infrastructure by closing off the source, even if I know the code is perfect, this is a step I will take.
But you can't close off the source - you have to accept the possibility that someone to whom you've granted access to the source could be hostile to you - in which case you have this exact same situation again (only you possibly don't even know it) It is true, however it might go against a natural reaction to keep your cards close to your chest, that if you rely on the 'bad guys' not seeing your code then you are relying on security through obscurity, and that means that outside the ring of trust, the only people who will *ever* see that code (if anyone) will be hostile
If there is such a source code breach at Google, it wouldn't be a bad idea for them to open it up for the rest to use.
Well quite - but seeing as you'll potentially never know if someone with malicious intent had already gained access, you might the best option is openness from the start...
The number is irrelevant, that wasn't my point. They're a reason to buy - or stay with Windows-based smartphones, whether they can compete in volume with the (not always high calibre) apps for the Apple. The mere inability to write bespoke apps for Apple devices is a plus for other platforms
What has being able to buy them got to do with anything?
No it's what you get for being wrong. Statements about associations between songs and ex-lovers, for example, are entirely irrelevant to this (now ex-)case, and to say that the LED scanner may have caused the retina to cause the optic nerve to fire the exact neuron to (somewhat indirectly) cause some damage to some other neurons is frankly absurd anyway - you're essentially waying that any minor event could have cause a mental problem. So why blame the scanner? To actually prove causation you'd need to do the equivalent of following the butterfly effect backwards from a Tsunami to the exact beating of the exact butterfly's wings. Good luck with that
Worst bet ever. Number of apps on Microsoft's own Windows Marketplace for Mobile = 872. Number of Apps on iTunes = 185,000.
Number of bespoke WinMo apps written by companies who use smartphones as ultra-portable devices for running in-house software?
hell, for consoles they had to poach sega's console development team
Who were otherwise very busy individuals...
Certainly in the UK, and I assume elsewhere in Europe (since half our communications industry is French, Spanish or German anyway) the ISPs have become convinced that they have a right to 'monetise' our connections beyond the monthly subscription. They all seem intent on proving pay-per-view VOD services and the like, and I think this is part of their effort to 'defend' something they have no right to, and that nobody wants
I think, in fact, you give them rather more credit than they deserve... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7708169.stm
What's Michael Jackson got to do with basketball?
I don't think that was the OP's point. The two WWII bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki killed more than 150,000 people, and that would make it a larger disaster, were it not for the fact that it isn't classed apparently as a disaster. Which was the OP's point.
Any leads on where to actually find this? Doesn't appear to be on DVD release anywhere, and the IMDB review alone isn't quite enough
Yes.. And no. To a large extent that's all correct I think, but there is still the more subtle hint that someone will have to 'sync' to get the whole thing working properly - and some people who might be comfortable plugging a TV into the power and HDMI cables might be persuaded to take the $150 installation because the 'sync' part looks a little more complicated, or that possibly they won't do it well enough to get the right results. It doesn't have to be an outright lie to scare people into paying for it...
Well you may of course be right about that
There is NO objective measure of 'slowing down' or 'significant delays in I/O processing' in the article at all, so I question why you're so certain that any such thing was unambiguously observed?
I think, to be fair, digital signatures could just as easily be incorporated into other means of communications - they're hardly specific to email, so I don't see them as being specifically way of securing or validating email per se...
Sorry, do what now? Which one of you is the mail man?
...and I think the reply might have been in agreement with him...
That doesn't definitively state that they observed a rise in virtual memory use - it could as easily be taken to mean that they're extrapolated the memory usage and their belief is that this leads to virtual memory usage. For me, if they'd actually meant that it DID lead to virtual memory usage and that they'd measured such, I'd have expected to see numbers. In the absence, I'm inclined to believe that they see the memory usage and infer from that that virtual memory is the inevitable next step.
Google pretty much *is* DNS When was the last time you instructed someone to 'open your browser, and in the address bar enter: www.xyz.com' and they actually did that, rather than entering it into one of the seven or either toolbars they have installed? Since nobody seems to understand that concept of URLs, why bother with them? Everyone searches (usually 'googles') for damn near everything anyway, so might as well do away with DNS for websites entirely and just use google + IP addresses...
Quite a bit, by the look of it...
Don't ever put your credit card information into Facebook or a Facebook app.
Well, no - but I'm no more likely to do that than I am to put my genitals in a meat grinder... I'm amazed that anyone would
Anecdotal evidence sucks.
Actually I find quite the opposite...
But potentially still useful for a clean install - since the system and apps will therefore be amongst the first xGB...
That said, this is the sort of situation that inevitably arises when violating the law. If you steal cars, and someone steals your stolen goods -- or tries to extort protection money from you, who are you going to call?
Well, I would have thought that was obvious
I definitely agree with the not-removing-key-from-pocket part of your point, but just how do you unlock the car without juggling your groceries if the key's in your pocket? You don't have to take the key out, but you still have to get your hand into your pocket (or manipulate the key through your trousers, but either way...)