They aren't your clients, they're Microsoft's clients. You are a lowly 3rd party consultant, and your add-on is locked in to that dysfunctional segment of the industry.
Your trust level is not with the customers, it is with Symantec and Microsoft.
Your problem is fundamentally outside the scope of this solution.
Your three independently operated notaries form the core of your system of trust.
And you tell your clients to quit trusting Norton/Symantec and Microsoft. Re-write your stuff to run on Linux and get your clients to put your app on Linux boxes.
I mean, seriously, if your target customer base is so limited, moving them to a reliable system is not nearly as hard.
The question is not why the spike, the question is why people would still deliberately subject themselves and their mail to Microsoft when they have plenty of options.
(I know, I know, some people acquire a taste for bondage. And, of course, there is now the question looming of why people would subject themselves and their data to Apple any more.)
(Not sure how serious I mean this post to be taken, but I sure wish I could get people to take their blinders off when looking at the computer industry.)
(Heh. This post is more parenthetic aside than comment.)
Ideally, all the libraries would be dynamically linked, and require loading only once into (virtual) memory locations that can be shared with all users, or at least with all sandboxed users owned by a single real user.
Reality is nowhere near close to that at this point, and will not be in any of the current architectures.
Or, in other words, sandboxed users.... allow you to go digging around for answers in websites that pop those ridiculous smiley ads and warnings about your "Windows" being full of "viruses" and such in your face.
Funny, I learned pointers in assembler and had little trouble with pointers in either Pascal or C. Not that Pascal pointers made sense to me until I learned C, but I didn't have much trouble with them.
The reason for using inc instead of + is precisely because x86 and other non-linear addressing exist, and pointers in such systems require overloading + if you use + with them. Pascal's Inc is supposed to hide the details of the math from the programmer, whether pointer or character or other non-linear discrete element.
Uhm. Good points, especially relative to Unicode, and especially on least-significant-byte-first systems like Linux on x86, or like MSWindows.
But,...
Unicode is a kludge. A great kludge, and better than any available alternative, but a kludge nonetheless. So Unicode and UTF-8 or UTF-16 are not reasons for mpt considering characters to be integers.
One of these days we're going to wake up and realize that integers on a least-significant-byte-first CPU/run-time are not integers, and that is the other practical reason for trying to hide the encryption points from their integer representation.
True, characters are not 8 or 16 bit integers, and the "char" type in C, with it's tradition of byteness, is a misnomer. (wide char is not much of an improvement, in no small part because of the silliness with the initial implementations of Unicode being 16 bit encoding points.)
But encoding points are integers. Integral values, if you must, but they can be treated as integers, which is very fortunate, because we would not be able to use computers to work with characters otherwise.
Yeah, we use basic arithmetic in our libraries, because trying to use straight, linear character classification tables for Unicode would tend to cause cache thrashing in a serious way. (Not that table lookup is anything other than arithmetic.)
If you know you and people close to you are going to be dying anyway, the best chance someone important to you survives is to become the barking chihuahua. And start learning to bite.
That's the reality that hasn't really hit home yet in the pampered big country to the north. You're never free until you are willing to fight for your freedom yourself.
Not sure if I'm asking a reasonable question or not about dark matter, but as long as we can't qualify the soul, we don't have a way to tell whether it has mass or not.
All we know for sure is that our attempts to measure such mass have been unsuccessful so far. And we really can't expect to get anywhere as long as we don't know what the soul is.
If there truly is no physical "spirit" to the soul, there is still the argument that the soul would be the sum of the information collected as memories, thinking patterns, learned behavior and habits, etc. over the lifetime to the present.
Which brings us back to the question of whether information has mass independent of the medium on which it is stored.
I was going to echo the general attitude that the fears are probably misguided, but somewhere in the Church literature (I'm "Mormon") I was reading several months back, I noted that we had sent a bunch of radiation detectors to the Touhoku area.
So they apparently are either taking the risk seriously, or they are wanting to provide our members with a way to check and avoid unnecessary worries.
But you might check with your nearest church or community group with which you have some sort of affiliation. Or, in fact, do not assume that the "government" would not send somebody by to check your gutter. Go ahead and check with your nearest yakusho (cho-yakusho -- town/subdivision -- or ku-yakusho -- ward, not the LDS kind, but the division of the large city kind). If your wife is Japanese, she should be able to find out pretty easily, if you can convince her that it's okay to ask. If not, look up the phone number of the place you go to get your gaijin registration taken care of.
Apple does not put out their stuff for OEM. HTC has no way to do establish a "mutually beneficial relationship" with Apple. Samsung does business with Apple in supplying certain parts, but that relationship is at will and really is not a big money maker for them.
Apple simply does not have the means to do hidden promotional or discount deals with them to cover the losses they will take for turning their backs on the mobile phone and tablet markets.
Microsoft, on the other hand, is pure OEM, and already has the relationship with both.
And there are lots of people who are willing to see the GPL de-fanged, because they don't dare believe in a world in which all the big players don't have one hand on everyone else's throat and the other in everyone else's pants (pardon the metaphor).
The people at the "top" have (once again, it happens every fifty years or so) forgotten about the great experiment in freedom.
The right thing is to recognize that no one can win the wars that the current patent,and for more companies to start standing up for sanity instead of letting the "big" companies bribe a continuance of the status quo.
Eventually, even Microsoft will die in the bloodbath that the current patent system allows. You can't limit ideas when you start allowing them to be used as corporate weapons.
Not that it alters the fact that, as others point out, HTC's position vs. Apple is significantly different than their position relative to Microsoft. Just like with Samsung, Apple has much less to offer in inducements and so forth, and HTC has much less room to negotiate.
If Apple were offering there iOS under OEM, there would be much more reason for HTC and Samsung to stand down. Surely you can see that.
Samsung and HTC stand a high chance of having to pay a lot of court costs to defend themselves, whether or not Microsoft loses.
If they win, and if they can show Microsoft to have been disingenuous in bringing the suit, they may be able to partially recoup those costs -- years down the road.
Most likely, as others have noted, Microsoft is offering them various incentives and inducements to do something that Microsoft can represent as a win. This is obvious to anyone even half thinking about it, which is why I'm going to question whether you might not be somewhat disingenuous in your misreading.
There are rules of procedure to protect litigants from having incidental but potentially damaging information made public during litigation. Kind of like dragging in the question of whether the CEO is guilty of spouse abuse. The lawyers can argue about whether the question is even relevant, but in the meanwhile the news companies are making hay. So the courts allow a certain amount of keeping secrets.
Over the past thirty years, those rules have progressively become more abused until we have this kind of stuff. Microsoft could get sanctioned for it if the right lawyer took it to the right judge, but then there would be people like Florian Mueller (who used to be a good guy) claiming that there must be something with the merit of the claims if side-issues are being brought up. Besides, big companies probably prefer to keep things as they are, with the secrecy and all.
What about HTC? They're playing ball and the only Microsoft products they seem to buy are Windows Phone 7 and Windows Mobile 6.5.... not exactly cash cows compared to Android. Why wouldn't they just ditch their Microsoft offerings and take them to court if the patents are flimsy?
You've read the reasons already, more than once, in reply to your posts above. Why keep up the fud game?
Slashdot Mirror
They aren't your clients, they're Microsoft's clients. You are a lowly 3rd party consultant, and your add-on is locked in to that dysfunctional segment of the industry.
Your trust level is not with the customers, it is with Symantec and Microsoft.
Your problem is fundamentally outside the scope of this solution.
Your three independently operated notaries form the core of your system of trust.
And you tell your clients to quit trusting Norton/Symantec and Microsoft. Re-write your stuff to run on Linux and get your clients to put your app on Linux boxes.
I mean, seriously, if your target customer base is so limited, moving them to a reliable system is not nearly as hard.
Good one.
gmail is fine with straight pop access.
But if you want the webmail and pop access to be synced you need to access the webmail somewhat regularly.
Did I interpret those graphs right?
Larry?
Only explains the spike.
The question is not why the spike, the question is why people would still deliberately subject themselves and their mail to Microsoft when they have plenty of options.
(I know, I know, some people acquire a taste for bondage. And, of course, there is now the question looming of why people would subject themselves and their data to Apple any more.)
(Not sure how serious I mean this post to be taken, but I sure wish I could get people to take their blinders off when looking at the computer industry.)
(Heh. This post is more parenthetic aside than comment.)
Ideally, all the libraries would be dynamically linked, and require loading only once into (virtual) memory locations that can be shared with all users, or at least with all sandboxed users owned by a single real user.
Reality is nowhere near close to that at this point, and will not be in any of the current architectures.
Or, in other words, sandboxed users. ... allow you to go digging around for answers in websites that pop those ridiculous smiley ads and warnings about your "Windows" being full of "viruses" and such in your face.
Funny, I learned pointers in assembler and had little trouble with pointers in either Pascal or C. Not that Pascal pointers made sense to me until I learned C, but I didn't have much trouble with them.
The reason for using inc instead of + is precisely because x86 and other non-linear addressing exist, and pointers in such systems require overloading + if you use + with them. Pascal's Inc is supposed to hide the details of the math from the programmer, whether pointer or character or other non-linear discrete element.
Uhm. Good points, especially relative to Unicode, and especially on least-significant-byte-first systems like Linux on x86, or like MSWindows.
But, ...
Unicode is a kludge. A great kludge, and better than any available alternative, but a kludge nonetheless. So Unicode and UTF-8 or UTF-16 are not reasons for mpt considering characters to be integers.
One of these days we're going to wake up and realize that integers on a least-significant-byte-first CPU/run-time are not integers, and that is the other practical reason for trying to hide the encryption points from their integer representation.
True, characters are not 8 or 16 bit integers, and the "char" type in C, with it's tradition of byteness, is a misnomer. (wide char is not much of an improvement, in no small part because of the silliness with the initial implementations of Unicode being 16 bit encoding points.)
But encoding points are integers. Integral values, if you must, but they can be treated as integers, which is very fortunate, because we would not be able to use computers to work with characters otherwise.
Yeah, we use basic arithmetic in our libraries, because trying to use straight, linear character classification tables for Unicode would tend to cause cache thrashing in a serious way. (Not that table lookup is anything other than arithmetic.)
If you know you and people close to you are going to be dying anyway, the best chance someone important to you survives is to become the barking chihuahua. And start learning to bite.
That's the reality that hasn't really hit home yet in the pampered big country to the north. You're never free until you are willing to fight for your freedom yourself.
How do you know the soul is not dark matter?
Not sure if I'm asking a reasonable question or not about dark matter, but as long as we can't qualify the soul, we don't have a way to tell whether it has mass or not.
All we know for sure is that our attempts to measure such mass have been unsuccessful so far. And we really can't expect to get anywhere as long as we don't know what the soul is.
If there truly is no physical "spirit" to the soul, there is still the argument that the soul would be the sum of the information collected as memories, thinking patterns, learned behavior and habits, etc. over the lifetime to the present.
Which brings us back to the question of whether information has mass independent of the medium on which it is stored.
(I have no mod points today.)
Googled for "ratiation detectors for Japan". Found this interesting link, among other things.
I was going to echo the general attitude that the fears are probably misguided, but somewhere in the Church literature (I'm "Mormon") I was reading several months back, I noted that we had sent a bunch of radiation detectors to the Touhoku area.
So they apparently are either taking the risk seriously, or they are wanting to provide our members with a way to check and avoid unnecessary worries.
But you might check with your nearest church or community group with which you have some sort of affiliation. Or, in fact, do not assume that the "government" would not send somebody by to check your gutter. Go ahead and check with your nearest yakusho (cho-yakusho -- town/subdivision -- or ku-yakusho -- ward, not the LDS kind, but the division of the large city kind). If your wife is Japanese, she should be able to find out pretty easily, if you can convince her that it's okay to ask. If not, look up the phone number of the place you go to get your gaijin registration taken care of.
Ah, yeah, Bugs was a bit more active in baiting poor Wyle E., now that you remind me.
Heh. Talk about social engineering.
Okay, let's try to put it together one more time.
Apple does not put out their stuff for OEM. HTC has no way to do establish a "mutually beneficial relationship" with Apple. Samsung does business with Apple in supplying certain parts, but that relationship is at will and really is not a big money maker for them.
Apple simply does not have the means to do hidden promotional or discount deals with them to cover the losses they will take for turning their backs on the mobile phone and tablet markets.
Microsoft, on the other hand, is pure OEM, and already has the relationship with both.
And there are lots of people who are willing to see the GPL de-fanged, because they don't dare believe in a world in which all the big players don't have one hand on everyone else's throat and the other in everyone else's pants (pardon the metaphor).
The people at the "top" have (once again, it happens every fifty years or so) forgotten about the great experiment in freedom.
The right thing is to recognize that no one can win the wars that the current patent,and for more companies to start standing up for sanity instead of letting the "big" companies bribe a continuance of the status quo.
Eventually, even Microsoft will die in the bloodbath that the current patent system allows. You can't limit ideas when you start allowing them to be used as corporate weapons.
One tin soldier rides away.
I'd forgotten about that.
Not that it alters the fact that, as others point out, HTC's position vs. Apple is significantly different than their position relative to Microsoft. Just like with Samsung, Apple has much less to offer in inducements and so forth, and HTC has much less room to negotiate.
If Apple were offering there iOS under OEM, there would be much more reason for HTC and Samsung to stand down. Surely you can see that.
Samsung and HTC stand a high chance of having to pay a lot of court costs to defend themselves, whether or not Microsoft loses.
If they win, and if they can show Microsoft to have been disingenuous in bringing the suit, they may be able to partially recoup those costs -- years down the road.
Most likely, as others have noted, Microsoft is offering them various incentives and inducements to do something that Microsoft can represent as a win. This is obvious to anyone even half thinking about it, which is why I'm going to question whether you might not be somewhat disingenuous in your misreading.
I thought that was Road Runner.
At least, when I was a kid it was always Road Runner letting poor old self-deluding Wyle E. Coyote beat himself up.
Should be the title of this article.
There are rules of procedure to protect litigants from having incidental but potentially damaging information made public during litigation. Kind of like dragging in the question of whether the CEO is guilty of spouse abuse. The lawyers can argue about whether the question is even relevant, but in the meanwhile the news companies are making hay. So the courts allow a certain amount of keeping secrets.
Over the past thirty years, those rules have progressively become more abused until we have this kind of stuff. Microsoft could get sanctioned for it if the right lawyer took it to the right judge, but then there would be people like Florian Mueller (who used to be a good guy) claiming that there must be something with the merit of the claims if side-issues are being brought up. Besides, big companies probably prefer to keep things as they are, with the secrecy and all.
What about HTC? They're playing ball and the only Microsoft products they seem to buy are Windows Phone 7 and Windows Mobile 6.5.... not exactly cash cows compared to Android. Why wouldn't they just ditch their Microsoft offerings and take them to court if the patents are flimsy?
You've read the reasons already, more than once, in reply to your posts above. Why keep up the fud game?