I'm sick of hearing about technology companies doing this that and the other thing. Technology is a tool, nothing more. You want an amazing medical breakthrough? Look to someone who knows something about medicine and biology, not a "technology company." No doubt technology is a huge help in many cases, but the ideas are driven by people who understand the problems, not the technology. What technology companies should be doing is working on making better tools, and let people who understand the underlying human problems use the tools.
Yes, since the report is only from one person who is unable to replicate it (according to TFA) my thought is it was just as likely to be an issue with his browser or host.
If the security of all that data relies on one patch being applied, then that is yet another colossal failure by Equifax. For something with this sort of impact, there should be multiple layers of safeguards not just patching a web server. There were a long line of failures here, not just a missing patch.
I never had the impression BTC was supposed to be secure, it was supposed to be universal and free of centralized control. Certain aspects of it have security certainly, but who promised BTC in general would be "secure"?
Why would this vast majority of poor people refrain from cheaply producing their own goods? There's nothing stopping them, unless the rich people put together a robot army to go out and destroy everyone else's capital.
Almost literally everything else: electronics, food, clothing, and so on. Parents are working two jobs to afford property taxes, not houses and cars. Housing prices are driven by something other than cost of production, namely demand and ability to "pay" higher prices. Cars is an excellent point though. According to the US government, prices have gone down, since the official CPI excludes a price increase for higher quality or better features, even if it is no longer possible to buy the lower priced version.
Aside from the fact that my assumption is what has happened so far, it is pretty farfetched to think that people will make tons of very cheap well made consumer goods via robot and then not sell them to anybody. True the future remains uncertain, but I'd be interested to hear why you believe your pessimistic assumption is better grounded than my optimistic one.
And over time as productivity grows, work hours continue to decrease. With cheap efficient robots making everything, maybe a job will only require on or two hours of work a week to make a decent living.
Malware already protects itself from being scanned or viewed, as much as it can. This isn't anything new. Some variants are even using containers and hypervisors to conceal the core operations within obfuscated blobs. Of course, those get downloaded by the browser on the fly. On the other hand, browser implementations have every chance to limit the scope of operations the EME blob can perform. But it's still more attack surface and I don't doubt they will find ways to use the legitimate functions in ways I don't like. Same thing that happened with the browser.
The problem is exactly what you described, the browser downloads a closed source component automatically with no interaction or probably knowledge of the user. The EFF's point was this introduces a whole new attack surface to try to implement an underlying idea which is widely regarded as impossible by people who understand the technology (DRM). And this auto-downloading is on by default, so it can be abused by anyone who figures out how to leverage it. Meanwhile the vast majority of users have no idea what it is or how to turn it off. I think you can see why the EFF opposed it.
Another way to look at it is, they picked up and left once they didn't get their way. "Didn't do what EFF wanted" isn't the same as "ignored the EFF". And now they don't have an opportunity to influence the future. What if others in W3C realize that they went down the wrong path? Now there are no allies for them. I think you could make a case for both stay and leave. EFF's statement was well written though.
If that's the case, why don't they just get rid of the taxes in the first place instead of just offering 'incentives' to a politically connected few? I always feel the idea of this sort of incentive is just admitting that the taxes are driving away businesses.
Slashdot Mirror
is a digital tool
"there simply isn't enough of a market for privacy" in other words, most people don't care as much as you do and you want to force them to care anyway
I think the game changed is the competition between various engine companies.
Controlled Folder Access is a great feature, and long overdue.
I'm sick of hearing about technology companies doing this that and the other thing. Technology is a tool, nothing more. You want an amazing medical breakthrough? Look to someone who knows something about medicine and biology, not a "technology company." No doubt technology is a huge help in many cases, but the ideas are driven by people who understand the problems, not the technology. What technology companies should be doing is working on making better tools, and let people who understand the underlying human problems use the tools.
Yes, since the report is only from one person who is unable to replicate it (according to TFA) my thought is it was just as likely to be an issue with his browser or host.
And don't forget the extreme health problems associated with long periods in space/low gravity. We are a long way from making the "monkeys in a can" model of space exploration workable.
A lot are moving to CME Pivot instead, which has been the front end for a lot of the AIM traffic anyway.
If the security of all that data relies on one patch being applied, then that is yet another colossal failure by Equifax. For something with this sort of impact, there should be multiple layers of safeguards not just patching a web server. There were a long line of failures here, not just a missing patch.
So you could say, BTC is more secure than the US dollar. But the bank's security may not be.
I never had the impression BTC was supposed to be secure, it was supposed to be universal and free of centralized control. Certain aspects of it have security certainly, but who promised BTC in general would be "secure"?
You can buy unlocked version from their website, but only in US and Canada.
Or they could just require quoted-printable format one line per tweet, and the various Twitter clients can handle multiline decoding
Why would this vast majority of poor people refrain from cheaply producing their own goods? There's nothing stopping them, unless the rich people put together a robot army to go out and destroy everyone else's capital.
Almost literally everything else: electronics, food, clothing, and so on. Parents are working two jobs to afford property taxes, not houses and cars. Housing prices are driven by something other than cost of production, namely demand and ability to "pay" higher prices. Cars is an excellent point though. According to the US government, prices have gone down, since the official CPI excludes a price increase for higher quality or better features, even if it is no longer possible to buy the lower priced version.
Aside from the fact that my assumption is what has happened so far, it is pretty farfetched to think that people will make tons of very cheap well made consumer goods via robot and then not sell them to anybody. True the future remains uncertain, but I'd be interested to hear why you believe your pessimistic assumption is better grounded than my optimistic one.
And over time as productivity grows, work hours continue to decrease. With cheap efficient robots making everything, maybe a job will only require on or two hours of work a week to make a decent living.
I see, a good point.
Ad blockers will just add EME blocking, if they haven't already. It's still just an HTTP request so they might already be blocking it.
Malware already protects itself from being scanned or viewed, as much as it can. This isn't anything new. Some variants are even using containers and hypervisors to conceal the core operations within obfuscated blobs. Of course, those get downloaded by the browser on the fly. On the other hand, browser implementations have every chance to limit the scope of operations the EME blob can perform. But it's still more attack surface and I don't doubt they will find ways to use the legitimate functions in ways I don't like. Same thing that happened with the browser.
But will Amazon's review of the website be deleted since it is not a verified purchase?
The problem is exactly what you described, the browser downloads a closed source component automatically with no interaction or probably knowledge of the user. The EFF's point was this introduces a whole new attack surface to try to implement an underlying idea which is widely regarded as impossible by people who understand the technology (DRM). And this auto-downloading is on by default, so it can be abused by anyone who figures out how to leverage it. Meanwhile the vast majority of users have no idea what it is or how to turn it off. I think you can see why the EFF opposed it.
Another way to look at it is, they picked up and left once they didn't get their way. "Didn't do what EFF wanted" isn't the same as "ignored the EFF". And now they don't have an opportunity to influence the future. What if others in W3C realize that they went down the wrong path? Now there are no allies for them. I think you could make a case for both stay and leave. EFF's statement was well written though.
If that's the case, why don't they just get rid of the taxes in the first place instead of just offering 'incentives' to a politically connected few? I always feel the idea of this sort of incentive is just admitting that the taxes are driving away businesses.
That said, your point is still valid, the options available to site operators are limited in this regard.