You are supposing that the enforcement end of the police are actually happy about these systems.
Personally, I think that every time a community installs shit like this, each officer becomes worried about job security. After all, the end result is not needing traffic cops, which most of them are.
So you want hard data.. Ubuntu's Lucid Lynx raw update list from 10.04 (April, 2010) to 10.04.1 (August, 2010) include more patches than I care to count. My estimate is 56 pages with 20 bug fixes per page, so well over 1000 bug fixes in 4 months.
Would you argue that it is more or less fair to be counting the number of bug fixes instead of the number of distinct patch packages released? Because right now what you have been doing is count the number of patch packages released while ignoring the total number of bugs that needed to be fixed, all the while ALSO wanting Windows to take the stain of application packages also released via Windows Update (ex: count Internet Explorer patches on windows, but don't count Firefox patches on linux)
Neither you nor me seem to have links to hard data handy, but at least one of us manages to stay nice:)
Hows this for not nice?
I run both Windows and Linux boxes. I have not tried to demean Linux in any way, and have only pointed out that it is Security through Obscurity. Meanwhile you have tried several times to demean Windows with unfair comparisons and logical fallacies. This proves that you wish to paint a specific picture decided upon priori, and are willing to do so shamelessly.
You are a Linux zealot and are thus completely irrational. I'm being nice on this one.
Speaking of which, I think that the "hybrid" vehicles we should be producing could be running from gas-powered generators instead of batteries, eliminating the storage concern entirely. I have a generator that produces gobs of power (something like 1500 amps) for periods of 18-20 hours, using only 7 gallons of gasoline to do so. You could go an awful long ways on 18-20 hours of driving time.
Amps is not a measure of power. Amps is a measure of electric current.
Next Tuesday, MS will break the record for patches in one day.
So because MS issues patches on a monthly cycle that that is your evidence that Windows is less secure? Really? Thats the evidence you have?
Your obscurity argument would hold more water if most *NIX would not dominate the server hosting as much as it does.
# of computers / # of servers = X
If X is large then...
*nix fills the definition of obscurity outstandingly, so your shameful attempt to modify the argument into a "server hosting" twist is simply that.. shameful. Your twist on things is 100% correct, but still doesnt make *nix less obscure. I'm not going to bother to figure out which one of these you are guilty of, here.
They now attack windows because it is the majority of all machines networked, just like they attacked *nix before windows had that majority. Advisory after advisory for *nix and VMS, year after year.
So, for all intents and purposes, as of right now, *NIX is more secure and evidence suggests that this is because it is obscure.
My current estimate (I have records) is about $1000/year, regardless of the age of the car, so I am not sure that "far exceeds the cost of the car" is correct unless you are talking about a used car.
In other words: I did claim that *NIX has always been perfect. I am simply saying they got their shit together a lot better, faster and more thoroughly than the Windows world.
You claimed it, but have provided no citation. There is in fact very little reason to believe that "they got their shit together".. the evidence, which I gave one citation of, indicates only that the preferred target is now windows.. that *nix is protected by obscurity, not security.
I used to monitor an independent organization that kept track.
Note that in the beginning there, all the exploits were either *nix or VMS-based, and that was because back then the internet was mostly *nix and VMS. It was only with the advent of PPP that brought millions of Windows machines directly to the internet that Windows became a target.
Even when CERT went down in 2003, there were still plenty of new exploits for *nix systems.. The standard sendmail was a notorious problem for more than a decade, with the same problems re-appearing again and again.
Its as if you guys think that people werent hacking networks before the WWW. Hell, my entire teenage years were before this WWW shit and I always managed to be on the internet by illegitimate means. Back then things were far more wide-open than they are now with "insecure as hell windows".. you guys have no idea what insecure means. With a good exploit you didn't just own system after system.. you owned network after network.
Even this article itself said that so much soil has been dumped into the lake that during the dry season, the level of water drops to a depth of 2 feet!
For some reason I think that you are imaging the possibility of a lake being "filled up" with dirt so that there isnt any more water. Water has a constant volume. If at one point the lake dropped to 4 feet in the dry season, and now it only drops to 2 feet, either the lake is twice as big now, OR THERE IS LESS PRECIPITATION AND THAT IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE EXTRA DIRT.
Well certainly after they gave it to Obama for literally no reason other than the political, it became clear that it was no longer a mark of any sort of greatness. Most would argue that this was true prior to this event, but it certainly became undeniable afterwards.
In February of 2009, Google licensed Microsofts syncing tech and then introduced Google Sync.br>
At the time, the list then also included Apple, Nokia, Palm, Samsung, and Sony Ericsson. Note the absence of Motorola.
"Google's licensing of these Microsoft patents relating to the Microsoft Exchange ActiveSync protocol is a clear acknowledgment of the innovation taking place at Microsoft. This agreement is also a great example of Microsoft' s openness to generally license our patents under fair and reasonable terms so long as licensees respect Microsoft intellectual property. This open approach has been part of Microsoft's IP licensing policy since 2003 and has resulted in over 500 licensing agreements of the last five years."
Even with a mountain of evidence in front of you, including 18+ posts timestamped head of yours, as well as the summary on your screen...
...you still completely fucking ignored it and proceeded to talk out your ass, while stating (and I quote) "I have no idea what the issue is"
For christ sakes, you even knew that you had no fucking idea what you were talking about. People that knowingly and willfully talk out their ass should not be paid attention to, ever. Nobody should ever listen to what you have to say because you knowingly and willfully make shit up.
Ah, sorry. I forgot that I have to give a direct citation despite the preponderance of evidence in my favour, but you're allow to make paranoid accusations without a shred of proof.
So *still* no citation? Not a single news article or anything on all of the internet that claims that there is evidence against this man for a crime other than not revealing his encryption key?
Perhaps you should make such a page, so that way instead of trying to bullshit your way into being believed, you could cite yourself.
Det Sgt Neil Fowler, of Lancashire Police, said: "Drage was previously of good character so the immediate custodial sentence handed down by the judge in this case shows just how seriously the courts take this kind of offense.".. the offense being not disclosing his encryption key.
Which part of 'innocent until proven guilty' confuses you? If you are by default presumed innocent, and that it requires substantial amounts of evidence to be found guilty, then giving up the password can only harm you regardless of the contents of the encryption.
You are beginning in a position of innocence.. so there is absolutely no reason to take a step in any direction. You cannot be 'more innocent.'
Tranny Midget Porn with Power Tools. I think that I'd gladly do a few months in prison rather than admit to that... not that I am into that.. that is to say, I came up with that at random... yeah.. at random.
Because Microsofts patent portfolio is so large and varied that its preferable to enter into a cross licensing deal.
The end result is that most companies *do* cross license with Microsoft without the muss and fuss of a legal battle, because by all rights Microsoft does have some patents of value that you want.
A non-comprehensive list of companies that Microsoft has cross-licensing deal with:
Just wait for a company to decide that being a torrent feeder is being part of a botnet and thus torrent feeders must be cut off. Good luck getting back on again.
...or wait for botnet writers to start using torrent sites as command and control points.
It seems to me that pushing them towards a greater level of covertness is a bad idea.
I agree that could be developed. I am saying there was not one line of code written to do anything like that.
Writing the code is a trivial issue here. We arent talking about something that is technically hard in any way. The hard part would be to get application developers to support the feature in a useful way.
A case-in-point is that on regular old windows I can highlight a bunch of files and drop them on other applications.. but not all other application. My favorite text editor responds to a file being dragged and dropped onto its window, but my favorite word processor does not.
The magic that made the iTouch/iPhone was not that it had multi-touch, but that (a) it shipped with enough multi-touch applications that the initial reception of the product was positive, (b) the momentum of Apple in general created an initial demand, and (c) apple gave the developers no choice but to support multi-touch.
The actual multi-touch interface paradigm has not been perfected yet. There is still plenty of room for innovative designs such as what Microsoft showed in that booklet mockup, as well as their compelling Microsoft Surface product. If it isn't Microsoft then it will be someone else, perhaps even Apple. The entire market will stand on each others shoulders at this point. Bootstrapped by Apple, but by no means exclusive to them as Android has shown.
That is an incredibly stupid thing to say. Of course they care. They want to generate energy by the most profitable means possible.
The company that obtains and delivers my electricity does not own the generation methods. So yea, they do only care about profits, but no that does not mean that there is monopoly generation entrenchment. It means the exact opposite. It means that any company that can generate electricity for less, REGARDLESS OF HOW IT IS GENERATED, will be able to sell 100% of their capacity.
So yeah.. you are drinking the fucking kool-aid, and no its not stupid to observe that. Whats stupid is that you didn't know that this is how the current market works. I guess you don't actually pay an electric bill.
It is the speculation that in the future the maintenance costs of the windfarm will be less than the cost of getting the energy elsewhere that is mostly at issue.
Unlike a coal/gas power plant which have a small physical footprint and thus a relatively low decommissioning cost, those wind farms are very expensive to remove. If the cost of maintenance exceeds other generation methods, or if demand falls sharply, the owning corporations will just disappear leaving a massive bill for the community where the farm resides. You will note that it is never an established energy corporation that owns these things.. its always a shell corporation owned by an established corporation that owns these things.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates the cost of removing a 34m diameter wind turbine at $120,000 and restoration of the land around one costing another $205,000. In 1997 the cost of removing California's existing first generation turbines was estimated to potentially exceed $100,000,000.
Its as bad as Nuclear in terms of decommissioning costs per kwh, but unlike Nuclear these sites are so massive that the communities they reside in can't just let the properties they sit on be held hostage.
Slashdot Mirror
You are supposing that the enforcement end of the police are actually happy about these systems.
Personally, I think that every time a community installs shit like this, each officer becomes worried about job security. After all, the end result is not needing traffic cops, which most of them are.
As you are into math: 49 / 30 = ?
So you want hard data.. Ubuntu's Lucid Lynx raw update list from 10.04 (April, 2010) to 10.04.1 (August, 2010) include more patches than I care to count. My estimate is 56 pages with 20 bug fixes per page, so well over 1000 bug fixes in 4 months.
Would you argue that it is more or less fair to be counting the number of bug fixes instead of the number of distinct patch packages released? Because right now what you have been doing is count the number of patch packages released while ignoring the total number of bugs that needed to be fixed, all the while ALSO wanting Windows to take the stain of application packages also released via Windows Update (ex: count Internet Explorer patches on windows, but don't count Firefox patches on linux)
Neither you nor me seem to have links to hard data handy, but at least one of us manages to stay nice :)
Hows this for not nice?
I run both Windows and Linux boxes. I have not tried to demean Linux in any way, and have only pointed out that it is Security through Obscurity. Meanwhile you have tried several times to demean Windows with unfair comparisons and logical fallacies. This proves that you wish to paint a specific picture decided upon priori, and are willing to do so shamelessly.
You are a Linux zealot and are thus completely irrational. I'm being nice on this one.
Speaking of which, I think that the "hybrid" vehicles we should be producing could be running from gas-powered generators instead of batteries, eliminating the storage concern entirely. I have a generator that produces gobs of power (something like 1500 amps) for periods of 18-20 hours, using only 7 gallons of gasoline to do so. You could go an awful long ways on 18-20 hours of driving time.
Amps is not a measure of power. Amps is a measure of electric current.
Amps * Volts = Watts.
Watts is a unit of power (kg * m^2 / s^3).
Next Tuesday, MS will break the record for patches in one day.
So because MS issues patches on a monthly cycle that that is your evidence that Windows is less secure? Really? Thats the evidence you have?
Your obscurity argument would hold more water if most *NIX would not dominate the server hosting as much as it does.
# of computers / # of servers = X
If X is large then...
*nix fills the definition of obscurity outstandingly, so your shameful attempt to modify the argument into a "server hosting" twist is simply that.. shameful. Your twist on things is 100% correct, but still doesnt make *nix less obscure. I'm not going to bother to figure out which one of these you are guilty of, here.
They now attack windows because it is the majority of all machines networked, just like they attacked *nix before windows had that majority. Advisory after advisory for *nix and VMS, year after year.
So, for all intents and purposes, as of right now, *NIX is more secure and evidence suggests that this is because it is obscure.
There. Fixed that for you.
My current estimate (I have records) is about $1000/year, regardless of the age of the car, so I am not sure that "far exceeds the cost of the car" is correct unless you are talking about a used car.
In other words: I did claim that *NIX has always been perfect. I am simply saying they got their shit together a lot better, faster and more thoroughly than the Windows world.
You claimed it, but have provided no citation. There is in fact very little reason to believe that "they got their shit together" .. the evidence, which I gave one citation of, indicates only that the preferred target is now windows .. that *nix is protected by obscurity, not security.
I used to monitor an independent organization that kept track.
.. you guys have no idea what insecure means. With a good exploit you didn't just own system after system.. you owned network after network.
Note that in the beginning there, all the exploits were either *nix or VMS-based, and that was because back then the internet was mostly *nix and VMS. It was only with the advent of PPP that brought millions of Windows machines directly to the internet that Windows became a target.
Even when CERT went down in 2003, there were still plenty of new exploits for *nix systems.. The standard sendmail was a notorious problem for more than a decade, with the same problems re-appearing again and again.
Its as if you guys think that people werent hacking networks before the WWW. Hell, my entire teenage years were before this WWW shit and I always managed to be on the internet by illegitimate means. Back then things were far more wide-open than they are now with "insecure as hell windows"
Even this article itself said that so much soil has been dumped into the lake that during the dry season, the level of water drops to a depth of 2 feet!
For some reason I think that you are imaging the possibility of a lake being "filled up" with dirt so that there isnt any more water. Water has a constant volume. If at one point the lake dropped to 4 feet in the dry season, and now it only drops to 2 feet, either the lake is twice as big now, OR THERE IS LESS PRECIPITATION AND THAT IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE EXTRA DIRT.
Well certainly after they gave it to Obama for literally no reason other than the political, it became clear that it was no longer a mark of any sort of greatness. Most would argue that this was true prior to this event, but it certainly became undeniable afterwards.
Almost the exact same thing happened here. D.A.R.E. is 90% lies & 10% peer pressure.
D.A.R.E
I TURNED IN MY
PARENTS AND ALL
I GOT WAS THIS
LOUSY T-SHIRT
The big question is why Motorola? Why not Google?
In February of 2009, Google licensed Microsofts syncing tech and then introduced Google Sync.br>
At the time, the list then also included Apple, Nokia, Palm, Samsung, and Sony Ericsson. Note the absence of Motorola.
From a Microsoft Press Release
"Google's licensing of these Microsoft patents relating to the Microsoft Exchange ActiveSync protocol is a clear acknowledgment of the innovation taking place at Microsoft. This agreement is also a great example of Microsoft' s openness to generally license our patents under fair and reasonable terms so long as licensees respect Microsoft intellectual property. This open approach has been part of Microsoft's IP licensing policy since 2003 and has resulted in over 500 licensing agreements of the last five years."
..its different because a cop following you doesnt typically lead to the question "Can we have our cop back now, please?"
Even with a mountain of evidence in front of you, including 18+ posts timestamped head of yours, as well as the summary on your screen...
...you still completely fucking ignored it and proceeded to talk out your ass, while stating (and I quote) "I have no idea what the issue is"
For christ sakes, you even knew that you had no fucking idea what you were talking about. People that knowingly and willfully talk out their ass should not be paid attention to, ever. Nobody should ever listen to what you have to say because you knowingly and willfully make shit up.
So they can't arrest without reasonable grounds for a start. That includes but is not limited to having evidence of the crime being committed.
There. Fixed that for your dumb ass.
Pics of your mom being impregnated or you didn't happen.
Many people have pics of that. He's for real.
Ah, sorry. I forgot that I have to give a direct citation despite the preponderance of evidence in my favour, but you're allow to make paranoid accusations without a shred of proof.
So *still* no citation? Not a single news article or anything on all of the internet that claims that there is evidence against this man for a crime other than not revealing his encryption key?
Perhaps you should make such a page, so that way instead of trying to bullshit your way into being believed, you could cite yourself.
..and yet you have given no citation that even hints at them having any evidence.
You must have read a different article.
.. the offense being not disclosing his encryption key.
Det Sgt Neil Fowler, of Lancashire Police, said: "Drage was previously of good character so the immediate custodial sentence handed down by the judge in this case shows just how seriously the courts take this kind of offense."
Which part of 'innocent until proven guilty' confuses you? If you are by default presumed innocent, and that it requires substantial amounts of evidence to be found guilty, then giving up the password can only harm you regardless of the contents of the encryption.
You are beginning in a position of innocence.. so there is absolutely no reason to take a step in any direction. You cannot be 'more innocent.'
Tranny Midget Porn with Power Tools. I think that I'd gladly do a few months in prison rather than admit to that... not that I am into that.. that is to say, I came up with that at random... yeah.. at random.
Because Microsofts patent portfolio is so large and varied that its preferable to enter into a cross licensing deal.
..thats just the short list of companies I found in the first few pages of a google search.
The end result is that most companies *do* cross license with Microsoft without the muss and fuss of a legal battle, because by all rights Microsoft does have some patents of value that you want.
A non-comprehensive list of companies that Microsoft has cross-licensing deal with:
Alpine, Amazon, Apple, Autodesk, Centrify, Denso, Epson, Fuji, Funai, HP, JVC, Kenwood, Lexmark, LG, Lotus, Nikon, Olympus, Onkyo, Panasonic, Pioneer, Samsung, TomTom, Toshiba, and Xerox.
Just wait for a company to decide that being a torrent feeder is being part of a botnet and thus torrent feeders must be cut off. Good luck getting back on again.
It seems to me that pushing them towards a greater level of covertness is a bad idea.
I agree that could be developed. I am saying there was not one line of code written to do anything like that.
Writing the code is a trivial issue here. We arent talking about something that is technically hard in any way. The hard part would be to get application developers to support the feature in a useful way.
A case-in-point is that on regular old windows I can highlight a bunch of files and drop them on other applications.. but not all other application. My favorite text editor responds to a file being dragged and dropped onto its window, but my favorite word processor does not.
The magic that made the iTouch/iPhone was not that it had multi-touch, but that (a) it shipped with enough multi-touch applications that the initial reception of the product was positive, (b) the momentum of Apple in general created an initial demand, and (c) apple gave the developers no choice but to support multi-touch.
The actual multi-touch interface paradigm has not been perfected yet. There is still plenty of room for innovative designs such as what Microsoft showed in that booklet mockup, as well as their compelling Microsoft Surface product. If it isn't Microsoft then it will be someone else, perhaps even Apple. The entire market will stand on each others shoulders at this point. Bootstrapped by Apple, but by no means exclusive to them as Android has shown.
That is an incredibly stupid thing to say. Of course they care. They want to generate energy by the most profitable means possible.
The company that obtains and delivers my electricity does not own the generation methods. So yea, they do only care about profits, but no that does not mean that there is monopoly generation entrenchment. It means the exact opposite. It means that any company that can generate electricity for less, REGARDLESS OF HOW IT IS GENERATED, will be able to sell 100% of their capacity.
So yeah.. you are drinking the fucking kool-aid, and no its not stupid to observe that. Whats stupid is that you didn't know that this is how the current market works. I guess you don't actually pay an electric bill.
It is the speculation that in the future the maintenance costs of the windfarm will be less than the cost of getting the energy elsewhere that is mostly at issue.
Unlike a coal/gas power plant which have a small physical footprint and thus a relatively low decommissioning cost, those wind farms are very expensive to remove. If the cost of maintenance exceeds other generation methods, or if demand falls sharply, the owning corporations will just disappear leaving a massive bill for the community where the farm resides. You will note that it is never an established energy corporation that owns these things.. its always a shell corporation owned by an established corporation that owns these things.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates the cost of removing a 34m diameter wind turbine at $120,000 and restoration of the land around one costing another $205,000. In 1997 the cost of removing California's existing first generation turbines was estimated to potentially exceed $100,000,000.
Its as bad as Nuclear in terms of decommissioning costs per kwh, but unlike Nuclear these sites are so massive that the communities they reside in can't just let the properties they sit on be held hostage.