When all your online access depends on it, you can't have enough redundancy.
Security isn't just about secrecy. It's also about being safe from loss.
Which is exactly why I created Master Password (algorithm/app): The theory is that all your passwords should be stateless, not rely on any form of storage at all, be long to be secure against brute-force attacks, be irreversible, and even if you lose everything you own tomorrow, be recreatable purely from your own knowledge.
It is my opinion that you cannot trust a human to make a good password.
You also cannot trust anything, a hard-disk, a notebook, a company(!) to store your passwords.
Which is why I use http://masterpasswordapp.com/ and I unlock it with a passphrase. The key elements here being: stateless, no storage, strong passwords.
There's a difference between using SHA1 for verifying integrity and using SHA1 for cryptographic purposes.
I don't think it's GIT's intent to cryptographically prove that nobody has injected a modified commit in your history while going through extreme effort to mask that single-commit modification.
Before you talk, you should think about all the angles. Think about what it means to flag someone as suspicious, think about how easy it is to make someone look suspicious, think about how easy it would be for someone who doesn't like YOU to make YOU look suspicious, and think about how easy it would be to sabotage anything on the internet when all it takes to "temporarily" censor something is a child-porn flag.
Before you think I'm conflating things, before you start spouting a reply, please step away from the keyboard, take ten minutes, and consider the fact that the world isn't black-and-white. Issues aren't all trivial, and in almost all of the cases, it's better to let the criminals go if it means you won't risk the innocent be jailed or permanently marked by association.
Hatred and short-sightedness are very dangerous. Only your rational thinking can curb that. Please be smarter.
Gather a fair distribution of your country's residents into a room and ask them to stand on the left if they believe the 1B$ should go to researching alternative energy and on the right if it should go to preventing terrorism.
There is an inherent flaw in democracy that you cannot ignore; the majority vote will most commonly be undereducated. That's only normal and not because your population is stupid, they're just not experts in what they're voting for.
Similarly, I won't expect promising results from having random people on the street prioritize my iteration planning.
When you're desperately holding onto democracy in the conviction that it will lead you to an ideal society, you're either blinding yourself from this truth or you have a very limited opinion on what is ideal. Unfortunately, though, I suspect Churchill was on to something here, "It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried.". Perhaps we should be researching forms of government instead.
Not only is this hurting unfortunate customers, it's also hurting hardware vendors or products that didn't get the Apple blessing. Anyway, getting into semantics about the printer example is pointless. The greater issue here is that any kind of issue at all requires an Apple-certified solution in this scenario. And such is rarely in the best interest of all customers.
If things are not locked down, customers can choose for an Apple certified solution that comes with Apple support and blessing. Or they can opt for going to the local tech guy who isn't necessarily less able than the staff at the Apple store; and often to the contrary.
When your mother buys a printer and AirPrint happens to not work with it, she might ask you or anyone tech-knowledgable to make it work for her.
Since the iPhone has locked you out of doing anything that isn't Apple-certified, your only reply to her will be, buy a new printer. This time, make sure it has AirPrint support on the label.
If the iPhone hadn't been locked down (eg. it's jailbroken), you could easily install additional printer drivers or support.
Yes, buying an iPhone is giving up the freedom to make your new computer do things that you need it to do but aren't certified by the vendor. And yes, consumers do suffer from that. Stop blinding yourself to that. The iPhone would work no different for your mom if there had been a way for techy people to become root. The only difference is, now any techy person can help her. Not just the Apple-certified ones, and not just with Apple-certified solutions.
That is what software freedom is eventually about. It matters to tech people just as much as it does to non-tech people, because it enables them to go to tech people for help. Stallman's formulated four freedoms are simply the rules he figures will guarantee a consumer's freedom to control their own devices, or get help with them from a knowledgable person.
Similarly, in your car analogy, it would be nice if vendors released sufficient documentation publicly so that the car repair person next door who happens to be a really awesome mechanic can help me with my car's issues. Instead, I'm forced to suffer the pain of finding a vendor-certified dealership. That pain is not for the better of me, kindly stop lying to me.
My comment is not rude, it is factual and constructive. For all you know, Max is a perfectly reasonable person who's interested in learning where he makes mistakes in his usage of English so that the next time he'll say it right. Not everybody takes criticism as an insult, and the world would be a much happier place if we could all be like them.
Most Russian ISPs will be implementing DPI (Deep Packet Inspection) to block the content. We're not talking DNS anymore here, we're talking ISPs inspecting and logging everything you send over the wire unencrypted. Be careful about what you type in Google now, the russian Register is watching.
I was wondering whether anyone sensible was awake on slashdot.
The list contains APNs Tokens (NOT "DevToken ID"s, whatever the heck that's supposed to mean). Which means the information comes from an APN-enabled application. Any app can get the device's UDID. Apple isn't explicitly involved. There wouldn't have been any APNs Token.
Whether the information was collected by the FBI, or obtained by the FBI as part of some investigation or whatever other means remains unknown, but I for one am really curious WHO BUILT THE APP that collected all of this information. If you want to point fingers, answer that question instead.
The point here is that while placebos may have an effect when taken, the extent of that effect should be no greater than that of targeted medication.
If medication designed to cure depression works better than a placebo does (ie. MORE people are cured, or symptoms are reduced FURTHER), then the medication is considered to "work". If the medication doesn't work, it will either be AS effective as a placebo (likely the case for homeopathic medicine) or LESS effective (adverse effects).
It really doesn't matter that placebos have an effect. Because if homeopathic medicine doesn't work, it effectively becomes a placebo. So yes, it's perfectly fair to compare against placebos.
There are a few problems in your line of thinking:
1. You seem to think that "ideas" are somehow unique enough that only one person can ever think of them and all others can only acquire the same by "stealing". 2. You seem to think that any great new ideas that have not yet been implemented are "new ideas".
The amount of registered IP today probably covers nearly anything anyone could possible come up with, unique or not, just by the mere fact that ideas are inherently very generic and most registered IPs are very badly evaluated.
Anyone talking about "intellectual PROPERTY" or "innovating" by registering new IP, makes me sick. Turning intellectual products into property is the death of intellectual innovation, and anyone that thinks otherwise has deluded themselves or hasn't thought it through.
Innovation would happen when LOTS of people innovated using the SAME intellectual product. Then there would be competition. Customers could choose considering things like price and quality. This choice would drive implementers to innovate more than their competition. It would drive the whole economy.
Turning intellectual products into property denies it from the competition and effectively breaks the whole foundation of capitalism.
The researchers know full-well what kind of company they're getting payed by. If they don't want to be affiliated with the crap the company does such as by the parent, they can go work elsewhere. They're still working for SONY, which means they didn't care to make that moral choice, which means they fully deserve the affiliation.
Talk like yours is what convinces people that "it's OK" to do evil crap. "The customer will forgive you", eventually. "Find someone to blame and throw them out".
That isn't going to stop the next idiot with an overzealous plan at SONY's board. Customers sticking to their principles will.
Might I point out that this is not a destructive tendency at all? Contrary to if people were to choose much more permissive licenses as the default without understanding them.
At least the author can at any point relicense any of his stuff. If you want to use the code and the license isn't permissive enough, contact the author and see whether he's OK with it. Problem solved.
If the author defaults to a very permissive license, there's no going back. Once the permissively licensed code is out there, it's too late to license it more restrictively later once the author finds out what his license really means.
Slashdot Mirror
This.
When all your online access depends on it, you can't have enough redundancy.
Security isn't just about secrecy. It's also about being safe from loss.
Which is exactly why I created Master Password (algorithm/app): The theory is that all your passwords should be stateless, not rely on any form of storage at all, be long to be secure against brute-force attacks, be irreversible, and even if you lose everything you own tomorrow, be recreatable purely from your own knowledge.
It is my opinion that you cannot trust a human to make a good password.
You also cannot trust anything, a hard-disk, a notebook, a company(!) to store your passwords.
Which is why I use http://masterpasswordapp.com/ and I unlock it with a passphrase. The key elements here being: stateless, no storage, strong passwords.
There's a difference between using SHA1 for verifying integrity and using SHA1 for cryptographic purposes.
I don't think it's GIT's intent to cryptographically prove that nobody has injected a modified commit in your history while going through extreme effort to mask that single-commit modification.
What exactly is your point? Because most of the users are apathetic to DRM, it needs to stay?
If you can sufficiently obfuscate a jail around your life such that you don't notice it in your daily doings, it belongs there? Of course not.
DRM solves no problems, but it CREATES a LOT of them. Here's something that solves problems: Get rid of it.
You are walking a dangerous road, friend.
Before you talk, you should think about all the angles. Think about what it means to flag someone as suspicious, think about how easy it is to make someone look suspicious, think about how easy it would be for someone who doesn't like YOU to make YOU look suspicious, and think about how easy it would be to sabotage anything on the internet when all it takes to "temporarily" censor something is a child-porn flag.
Before you think I'm conflating things, before you start spouting a reply, please step away from the keyboard, take ten minutes, and consider the fact that the world isn't black-and-white. Issues aren't all trivial, and in almost all of the cases, it's better to let the criminals go if it means you won't risk the innocent be jailed or permanently marked by association.
Hatred and short-sightedness are very dangerous. Only your rational thinking can curb that. Please be smarter.
Gather a fair distribution of your country's residents into a room and ask them to stand on the left if they believe the 1B$ should go to researching alternative energy and on the right if it should go to preventing terrorism.
There is an inherent flaw in democracy that you cannot ignore; the majority vote will most commonly be undereducated. That's only normal and not because your population is stupid, they're just not experts in what they're voting for.
Similarly, I won't expect promising results from having random people on the street prioritize my iteration planning.
When you're desperately holding onto democracy in the conviction that it will lead you to an ideal society, you're either blinding yourself from this truth or you have a very limited opinion on what is ideal. Unfortunately, though, I suspect Churchill was on to something here, "It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried.". Perhaps we should be researching forms of government instead.
Be careful in your defence of democracy: You may well find the sensible interests are the minority.
No, you would use software such as the following instead:
http://intelliborn.com/truprint.html
Not only is this hurting unfortunate customers, it's also hurting hardware vendors or products that didn't get the Apple blessing. Anyway, getting into semantics about the printer example is pointless. The greater issue here is that any kind of issue at all requires an Apple-certified solution in this scenario. And such is rarely in the best interest of all customers.
If things are not locked down, customers can choose for an Apple certified solution that comes with Apple support and blessing. Or they can opt for going to the local tech guy who isn't necessarily less able than the staff at the Apple store; and often to the contrary.
When your mother buys a printer and AirPrint happens to not work with it, she might ask you or anyone tech-knowledgable to make it work for her.
Since the iPhone has locked you out of doing anything that isn't Apple-certified, your only reply to her will be, buy a new printer. This time, make sure it has AirPrint support on the label.
If the iPhone hadn't been locked down (eg. it's jailbroken), you could easily install additional printer drivers or support.
Yes, buying an iPhone is giving up the freedom to make your new computer do things that you need it to do but aren't certified by the vendor. And yes, consumers do suffer from that. Stop blinding yourself to that. The iPhone would work no different for your mom if there had been a way for techy people to become root. The only difference is, now any techy person can help her. Not just the Apple-certified ones, and not just with Apple-certified solutions.
That is what software freedom is eventually about. It matters to tech people just as much as it does to non-tech people, because it enables them to go to tech people for help. Stallman's formulated four freedoms are simply the rules he figures will guarantee a consumer's freedom to control their own devices, or get help with them from a knowledgable person.
Similarly, in your car analogy, it would be nice if vendors released sufficient documentation publicly so that the car repair person next door who happens to be a really awesome mechanic can help me with my car's issues. Instead, I'm forced to suffer the pain of finding a vendor-certified dealership. That pain is not for the better of me, kindly stop lying to me.
There is nothing but hate in your post. You might as well be talking to a wall.
If you could substantiate some of that with something of value, we might be able to learn from whatever wisdom drew you to that conclusion.
He didn't have a watch in his thick boots. He had a watch. And thick boots.
man was arrested at Oakland International Airport after security officers found him wearing an unusual watch
My comment is not rude, it is factual and constructive. For all you know, Max is a perfectly reasonable person who's interested in learning where he makes mistakes in his usage of English so that the next time he'll say it right. Not everybody takes criticism as an insult, and the world would be a much happier place if we could all be like them.
Grammar is important. "Don't just confuse it" means something rather different from "Just don't confuse it".
Most Russian ISPs will be implementing DPI (Deep Packet Inspection) to block the content. We're not talking DNS anymore here, we're talking ISPs inspecting and logging everything you send over the wire unencrypted. Be careful about what you type in Google now, the russian Register is watching.
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/11/russia-surveillance/all/
He wasn't saying anything about iOS 6 maps.
Um, you see no privacy implications involved with having to put your chocolate bars in a metal box in order NOT to be tracked?
Sounds to me like you're already part of brainwashed society.
I personally wouldn't mind patents becoming restricted to a 6month lifetime.
That way the innovator has 6 months of head-start until the rest of the world is free to compete.
The exit code of true?
I was wondering whether anyone sensible was awake on slashdot.
The list contains APNs Tokens (NOT "DevToken ID"s, whatever the heck that's supposed to mean). Which means the information comes from an APN-enabled application. Any app can get the device's UDID. Apple isn't explicitly involved. There wouldn't have been any APNs Token.
Whether the information was collected by the FBI, or obtained by the FBI as part of some investigation or whatever other means remains unknown, but I for one am really curious WHO BUILT THE APP that collected all of this information. If you want to point fingers, answer that question instead.
The point here is that while placebos may have an effect when taken, the extent of that effect should be no greater than that of targeted medication.
If medication designed to cure depression works better than a placebo does (ie. MORE people are cured, or symptoms are reduced FURTHER), then the medication is considered to "work". If the medication doesn't work, it will either be AS effective as a placebo (likely the case for homeopathic medicine) or LESS effective (adverse effects).
It really doesn't matter that placebos have an effect. Because if homeopathic medicine doesn't work, it effectively becomes a placebo. So yes, it's perfectly fair to compare against placebos.
And that's exactly why you shouldn't store your passwords anywhere.
This tool/algorithm will generate passwords on demand so you don't need to upload them to the cloud or save them on your failure-prone hardware.
There are a few problems in your line of thinking:
1. You seem to think that "ideas" are somehow unique enough that only one person can ever think of them and all others can only acquire the same by "stealing".
2. You seem to think that any great new ideas that have not yet been implemented are "new ideas".
The amount of registered IP today probably covers nearly anything anyone could possible come up with, unique or not, just by the mere fact that ideas are inherently very generic and most registered IPs are very badly evaluated.
Anyone talking about "intellectual PROPERTY" or "innovating" by registering new IP, makes me sick. Turning intellectual products into property is the death of intellectual innovation, and anyone that thinks otherwise has deluded themselves or hasn't thought it through.
Innovation would happen when LOTS of people innovated using the SAME intellectual product. Then there would be competition. Customers could choose considering things like price and quality. This choice would drive implementers to innovate more than their competition. It would drive the whole economy.
Turning intellectual products into property denies it from the competition and effectively breaks the whole foundation of capitalism.
The researchers know full-well what kind of company they're getting payed by. If they don't want to be affiliated with the crap the company does such as by the parent, they can go work elsewhere. They're still working for SONY, which means they didn't care to make that moral choice, which means they fully deserve the affiliation.
Talk like yours is what convinces people that "it's OK" to do evil crap. "The customer will forgive you", eventually. "Find someone to blame and throw them out".
That isn't going to stop the next idiot with an overzealous plan at SONY's board.
Customers sticking to their principles will.
[citation needed]
Might I point out that this is not a destructive tendency at all? Contrary to if people were to choose much more permissive licenses as the default without understanding them.
At least the author can at any point relicense any of his stuff. If you want to use the code and the license isn't permissive enough, contact the author and see whether he's OK with it. Problem solved.
If the author defaults to a very permissive license, there's no going back. Once the permissively licensed code is out there, it's too late to license it more restrictively later once the author finds out what his license really means.