So those who seek to profit from the platform Apple has built... will have to pay Apple for the privilege. Oh, the horror!
Sounds a lot more like "those who wish to profit and do business with apple at the same time owe apple 30% no matter what they do"... They are basically ensuring that no competitive market on any level (even below the iTunes market) can take hold since they are demanding that all app related items are sold alongside the apps in the store.
In the team's research paper (PDF), they suggest a defence mechanism against Soundminer: an intermediary layer that analyses input from the microphone before passing it to an application, able to detect credit card numbers and prevent their transmission to Soundminer-like Trojans.
This is possible, but why not take it one step farther (and simpler) and just make an event handler that lets you know what is going on when. These apps all work WITHIN the security construct of the Android OS. They don't even have to exploit code defects or undermine system permissions for this to work; they ask the user if the app is allowed to record (possibly during phone calls) and if its also allowed to send data (possibly right after a phone call). The user doesn't put two and two together, allows the activity and doesn't give it a second thought.
Interlude: This isn't a problem just with "ok-mashing lusers" who blindly accept permissions on anything that comes along. You might want an app with the ability to record voice calls (for security, quality assurance, etc.) and you might want that app to also be able to send data to the internet so it can upload the audio, or something similarly useful. What even the smartest of the smart users don't have any visibility over is the actual source code of all of these apps, to make sure that the app is *only* doing what you want it to. Even astute users, who do everything right except for misplacing their trust in the app developer, can fall for this attack.
Solution: Introduce an event handling feature that can be set up to notify users of possibly malicious activity. If you are paranoid, you will check all the boxes off and be notified when "a third party app is recording while the phone is active", "a third party app is backgrounded and sending data to an internet service and is not on the whitelist", etc. etc. etc. This way you can tell if some random app you didnt even think you were using at the time happened to get ahold of some data you didnt want it to have, and sent it off to a collection server. Is it going to stop the activity? No. Is it going to give the average user who pays attention to their phone but doesn't have the time/wherewithal to do code audits on every app they have installed? YES.
That's not how they avoided collision. Banks have fully integrated CID data into their AVR systems for a long time now. You called in with the phone registered to that account, they immediately knew the card number that was up for activation but had you confirm it regardless. Likewise, for a bit more security they had you confirm part of your SSN. This is all well and good, until the registered number associated with your account is a cellphone with compromised software that can relay a call from an attacker, an attacker who happens to have already picked off your SSN via other communications, and is now sitting on a fully activated, high-limit card with your name on it.
...28 scientists and engineers at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory filed suit against the US government and the California Institute of Technology (Caltech) in 2007 saying that NASA's invasive background investigations as required by government regulations.
Perhaps you meant to finish that sentence with a verb or two? I am forced to guess... Did the background checks insult their mom and kick their dog?
Another idea listed is that a "zero CO2 emissions" is developed along these lines: 'H2O and CO2 would be converted to methane, would fuel electricity-producing power plants that generate more CO2 and H2O, to keep the process going.'
So basically, it would be a solar-powered station that could run around the clock using methane as a storage medium. I know that for as awesome as this sounds, it is equally unlikely to ever come to fruition to the extent that it is explained here.
You're right that there is no way to guarantee security without extreme measures (see, the DOD) Instead, it's about support volume (and the related costs). If you get one or two incidents a year involving a broken computer (with security implications) with a "closed" system that takes reasonable security measures, it's a lot more cost effective than fighting 1 or 2 incidents a *day* as users find more effective ways to break their own computers. Also, the threat profile (i.e. the likelihood that the breakin resulted in a measurable loss for the company because the attacker was able to make off with valuable material) is a lot smaller.
Sure, attempting 100% security is going to cost 100% of your resources and still not going to be 100% effective. However, once the "cost" slider leaves 100%, how far down do you want it to take the "Effective" slider?
Seriously, a 5 year old pendium D with 2gb of ram running XP will tear the fuck out of office 2003 or 2007. This is work. Do work.
Oh, what I would give to be able to get everything done with Office 2003 or 2007! As it is, my PDF viewer has to fight over the virus scanner, 2 firewalls, IDS, "policy manager", and probably a tattletale program or two thrown in for good measure by the IT guys who want their 10 or so lives to be simple at the expense of the simplicity of the 1000 users who have to fight their computer to get it to do what they want it to.
Hey, at least browsing Slashdot is nice and fast! Maybe that's why it's so damn addictive.
My county frequently charges the inmates for room and board while they are incarcerated.
Interesting. But I have to wonder (without trolling, I swear) how far beyond the payroll of the accounts receivable department does your income for said customer-inmates go? I would suspect that you are susceptible to a recursive loop as people are sentenced for not paying their previous jailing fees and end up incurring more fees as a result.
Wikipedia is still the fastest first step to something usable overall. If you expect 10% of every page to be wrong, it's still enough to settle basic coworker arguments.
Nice to see your basic use case for Wikipedia isn't anything dumb like archiving human knowledge, or allowing for the free exchange of information and ideas...
Apple's way is more discoverable because it isn't hiding, Android's way is more efficient because it doesn't waste valuable screen space drawing back buttons and menu selections always on screen.
Discoverable? Both are valid, I agree, but trying to say that a pentagon facing left is "more intuitive" than an arrow is kind of silly. Even before I started using an Android phone I was constantly annoyed by the iPod Touch UI and the need to find/press the little back choice in the app instead of using the "one button", which given the lack of multitasking (until recently) had the nice side effect of completely closing the app.
Of course there are differences, I don't entirely disagree with you. I was mostly just trying to play up another angle on the argument. This conversation is all the more epic considering your handle is "slimjim"...
Net gain to society? WTF. Are we advocating low impact crimes to help society? I can see some PSA's now - "Forget Jobcorps, come hack email accounts with us and help your community!" This line of thinking also states for future potential crimelords that if you hack into email, your time is a walk in the park. If there is no deterrent then what is the point of the criminal justice system?
Wow, way to completely miss the point. Read sentences much? He meant that the COMMUNITY SERVICE was a net gain for society, since the perp has to do something productive to earn his forgiveness, instead of being locked up and supported by taxpayers.
Not even cracked. Please stop talking about this guy like he has some computer wiizardry - he guessed at recovery questions. If I leave a riddle taped to my safe that gives the combo when solved, how angry can I be when somebody figures it out?
If my car has only a thin, brittle piece of glass protecting it from being entered into and driven off without my consent, how angry can I be when someone figures it out?
I suspect that the computer has a dead on confidence rating by the time Alex is finishing his last syllable, so the decision of whether or not to ring in is clear. Just like a human, but the computer has the advantage of knowing that as soon as the buzzer is "open for buzzing" it can ring in within a millisecond instead of the tens or hundreds it takes a human to register sensory information and command their thumb to press.
You can really tell the difference between a player that's good or bad at buzzing... Some players mash the buzzer vigorously but never seem to be the first one in regardless of intent. It's a skill that presents a very clear advantage.
Anyone care to try to replicate the results? You could probably just use his list, or create a list of your own if you really want to. I'd do it myself but I'm supposed to be working.
Duh, just post your actual work to an "ask slashdot" post, then come back and work on this instead. I mean come on, what are you, new here?
After trying to put up with Bing (being the annoying default in IE 7/8, and on my smartphone) it just doesn't hit the right notes with the kinds of searching I do. It's probably that it doesn't prioritize Wikipedia results high enough, though.
There are some questions where you need to understand the question at a deeper level, like the before-and-after categorys (i.e. Abraham Lincoln Towncar).
You must be thinking of Wheel of Fortune... While its not impossible to see a response like that in Jeopardy, it is much more commonly seen in the following time slot.
It doesn't get access to a search engine, though. It needs to use pre-compiled repositories of information, all indexed in a way that makes identifying the right "Response" (remember the questions are answers) in the right amount of time.
That being said, a computer is almost certainly so much better at "hitting the buzzer" in the allowed window than a human, that it possesses a significant advantage from the start.
You're just being obtuse. It means that all new smartphones introduced in 2011 will use dual core chips. Still a rather high goal, but definitely plausible at this point.
Although it hasn't technically happened yet, the iPhone 4 for Verizon is almost certainly being released in 2011, with a single core chip... So much for "ALL". The author should have just gone for "Some" and saved himself the ridicule. He is trying to read tea leaves when the writing is on the wall (as seen at CES) and as such he sounds like a pretty big idiot.
Slashdot Mirror
So those who seek to profit from the platform Apple has built... will have to pay Apple for the privilege. Oh, the horror!
Sounds a lot more like "those who wish to profit and do business with apple at the same time owe apple 30% no matter what they do"... They are basically ensuring that no competitive market on any level (even below the iTunes market) can take hold since they are demanding that all app related items are sold alongside the apps in the store.
Lion's den you say... http://www.lionsdenadult.com/
You had to see that coming, right?
Is it sad that my first thought was "good, now they can just buy the control back!"
Not only do they get to find out what sites have vulnerabilities, but they can use the exchange to try to track down the perps at the same time.
Your car is touching the ground. Shielding is easy when you have a solid ground. How, exactly, do you get an effective ground when you're in the air?
Your car's *rubber* tires are touching the ground... 3-4 inches of rubber and a mile of air are pretty similar in terms of ground potential.
In the team's research paper (PDF), they suggest a defence mechanism against Soundminer: an intermediary layer that analyses input from the microphone before passing it to an application, able to detect credit card numbers and prevent their transmission to Soundminer-like Trojans.
This is possible, but why not take it one step farther (and simpler) and just make an event handler that lets you know what is going on when. These apps all work WITHIN the security construct of the Android OS. They don't even have to exploit code defects or undermine system permissions for this to work; they ask the user if the app is allowed to record (possibly during phone calls) and if its also allowed to send data (possibly right after a phone call). The user doesn't put two and two together, allows the activity and doesn't give it a second thought.
Interlude: This isn't a problem just with "ok-mashing lusers" who blindly accept permissions on anything that comes along. You might want an app with the ability to record voice calls (for security, quality assurance, etc.) and you might want that app to also be able to send data to the internet so it can upload the audio, or something similarly useful. What even the smartest of the smart users don't have any visibility over is the actual source code of all of these apps, to make sure that the app is *only* doing what you want it to. Even astute users, who do everything right except for misplacing their trust in the app developer, can fall for this attack.
Solution: Introduce an event handling feature that can be set up to notify users of possibly malicious activity. If you are paranoid, you will check all the boxes off and be notified when "a third party app is recording while the phone is active", "a third party app is backgrounded and sending data to an internet service and is not on the whitelist", etc. etc. etc. This way you can tell if some random app you didnt even think you were using at the time happened to get ahold of some data you didnt want it to have, and sent it off to a collection server. Is it going to stop the activity? No. Is it going to give the average user who pays attention to their phone but doesn't have the time/wherewithal to do code audits on every app they have installed? YES.
That's not how they avoided collision. Banks have fully integrated CID data into their AVR systems for a long time now. You called in with the phone registered to that account, they immediately knew the card number that was up for activation but had you confirm it regardless. Likewise, for a bit more security they had you confirm part of your SSN. This is all well and good, until the registered number associated with your account is a cellphone with compromised software that can relay a call from an attacker, an attacker who happens to have already picked off your SSN via other communications, and is now sitting on a fully activated, high-limit card with your name on it.
...28 scientists and engineers at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory filed suit against the US government and the California Institute of Technology (Caltech) in 2007 saying that NASA's invasive background investigations as required by government regulations.
Perhaps you meant to finish that sentence with a verb or two? I am forced to guess... Did the background checks insult their mom and kick their dog?
Another idea listed is that a "zero CO2 emissions" is developed along these lines: 'H2O and CO2 would be converted to methane, would fuel electricity-producing power plants that generate more CO2 and H2O, to keep the process going.'
So basically, it would be a solar-powered station that could run around the clock using methane as a storage medium. I know that for as awesome as this sounds, it is equally unlikely to ever come to fruition to the extent that it is explained here.
You're right that there is no way to guarantee security without extreme measures (see, the DOD) Instead, it's about support volume (and the related costs). If you get one or two incidents a year involving a broken computer (with security implications) with a "closed" system that takes reasonable security measures, it's a lot more cost effective than fighting 1 or 2 incidents a *day* as users find more effective ways to break their own computers. Also, the threat profile (i.e. the likelihood that the breakin resulted in a measurable loss for the company because the attacker was able to make off with valuable material) is a lot smaller.
Sure, attempting 100% security is going to cost 100% of your resources and still not going to be 100% effective. However, once the "cost" slider leaves 100%, how far down do you want it to take the "Effective" slider?
Seriously, a 5 year old pendium D with 2gb of ram running XP will tear the fuck out of office 2003 or 2007. This is work. Do work.
Oh, what I would give to be able to get everything done with Office 2003 or 2007! As it is, my PDF viewer has to fight over the virus scanner, 2 firewalls, IDS, "policy manager", and probably a tattletale program or two thrown in for good measure by the IT guys who want their 10 or so lives to be simple at the expense of the simplicity of the 1000 users who have to fight their computer to get it to do what they want it to.
Hey, at least browsing Slashdot is nice and fast! Maybe that's why it's so damn addictive.
My county frequently charges the inmates for room and board while they are incarcerated.
Interesting. But I have to wonder (without trolling, I swear) how far beyond the payroll of the accounts receivable department does your income for said customer-inmates go? I would suspect that you are susceptible to a recursive loop as people are sentenced for not paying their previous jailing fees and end up incurring more fees as a result.
Wikipedia is still the fastest first step to something usable overall. If you expect 10% of every page to be wrong, it's still enough to settle basic coworker arguments.
Nice to see your basic use case for Wikipedia isn't anything dumb like archiving human knowledge, or allowing for the free exchange of information and ideas...
this always made me chuckle...
No, I don't think the act was funny or it should be joked about, before you start.
Wait for it... Wait for it...
Baaaahahahahahahahah. But, does it not fit in the "hoax" category since it is outlandishly false?
As long as it wasn't the salt-withered but still-living body of Takezo Kensei, they can go ahead and resurrect whatever they want.
So first of all - please do not say her name - she is like Beatleguice and will continue to stick around as long as you talk about her.
Beetlejuice. Betelgeuse. Please pick one.
Apple's way is more discoverable because it isn't hiding, Android's way is more efficient because it doesn't waste valuable screen space drawing back buttons and menu selections always on screen.
Discoverable? Both are valid, I agree, but trying to say that a pentagon facing left is "more intuitive" than an arrow is kind of silly. Even before I started using an Android phone I was constantly annoyed by the iPod Touch UI and the need to find/press the little back choice in the app instead of using the "one button", which given the lack of multitasking (until recently) had the nice side effect of completely closing the app.
Of course there are differences, I don't entirely disagree with you. I was mostly just trying to play up another angle on the argument. This conversation is all the more epic considering your handle is "slimjim"...
Net gain to society? WTF. Are we advocating low impact crimes to help society? I can see some PSA's now - "Forget Jobcorps, come hack email accounts with us and help your community!"
This line of thinking also states for future potential crimelords that if you hack into email, your time is a walk in the park. If there is no deterrent then what is the point of the criminal justice system?
Wow, way to completely miss the point. Read sentences much? He meant that the COMMUNITY SERVICE was a net gain for society, since the perp has to do something productive to earn his forgiveness, instead of being locked up and supported by taxpayers.
Not even cracked. Please stop talking about this guy like he has some computer wiizardry - he guessed at recovery questions. If I leave a riddle taped to my safe that gives the combo when solved, how angry can I be when somebody figures it out?
If my car has only a thin, brittle piece of glass protecting it from being entered into and driven off without my consent, how angry can I be when someone figures it out?
Bad analogy, meet car analogy. Hoyoooooo!
I suspect that the computer has a dead on confidence rating by the time Alex is finishing his last syllable, so the decision of whether or not to ring in is clear. Just like a human, but the computer has the advantage of knowing that as soon as the buzzer is "open for buzzing" it can ring in within a millisecond instead of the tens or hundreds it takes a human to register sensory information and command their thumb to press.
You can really tell the difference between a player that's good or bad at buzzing... Some players mash the buzzer vigorously but never seem to be the first one in regardless of intent. It's a skill that presents a very clear advantage.
Anyone care to try to replicate the results? You could probably just use his list, or create a list of your own if you really want to. I'd do it myself but I'm supposed to be working.
Duh, just post your actual work to an "ask slashdot" post, then come back and work on this instead. I mean come on, what are you, new here?
After trying to put up with Bing (being the annoying default in IE 7/8, and on my smartphone) it just doesn't hit the right notes with the kinds of searching I do. It's probably that it doesn't prioritize Wikipedia results high enough, though.
There are some questions where you need to understand the question at a deeper level, like the before-and-after categorys (i.e. Abraham Lincoln Towncar).
You must be thinking of Wheel of Fortune... While its not impossible to see a response like that in Jeopardy, it is much more commonly seen in the following time slot.
It doesn't get access to a search engine, though. It needs to use pre-compiled repositories of information, all indexed in a way that makes identifying the right "Response" (remember the questions are answers) in the right amount of time.
That being said, a computer is almost certainly so much better at "hitting the buzzer" in the allowed window than a human, that it possesses a significant advantage from the start.
You're just being obtuse. It means that all new smartphones introduced in 2011 will use dual core chips. Still a rather high goal, but definitely plausible at this point.
Although it hasn't technically happened yet, the iPhone 4 for Verizon is almost certainly being released in 2011, with a single core chip... So much for "ALL". The author should have just gone for "Some" and saved himself the ridicule. He is trying to read tea leaves when the writing is on the wall (as seen at CES) and as such he sounds like a pretty big idiot.