Knocking websites off is pretty pathetic and childish (and really, not all that hard unless they're backed by places like Akamai), however, that isn't the part I'm interested in.
When they DDOS somebody, there's a decent chance that someone will panic and make a mistake with security, or Anon will find a mistake that someone had already made with their security, and use that to vacuum their data. There's a decent chance that they will find something juicy.
That being said, unless they find something actionably criminal, none of it will matter. As others have said, these Trump supports have wrapped themselves in a reality distortion field that puts Apple to shame, and nothing will dissuade them short of Trump assassinating their children right in front of them. (And even then, only maybe).
And if there's anybody that knows all about artificially lowering prices in order to destroy the competition and have the market to itself, it would be China.
Do you even realize how much effort that takes, especially when other people are involved? It's not just one person making a switch. It's their friends, their family. And if those people consider it too much of a hassle to switch, then either you have to stop using that medium to talk to them, or you have to maintain multiple clients.
We've already walked down this road before, with the billion and one IM clients that are currently available. Constantly hopping from one provider to another is a massive PITA, to the point where everyone just gives up and goes back to SMS and phone calls with regular phones, cause that's the only system that is actually stable.
Have everyone leave their electronics in their lockers on the day of the test. Then detonate a small EMP bomb in the middle of the class that will destroy any electronics that they may have snuck in with.
That is true, although I've seen articles about how their gaming division is on shakey ground.
Desktop belongs to Microsoft. There's no denying it. But there has also been plenty of argument about how much progress Desktop has lost, because of Microsoft's stranglehold. Microsoft long ago stopped trying to compete via quality products. They preferred to get what they want with backroom shenanigans.
Lately it seems like that position is changing, but the problem here is that apart from the diehard Microsofties, Microsoft has done an excellent job of fostering massive distrust, and a couple of positive press releases are not going to be enough to make up for 3 decades of very hostile behaviour.
That's cause people look out for that behaviour now. Outside of the desktop, they do not have a dominant position in any other industry. At best, Microsoft has tiny footholds, and most of those have collapsed. Because we now have a generation of IT people that saw what Microsoft did in the past with PCs, and won't give them the chance to do it again.
So Microsoft needs to come up with new strategies to get what they want, such as ballot-stuffing industry standards bodies.
That's a strawman argument. There is zero evidence that that is their intention.
However, the is more than ample evidence of Microsoft disrupting competition in various, and sometimes ingenious, ways to either give them a significant edge, or to destroy their competition entirely.
Classic examples include: -Trying to add windows-only extensions to java. Sun called them on that, sued, and thankfully won. -Refusing to give OEMs very generous discounts/bonuses/etc, if they sold machines with anything other than Windows. -Bundling IE with Windows, to destroy Netscape. They were ultimately sued by the US and European gov'ts, and lost, but they still won cause they became the default browser for a good decade. They subsequently did their damndest to fill the internet with proprietary crap like ActiveX, that wouldn't work on any other browser or OS. -They successfully got Office OpenXML declared an industry standard, in one of the most sleazy and contentious ballots in the history of the ISO. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standardization_of_Office_Open_XML) In the process, their ballot member stuffing hamstrung the ISO and ruined ISO's reputation.
The list is just massive, but the point is this. Microsoft would never do something so comically simplistic as try to 'close open source'. Their MO is to corrupt whatever they touch so that they can squeeze a disproportionate benefit from it.
They may well not be planning any such thing at all. But based on their previous behaviour, only a fool would take their word at face value.
That's the thing. You're completely ignoring the emotional element, dismissing it as something valueless. But it's not just about a pay packet.
Perfect example... I could be making a shit ton more money elsewhere, with my skill set. But I'm not leaving, cause the company I currently work for is one of the best places I've ever worked. Management does everything it can to not only make employees succeed, but make them *want* to succeed. And not in a, "Some consultant advised us to do team building exercises" kind of way... In the, "the leadership actually *cares*" kind of way.
I've lost track of the number of employees that have left, only to humbly come back again after realizing that that greener pasture they found was a field full of cowshit. And we've welcomed them back, too.
TL;DR: Comparing performance with this class of device serves no useful purpose other than providing fodder for people who masturbate to performance statistics.
It's amazing how people manage to miss the point of things.
The raspberry pi exists because it provides a cheap and low-learning-curve introduction to creating your own electronic projects.
Yes, there are alternatives, because having different options is a good thing cause different people and different projects have different requirements. But the idea of benchmarking inexpensive hobby boards is just.... absurdist e-wanking. Either the board is suitable for what you're trying to do, or it isn't. If your project isn't going to run properly one board, why would it work on a board that's a little bit faster?
If your project needs the best possible performance, then maybe you're using the entirely wrong class of hardware.
And then of course, is this bit here:
While the ODROID-C2 doesn't appear to be shipping in quantities yet
So in other words, it's not even an option for most people if they want to build something right now.
How about telling us what the board *can do* compared to the Pi? Does it handle EM interference better? Does it have a ginormous number of I/O pins for connecting large quantities of sensors? Is it powerful enough to serve as a self-contained media box that can stream full HD video without dropping frames or hiccuping?
The surgical equivalent of Visual Basic developers.
Some things are just plain hard, and require talent, training and skill to perform. The last think anyone needs is people who have only a barely passing knowledge of surgery to be anywhere near an operating table.
The core language was stable, but because they didn't differentiate between the language and the support libraries, it basically amounted to them continually 'changing' java. Java now has a bajillion different ways of doing the same things. There are multiple windowing toolkits (AWT, Swing, etc), and don't get me started about server side stuff. JSP. Faces. It's ridiculous, and makes it unnecessarily difficult for people to get into java development cause there are too many equally valid sub-technologies to learn, and many (bad) projects may even mix and match between them.
I was a major fan of Angular until all this crap with Angular 2.
Was it *really* necessary to make fundamental changes to the syntax, thereby making it completely incompatible with Angular 1? It's dishonest to even call it Angular 2, when it has almost nothing in common with the previous.
And everyone thought Java's constantly revolving APIs were bad...
Are you trying to claim that a manufacturer who DOESN'T get an MS certification is somehow prevented from that option?
I think you misread the question. The question was about requirements for purchasing products from vendors, not telling vendors what they are and arn't allowed to do. (That's Microsoft's job)
There's nothing childish about mentioning Microsoft explicitly. They were the ones that championed Secure Boot in the first place, forcing OEMs to implement it for certification. Most major linux vendors have the resources to get their boot keys into the database, but smaller distros probably wouldn't.
Even then, the database is then stored locally in the UEFI, so if there's a Linux distro that's late to the party, they're still screwed with the current generation of hardware unless a bios update is released.
Additionally, Windows 8 certification mandated that it must be possible to disable Secure Boot (after significant outcry about possible lock-in). But for Windows 10 certification that requirement has been quietly dropped again, once again raising that concern about lock-in.
The submitter has stated that their guidelines will require any new hardware to have the ability to disable SecureBoot, certification requirement or not.
The question is, how do you explain that to people who may not understand the technical nuances.
The easiest way I can think of, is to make sure the hardware provides the ability to install Windows 7 (Just because Windows 10 licensing permits downgrade rights, it doesn't follow the hardware will let you), which doesn't support SecureBoot. If you can install Windows 7, you can anything else you want.
Slashdot Mirror
What's better than having privacy invasion and telemetry you can't shut off?
Why, Privacy invasion and telemetry being sent over a limited, metered pipe that you have to pay through the nose for, of course!
These people don't believe in climate change, so there's nothing to worry about.
Why is it anyone's responsibility to protect people who not only don't want to be protected, but refuse to acknowlege that a problem even exists?
Knocking websites off is pretty pathetic and childish (and really, not all that hard unless they're backed by places like Akamai), however, that isn't the part I'm interested in.
When they DDOS somebody, there's a decent chance that someone will panic and make a mistake with security, or Anon will find a mistake that someone had already made with their security, and use that to vacuum their data. There's a decent chance that they will find something juicy.
That being said, unless they find something actionably criminal, none of it will matter. As others have said, these Trump supports have wrapped themselves in a reality distortion field that puts Apple to shame, and nothing will dissuade them short of Trump assassinating their children right in front of them. (And even then, only maybe).
In Soviet Russia... Android Googles YOU!"
Although to be fair, it's not just Russia.
And if there's anybody that knows all about artificially lowering prices in order to destroy the competition and have the market to itself, it would be China.
Do you even realize how much effort that takes, especially when other people are involved? It's not just one person making a switch. It's their friends, their family. And if those people consider it too much of a hassle to switch, then either you have to stop using that medium to talk to them, or you have to maintain multiple clients.
We've already walked down this road before, with the billion and one IM clients that are currently available. Constantly hopping from one provider to another is a massive PITA, to the point where everyone just gives up and goes back to SMS and phone calls with regular phones, cause that's the only system that is actually stable.
Hey, it works for Oracle.
If this comment wasn't so blatantly homophobic, I'd give it a solid golf clap.
Have everyone leave their electronics in their lockers on the day of the test. Then detonate a small EMP bomb in the middle of the class that will destroy any electronics that they may have snuck in with.
(insert trollface here)
That is true, although I've seen articles about how their gaming division is on shakey ground.
Desktop belongs to Microsoft. There's no denying it. But there has also been plenty of argument about how much progress Desktop has lost, because of Microsoft's stranglehold. Microsoft long ago stopped trying to compete via quality products. They preferred to get what they want with backroom shenanigans.
Lately it seems like that position is changing, but the problem here is that apart from the diehard Microsofties, Microsoft has done an excellent job of fostering massive distrust, and a couple of positive press releases are not going to be enough to make up for 3 decades of very hostile behaviour.
I absolutely do not support Japan doing military research....
unless it involves building giant sword-wielding mecha. I would absolutely support giant sword-wielding mecha.
That's cause people look out for that behaviour now. Outside of the desktop, they do not have a dominant position in any other industry. At best, Microsoft has tiny footholds, and most of those have collapsed. Because we now have a generation of IT people that saw what Microsoft did in the past with PCs, and won't give them the chance to do it again.
So Microsoft needs to come up with new strategies to get what they want, such as ballot-stuffing industry standards bodies.
That's a strawman argument. There is zero evidence that that is their intention.
However, the is more than ample evidence of Microsoft disrupting competition in various, and sometimes ingenious, ways to either give them a significant edge, or to destroy their competition entirely.
Classic examples include:
-Trying to add windows-only extensions to java. Sun called them on that, sued, and thankfully won.
-Refusing to give OEMs very generous discounts/bonuses/etc, if they sold machines with anything other than Windows.
-Bundling IE with Windows, to destroy Netscape. They were ultimately sued by the US and European gov'ts, and lost, but they still won cause they became the default browser for a good decade. They subsequently did their damndest to fill the internet with proprietary crap like ActiveX, that wouldn't work on any other browser or OS.
-They successfully got Office OpenXML declared an industry standard, in one of the most sleazy and contentious ballots in the history of the ISO. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standardization_of_Office_Open_XML) In the process, their ballot member stuffing hamstrung the ISO and ruined ISO's reputation.
The list is just massive, but the point is this. Microsoft would never do something so comically simplistic as try to 'close open source'. Their MO is to corrupt whatever they touch so that they can squeeze a disproportionate benefit from it.
They may well not be planning any such thing at all. But based on their previous behaviour, only a fool would take their word at face value.
We're a small-medium (depending on your POV) custom software development house in Canada. Primarily java, but we do whatever the client wants.
jonah-jobs@jonahgroup.com
That's the thing. You're completely ignoring the emotional element, dismissing it as something valueless. But it's not just about a pay packet.
Perfect example... I could be making a shit ton more money elsewhere, with my skill set. But I'm not leaving, cause the company I currently work for is one of the best places I've ever worked. Management does everything it can to not only make employees succeed, but make them *want* to succeed. And not in a, "Some consultant advised us to do team building exercises" kind of way... In the, "the leadership actually *cares*" kind of way.
I've lost track of the number of employees that have left, only to humbly come back again after realizing that that greener pasture they found was a field full of cowshit. And we've welcomed them back, too.
Yes. The problem is that this company is the exception, not the rule. Otherwise we wouldn't have Disney IT people sounding off at Trump rallies.
Or maybe if companies showed the same loyalty to their employees that they demand from them, this wouldn't be a problem.
I predict a polite slashdot discussion with well-thought out posts and and properly researched and cited information.
Oh who am I kidding...
TL;DR: Comparing performance with this class of device serves no useful purpose other than providing fodder for people who masturbate to performance statistics.
It's amazing how people manage to miss the point of things.
The raspberry pi exists because it provides a cheap and low-learning-curve introduction to creating your own electronic projects.
Yes, there are alternatives, because having different options is a good thing cause different people and different projects have different requirements. But the idea of benchmarking inexpensive hobby boards is just.... absurdist e-wanking. Either the board is suitable for what you're trying to do, or it isn't. If your project isn't going to run properly one board, why would it work on a board that's a little bit faster?
If your project needs the best possible performance, then maybe you're using the entirely wrong class of hardware.
And then of course, is this bit here:
While the ODROID-C2 doesn't appear to be shipping in quantities yet
So in other words, it's not even an option for most people if they want to build something right now.
How about telling us what the board *can do* compared to the Pi? Does it handle EM interference better? Does it have a ginormous number of I/O pins for connecting large quantities of sensors? Is it powerful enough to serve as a self-contained media box that can stream full HD video without dropping frames or hiccuping?
The surgical equivalent of Visual Basic developers.
Some things are just plain hard, and require talent, training and skill to perform. The last think anyone needs is people who have only a barely passing knowledge of surgery to be anywhere near an operating table.
Scrap math entirely, and let people spend that time watching "Ow My Balls!" instead.
That would be more in tune with the swiftly deteriorating IQ level of American society.
The core language was stable, but because they didn't differentiate between the language and the support libraries, it basically amounted to them continually 'changing' java. Java now has a bajillion different ways of doing the same things. There are multiple windowing toolkits (AWT, Swing, etc), and don't get me started about server side stuff. JSP. Faces. It's ridiculous, and makes it unnecessarily difficult for people to get into java development cause there are too many equally valid sub-technologies to learn, and many (bad) projects may even mix and match between them.
I was a major fan of Angular until all this crap with Angular 2.
Was it *really* necessary to make fundamental changes to the syntax, thereby making it completely incompatible with Angular 1? It's dishonest to even call it Angular 2, when it has almost nothing in common with the previous.
And everyone thought Java's constantly revolving APIs were bad...
Sometimes I wish slashdot permitted embedded images, cause things like this just beg to for a nice big Nelson HA HA.
Are you trying to claim that a manufacturer who DOESN'T get an MS certification is somehow prevented from that option?
I think you misread the question. The question was about requirements for purchasing products from vendors, not telling vendors what they are and arn't allowed to do. (That's Microsoft's job)
There's nothing childish about mentioning Microsoft explicitly. They were the ones that championed Secure Boot in the first place, forcing OEMs to implement it for certification. Most major linux vendors have the resources to get their boot keys into the database, but smaller distros probably wouldn't.
Even then, the database is then stored locally in the UEFI, so if there's a Linux distro that's late to the party, they're still screwed with the current generation of hardware unless a bios update is released.
Additionally, Windows 8 certification mandated that it must be possible to disable Secure Boot (after significant outcry about possible lock-in). But for Windows 10 certification that requirement has been quietly dropped again, once again raising that concern about lock-in.
The submitter has stated that their guidelines will require any new hardware to have the ability to disable SecureBoot, certification requirement or not.
The question is, how do you explain that to people who may not understand the technical nuances.
The easiest way I can think of, is to make sure the hardware provides the ability to install Windows 7 (Just because Windows 10 licensing permits downgrade rights, it doesn't follow the hardware will let you), which doesn't support SecureBoot. If you can install Windows 7, you can anything else you want.