Let's play pretend for a moment and say that this ain't a honeypot.
First, the "samples" released were crappy. Really crappy. A few router security holes, few of them unknown in the relevant circles. Nobody who could pay for that would.
Then there's the fact that you're fully dependent on the word of criminals. First, that they deliver in the first place, and second, that they only deliver to you. That's two things nobody in their right mind would put his money on.
This is more a result of people wanting the latest gadget with the most gimmicks, ignoring security or whether they actually need those gimmicks. This of course leads to manufacturers stuffing more and more gimmicks into their toys, and with the rule that the first to the market makes the buck, security is simply ignored, since the customer does not give a shit about it.
The reason you can't simply get as many bots isn't that ISPs start finding out that they have a responsibility. It's simply that more players are fighting over the bots.
Next step is probably botters hacking devices and changing the passwords so other bot herders can't use them. It's the usual game: A resource is only valuable if the other one does NOT have it.
The whole point is not eliminating "whole sections of society". That's exactly what this is about. If we refuse to vaccinate, we endanger those that cannot be vaccinated. Because the same group also cannot participate in a potential cure, for exactly the same reasons.
If these people could only endanger themselves, I'd say more power to them. Don't get vaccinated, but at least then have the decency to die peacefully when you get infected. If that was the whole story, I would not mind it. Not one bit. I'm all for idiots and assholes removing themselves from the gene pool. We, as society, can only benefit from it.
So technically, I would actually be for the removal of a section of society... albeit by their own doing, not mine.
The problem is that they don't just endanger themselves, but others too. It's a bit like drunk driving. If they could only kill themselves, all I would do is make sure they have enough to ensure a speedy delivery. Unfortunately they rarely die alone.
You might also remember that people got lynched in the wild west for no crime other than being the "wrong" person at the wrong place at the wrong time. What about their freedom?
Freedom is something earned by responsibility. That part is one that people easily forget.
Obviously their market study didn't lead them to the conclusion that people would like to buy phones that come with a protective cover. It seems there can't be a market for that.
Ok, lemme rephrase that: There's a shortage of work that would be paying a wage.
And yes, you're absolutely right. Demand creates jobs. I've been saying this for ages, and every single time without fail I get shouted down that jobs are created by employers. But to employers, the job he creates is the necessary evil he would gladly go without if he could. Because "creating" a job means expense for him, not revenue.
I create a job if I want to buy apples. I create that job for the guy picking them. I create a job by wanting a new computer. I create a job by wanting to spend an evening at a bar. Ok, not a whole job, but a fraction thereof at least. If for nobody else, than for the owner of the bar who can keep the bar running because I spend my evening and my 100 bucks there.
And that only works if people have money to spend. But that's a different topic. What's left is that yes, there is work to be done. But pressing people to do it without a wage only creates even more pressure on wage earners who would now have to compete with these people forced into work. And if you tell me that "this would only apply to work nobody else wants to do" I have one sentence for you:
"H1B visa are just for jobs that we cannot fill with domestic workers"
But whether I like it thin or whether I don't care, I can't get more battery time out of the iPhone. Which WOULD, on the other hand, be something I care about.
There are fortunately still companies that make phones with decent battery times. Yes, that means my phone is not ultra thin and I also have to pay less for it, but it runs for a week on a single charge.
This is Apple you're dealing with. Apple does not make compromises. It's less convenient AND more expensive. Not or. We know what our customers can expect from us!
You buy a superspecialawesome phone that is ultrasuper thin. Then you stick it into a phone case, returning it to the 3-4mm you had before.
So... you have a phone with a crappy battery life because they can only include a paper thin battery pack, which has to be glued on and can't be exchanged "or it would get too thick", you accept that they take away your headphone jack for the sake of thinness, then you pay extra to put a case around it that returns it to brick size.
Let me spell that in a way that you people understand: #idontgetit
That's pretty much what someone did at an office I worked before.
They had a system where someone could call IT to say they forgot their password, which resulted in their account being locked and a new password was generated. What this person did was to call IT as the last thing before he went home, said he forgot his PW, had his account locked, then next morning he would show up, pick up his password "for the day", enter it, shredder the paper it was printed on, do his stuff, call IT at noon with a lost password...
He pretty much got away with it because he had the agreement with IT that they wouldn't cause a stir and he won't tell anyone about his trick to avoid memorizing passwords with ridiculous requirements.
Chances are good that you're as creative as 99% of the pet owners out there and picked the name for your pooch from a rather small pool of possible choices.
There's three possible kinds of security factors. Something you know, something you have and something you are (or, more cynically, something you can forget, something you can lose and something that can be chopped off). They all have their advantages and disadvantages, but saying that one is superior to the others is simply and plainly wrong.
And the key reason, btw, why pages don't do it is simple: When people forget their password, resetting that is easy (plus they get your email address so you can reset it in the first place), but if you lose the token...
Slashdot Mirror
I often wonder the same with some code we produce here...
Let's play pretend for a moment and say that this ain't a honeypot.
First, the "samples" released were crappy. Really crappy. A few router security holes, few of them unknown in the relevant circles. Nobody who could pay for that would.
Then there's the fact that you're fully dependent on the word of criminals. First, that they deliver in the first place, and second, that they only deliver to you. That's two things nobody in their right mind would put his money on.
This is more a result of people wanting the latest gadget with the most gimmicks, ignoring security or whether they actually need those gimmicks. This of course leads to manufacturers stuffing more and more gimmicks into their toys, and with the rule that the first to the market makes the buck, security is simply ignored, since the customer does not give a shit about it.
It's simply market economics at work.
The reason you can't simply get as many bots isn't that ISPs start finding out that they have a responsibility. It's simply that more players are fighting over the bots.
Next step is probably botters hacking devices and changing the passwords so other bot herders can't use them. It's the usual game: A resource is only valuable if the other one does NOT have it.
So issuing this command makes cosmic rays strike our planet?
Linux and systemd are way more powerful than even I could have imagined!
So I'm a snob when I don't get why people buy ultraslim phones that need a cover which turns the phone into the usual brick again?
Are you honestly comparing vaccination with enforced sterilization? What the fuck?
The whole point is not eliminating "whole sections of society". That's exactly what this is about. If we refuse to vaccinate, we endanger those that cannot be vaccinated. Because the same group also cannot participate in a potential cure, for exactly the same reasons.
If these people could only endanger themselves, I'd say more power to them. Don't get vaccinated, but at least then have the decency to die peacefully when you get infected. If that was the whole story, I would not mind it. Not one bit. I'm all for idiots and assholes removing themselves from the gene pool. We, as society, can only benefit from it.
So technically, I would actually be for the removal of a section of society... albeit by their own doing, not mine.
The problem is that they don't just endanger themselves, but others too. It's a bit like drunk driving. If they could only kill themselves, all I would do is make sure they have enough to ensure a speedy delivery. Unfortunately they rarely die alone.
I am not talking with selfish assholes who cannot accept their responsibility to society.
You might also remember that people got lynched in the wild west for no crime other than being the "wrong" person at the wrong place at the wrong time. What about their freedom?
Freedom is something earned by responsibility. That part is one that people easily forget.
Obviously their market study didn't lead them to the conclusion that people would like to buy phones that come with a protective cover. It seems there can't be a market for that.
And if supplies get scarce, give me one good reason why I, your guard, should not simply eliminate a, from my point of view, useless eater.
Ok, lemme rephrase that: There's a shortage of work that would be paying a wage.
And yes, you're absolutely right. Demand creates jobs. I've been saying this for ages, and every single time without fail I get shouted down that jobs are created by employers. But to employers, the job he creates is the necessary evil he would gladly go without if he could. Because "creating" a job means expense for him, not revenue.
I create a job if I want to buy apples. I create that job for the guy picking them. I create a job by wanting a new computer. I create a job by wanting to spend an evening at a bar. Ok, not a whole job, but a fraction thereof at least. If for nobody else, than for the owner of the bar who can keep the bar running because I spend my evening and my 100 bucks there.
And that only works if people have money to spend. But that's a different topic. What's left is that yes, there is work to be done. But pressing people to do it without a wage only creates even more pressure on wage earners who would now have to compete with these people forced into work. And if you tell me that "this would only apply to work nobody else wants to do" I have one sentence for you:
"H1B visa are just for jobs that we cannot fill with domestic workers"
So either I'm lucky or cheap Chinese knockoffs are better at surviving drops than ass expensive phones...
Why do contemporary cellphones need a case? Mine came with an outer shell that did a pretty good job at keeping the contents from falling out...
But whether I like it thin or whether I don't care, I can't get more battery time out of the iPhone. Which WOULD, on the other hand, be something I care about.
There are fortunately still companies that make phones with decent battery times. Yes, that means my phone is not ultra thin and I also have to pay less for it, but it runs for a week on a single charge.
This is Apple you're dealing with. Apple does not make compromises. It's less convenient AND more expensive. Not or. We know what our customers can expect from us!
You buy a superspecialawesome phone that is ultrasuper thin. Then you stick it into a phone case, returning it to the 3-4mm you had before.
So ... you have a phone with a crappy battery life because they can only include a paper thin battery pack, which has to be glued on and can't be exchanged "or it would get too thick", you accept that they take away your headphone jack for the sake of thinness, then you pay extra to put a case around it that returns it to brick size.
Let me spell that in a way that you people understand:
#idontgetit
That's pretty much what someone did at an office I worked before.
They had a system where someone could call IT to say they forgot their password, which resulted in their account being locked and a new password was generated. What this person did was to call IT as the last thing before he went home, said he forgot his PW, had his account locked, then next morning he would show up, pick up his password "for the day", enter it, shredder the paper it was printed on, do his stuff, call IT at noon with a lost password...
He pretty much got away with it because he had the agreement with IT that they wouldn't cause a stir and he won't tell anyone about his trick to avoid memorizing passwords with ridiculous requirements.
Chances are good that you're as creative as 99% of the pet owners out there and picked the name for your pooch from a rather small pool of possible choices.
Like, say, text message transaction codes sent to a smartphone used to do online banking.
And please don't think nobody would be stupid enough to do that.
There's three possible kinds of security factors. Something you know, something you have and something you are (or, more cynically, something you can forget, something you can lose and something that can be chopped off). They all have their advantages and disadvantages, but saying that one is superior to the others is simply and plainly wrong.
And the key reason, btw, why pages don't do it is simple: When people forget their password, resetting that is easy (plus they get your email address so you can reset it in the first place), but if you lose the token...
Space exploration is no spectator sport. It's a bit like hacking. Why do you think Hollywood has the urge to spice it up with bullshit?
No problem there. Get the fuck out of society if you aren't willing to do your share.
Your forced labor example falls flat considering that the main reason people are unemployed is that there simply is no work to be done.