Microsoft just wants you to hand over your code, train their AI, and then live from the results of the AI.
Yes, what a terrible thing information aggregation and sharing is. Just look at Slashdot, taking your comments, populating their website and living from the results!
So how do I attach, say, gdb to the JavaScript virtual machine of Firefox?
I doubt gdb supports such a thing.
In that case, what would you describe as the same between debugging a program compiled to a machine language and debugging a program transpiled to JavaScript, and what would you describe as different?
I assume the OP probably has a similar view but you need your source and your symbols so that you have that link between the source code and the compiled code.In the case of javascript it is called a "source map" and all the major browsers support them.
It's pretty silly to assume that in this day and age with complex systems and the device physically in the hands of those wanting to break into it that it still remains unbreakable. Yes it may have needed a bespoke solution for that particular software version but it's pretty naive and stupid to try and sweep this discussion under the rug because you believe Apple's product is completely secure.
Case in point: The san bernadino shooter's one didn't.
You seem to be asserting something that is not yet known. Are you sure there was nothing on the phone?
There certainly doesn't seem to have been. Fact is even with full device encryption and the retry limit they just used burner phones for anything that left a trail of evidence. I really don't think it's that common that a case hinges entirely on getting access to a selfie on the offender's phone of them loading a gun or building a bomb.
Most likely not, read the draft if you're interested:
Applicable exceptions are as follows:
1. The release of the item is restricted by another statute or regulation, such as the Export Administration Regulations, the International Traffic in Arms Regulation, or the laws and regulations governing classified information;
2. The release of the item would compromise national security, confidentiality, or individual privacy;
3. The release of the item would create an identifiable risk to the stability, security, or integrity of the agency’s systems or personnel;
4. The release of the item would compromise agency mission, programs, or operations; or
5. The CIO believes it is in the national interest to exempt publicly releasing the work.
I'm afraid that both you and reality are hopelessly naive.
Reality is naive? Ok then. I'm willing to hear your explanation and what specifically you're trying to refute. Sounds like you're clumsily trying to make a point but you don't know what it is.
I've been watching for decades, I'm getting bored of seeing people like you parrot the same thing over and over with empty hypotheses and no result. With Java, HTML, Javascript, Linux, webmail, etc... still never "extinguished" in fact they just end up utilizing them and making money, which is exactly what a for-profit company wants to do. Not supporting them only hurts Microsoft and drives people to other platforms and indeed that we have seen.
Except pictures of you loading the gun used in the crime, or building the bomb, or scheduling the crime with a known accomplist would be critical evidence.
But you wouldn't know if such circumstantial evidence even exists, in fact it probably doesn't. Like in the very instance we're referring to, whatever evidence may have existed was simply destroyed on burner phones.
To suggest that a mobile phone, owned by a suspect, wouldn't contain critical evidence in any criminal case takes an amount of naivety I'm not sure I'm ready to deal with.
Case in point: The san bernadino shooter's one didn't.
I could have evidence that your power bill tripled overnight, and show the court the increased heat signature of your house from an arial view during the same time period. However, reasonable doubt would still exist until I could present a pot plant physically pulled from your basement. Key evidence on a phone could be correspondance, pictures, and video.
Right so that's why search warrants exist, so that based on the presented power bill and heat signature you could obtain a warrant to retrieve that plant from the basement. Correspondance saying that said plant exists or pictures of a plant are themselves not very compelling until you produce the plant from the basement, if you turn up and there are no plants in the basement then the non-physical "evidence" on the phone isn't much use.
When key evidence is behind locked doors you need a way to access it.
But that is not the case at all. Not only does it seem there was "no key evidence" found in this case but the authorities did not know what might be on the phone nor could they even come up with a reasonable explanation for what they thought might be on there that needed access to, in fact their best attempt was their ridiculous "dormant cyber pathogen" hypothesis.
The plan is to have a Linux dist license M$ BS patents ( they could be broken in court at $10,000,000 per patent ) - use it as a way to attack free (as in freedom ) distros - like Debian, Gentoo, Slackware etc..
If they make a custom distribution that incorporates their patented software that doesn't affect free distros like Debian, Gentoo or Slackware at all, much less 'attack' them.
Calling Android Linux at this point is absolutely pointless. Its Tivo-ization 2.0
It appears you aren't very familiar with the history of Linux. While nobody is calling Android Linux (because Android is software that encapsulates the Linux kernel much like Ubuntu or Slackware), Android systems are indeed using Linux as their kernel and Tivoization is encouraged. Torvalds himself says "I think Tivoization is *good*." It's the Free Software advocates that say Tivoization is bad and Linux is not a vehicle for the FSF to push their agenda, hence the license preamble (preceding the GPL) in the COPYING file, lack of copyright assignment and the refusal to engage even considering a move to GPLv3.
And Apple saying the same thing about stock apps on the iPhone:
"This is a more complex issue than it first appears. There are some apps that are linked to something else on the iPhone. If they were to be removed they might cause issues elsewhere on the phone"
Feel free to install Windows 10 and see what freedoms this gains you.
You don't have to be such an absolutist. Thanks to freedom of choice I can modify the open source driver if I want, I can use that in certain cases if I want and I can choose the best tool for the job. If a game or application runs better with the proprietary drivers then use those while you're playing that game and switch to the open source drivers if they work better for a different task.
This idea of "if you don't run open source drivers you might as well run Windows" is retarded, not that long ago pretty much everybody running Linux was using proprietary blobs, in fact most still are for at least some hardware (actually pretty much all if you consider the microcode in your CPU).
So stop saying you care about the four freedoms and just admit the community only cares about free as in beer because that is EXACTLY what we are talking about here.
Whoa there cowboy, I think you replied to the wrong post, or didn't read properly. I didn't ever say I care about the four freedoms, in fact I pointed out that most people - me included - are quite content with whatever works the best, be it proprietary or free software. If the best option is Linux with an AMD GPU and open source drivers then sure I'll buy an AMD card when upgrade time comes.
yeah if you use the proprietary nvidia drivers it works great. too bad the open source one sucks.
Do you really think any significant portion of gamers and other end users care about that? They want their systems to work well, they don't want to be writing driver code and recompiling hardware drivers.
Isn't that the strategy of every single company that wants to compete in an existing market? If you read up on it the idea is to embrace a product category by producing a competitor, extend your competing product to have features users want in an effort to extinguish the competition.
Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft just wants you to hand over your code, train their AI, and then live from the results of the AI.
Yes, what a terrible thing information aggregation and sharing is. Just look at Slashdot, taking your comments, populating their website and living from the results!
So how do I attach, say, gdb to the JavaScript virtual machine of Firefox?
I doubt gdb supports such a thing.
In that case, what would you describe as the same between debugging a program compiled to a machine language and debugging a program transpiled to JavaScript, and what would you describe as different?
I assume the OP probably has a similar view but you need your source and your symbols so that you have that link between the source code and the compiled code.In the case of javascript it is called a "source map" and all the major browsers support them.
so we can't even talk about anything further.
It's pretty silly to assume that in this day and age with complex systems and the device physically in the hands of those wanting to break into it that it still remains unbreakable. Yes it may have needed a bespoke solution for that particular software version but it's pretty naive and stupid to try and sweep this discussion under the rug because you believe Apple's product is completely secure.
Well yes, being more secure means the "many eyes" of open source also have to be white-hat hacker eyes.
Case in point: The san bernadino shooter's one didn't.
You seem to be asserting something that is not yet known. Are you sure there was nothing on the phone?
There certainly doesn't seem to have been. Fact is even with full device encryption and the retry limit they just used burner phones for anything that left a trail of evidence. I really don't think it's that common that a case hinges entirely on getting access to a selfie on the offender's phone of them loading a gun or building a bomb.
Most likely not, read the draft if you're interested:
Applicable exceptions are as follows:
1. The release of the item is restricted by another statute or regulation, such as the Export Administration Regulations, the International Traffic in Arms Regulation, or the laws and regulations governing classified information;
2. The release of the item would compromise national security, confidentiality, or individual privacy;
3. The release of the item would create an identifiable risk to the stability, security, or integrity of the agency’s systems or personnel;
4. The release of the item would compromise agency mission, programs, or operations; or
5. The CIO believes it is in the national interest to exempt publicly releasing the work.
I'm afraid that both you and reality are hopelessly naive.
Reality is naive? Ok then. I'm willing to hear your explanation and what specifically you're trying to refute. Sounds like you're clumsily trying to make a point but you don't know what it is.
Keep watching, bub...
I've been watching for decades, I'm getting bored of seeing people like you parrot the same thing over and over with empty hypotheses and no result. With Java, HTML, Javascript, Linux, webmail, etc... still never "extinguished" in fact they just end up utilizing them and making money, which is exactly what a for-profit company wants to do. Not supporting them only hurts Microsoft and drives people to other platforms and indeed that we have seen.
Except pictures of you loading the gun used in the crime, or building the bomb, or scheduling the crime with a known accomplist would be critical evidence.
But you wouldn't know if such circumstantial evidence even exists, in fact it probably doesn't. Like in the very instance we're referring to, whatever evidence may have existed was simply destroyed on burner phones.
To suggest that a mobile phone, owned by a suspect, wouldn't contain critical evidence in any criminal case takes an amount of naivety I'm not sure I'm ready to deal with.
Case in point: The san bernadino shooter's one didn't.
I could have evidence that your power bill tripled overnight, and show the court the increased heat signature of your house from an arial view during the same time period. However, reasonable doubt would still exist until I could present a pot plant physically pulled from your basement. Key evidence on a phone could be correspondance, pictures, and video.
Right so that's why search warrants exist, so that based on the presented power bill and heat signature you could obtain a warrant to retrieve that plant from the basement. Correspondance saying that said plant exists or pictures of a plant are themselves not very compelling until you produce the plant from the basement, if you turn up and there are no plants in the basement then the non-physical "evidence" on the phone isn't much use.
When key evidence is behind locked doors you need a way to access it.
But that is not the case at all. Not only does it seem there was "no key evidence" found in this case but the authorities did not know what might be on the phone nor could they even come up with a reasonable explanation for what they thought might be on there that needed access to, in fact their best attempt was their ridiculous "dormant cyber pathogen" hypothesis.
And I quote from the book of Ackbar, "It's a trap!" Their licenses are lame.
Then all open source is "a trap", a quick look at their github page and their major projects are using OSI licenses:
-.net core - MIT license
-msbuild - MIT license
-bot builder - MIT license
-visual studio code - MIT license
-objective C for windows - MIT license
-f sharp - Apache license
-c++ REST sdk -Apache licenes
-typescript - Apache license
-node js tools for vs - Apache license
There's even projects released under the GPL: R host and Tocino
Or the computational network toolkit here, what's 'lame' about that license?
The plan is to have a Linux dist license M$ BS patents ( they could be broken in court at $10,000,000 per patent ) - use it as a way to attack free (as in freedom ) distros - like Debian, Gentoo, Slackware etc..
If they make a custom distribution that incorporates their patented software that doesn't affect free distros like Debian, Gentoo or Slackware at all, much less 'attack' them.
Embrace, extend and extinguish what?
It's not the best outcome for them, but it's better than getting handed their ass in the PR battle, like they were.
Yes because we all know if there's one thing the FBI fears it's bad PR.
Calling Android Linux at this point is absolutely pointless. Its Tivo-ization 2.0
It appears you aren't very familiar with the history of Linux. While nobody is calling Android Linux (because Android is software that encapsulates the Linux kernel much like Ubuntu or Slackware), Android systems are indeed using Linux as their kernel and Tivoization is encouraged. Torvalds himself says "I think Tivoization is *good*." It's the Free Software advocates that say Tivoization is bad and Linux is not a vehicle for the FSF to push their agenda, hence the license preamble (preceding the GPL) in the COPYING file, lack of copyright assignment and the refusal to engage even considering a move to GPLv3.
I dunno about that, if you want the best graphics performance on Linux the choice is still nvidia.
Would I be interested in nvidia's version of Linux?
No.
Wouldn't that depend on what it is? Seems a pretty silly move to dismiss something without even knowing anything about it.
And Apple saying the same thing about stock apps on the iPhone:
"This is a more complex issue than it first appears. There are some apps that are linked to something else on the iPhone. If they were to be removed they might cause issues elsewhere on the phone"
Yeah that's fair enough, I agree with that.
Feel free to install Windows 10 and see what freedoms this gains you.
You don't have to be such an absolutist. Thanks to freedom of choice I can modify the open source driver if I want, I can use that in certain cases if I want and I can choose the best tool for the job. If a game or application runs better with the proprietary drivers then use those while you're playing that game and switch to the open source drivers if they work better for a different task.
This idea of "if you don't run open source drivers you might as well run Windows" is retarded, not that long ago pretty much everybody running Linux was using proprietary blobs, in fact most still are for at least some hardware (actually pretty much all if you consider the microcode in your CPU).
So stop saying you care about the four freedoms and just admit the community only cares about free as in beer because that is EXACTLY what we are talking about here.
Whoa there cowboy, I think you replied to the wrong post, or didn't read properly. I didn't ever say I care about the four freedoms, in fact I pointed out that most people - me included - are quite content with whatever works the best, be it proprietary or free software. If the best option is Linux with an AMD GPU and open source drivers then sure I'll buy an AMD card when upgrade time comes.
in other words: I don't give a damn about my freedom, just let me play my stupid game.
Kind of, but don't be so melodramatic, in reality it is:
"I don't give a damn about my freedom to modify my graphics driver, just let me use my computer to play games and run applications "
And yes this is true of the vast majority of computer users.
yeah if you use the proprietary nvidia drivers it works great. too bad the open source one sucks.
Do you really think any significant portion of gamers and other end users care about that? They want their systems to work well, they don't want to be writing driver code and recompiling hardware drivers.
"Embrace, Extend, Extinguish."
Isn't that the strategy of every single company that wants to compete in an existing market? If you read up on it the idea is to embrace a product category by producing a competitor, extend your competing product to have features users want in an effort to extinguish the competition.