Because people do things like open files in emails from friends, have people they know stick USB thumb drives in their machines and so on. These are infection vectors that you can't really handle with a firewall.
Heuristics. Basically AV vendors set their software to look for something, anything that could be judged as "virus like" and flag it.
As a result, tester's top AV software picks are also top picks in hogging system resources, and tend to produce ridiculous amounts of false positives. Because that's what massively overly tight settings on heuristics engine will do. But AV vendors sell FEAR first and foremost. The more "scary stuff" their AV finds, the more likely user will think "oh this AV just saved me from losing my bank account!" and buy more.
MSSE has worst success in zero day detection because their heuristics engine is one of the more sane ones on the market. It's light on resources and rarely (in comparison to the top picks of that tests) produces false positives. As a result, it also has a higher chance of missing zero day stuff that might have been detected by extremely aggressive heuristics scanner.
MSSE does its job, and does it well. The main point where it "fails" is detecting zero day stuff or stuff that is rarely or never detected outside the labs.
Zero day stuff is detected with heuristics. Heuristics are the main cause for massive amount of false positives. MSSE has it set to low on purpose - to minimize constant "I've detected something that sorta, kinda, might possibly, maybe, be something that remotely resembles a virus" that many other AV suites tend to get.
So unless you're being actively targeted by zero day virii (and these tend to be costly, so private person is highly unlikely to be a target), MSSE is probably the best option on the market. It's free, it doesn't have overly right heuristics engine telling you that compressed executables are potential viruses, it's fast because it doesn't do those intensive heuristics scans.
And it detects most non-zero day stuff just fine.
And that's the reality of it. If you're a company, or a person in need of some extra chance of detecting zero day threats at expense of significant loss of system resources as well as dealing with false positives, you should look elsewhere. If you're just a home user with sane security policy, MSSE is likely the best choice for you.
I strongly recommend you read microsoft's answer. It's very through in why the entire "certification" is basically yet another attempt to scare people into buying anti-malware suite.
Below are the main bullet points of MS's answer in addition to factor mentioned above:
1. AV-Test reports on samples hit/missed by category. We report (and prioritize our work) based on customer impact.
2. AV-Test's test results indicate that our products detected 72 percent of all "0-day malware" using a sample size of 100 pieces of malware. We know from telemetry from hundreds of millions of systems around the world that 99.997 percent of our customers hit with any 0-day did not encounter the malware samples tested in this test.
3. AV-Test's test results indicate that our products missed 9 percent of "recent malware" using a sample size of 216,000 pieces of malware. We know from telemetry that 94 percent of these missed malware samples were never encountered by any of our customers.
That was in Japan. They routinely recommend anal suppositories for medication that we usually take oral stuff in the EU/US, such as stuff to bring down fever associated with flu. And yet, they have no TSA.
Aye, but who are the talent making these inventions? Are they born US citizens, or are they immigrants brought in by economic power of US?
We don't have to ask this about post WW2 might, which is what made US what it is today. That boom was driven by European talent trying to escape the war and all its problems as well as horrifying aftermath, which caused unprecedented concentration of bright minds in US after the war. It can be argued that one of the factors behind US's decline is failure to attract as much talent and complete failure to foster its own population to replace the losses or existing talent pool to aging process.
Income inequality is a problem because it causes massive amounts of lost talent. People who could have been on forefront of sciences, politics, military and so on instead are forced into menial jobs just because they happened to be borne into the wrong family.
Most first world countries view this as a massive waste of human talent that is unacceptable. US pretty much stands solo on the other end of the pond with most of the 3rd world in viewing such massive sacrifice of human talent as acceptable without any significant advantage for having this issue (other then saving on having to actually invest in proper general education and higher education to give these people opportunities based on their talent, rather then wealth of family they happened to be born into).
Not really. SSDs are usually for "frequent use software" only. That means OS, office suite, games.
The actual size intensive data that you put in long term storage goes to hard drives or is at least backed up there. You rarely if ever need faster access to it.
Meanwhile loss of software installation is rarely worth more then cost of SSD. You just reinstall and in some cases reconfigure and you're good to go again. Especially now that so much software can simply be re-downloaded from "the cloud".
As of typing this, three. They've been moved from RAID0 to JBOD because I don't trust them as much anymore, but they've spent their entire lives in active use as RAID0 until last couple of years when I gave machine they're in to my parents.
They still work fine and SMART checks them out okay on most points but some wear and tear statistics. Good old pre-maxtor acquisition seagate.
Rest of my drives are younger simply because I don't use older drives anymore. Not because they broke, but because they were too small and required IDE interface (and room in the case).
This was mt first thought as well. If employer's management has any common sense, at this point the man should be pushed into management ASAP. People who can do outsourcing that well are very rare.
But they don't use the same basis - that's the point. Basis lays in the law. Laws are different, as they are based on legal framework of each country.
This is why for example, Spain still allows for download of copyrighted media for free for personal use in law which is in accordance with copyright directive, while many countries made it illegal with different penalties. And yet everyone is in compliance with the directive. Because that's how EU works, directive is not a LAW, it's a DIRECTIVE for countries' legislative branch to create a law based on the directive, in accordance with local legal framework, culture and legal expectations. As a result, some may adapt a bare minimum approach, some may adapt massively overkill approach, and some may adapt something else entirely with opt-outs and so on.
Apple is in the wrong, and will likely be found to be guilty as it was in Italy. But this will happen in a different court, in a different country and based on a different law.
Fun detail: word "barbaric" originally referred to any non-Latin terms. The original meaning was "bar-bar language" which means something primitive and indecipherable.
You trying to peddle it as a way to describe Latin words which notably function to define exact meanings in current legal system in many countries likely including your own is quite hilarious in itself.
That would be because US has largely derived its system from British case law.
Tell that to an Italian who worked in the system, and you'll be laughed out of the room as an "ignorant yankee". And he'll be correct.
Remember, while Old World's legal system are generally derived from combination of Roman justice system, Catholic courts and to an extent Napoleon Code, they have extreme nationalist pride of thousands of years that they in fact represent justice in their own country, and other country's justice has nothing to do with it.
The reason why this is filed in Brussels is because Brussels is Belgian capital city. Italian case was tried in Italian courts, that have a very different system. As grandparent point out, there's little to no stare decisis between two systems, for obvious reasons of these being different court systems. About the only comparison that could be drawn is that both laws are drawn on basis of the same EU directive. But even these laws are only BASED on the directive, and typically implement it in different ways to suit each country's legal system. A great example of this has been the copyright legislation, which varies from it being legal to download whatever you want for your personal use in Spain to it being illegal here in Finland. All based on the same directive.
Can? Yes. But in bioware's KOTOR world, powerful ones don't get kicked out for fucking around. That's just the reality of it.
It's pretty obvious that KOTOR is not part of lucasarts' original universe. It's a creation of bioware, it exists over a thousand years before the movie timeline and universe is very visibly different. A good example of this is just how nasty the republic actually is, and how evil jedi can be in the games while remaining "jedi".
But once you're in, you're in. The "kicking out" part never happens to any main characters of the games in the universe. In spite of them OPENLY showing off their relationships in discussions.
Which is my entire point. Rules are applied selectively. As a result, you end up in situation where powerful, such as your main characters, have free reign to go fucking around (literally) and still stay in the order.
This isn't done just to cut costs, but to cut size. Current market has a serious case of "thinness fetish" and that means that any layers on top of the glass must be as thin as possible.
In applications where thickness isn't that much of a problem, it's often cheaper to still just use modular film. Such film is much cheaper to produce after all, and allows for a lot more customization of end product.
Slashdot Mirror
Because people do things like open files in emails from friends, have people they know stick USB thumb drives in their machines and so on. These are infection vectors that you can't really handle with a firewall.
Heuristics. Basically AV vendors set their software to look for something, anything that could be judged as "virus like" and flag it.
As a result, tester's top AV software picks are also top picks in hogging system resources, and tend to produce ridiculous amounts of false positives. Because that's what massively overly tight settings on heuristics engine will do. But AV vendors sell FEAR first and foremost. The more "scary stuff" their AV finds, the more likely user will think "oh this AV just saved me from losing my bank account!" and buy more.
MSSE has worst success in zero day detection because their heuristics engine is one of the more sane ones on the market. It's light on resources and rarely (in comparison to the top picks of that tests) produces false positives. As a result, it also has a higher chance of missing zero day stuff that might have been detected by extremely aggressive heuristics scanner.
Actually, you just summarized microsoft's answer there. They even provide accurate numbers to back up your point along with making your point.
MSSE does its job, and does it well. The main point where it "fails" is detecting zero day stuff or stuff that is rarely or never detected outside the labs.
Zero day stuff is detected with heuristics. Heuristics are the main cause for massive amount of false positives. MSSE has it set to low on purpose - to minimize constant "I've detected something that sorta, kinda, might possibly, maybe, be something that remotely resembles a virus" that many other AV suites tend to get.
So unless you're being actively targeted by zero day virii (and these tend to be costly, so private person is highly unlikely to be a target), MSSE is probably the best option on the market. It's free, it doesn't have overly right heuristics engine telling you that compressed executables are potential viruses, it's fast because it doesn't do those intensive heuristics scans.
And it detects most non-zero day stuff just fine.
And that's the reality of it. If you're a company, or a person in need of some extra chance of detecting zero day threats at expense of significant loss of system resources as well as dealing with false positives, you should look elsewhere. If you're just a home user with sane security policy, MSSE is likely the best choice for you.
I strongly recommend you read microsoft's answer. It's very through in why the entire "certification" is basically yet another attempt to scare people into buying anti-malware suite.
Below are the main bullet points of MS's answer in addition to factor mentioned above:
1. AV-Test reports on samples hit/missed by category. We report (and prioritize our work) based on customer impact.
2. AV-Test's test results indicate that our products detected 72 percent of all "0-day malware" using a sample size of 100 pieces of malware. We know from telemetry from hundreds of millions of systems around the world that 99.997 percent of our customers hit with any 0-day did not encounter the malware samples tested in this test.
3. AV-Test's test results indicate that our products missed 9 percent of "recent malware" using a sample size of 216,000 pieces of malware. We know from telemetry that 94 percent of these missed malware samples were never encountered by any of our customers.
That was in Japan. They routinely recommend anal suppositories for medication that we usually take oral stuff in the EU/US, such as stuff to bring down fever associated with flu. And yet, they have no TSA.
So that was a pretty multi-faceted joke of you.
Aye, but who are the talent making these inventions? Are they born US citizens, or are they immigrants brought in by economic power of US?
We don't have to ask this about post WW2 might, which is what made US what it is today. That boom was driven by European talent trying to escape the war and all its problems as well as horrifying aftermath, which caused unprecedented concentration of bright minds in US after the war. It can be argued that one of the factors behind US's decline is failure to attract as much talent and complete failure to foster its own population to replace the losses or existing talent pool to aging process.
Income inequality is a problem because it causes massive amounts of lost talent. People who could have been on forefront of sciences, politics, military and so on instead are forced into menial jobs just because they happened to be borne into the wrong family.
Most first world countries view this as a massive waste of human talent that is unacceptable. US pretty much stands solo on the other end of the pond with most of the 3rd world in viewing such massive sacrifice of human talent as acceptable without any significant advantage for having this issue (other then saving on having to actually invest in proper general education and higher education to give these people opportunities based on their talent, rather then wealth of family they happened to be born into).
I was answering to parent's ridiculous hyperbole. Not actual life expectancy of current drivers.
Sure. But not the engine block or breaks. Kind of like how I'm okay with dust filters on my PC intakes being clogged every 6 months or so.
Well enough not to be found out for a long time and be found best coder of the workplace.
A less-then-year life expectancy for home user internal PC storage medium is okay with you?
Are you also okay with couple of years life expectancy of a car? Five year life expectancy of a house?
Because that is just an absurd reduction in life expectancy.
Not really. SSDs are usually for "frequent use software" only. That means OS, office suite, games.
The actual size intensive data that you put in long term storage goes to hard drives or is at least backed up there. You rarely if ever need faster access to it.
Meanwhile loss of software installation is rarely worth more then cost of SSD. You just reinstall and in some cases reconfigure and you're good to go again. Especially now that so much software can simply be re-downloaded from "the cloud".
As of typing this, three. They've been moved from RAID0 to JBOD because I don't trust them as much anymore, but they've spent their entire lives in active use as RAID0 until last couple of years when I gave machine they're in to my parents.
They still work fine and SMART checks them out okay on most points but some wear and tear statistics. Good old pre-maxtor acquisition seagate.
Rest of my drives are younger simply because I don't use older drives anymore. Not because they broke, but because they were too small and required IDE interface (and room in the case).
This was mt first thought as well. If employer's management has any common sense, at this point the man should be pushed into management ASAP. People who can do outsourcing that well are very rare.
Correct. Now ask yourself, what is the directive, and why is it called a "directive" and not a "law"?
Once you find the answer to that question, you'll understand my statement.
But they don't use the same basis - that's the point. Basis lays in the law. Laws are different, as they are based on legal framework of each country.
This is why for example, Spain still allows for download of copyrighted media for free for personal use in law which is in accordance with copyright directive, while many countries made it illegal with different penalties. And yet everyone is in compliance with the directive. Because that's how EU works, directive is not a LAW, it's a DIRECTIVE for countries' legislative branch to create a law based on the directive, in accordance with local legal framework, culture and legal expectations. As a result, some may adapt a bare minimum approach, some may adapt massively overkill approach, and some may adapt something else entirely with opt-outs and so on.
Apple is in the wrong, and will likely be found to be guilty as it was in Italy. But this will happen in a different court, in a different country and based on a different law.
Parent's point is that it occurred:
1. In a different legal system.
2. In a different country.
3. Based on a different law.
Fun detail: word "barbaric" originally referred to any non-Latin terms. The original meaning was "bar-bar language" which means something primitive and indecipherable.
You trying to peddle it as a way to describe Latin words which notably function to define exact meanings in current legal system in many countries likely including your own is quite hilarious in itself.
That would be because US has largely derived its system from British case law.
Tell that to an Italian who worked in the system, and you'll be laughed out of the room as an "ignorant yankee". And he'll be correct.
Remember, while Old World's legal system are generally derived from combination of Roman justice system, Catholic courts and to an extent Napoleon Code, they have extreme nationalist pride of thousands of years that they in fact represent justice in their own country, and other country's justice has nothing to do with it.
The reason why this is filed in Brussels is because Brussels is Belgian capital city. Italian case was tried in Italian courts, that have a very different system. As grandparent point out, there's little to no stare decisis between two systems, for obvious reasons of these being different court systems. About the only comparison that could be drawn is that both laws are drawn on basis of the same EU directive. But even these laws are only BASED on the directive, and typically implement it in different ways to suit each country's legal system. A great example of this has been the copyright legislation, which varies from it being legal to download whatever you want for your personal use in Spain to it being illegal here in Finland. All based on the same directive.
Can? Yes. But in bioware's KOTOR world, powerful ones don't get kicked out for fucking around. That's just the reality of it.
It's pretty obvious that KOTOR is not part of lucasarts' original universe. It's a creation of bioware, it exists over a thousand years before the movie timeline and universe is very visibly different. A good example of this is just how nasty the republic actually is, and how evil jedi can be in the games while remaining "jedi".
Or how nice sith can be while remaning sith.
Javascript has NOTHING to do with java.
But once you're in, you're in. The "kicking out" part never happens to any main characters of the games in the universe. In spite of them OPENLY showing off their relationships in discussions.
Which is my entire point. Rules are applied selectively. As a result, you end up in situation where powerful, such as your main characters, have free reign to go fucking around (literally) and still stay in the order.
This isn't done just to cut costs, but to cut size. Current market has a serious case of "thinness fetish" and that means that any layers on top of the glass must be as thin as possible.
In applications where thickness isn't that much of a problem, it's often cheaper to still just use modular film. Such film is much cheaper to produce after all, and allows for a lot more customization of end product.
You just listed the reasons why SWTOR failed. Because it needed you to want to do these things. That's where games strengths are.
And as you point out, most people do not want to do these things. That's likely the single biggest factor in SWTOR's failure.