Those TSA-approved locks were already useless against someone with a $40 set of linesman's pliers, but your point still stands.
I'm very curious how, like a key, using nothing but your linemans pliers you can remove the lock, rummage through and replace items in the luggage, and then put the lock back on leaving no trace of break-in what so ever.
Specifically that last part. It never worked for me with bolt cutters or torches.
Changing the time twice a year, how fucking lazy are you?
Exceptionally so!:D
Actually the only analog clock left in my life is one that hangs on my office wall. I never use it, but it came with the office and I can't be bothered to take it down.
I simply never set or adjust it. Eventually other people notice it's wrong or the battery is dead and fix the problem for me.
But I suppose the company and that clock may outlive my employment there, in which case the incorrect clock will become my replacements problem, and at least for me the problem will then be solved once and for all.
I don't think so. AIX(r) is registered trade mark of IBM; I wonder how can Microsoft use that name.
My guess is the developers of this AI project are either A) too young to know about AIX, or B) under the impression that because their project isn't an operating system, it doesn't violate IBMs trade mark on AIX in the sphere of "computer, operating system"
But still I think you're completely right.
I'd assume many of the developers that would be using this AI system in Minecraft WILL recognize AIX from elsewhere (very likely IBM) and thus it does cause confusion even if it wasn't a legal issue.
Also possible is the developers of the AI project may have made the assumption that this project isn't an operating system and so won't infringe on IBMs mark. The only problem with that is once the lawyers become involved, it all boils down to what is an operating system and how close to a library does it need to get to cause confusion, and who can better convince a judge (and maybe jury) of their argument. Oops.
Microsoft, being a company that depends on their "Windows" mark being limited to the definition of an operating system as well, I can only imagine what the MS legal department is screaming right about now. That can't be a fight they want to start, let alone against IBM.
A trojan horse is something that claims to be something that it isn't. Everything is very up front about what it is so long as you actually read what it is.
Fair enough. Let's actually read what it is then, and I'll let you show us where it mentions up front that it inserts advertisements into Internet Explorer.
This security update resolves several reported vulnerabilities in Internet Explorer. The most severe of these vulnerabilities could allow remote code execution if a user views a specially crafted webpage in Internet Explorer. To learn more about these vulnerabilities, see Microsoft Security Bulletin MS16-023.
Additionally, this security update includes several nonsecurity-related fixes for Internet Explorer.
This security update resolves vulnerabilities in Internet Explorer. The most severe of the vulnerabilities could allow remote code execution if a user views a specially crafted webpage using Internet Explorer. An attacker who successfully exploited this vulnerability could gain the same user rights as the current user. If the current user is logged on with administrative user rights, an attacker who successfully exploited this vulnerability could take control of an affected system. An attacker could then install programs; view, change, or delete data; or create new accounts with full user rights.
This security update is rated Critical for Internet Explorer 9 (IE 9), and Internet Explorer 11 (IE 11) on affected Windows clients, and Moderate for Internet Explorer 9 (IE 9), Internet Explorer 10 (IE 10), and Internet Explorer 11 (IE 11) on affected Windows servers. For more information, see the Affected Software section.
The security update addresses the vulnerabilities by: - Modifying how Internet Explorer handles objects in memory
For more information about the vulnerabilities, see the Vulnerability Information section.
Personally I do not consider the phrase "Additionally, this security update includes several nonsecurity-related fixes for Internet Explorer." to be anything resembling up front about what it does. There are no further details.
Worse, the phrase "non-security related fixes" appears at first glance to be a hyperlink, but it actually links to https://support.microsoft.com/ There is literally no additional information and the hyperlink is useless. The main support landing page in fact makes no mention about Internet Explorer anywhere, let alone details any changes to it.
Where is this up front explanation about the advertisements added to the browser? Where is any mention of the non-security update that this new ad clearly is? Or any other potential non-security updates since it is specifically worded as plural meaning more than one? Where is this greater-than-one-item listing you claim exists that we simply are ignoring? Exactly what phrase actually stated on those pages would lead one to believe this behavior would be changed to make any type of informed choice regarding the update?
I'd like to add a butchered quote that is relevant:
The price for having freedom and presumption of innocence is the fact that guilty men may roam free and evil men may do harm before they can be stopped. But if stopping them means risking the loss of freedom and the punishment of the innocent, then tolerating such men is the cost that we must accept for all the treasures a free society offers. A saboteur, terrorist, or criminal can only destroy objects and harm lives. But they are incapable of touching the foundation on which that freedom is founded. Only our fear and paranoia can do that.
Also cheese and wine. It's well known that a serious criminal once ate cheese and drank wine, so we should impose international sanctions on any nation producing such dangerous substances immediately, since clearly it is a haven for hardened criminals.
Well you don't want the terrorists practicing tyromancy now do you? Then they would have ALL of our secrets!!
It would be far better to ban cheese and mandate encryption purely to keep the terrorists in the dark.
His 'child pornography' conviction involved someone he was dating - either sending his pics of himself at 17 to a girl, or receiving pics of his 17 year old girlfriend. Similar issues for the child prostition could apply.
In Japan the age of consent is 13 years old. There is also a 1 year buffer for age differences.
A 25+ year old having sex with a 13 year old is perfectly legal. A 13 year old having sex with a 12 year old is also legal.
The pictures involved would need to be of a 12 year old or younger person before child pornography laws applied. Sexual acts would also need to be between a 12 year old or younger person, and someone older than 14 years old before child prostitution laws applied.
The only new news to me here is that forced sex with a 12 year old or younger kid in Japan only seems carries a 3 year max sentence, assuming the news report is true...
It would be a simple matter for Apple to write the patched OS so that it only works on one particular phone.
It would also be a simple matter for the FBI to stop supporting ISIS, Chinese hackers, and Russian hackers, and stop providing them access to all law abiding US citizens personal information, family and children contact info and GPS locations, and generally start abiding by the laws that allow the FBI to exist in the first place.
The entitlement crowd thinks everything should be free. They have no concept of how many people make a living creating their entertainment - they only care that they are entertained.
Please to explain why me paying $60 to $120 per DVD and BluRay a few hundred times over makes you interpret me as being entitled to free stuff?
Just wait until the government comes after you for using the "loophole" of only paying what the tax table they provided you claimed you owe.
"What, you used our tax table to pay what we said you owe? Well THERE'S your problem! No wonder you under paid us. Now give us the rest of our money."
As you say, just because the law as written says you must only pay what the tax table says you should be paying, doesn't mean you not paying enough is right or legal.
Use Bitcoins and get tagged by the FBI and all other three letter agencies you can think of.
If you're an American and not working for the authorities, you're already "tagged" by the government for observation as a suspected criminal. No action is required on your part for this, so there is little point in letting it stop you from using bitcoin.
In fact if you want to go by mob rule using a survey, didn't something like 80% of Americans support lifting the laws preventing torture right after 9/11?
Guess we can knock torture laws off the books now.
Also survey results of rapists in prison show that 90% of people questioned feel their forced sexual advances were not their fault, but the woman was somehow wanting it.
Guess we can knock rape laws off the books now.
My own survey to 3 mass murders also resulted in 100% of people questioned believing murder should be accepted when it is for a greater good.
Guess we can knock murder laws off the books too.
Fortunately however we are supposed to live in a country under rule of law. All this survey proves is 50% of Americans are in favor of committing crimes in full violation of the law, and they could care less about their actions. Obviously the very definition of a dangerous criminal that should be removed from civilized society to prevent the harm resulting in their lack of capability of having empathy.
How nice they so kindly provided a listing of their names for the authorities...
In the past, dunkindave posted a reply to let me know that my particular concern was already dealt with by Apple, his response just wasn't condescending like this one. In the future, when you provide a different example, it should really be about cars.
Actually as a second major character flaw of mine, I am not knowledgeable enough about cars to provide any useful analogies with them;P
Perhaps that condescension wasn't fair to direct at you personally, but as you can see from the other comments there are many who post the exact same thing you did over and over and over again, after being corrected over and over again as well.
When I read exactly what the FBI was asking Apple to do, I realized that there was a back door, and that Apple will most likely be doing what they can to close this back door in a future iPhone release.
Since future and past tense clearly matter to no one anymore, lets see how ridiculous you sound with a different example:
Windows HAS a huge security hole in that it completely LACKS any form of user authentication and HAS no form of file/folder access control.
Windows 95 and FAT32, Microsoft's current product, most definitely needs to be fixed before these problems are exploited across the entire Internet.
Since Apple fixed (past tense) the very problem you claim exists now (present tense), I don't see it as unfair to lambast Microsoft for their past and already fixed problems just the same.
In fact, it's also fair to claim you are (present tense) a thief, since when you were a toddler (past tense) you grabbed a piece of candy from the bin at the store and put it in your mouth without paying. It wouldn't be fair to look at the person you are now and have worked to become to judge your potential to steal, right?
As an extreme introvert, that isn't as difficult as you make it out to be. In fact it comes quite naturally.
I have no interest in crippling or hindering technological progress, but I do have interest in being left to my own means so long as those means don't harm or effect you in any way (and I can't see how that wouldn't be the case)
You may see my choices as limiting my life, but to me they are hardly choices and the things I "lose out on" are not things I was interested in the first place so am OK with not having.
All I really expect from anyone else is to not actively try to harm me, limit my own choices for the sake of those choices being different from yours, and to be left be.
I wonder if whomever wrote that realized the double-edged nature of their comment or not.
"If naked singularities exist, general relativity breaks down," said co-author Saran Tunyasuvunakool, also a PhD student from DAMTP. "And if general relativity breaks down, it would throw everything upside down, because it would no longer have any predictive power -- it could no longer be considered as a standalone theory to explain the universe."
In other words:
"This research we are asking you for more grant money to continue studying, we have now demonstrated is completely and thoroughly proven physically impossible by all known laws of physics!"
A "reasonable person" upon learning their data had been stolen from someone who was supposed to keep it safe would then prudently take measures to detect and limit the damage if the data were misused.
A "reasonable person" perhaps, but hundreds of people in our government have been trying to pass many laws this week to make protecting said data a crime, and also making it a crime to not provide a way for hackers to obtain that data trivially.
So to the powers at be, of course no harm was done, these "breaches" are a good thing.
Apple is protecting itself from charge of Treason, something you yourself are guilty of.
Actually this has been the worst part regarding discussing these people and their hatred of America.
Treason isn't really the correct term. These people certainly have over-thrown the American government alright, but not through the use of force or violence. In fact they took over by exploiting bugs in the system itself, which means treason isn't a proper description of their actions.
Terrorist isn't the correct term either, pretty much for the same reason. Yes their actions terrify the fuck out of me, but they are not doing it through the use of violence. In fact the harm they are causing is (mostly) harm allowed from within the system (IE the use of law enforcement to imprison people) Obviously those in the government in favor of torture and other crimes DO fall under the terrorist label, but that is fairly limited (not saying it isn't bad or a problem, far from, but it doesn't apply to many law makers including these people)
So what term do we coin for these people?
Law-hackers? Legalese-kiddies? Just America-haters?
None of those sound to me as strong of a term as is needed for the damage and harm these people have done and are doing to so many millions of people.
But reusing other less apt terms just derails the discussion away from the topic at hand and onto stupid needless definition-nazi arguments.
If someone legitimately infringes content they eventually cut off your ability to upload content. Why can't they do the same from the other direction? If someone issues too many bogus claims they lose the ability to issue more claims.
Because filing a bogus claim is a legal action codified in law as your right to do. Ignoring a bogus claim however is a criminal action with some pretty heavy penalties for doing.
Slashdot Mirror
Those TSA-approved locks were already useless against someone with a $40 set of linesman's pliers, but your point still stands.
I'm very curious how, like a key, using nothing but your linemans pliers you can remove the lock, rummage through and replace items in the luggage, and then put the lock back on leaving no trace of break-in what so ever.
Specifically that last part. It never worked for me with bolt cutters or torches.
Could you detail your methods for me please?
Changing the time twice a year, how fucking lazy are you?
Exceptionally so! :D
Actually the only analog clock left in my life is one that hangs on my office wall.
I never use it, but it came with the office and I can't be bothered to take it down.
I simply never set or adjust it. Eventually other people notice it's wrong or the battery is dead and fix the problem for me.
But I suppose the company and that clock may outlive my employment there, in which case the incorrect clock will become my replacements problem, and at least for me the problem will then be solved once and for all.
I don't think so. AIX(r) is registered trade mark of IBM; I wonder how can Microsoft use that name.
My guess is the developers of this AI project are either
A) too young to know about AIX, or
B) under the impression that because their project isn't an operating system, it doesn't violate IBMs trade mark on AIX in the sphere of "computer, operating system"
But still I think you're completely right.
I'd assume many of the developers that would be using this AI system in Minecraft WILL recognize AIX from elsewhere (very likely IBM) and thus it does cause confusion even if it wasn't a legal issue.
Also possible is the developers of the AI project may have made the assumption that this project isn't an operating system and so won't infringe on IBMs mark.
The only problem with that is once the lawyers become involved, it all boils down to what is an operating system and how close to a library does it need to get to cause confusion, and who can better convince a judge (and maybe jury) of their argument. Oops.
Microsoft, being a company that depends on their "Windows" mark being limited to the definition of an operating system as well, I can only imagine what the MS legal department is screaming right about now. That can't be a fight they want to start, let alone against IBM.
A trojan horse is something that claims to be something that it isn't. Everything is very up front about what it is so long as you actually read what it is.
Fair enough. Let's actually read what it is then, and I'll let you show us where it mentions up front that it inserts advertisements into Internet Explorer.
https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/3139929
This security update resolves several reported vulnerabilities in Internet Explorer. The most severe of these vulnerabilities could allow remote code execution if a user views a specially crafted webpage in Internet Explorer. To learn more about these vulnerabilities, see Microsoft Security Bulletin MS16-023.
Additionally, this security update includes several nonsecurity-related fixes for Internet Explorer.
The only hyperlink is the phrase "Microsoft Security Bulletin MS16-023" which directs to the page:
https://technet.microsoft.com/library/security/MS16-023
This security update resolves vulnerabilities in Internet Explorer. The most severe of the vulnerabilities could allow remote code execution if a user views a specially crafted webpage using Internet Explorer. An attacker who successfully exploited this vulnerability could gain the same user rights as the current user. If the current user is logged on with administrative user rights, an attacker who successfully exploited this vulnerability could take control of an affected system. An attacker could then install programs; view, change, or delete data; or create new accounts with full user rights.
This security update is rated Critical for Internet Explorer 9 (IE 9), and Internet Explorer 11 (IE 11) on affected Windows clients, and Moderate for Internet Explorer 9 (IE 9), Internet Explorer 10 (IE 10), and Internet Explorer 11 (IE 11) on affected Windows servers. For more information, see the Affected Software section.
The security update addresses the vulnerabilities by:
- Modifying how Internet Explorer handles objects in memory
For more information about the vulnerabilities, see the Vulnerability Information section.
Personally I do not consider the phrase "Additionally, this security update includes several nonsecurity-related fixes for Internet Explorer." to be anything resembling up front about what it does. There are no further details.
Worse, the phrase "non-security related fixes" appears at first glance to be a hyperlink, but it actually links to https://support.microsoft.com/
There is literally no additional information and the hyperlink is useless.
The main support landing page in fact makes no mention about Internet Explorer anywhere, let alone details any changes to it.
Where is this up front explanation about the advertisements added to the browser?
Where is any mention of the non-security update that this new ad clearly is? Or any other potential non-security updates since it is specifically worded as plural meaning more than one?
Where is this greater-than-one-item listing you claim exists that we simply are ignoring?
Exactly what phrase actually stated on those pages would lead one to believe this behavior would be changed to make any type of informed choice regarding the update?
I'd like to add a butchered quote that is relevant:
The price for having freedom and presumption of innocence is the fact that guilty men may roam free and evil men may do harm before they can be stopped.
But if stopping them means risking the loss of freedom and the punishment of the innocent, then tolerating such men is the cost that we must accept for
all the treasures a free society offers. A saboteur, terrorist, or criminal can only destroy objects and harm lives.
But they are incapable of touching the foundation on which that freedom is founded. Only our fear and paranoia can do that.
One day , just think from the victims families point of view .
You mean the families that ALSO say it is wrong for the FBI to have the ability to decrypt iPhones world over?
http://news.slashdot.org/story...
it's just about one iPhone data
Repeating a lie, that you are damn well aware is a lie, over and over will not make it any more true.
Also cheese and wine. It's well known that a serious criminal once ate cheese and drank wine, so we should impose international sanctions on any nation producing such dangerous substances immediately, since clearly it is a haven for hardened criminals.
Well you don't want the terrorists practicing tyromancy now do you? Then they would have ALL of our secrets!!
It would be far better to ban cheese and mandate encryption purely to keep the terrorists in the dark.
How do you exhaust when there is a shield on top of the port?
A $10 sheet of metal bent into an upside down V shape usually.
Or you can get all extra fancy: https://www.google.com/search?q=chimney+cap
His 'child pornography' conviction involved someone he was dating - either sending his pics of himself at 17 to a girl, or receiving pics of his 17 year old girlfriend. Similar issues for the child prostition could apply.
In Japan the age of consent is 13 years old. There is also a 1 year buffer for age differences.
A 25+ year old having sex with a 13 year old is perfectly legal. A 13 year old having sex with a 12 year old is also legal.
The pictures involved would need to be of a 12 year old or younger person before child pornography laws applied.
Sexual acts would also need to be between a 12 year old or younger person, and someone older than 14 years old before child prostitution laws applied.
The only new news to me here is that forced sex with a 12 year old or younger kid in Japan only seems carries a 3 year max sentence, assuming the news report is true...
So?
No one said it was a burden Apple couldn't afford financially. They said it was an undue burden.
There's no shame in having to look the words up.
It would be a simple matter for Apple to write the patched OS so that it only works on one particular phone.
It would also be a simple matter for the FBI to stop supporting ISIS, Chinese hackers, and Russian hackers, and stop providing them access to all law abiding US citizens personal information, family and children contact info and GPS locations, and generally start abiding by the laws that allow the FBI to exist in the first place.
The entitlement crowd thinks everything should be free. They have no concept of how many people make a living creating their entertainment - they only care that they are entertained.
Please to explain why me paying $60 to $120 per DVD and BluRay a few hundred times over makes you interpret me as being entitled to free stuff?
You just need to go back to school for training in being a robot-troll, like the guy in the vid with the hockey stick.
Maybe take night classes on how to program robots to be trolls to other robots too, just to be extra safe about your future!
Just wait until the government comes after you for using the "loophole" of only paying what the tax table they provided you claimed you owe.
"What, you used our tax table to pay what we said you owe? Well THERE'S your problem! No wonder you under paid us. Now give us the rest of our money."
As you say, just because the law as written says you must only pay what the tax table says you should be paying, doesn't mean you not paying enough is right or legal.
Use Bitcoins and get tagged by the FBI and all other three letter agencies you can think of.
If you're an American and not working for the authorities, you're already "tagged" by the government for observation as a suspected criminal.
No action is required on your part for this, so there is little point in letting it stop you from using bitcoin.
Indeed!
In fact if you want to go by mob rule using a survey, didn't something like 80% of Americans support lifting the laws preventing torture right after 9/11?
Guess we can knock torture laws off the books now.
Also survey results of rapists in prison show that 90% of people questioned feel their forced sexual advances were not their fault, but the woman was somehow wanting it.
Guess we can knock rape laws off the books now.
My own survey to 3 mass murders also resulted in 100% of people questioned believing murder should be accepted when it is for a greater good.
Guess we can knock murder laws off the books too.
Fortunately however we are supposed to live in a country under rule of law.
All this survey proves is 50% of Americans are in favor of committing crimes in full violation of the law, and they could care less about their actions. Obviously the very definition of a dangerous criminal that should be removed from civilized society to prevent the harm resulting in their lack of capability of having empathy.
How nice they so kindly provided a listing of their names for the authorities...
In the past, dunkindave posted a reply to let me know that my particular concern was already dealt with by Apple, his response just wasn't condescending like this one.
In the future, when you provide a different example, it should really be about cars.
Actually as a second major character flaw of mine, I am not knowledgeable enough about cars to provide any useful analogies with them ;P
Perhaps that condescension wasn't fair to direct at you personally, but as you can see from the other comments there are many who post the exact same thing you did over and over and over again, after being corrected over and over again as well.
At least consider this as my apology.
When I read exactly what the FBI was asking Apple to do, I realized that there was a back door, and that Apple will most likely be doing what they can to close this back door in a future iPhone release.
Since future and past tense clearly matter to no one anymore, lets see how ridiculous you sound with a different example:
Windows HAS a huge security hole in that it completely LACKS any form of user authentication and HAS no form of file/folder access control.
Windows 95 and FAT32, Microsoft's current product, most definitely needs to be fixed before these problems are exploited across the entire Internet.
Since Apple fixed (past tense) the very problem you claim exists now (present tense), I don't see it as unfair to lambast Microsoft for their past and already fixed problems just the same.
In fact, it's also fair to claim you are (present tense) a thief, since when you were a toddler (past tense) you grabbed a piece of candy from the bin at the store and put it in your mouth without paying.
It wouldn't be fair to look at the person you are now and have worked to become to judge your potential to steal, right?
As an extreme introvert, that isn't as difficult as you make it out to be. In fact it comes quite naturally.
I have no interest in crippling or hindering technological progress, but I do have interest in being left to my own means so long as those means don't harm or effect you in any way (and I can't see how that wouldn't be the case)
You may see my choices as limiting my life, but to me they are hardly choices and the things I "lose out on" are not things I was interested in the first place so am OK with not having.
All I really expect from anyone else is to not actively try to harm me, limit my own choices for the sake of those choices being different from yours, and to be left be.
In the world of Facebook, who has privacy anymore?
Those of us that care about protecting it, and don't use facebook.
I wonder if whomever wrote that realized the double-edged nature of their comment or not.
"If naked singularities exist, general relativity breaks down," said co-author Saran Tunyasuvunakool, also a PhD student from DAMTP. "And if general relativity breaks down, it would throw everything upside down, because it would no longer have any predictive power -- it could no longer be considered as a standalone theory to explain the universe."
In other words:
"This research we are asking you for more grant money to continue studying, we have now demonstrated is completely and thoroughly proven physically impossible by all known laws of physics!"
A "reasonable person" upon learning their data had been stolen from someone who was supposed to keep it safe would then prudently take measures to detect and limit the damage if the data were misused.
A "reasonable person" perhaps, but hundreds of people in our government have been trying to pass many laws this week to make protecting said data a crime, and also making it a crime to not provide a way for hackers to obtain that data trivially.
So to the powers at be, of course no harm was done, these "breaches" are a good thing.
Apple is protecting itself from charge of Treason, something you yourself are guilty of.
Actually this has been the worst part regarding discussing these people and their hatred of America.
Treason isn't really the correct term.
These people certainly have over-thrown the American government alright, but not through the use of force or violence.
In fact they took over by exploiting bugs in the system itself, which means treason isn't a proper description of their actions.
Terrorist isn't the correct term either, pretty much for the same reason.
Yes their actions terrify the fuck out of me, but they are not doing it through the use of violence.
In fact the harm they are causing is (mostly) harm allowed from within the system (IE the use of law enforcement to imprison people)
Obviously those in the government in favor of torture and other crimes DO fall under the terrorist label, but that is fairly limited (not saying it isn't bad or a problem, far from, but it doesn't apply to many law makers including these people)
So what term do we coin for these people?
Law-hackers? Legalese-kiddies? Just America-haters?
None of those sound to me as strong of a term as is needed for the damage and harm these people have done and are doing to so many millions of people.
But reusing other less apt terms just derails the discussion away from the topic at hand and onto stupid needless definition-nazi arguments.
I'm just waiting for the day that elementary school children are given decades long prison sentences for using pig latin in the school yard :/
If someone legitimately infringes content they eventually cut off your ability to upload content. Why can't they do the same from the other direction? If someone issues too many bogus claims they lose the ability to issue more claims.
Because filing a bogus claim is a legal action codified in law as your right to do.
Ignoring a bogus claim however is a criminal action with some pretty heavy penalties for doing.