You are absolutely correct it won't change the ability of congress to one off ban drugs. But most drug it doesn't want to ban but control. Further there are tens of thousands of drugs in the USA that are legal, about a thousand applications a year and hundreds of thousands of foreign drugs. Congress could deal with 10 drug bans a day 200 working days a year and barely keep up with the new stuff.
And I'm thrilled the Republican candidates are saying that stuff. If they were being sane and reasonable no way would a Democrat stand a chance with 9% unemployment.
I hope you are kidding. The Republicans are not going to disband the FCC. Radio, television, paging, cell phones... i.e. corporate America doesn't want wide open signal piracy like there was before it existed. As for the FAA American planes won't be able to fly abroad without the FAA. No FDA means drug legalization essentially. EPA they might want to get rid of, but then the states have free rein and the Republicans get blamed for every environment harm from then on.
Similarly, vast hordes bought an iPhone because they lacked sufficient stature to risk the social consequences of being different.
Huh? When the iPhone came out it was different, The norm was the blackberry. Apple has consistently pushed the "think different" motif. I think you could make that claim about Windows, though even there I'd be doubtful. For iPhone it isn't plausible.
As for the rest on the tool chain. A tiny percentage of phone users develop software for their own use. It simply isn't a major consideration. Were it, probably JavaVM, the most mature platform is likely the best. Most of the fairly good RAD tools for mobile work equally well for Apple and Android. So again I'd want some evidence.
As far as QA the issue is what's in the respective stores. Right now the Apple store is 7x the size (in terms of sales) of the Android, Blackberry and Nokia stores put together. I don't even think the WP7 store is 1% of the size. The apps aren't there yet. They may be in the future and QA I think is a great model. We'll see if Microsoft does as well a job, or perhaps better.
Depends how much they want to stop the merger. The FCC has ultimate control over the frequencies. If they let AT&T understand that if they go ahead with the merger they won't be getting US spectrum for the merged company, or even that T-mobile's spectrum will be going elsewhere....
Necessity. IOS believes the user to sending into an update / reset process. As for catching the majority of users... remember that Apple can change the ground rules almost instantly. For example they can send a real update that makes the reset process harder. And of course they can go after the website ferociously.
The actual jailbreak website takes a few minutes and active cooperation of the end user. It is really easy comparatively, but that is far short of doing it unnoticed.
I can imagine something a malware type attack using the jailbreak + install crap type website strategy. But I doubt someone is going to do an install that says it is resetting your device (i.e. the messages you get from the OS) from a spam email. I hope.
1) There don't exist all purpose trusted sources for the desktop. 2) Users are unclear on the desktop whether they are installing from a trusted or untrusted source. 3) There aren't from the naive end user's perspective additional security mechanisms to adjust the amount of harm an application can cause.
Marketshare is a neutral metric of fit. Quality of a product for the actual customers, all variables being considered. It comes from the idea of market rationality which is one of the core ideas of capitalism. Basically I assume consumers are at least semi-rational and only semi-correlated in their individual choices and collectively I can end up with a highly rational machine for collective choices.
That is not at all what happened. The veneer came last.
There were 3 main features of Longhorn:
1) A new security system, Paladium. 2) A database file system WinFS 3) A new interface (what would become Aero).
(1) was terribly controversial. And very labor intensive. Microsoft never considered doing something like what Apple did with iOS to make it pay for them.
(2) had serious problems with compatibility. It would have required a strong arm upgrade cycle in terms of backwards and forwards compatibility. So it get sent to the SQL server group and is today part of their advanced server offerings. Microsoft has been at this for 2 decades they aren't giving up on it.
You don't have to use iCloud. I have a brand new iPhone 4S and I sync the old fashioned way, to iTunes. I might switch for the music features but until I do Apple doesn't have a copy of that stuff. Further what you sync is determined by you.
I'm sorry you are just factually wrong here. Judge Jackson's order was specifically to force Microsoft to create versions of Windows which allowed for a new browser.
I agree Microsoft takes half steps in this direction all the time. NT 3.51 had a solid capabilities model. The problem is that Microsoft has not wanted to making breaking changes to so it wasn't heavily used and then there was a permissions model, but everything had to run as administrator. I think in general Microsoft has done some nice stuff for security given how problematic their community is. The big problem they have always had is developers who don't follow direction.
In any case GGP was saying the permissions problem was impossible.
Oh I actually bought CDs. I used a 120m floppy (not a typo) as my writable media. I don't think I had a writer either, but there were plenty of low volume CD software.
They did use it on NT. The problem was compatibility. Windows was a very bad developer friendly platform and forcing a major security rewrite of Windows for Workgroups code to work under NT 3.51 wasn't in the cards. The direction was to make the transition seemless and move enterprise customers over quickly to NT. NT 4.0's success I think proves that they made the right choice.
If a company has meaningful competitors it is not a monopoly.
Monopoly law has a bunch of purposes. One of the key purposes is to prevent a monopoly in one area from spreading to others. That was the provision that Microsoft violated. The court found they used their OS monopoly to establish a browser monopoly.
I actually think the court decided wrongly, but Microsoft perjured themselves on the stand and well, losing the case is commonly the penalty for lying to the court.
Exactly. And those are default and maybe you OK the grants during the install with this kind of list.
Though I'd make your first example about screen more detailed. For example an app should have the ability to send requests to the window manager, but most apps shouldn't have the ability to control the screen or take control. Apps that are time critical though should be able to send me "deal with me now" type message,
Which is stupid. A "docx" file is obviously intended for Word. There should be a default permission that Word can access any docx file in the User's directories. Not having that kind of thing creates a bad experience and undermines use of the security system.
It was during the days of Active X. There were also some problems with IE security itself. But the real problem was Active X was very friendly by default, end users had to up their own security.
I agree with you. Very early on Linux decided to convert the windows power users. I don't think they ever got there, but the focus on friendlyness and evangelism made them much easier for wanna be unix users.
In '95 I had been a Unix user fulltime for 3 years and 4 years lightly before that. But I had never been an admin. The books / documentation were the right level for me.
Slashdot Mirror
You are absolutely correct it won't change the ability of congress to one off ban drugs. But most drug it doesn't want to ban but control. Further there are tens of thousands of drugs in the USA that are legal, about a thousand applications a year and hundreds of thousands of foreign drugs. Congress could deal with 10 drug bans a day 200 working days a year and barely keep up with the new stuff.
And I'm thrilled the Republican candidates are saying that stuff. If they were being sane and reasonable no way would a Democrat stand a chance with 9% unemployment.
I hope you are kidding. The Republicans are not going to disband the FCC. Radio, television, paging, cell phones... i.e. corporate America doesn't want wide open signal piracy like there was before it existed. As for the FAA American planes won't be able to fly abroad without the FAA. No FDA means drug legalization essentially. EPA they might want to get rid of, but then the states have free rein and the Republicans get blamed for every environment harm from then on.
Huh? When the iPhone came out it was different, The norm was the blackberry. Apple has consistently pushed the "think different" motif. I think you could make that claim about Windows, though even there I'd be doubtful. For iPhone it isn't plausible.
As for the rest on the tool chain. A tiny percentage of phone users develop software for their own use. It simply isn't a major consideration. Were it, probably JavaVM, the most mature platform is likely the best. Most of the fairly good RAD tools for mobile work equally well for Apple and Android. So again I'd want some evidence.
As far as QA the issue is what's in the respective stores. Right now the Apple store is 7x the size (in terms of sales) of the Android, Blackberry and Nokia stores put together. I don't even think the WP7 store is 1% of the size. The apps aren't there yet. They may be in the future and QA I think is a great model. We'll see if Microsoft does as well a job, or perhaps better.
Depends how much they want to stop the merger. The FCC has ultimate control over the frequencies. If they let AT&T understand that if they go ahead with the merger they won't be getting US spectrum for the merged company, or even that T-mobile's spectrum will be going elsewhere....
That is going to bring your percentage down. Most iPhone -> iPhone communication uses the Messanger not SMTP.
Necessity. IOS believes the user to sending into an update / reset process. As for catching the majority of users... remember that Apple can change the ground rules almost instantly. For example they can send a real update that makes the reset process harder. And of course they can go after the website ferociously.
The actual jailbreak website takes a few minutes and active cooperation of the end user. It is really easy comparatively, but that is far short of doing it unnoticed.
I can imagine something a malware type attack using the jailbreak + install crap type website strategy. But I doubt someone is going to do an install that says it is resetting your device (i.e. the messages you get from the OS) from a spam email. I hope.
1) There don't exist all purpose trusted sources for the desktop.
2) Users are unclear on the desktop whether they are installing from a trusted or untrusted source.
3) There aren't from the naive end user's perspective additional security mechanisms to adjust the amount of harm an application can cause.
Marketshare is a neutral metric of fit. Quality of a product for the actual customers, all variables being considered. It comes from the idea of market rationality which is one of the core ideas of capitalism. Basically I assume consumers are at least semi-rational and only semi-correlated in their individual choices and collectively I can end up with a highly rational machine for collective choices.
That is not at all what happened. The veneer came last.
There were 3 main features of Longhorn:
1) A new security system, Paladium.
2) A database file system WinFS
3) A new interface (what would become Aero).
(1) was terribly controversial. And very labor intensive. Microsoft never considered doing something like what Apple did with iOS to make it pay for them.
(2) had serious problems with compatibility. It would have required a strong arm upgrade cycle in terms of backwards and forwards compatibility. So it get sent to the SQL server group and is today part of their advanced server offerings. Microsoft has been at this for 2 decades they aren't giving up on it.
(3) Happened.
You don't have to use iCloud. I have a brand new iPhone 4S and I sync the old fashioned way, to iTunes. I might switch for the music features but until I do Apple doesn't have a copy of that stuff. Further what you sync is determined by you.
I'm sorry you are just factually wrong here. Judge Jackson's order was specifically to force Microsoft to create versions of Windows which allowed for a new browser.
It was prohibited to install a 3rd party browser as the default browser.
Freudian slip.
I agree Microsoft takes half steps in this direction all the time. NT 3.51 had a solid capabilities model. The problem is that Microsoft has not wanted to making breaking changes to so it wasn't heavily used and then there was a permissions model, but everything had to run as administrator. I think in general Microsoft has done some nice stuff for security given how problematic their community is. The big problem they have always had is developers who don't follow direction.
In any case GGP was saying the permissions problem was impossible.
The question was virus outbreaks not unpatched holes.
Macs don't get malware mostly. And MacDefender is so easy to remove it hardly counts.
Oh I actually bought CDs. I used a 120m floppy (not a typo) as my writable media. I don't think I had a writer either, but there were plenty of low volume CD software.
They did use it on NT. The problem was compatibility. Windows was a very bad developer friendly platform and forcing a major security rewrite of Windows for Workgroups code to work under NT 3.51 wasn't in the cards. The direction was to make the transition seemless and move enterprise customers over quickly to NT. NT 4.0's success I think proves that they made the right choice.
But grumble grumble.
Wikipedia is wrong, or being too brief. This came up during the SCO trial. I have Linus' original post to usenet on the 4 names it went through.
If a company has meaningful competitors it is not a monopoly.
Monopoly law has a bunch of purposes. One of the key purposes is to prevent a monopoly in one area from spreading to others. That was the provision that Microsoft violated. The court found they used their OS monopoly to establish a browser monopoly.
I actually think the court decided wrongly, but Microsoft perjured themselves on the stand and well, losing the case is commonly the penalty for lying to the court.
I don't use Android but on iOS I deny apps permissions all the time and they seem to work OK in reduced permissions mode.
Exactly. And those are default and maybe you OK the grants during the install with this kind of list.
Though I'd make your first example about screen more detailed. For example an app should have the ability to send requests to the window manager, but most apps shouldn't have the ability to control the screen or take control. Apps that are time critical though should be able to send me "deal with me now" type message,
Which is stupid. A "docx" file is obviously intended for Word. There should be a default permission that Word can access any docx file in the User's directories. Not having that kind of thing creates a bad experience and undermines use of the security system.
It was during the days of Active X. There were also some problems with IE security itself. But the real problem was Active X was very friendly by default, end users had to up their own security.
I agree with you. Very early on Linux decided to convert the windows power users. I don't think they ever got there, but the focus on friendlyness and evangelism made them much easier for wanna be unix users.
In '95 I had been a Unix user fulltime for 3 years and 4 years lightly before that. But I had never been an admin. The books / documentation were the right level for me.