Let's see spend $100,000 every 20 years to upgrade the software
You're an idiot.
$500,000 every 5 years, maybe. Then there's all the consulting and troubleshooting costs to get some antiquated piece of crap that was released last year to run on a 5 year old OS which is way more advanced than that application is capable of running on.
You've obviously never dealt with niche market enterprise level software.....
That's not racist. AC is just showing a propensity for a certain type of porn....:-/
Seriously, though....I read this story in my local paper yesterday, I think. This is the first time I've ever seen/. behind the local paper for news like this.
Of course, it could have been posted on/. three days ago, and this is just a dupe....
Actually, while not a precedent, it could certainly be used as evidence in a filesharing case.
If Joe gets sued for filesharing, and the music industry is asking for $100,000 per song, then Joe can hold up this settlement, and ask the music industry "Didn't you push to settle this case for $167 per song when you were infringing copyright? So according to your own published statements, that is a legitimate value for a copied song, correct? So this $100,000 per song that you are asking for could be lowered to $167 per song, and still be within what you consider reasonable, correct?"
And after that, Joe could get into the differences between casual copyright infringement, and willful, commercial copyright infringement.
And they do take the risk in investing in unproven bands,
This is a common misconception.
If you're an unproven band, and you want to record an album, you pay all your studio costs, along with a bunch of other crap. Then, the record company takes their share of profits, before you ever see a dime.
It's worse than a MAFIA protection racket, loan shark, and government taxation combined.
Right, they'll just call up the Somalian Pirate Engineering Corps and have them whipped up in a jiffy.
You say that like it couldn't happen.
Sure, there isn't a SPEC right now, but if lots of ships start using this LASER idea, what's to stop a group of piracy-friendly techies in the country building something like this?
Or, until the pirates come up with some way to guide an RPG using a laser.
It's not like laser detectors are that expensive, and a rudimentary steering mechanism, controlled by a few laser detectors mounted at various angles, would steer the RPG right down the barrel of the laser.
Sure, the pirates aren't exactly known for their technological prowess, but this sounds like an invitation for them to start figuring it out.
But the above post says casinos can ban people for "any" reason,
Actually, no, it doesn't. It simply says:
They are allowed to simply bar you from gambling at their tables. There's no law that says they are REQUIRED to let everyone gamble.
Considering the context this statement was made in, it's pretty obvious that it's referring to barring someone for counting cards, rather than "any reason" as you claim.
1. Phishing email is sent out. 2. Desktop users won't check their email for several hours, because they're at work/away from their desk/in a meeting, but mobile user gets email immediately, because their device is on their belt. 3. Mobile user provides username/password to fake site. 4. Site gets noticed by server admin and taken down. 5. Desktop user gets to their computer, reads email, checks site, and finds "404 - page not found".
It may be encrypting traffic it places on the network, but it seems unlikely it would encrypt standard packet structures.
If the data uses protocol encapsulation, then you're SOL trying to figure out even the final destination.
By that I mean, if the data is sent from your phone directly to an AT&T server, which then forwards it on to a third party, (maybe Microsoft, maybe not) based on either an agreement with the third party, or a final destination header that's in the encrypted payload of the data sent from the phone, then there's no easy way to figure out who the third party is.
Of course, this means that AT&T would have to be implicit in whatever plot this is, so you could always find an AT&T engineer and apply the rubber hose technique until they crack.....
This also seems similar to a story that came out a while back regarding mystery data xfers on the iphone
The iPhone data logs were determined to be daily data usage logs sent to AT&T for billing and for the data stats they provide via text to the user.
Wait....you mean tell me the phone has to tell the ISP how much data it's used so they know what to bill?!?
I don't know about you, but this seems ripe for abuse to me. If phones can be jailbroken, surely they could also be configured to tell the ISP that only 100KB of data has been used, regardless of the fact that the connection has been saturated the entire month....
I was under the impression that this key was used to sign applications (read: games) run on the console, not the firmware itself, so they could put a new key in firmware to check the legitimacy of a game disc that was put in it.
If it's for signing the firmware itself, then I completely see their problem.
That's what I get for only skimming the summary...
Antivirus software is not for surfing the Internet. Antivirus software is for scanning for and removing viruses.
1. My "anti-virus" scans all inbound Internet data -- ergo, I use it while I'm surfing the web. 2. Antivirus software can not be used to remove viruses. How is an antivirus running on a root-kitted system supposed to remove the rootkit?
It's not. But nowhere in my post did I say it's for removing viruses that have already infected the machine it's running on.
It's for removing viruses from email, removing viruses from network traffic, removing viruses from USB drives, etc,etc. For crappy viruses, it can also remove them from the currently running system. However, you're right; root-kitted machines cannot generally be cleaned by A/V running in the infected environment.
However, this is all semantic bullshit, and largely irrelevant to my original point, which was this:
There's a big difference between:
a) downloading something with your browser, and your A/V saying "Wait a minute while I check that."
and
b) wanting to download something, so your browser says "I can't do this," then says to your A/V software "Hey...download this URL for me, here's a bunch of cookies you might need, session ID, and all sorts of POST data, and you'd better include this referrer URL, or you might get banned. Oh.....can you let me know when you've got that downloaded, so I can tell the user that it's done?"
The key also cannot be changed without hardware modifications. Oops.
While it may be true that the hardware key cannot be changed without changing the hardware, what's to stop Sony from doing a firmware update that changes where the key is looked for? Just because there is a key in hardware, doesn't mean it has to be used. I bet they'll just include a new key in the next firmware, and the new firmware will simply ignore the hardware key.
Slashdot Mirror
Let's see spend $100,000 every 20 years to upgrade the software
You're an idiot.
$500,000 every 5 years, maybe. Then there's all the consulting and troubleshooting costs to get some antiquated piece of crap that was released last year to run on a 5 year old OS which is way more advanced than that application is capable of running on.
You've obviously never dealt with niche market enterprise level software.....
"Above best efforts" really means "above the best effort we are willing to put in, unless you pay us our extortion money."
"I have Microsoft XP."
Need I say more?
Why is your SSH port open to the Internet? That's what VPNs are for.
And just what is it about the CLI do you think makes people happy about the idea of typing in something they don't understand?
The lure of free porn/celebrity gossip/"Is this you on being a drunken fool on Facebook?"/etc.
No kidding.
And now, the search is so full of SEO poisoning spam results, you can't actually find any cameras on the first few pages of results.
That's not racist. :-/
AC is just showing a propensity for a certain type of porn....
Seriously, though....I read this story in my local paper yesterday, I think. This is the first time I've ever seen /. behind the local paper for news like this.
Of course, it could have been posted on /. three days ago, and this is just a dupe....
Harvesting antimatter is incredibly hard. ...
And you know this how?
He's only got one hand, you insensitive clod!!
No kidding. I was so expecting that link to be to the US legislation.....
Actually, while not a precedent, it could certainly be used as evidence in a filesharing case.
If Joe gets sued for filesharing, and the music industry is asking for $100,000 per song, then Joe can hold up this settlement, and ask the music industry "Didn't you push to settle this case for $167 per song when you were infringing copyright? So according to your own published statements, that is a legitimate value for a copied song, correct? So this $100,000 per song that you are asking for could be lowered to $167 per song, and still be within what you consider reasonable, correct?"
And after that, Joe could get into the differences between casual copyright infringement, and willful, commercial copyright infringement.
And they do take the risk in investing in unproven bands,
This is a common misconception.
If you're an unproven band, and you want to record an album, you pay all your studio costs, along with a bunch of other crap. Then, the record company takes their share of profits, before you ever see a dime.
It's worse than a MAFIA protection racket, loan shark, and government taxation combined.
slashdot = stagnated
Yet you're still here, you POS Kritopeit clone....
The problem with wikipedia is that fucking idiots with admin hats go around making the place worse every day.
So basically, what you're saying is, wikipedia is a subset of earth.
Right, they'll just call up the Somalian Pirate Engineering Corps and have them whipped up in a jiffy.
You say that like it couldn't happen.
Sure, there isn't a SPEC right now, but if lots of ships start using this LASER idea, what's to stop a group of piracy-friendly techies in the country building something like this?
Well, according to Wikipedia, the Pinto is 4.1 metres long, 1.76 metres wide, and 1.3 metres high.
The question is, can you find enough of these that aren't already either a pile of rust flakes, or a fireball, to use against all the pirates?
Or, until the pirates come up with some way to guide an RPG using a laser.
It's not like laser detectors are that expensive, and a rudimentary steering mechanism, controlled by a few laser detectors mounted at various angles, would steer the RPG right down the barrel of the laser.
Sure, the pirates aren't exactly known for their technological prowess, but this sounds like an invitation for them to start figuring it out.
No they don't. I just won it from them, dammit!!!
But the above post says casinos can ban people for "any" reason,
Actually, no, it doesn't. It simply says:
They are allowed to simply bar you from gambling at their tables. There's no law that says they are REQUIRED to let everyone gamble.
Considering the context this statement was made in, it's pretty obvious that it's referring to barring someone for counting cards, rather than "any reason" as you claim.
The timeline goes something like this:
1. Phishing email is sent out.
2. Desktop users won't check their email for several hours, because they're at work/away from their desk/in a meeting, but mobile user gets email immediately, because their device is on their belt.
3. Mobile user provides username/password to fake site.
4. Site gets noticed by server admin and taken down.
5. Desktop user gets to their computer, reads email, checks site, and finds "404 - page not found".
In other words, there's no story here.
No shit.
Big surprise, people who get their email immediately are more likely to be first to visit a phishing site before it's taken down.
It may be encrypting traffic it places on the network, but it seems unlikely it would encrypt standard packet structures.
If the data uses protocol encapsulation, then you're SOL trying to figure out even the final destination.
By that I mean, if the data is sent from your phone directly to an AT&T server, which then forwards it on to a third party, (maybe Microsoft, maybe not) based on either an agreement with the third party, or a final destination header that's in the encrypted payload of the data sent from the phone, then there's no easy way to figure out who the third party is.
Of course, this means that AT&T would have to be implicit in whatever plot this is, so you could always find an AT&T engineer and apply the rubber hose technique until they crack.....
This also seems similar to a story that came out a while back regarding mystery data xfers on the iphone
The iPhone data logs were determined to be daily data usage logs sent to AT&T for billing and for the data stats they provide via text to the user.
Wait....you mean tell me the phone has to tell the ISP how much data it's used so they know what to bill?!?
I don't know about you, but this seems ripe for abuse to me. If phones can be jailbroken, surely they could also be configured to tell the ISP that only 100KB of data has been used, regardless of the fact that the connection has been saturated the entire month....
Aah...I see.
I was under the impression that this key was used to sign applications (read: games) run on the console, not the firmware itself, so they could put a new key in firmware to check the legitimacy of a game disc that was put in it.
If it's for signing the firmware itself, then I completely see their problem.
That's what I get for only skimming the summary...
Antivirus software is not for surfing the Internet. Antivirus software is for scanning for and removing viruses.
1. My "anti-virus" scans all inbound Internet data -- ergo, I use it while I'm surfing the web.
2. Antivirus software can not be used to remove viruses. How is an antivirus running on a root-kitted system supposed to remove the rootkit?
It's not. But nowhere in my post did I say it's for removing viruses that have already infected the machine it's running on.
It's for removing viruses from email, removing viruses from network traffic, removing viruses from USB drives, etc,etc. For crappy viruses, it can also remove them from the currently running system. However, you're right; root-kitted machines cannot generally be cleaned by A/V running in the infected environment.
However, this is all semantic bullshit, and largely irrelevant to my original point, which was this:
There's a big difference between:
a) downloading something with your browser, and your A/V saying "Wait a minute while I check that."
and
b) wanting to download something, so your browser says "I can't do this," then says to your A/V software "Hey...download this URL for me, here's a bunch of cookies you might need, session ID, and all sorts of POST data, and you'd better include this referrer URL, or you might get banned. Oh.....can you let me know when you've got that downloaded, so I can tell the user that it's done?"
Speaking of firmware updates......
The summary states that:
The key also cannot be changed without hardware modifications. Oops.
While it may be true that the hardware key cannot be changed without changing the hardware, what's to stop Sony from doing a firmware update that changes where the key is looked for?
Just because there is a key in hardware, doesn't mean it has to be used. I bet they'll just include a new key in the next firmware, and the new firmware will simply ignore the hardware key.