I've seen this kind of horseshit come up lots of times; in Brocade too long ago. In large corporations, top management is either drinking the Kool-Aid, Or maybe intentionally coming up with ridiculous bogus assertions that anyone familiar with technology and a few brain cells could clearly recognize as bogus.
Network neutrality and self-driving cars have nothing to do with each other. Also, network neutrality is not about "No paid prioritization"; it's about no paid prioritization of different products or services based on throttling or accelerating certain websites on the same internet (that thus exist at the same level of service) based on business reasons behind the scenes -- or other providers' competitive nature or refusal to pay extra eyeball taxes.
Network neutrality don't prevent you from selling an entirely separate network service to consumers AND sharing backbone infrastructure, and providing those separate network systems different priority.
Shoulder surfers can watch the keyboard, so masking often provides a false sense of security.
It is best for the user to feel "exposed" and take other precautions to prevent people seeing them type, especially for rare operations like setting the password where needing to see potential typos is an issue.
If cryptocurrencies want to go legit as a legal tender, they need to do the same to ransomware addresses.
I guess what needs to be done is introduce trusted "Blacklisting" authorities that all users, and possibly all nodes will honor.
If an address is BLACKLISTED, then all services and bitcoin nodes check the path coins have taken, and the coins that passed through a blacklisted address cannot be spent anywhere further, they are tainted: Both transaction/payment providers/exchanges/retailers or other business running nodes and Miners/Network nodes will consume the blacklist and boycott their requested transactions.
Some centralized agreed-upon "Coin seizure arbitration authority" could be entrusted to sign WHITELISTED addresses, and Blacklisted coins can be spent to a WHITELISTED transaction by the trusted authority and clears the taint.
This would allow criminals to "self-forfeit" their stolen assets in exchange, for, probably some minor consideration such as reduced jail time, or freeing up other tainted coins they own which were not involved in the activity.
Ethereum has done it before in a previous hacking. They could write a patch, in theory, to do a fork and invalidate all transactions to the Hacker's address.
If that is their intention, they should announce it immediately to help mitigate damage (Make sure the hacker doesn't spend further and leave other people holding the bag).
and no, consolidating our entire solar grid into a single spot wouldn't make much sense from a security standpoint
So instead of having 1 10000 Mi^2 site.... have 10000 1x1 Mi^2 sites.... or better yet 185,853,333 sites that are 1500 Square-Ft of panels each.
Just make sure they are all well-distributed across the grid and hardened, so they are not easily damaged by weather conditions, and not easily harmed by remote electrical attacks.
is an idiot who brought in a device like a wireless router that acted as a DHCP server or similar and kicked a pile of people off a network
That is not the problem. We have a very robust solution to that technical problem that any modern switch OS will support. Rogue devices on the network can be used to create backdoors, they may be infected or vulnerable to serve as attacker beachheads, or otherwise facilitate malicious activity such as with ARP Poisoning, because Ethernet was not designed for security, it is very susceptible to malicious actors --- Also, because the local network is behind the firewall, you're skipping security barriers, And who's to say that unauthorized device isn't a rogue VPN tunneling through the perimeter to allow outsider access?
Crazy policies like "you're not allowed control over the software that runs on your computer"
Hi.... these are not IT Decisions. These are security decisions.
I work in InfoSec. The IT department might not like these policies, But management has signed off on them with our recommendation.
These policies are imposed even on members of the IT staff.
Even the sysadmins don't have Administrator-level access to their desktops or workstations or the ability to install software.
If they need something, they open a ticket just like anybody else, and if Level 1 support can address the issue they will
(The support tech uses the privilege management software to temporarily elevate permissions to conduct approved support session processes, which are monitored and recorded for auditing using screen recording software).
And who would enforce this type of regulation in the first place besides the ambulance chasing lawyers.
The point is just to instill some fear in the majority extension developers against trying to sell out to some fly-by-night operation, because the average app developer could be facing significant risk of liability.
The concept is not to capture 100% of cases, But to reduce how "enticing" 3rd party buyout offers are likely to appear.
If Microsoft makes an extension, they can't notify Google every time some little old lady buys or sells some shares from her retirement account.
Such immaterial transactions are not a change of beneficial ownership.
and it is in turn owned by some Cayman holding company, and it is in turn owned by some, etc., there's no way to know or get reports that every entity that holds any stake has to report when it sells.
It is in fact doable, and many companies already have such terms you have to sign for certain partnerships. APP MAY NOT allowed to be BE specified, ALTERED OR ADMINISTERED by a 3rd party is just another contractual restriction. Or they can simply allow the whole suspicious "Cayman holding company" structure to be used by owners of apps in the first place.
Now we just need Google to update the Chrome extension policy to require The Developer MUST notify Google prior to any sale or acquiring, disposing, or changing beneficial ownership regarding any app software And disclose to all users the sale 30 days prior to any further software updates, details of the acquirer, and any other business the acquirer has regarding Chrome-related extensions, Otherwise, the author and publisher of any updated version agree to each pay Google the sum of $10 Million dollars, in the event the original developer or acquirer is negligent in their duty to notify.
But why not adults too? There are more vaccinated adults than children
Honestly.... I don't know or remember all of what I was ever vaccinated against, Or how long each vaccine lasts. It's not like you get an annual ticket reminding you what your vaccines are or when they expire.
I had lots of vaccines as a kid/teenager, and even if I know exactly what clinics I visited as a kid... it is doubtful there would be any record kept for more than a few years.
Yeah that autism is caused by vaccines is an already debunked myth mostly spread by the anti vacc crowd.
We as a society need to start dragging members of the Anti Vacc crowd who spread that message into the civil and criminal courts and lock them up and jail and have successful lawsuits against these people on charges for gross misconduct in spreading unproven claims or proven disinformation claimed to be truth causing the thousands of lost lives and millions or billions of $$$ in harm.
Yes, they have their free speech rights. No free speech does not include a freedom to recklessly spread rumors or unproven information "as fact" with no basis for verification and be held free from consequences.
For some perspective, no browser seems to actually be fully compliant.
They are fundamentally compliant. There are some limitations, because the W3C keeps adding new standards, and the browsers haven't provided a mature implementation of all the new features yet.
But the HTML standard wars are essentially over..... Browsers aren't going out and doing something insane like trying to work around the process, 1up the competition by adding new nonstandard features, Or create new elements under HTML5 DocType which the standard doesn't call for.
Though I don't think they'd be able to tie it into the national phone system
Like tying into the phone system is hard these days...... Teenagers are doing it with nothing more than an internet connection and a VoIP service. Either a free one like Skype, or a more enterprisey SIP trunking service.
absolutely true that someone else can write a browser that implements HTML5 plus a proprietary tag for OfficeWebâ
No... if the DocType says HTML5, then the renderer must implement Exactly the tags, Attributes, and DOM trees present in the HTML5 standards and no others: If they omit tags or provide additional tags or attributes, then the browser is no longer compliant with the standard and cannot claim to support HTML5.
m Gen-Y; I've walked around my entire life, in all sorts of places, and have never been approached or robbed by anyone
If you want to play that game.... I would point out, that i've been approached on multiple occasions by people asking for cash, and I've heard from 5 or 6 different friends/acquaintenances (a majority of these acquaintenaces female...) who at some time within the past 9 or 10 years that were mugged, robbed, or attempted to be robbed under threat of violence at gunpoint at different places at different times.
It is hard to tell what the risk will be for any particular individual, and there are many factors.
It IS potentially dangerous in that all the cash you are carrying might be stolen. Although it is also likely that in a confrontation, your $1000 Cell phone, Driver's license, Wallet, and your credit cards would all be stolen, And you would likely be subdued, tossed in a ditch, or otherwise prevented from promptly reporting the theft of said CCs, so robbers have plenty of time to spend some $$$ in your name; They may also force you to hand over your Debit card or ATM PIN numbers, and make significant withdrawals from your bank accounts.
But in theory, a less brazen robber will only go for the cash, and your $$$ in other forms will be protected because of your limited liability for unauthorized charges --- You MIGHT be able to get some banking transactions reversed, And at the very least, there will be more tangible documentation of the crime than some cash you claimed to have been carrying.
ALSO, Because cash is so liquid and easy to conceal the fact it is stolen cash..... thieves are more likely to target cash. So the more people who are carrying around a lot of cash, or the more likely potential robbers THINK or BELIEVE you might be carrying around cash AND the more vulnerable a target, the more likely it is you might become a robbery or attempted robbery victim.
How in the world do you arrogate to yourself the right to decide what belongs in a web browser or implements a 'web site'.
What is a HTML5-compliant website is defined by the HTML5 standard.
A HTML5-compliant browser is a web browser that implements the DOM.
I don't care about proprietary vendor-specific extensions in the browser.... If your hypertext content uses a proprietary extension, that is fine, BUT your content is no-longer HTML5.
Also, HTML5 as an open standard should not specify media types that require proprietary secret software to view.
No DRM media objects for the same reason HTML5 doesn't specify a tag for including Microsoft Office document.DocX file text/content inside a webpage.
but microwaves like cell and wifi don't bounce around the upper atmosphere the same way
If there's a RF range the prisons don't jam, then eventually I would expect rogue modified cellphones pairing with rogue criminal-controlled cellular base stations to be a concern....
There are some cell phone frequencies in the UHF ranges around 800mhz. Emissions in these ranges are still subject to tropospheric ducting.
EFF may find it offensive the rest of us just want shit to work, when I browse Netflix or whatever other streaming site I choose I don't want a fucking plugin and all the incompatibilities
Right.... Plugins are history. And DRM should Not be grafted into an open standard such as HTML. If Netflix insists on DRM-encoded content, only option should be to use their own custom protocol with an external viewer: Not the web browser, because they are not implementing a "Web site", at that point, they are implementing an encrypted binary blob that can only be viewed using proprietary software.
This is no Robot Lawyer. I am not sure exactly what it is to be called, but a Robot Lawyer it is not. It is more like a "Robotic/Automated assistant for a small selection of certain legal matters that gives you a canned form or canned letter to use for the simplest situations", and Its effectiveness depends partly on flying under the radar, because lawyers happen to often write the same kind of verbiage, and the letters they use can "Bluff the prosecution" out of pursuing further actions, that is, cause the authorities to skip over you because you're too much trouble and they'd actually have to do work to pursue you, since the canned forms make them THINK you have actually bothered with the expense to hiring lawyers, causing them to back off to avoid extra costs or adverse ruling against them.... So you can get the penalty cancelled by the court, and then the government workers don't bother to pursue the matter further, since it's not worth it in their minds.
COUGH. If they DID choose to pursue the matter, your Robotic "Lawyer" would be quickly outgunned.
Highest priority in a desktop should be UI with ability to pop up a limited system control panel to nuke bad behaving programs/processes/services.
How about "Press [BREAK] to pause the system and open a debug prompt" Which then has commands available to show process statistics, terminate any process, set breakpoints, or Read/Modify any memory address on the system ?
That's the same the rich do with the poor: convince them that they are, somehow richer than others
Well, if you are in the US, then you are rich, because basically anyone in the US can get the 3 basic needs met (Water, Food, and Shelter), and almost everyone can access conveniences and comforts such as Telephone-based communications, Automotive vehicular transportation, Running-water based Showers and Toilets, Comfortable beds, and some form of Entertainment. Most of the poor are separated by physical barriers such as the high seas, or international boundaries, at the very least.
but that doesn't mean he didn't have significant advantages afforded to him based entirely on which womb he popped out of
Your parents' are also a predictor regarding whether you will have integrity and follow the straight and narrow path OR whether you will take up a life of crime. Perhaps we should then say it is unfair that we have prisons and criminal justice, because some people had bad parents, and thus say we need to either excuse all of these offenses, or impose a 2.5% tax on innocent people --- Every citizen will have to pay this tax as a 2.5% of their otherwise free days will have to be spent in prison, Because some people disadvantaged were destined by their parents to become prisoners at birth, therefore this "Is Unfair", And for some unknown reason, the Government has now decided one of its jobs is to fix all manner of Unfair things.
What womb you popped out of does not determine your future, because there are plenty of kids raised as adopted.
Peoples wealth can be largely affected by their parents' attitude and parenting abilities, And how their parents influence their development, however.
Maybe you should just say: We live in a meritocracy, BUT some people will not become wealthy no matter how hard they work, because they make mistakes and don't know how to recognize an admin mistakes, or didn't get the needed education, or didn't have the right drive, AND Parents can affect all these things for the better or for the worse.
Slashdot Mirror
I've seen this kind of horseshit come up lots of times; in Brocade too long ago. In large corporations,
top management is either drinking the Kool-Aid, Or maybe intentionally coming up with ridiculous bogus assertions that
anyone familiar with technology and a few brain cells could clearly recognize as bogus.
Network neutrality and self-driving cars have nothing to do with each other.
Also, network neutrality is not about "No paid prioritization"; it's about no paid prioritization of different products or services based on throttling or accelerating certain websites on the same internet (that thus exist at the same level of service) based on business reasons behind the scenes -- or other providers' competitive nature or refusal to pay extra eyeball taxes.
Network neutrality don't prevent you from selling an entirely separate network service to consumers AND sharing backbone infrastructure, and providing those separate network systems different priority.
If you access a different TLD, then you are connecting to servers in a different country, therefore the location IS very different.
Shoulder surfers can watch the keyboard, so masking often provides a false sense of security.
It is best for the user to feel "exposed" and take other precautions to prevent people seeing them type, especially for rare operations like setting the password where needing to see potential typos is an issue.
If cryptocurrencies want to go legit as a legal tender, they need to do the same to ransomware addresses.
I guess what needs to be done is introduce trusted "Blacklisting" authorities that all users, and possibly all nodes will honor.
If an address is BLACKLISTED, then all services and bitcoin nodes check the path coins have taken, and the coins that passed through a blacklisted address cannot be spent anywhere further, they are tainted: Both transaction/payment providers/exchanges/retailers or other business running nodes and Miners/Network nodes will consume the blacklist and boycott their requested transactions.
Some centralized agreed-upon "Coin seizure arbitration authority" could be entrusted to sign WHITELISTED addresses, and Blacklisted coins can be spent to a WHITELISTED transaction by the trusted authority and clears the taint.
This would allow criminals to "self-forfeit" their stolen assets in exchange, for, probably some minor consideration such as reduced jail time, or freeing up other tainted coins they own which were not involved in the activity.
Ethereum has done it before in a previous hacking. They could write a patch, in theory, to do a fork and invalidate all transactions to the Hacker's address.
If that is their intention, they should announce it immediately to help mitigate damage (Make sure the hacker doesn't spend further and leave other people holding the bag).
and no, consolidating our entire solar grid into a single spot wouldn't make much sense from a security standpoint
So instead of having 1 10000 Mi^2 site.... have 10000 1x1 Mi^2 sites....
or better yet 185,853,333 sites that are 1500 Square-Ft of panels each.
Just make sure they are all well-distributed across the grid and hardened, so they are not easily damaged by weather conditions, and not easily harmed by remote electrical attacks.
is an idiot who brought in a device like a wireless router that acted as a DHCP server or similar and kicked a pile of people off a network
That is not the problem. We have a very robust solution to that technical problem that any modern switch OS will support.
Rogue devices on the network can be used to create backdoors, they may be infected or vulnerable to serve as attacker beachheads, or otherwise facilitate malicious activity such as with ARP Poisoning, because Ethernet was not designed for security, it is very susceptible to malicious actors --- Also, because the local network is behind the firewall, you're skipping security barriers, And who's to say that unauthorized device isn't a rogue VPN tunneling through the perimeter to allow outsider access?
Crazy policies like "you're not allowed control over the software that runs on your computer"
Hi.... these are not IT Decisions. These are security decisions.
I work in InfoSec. The IT department might not like these policies, But management has signed off on them with our
recommendation.
These policies are imposed even on members of the IT staff.
Even the sysadmins don't have Administrator-level access to their desktops or workstations or the ability to install software.
If they need something, they open a ticket just like anybody else, and if Level 1 support can address the issue they will
(The support tech uses the privilege management software to temporarily elevate permissions to conduct approved support session processes,
which are monitored and recorded for auditing using screen recording software).
That's what "Company Helpdesk" is for. The Company Helpdesk should route only IT matters to IT.
And who would enforce this type of regulation in the first place besides the ambulance chasing lawyers.
The point is just to instill some fear in the majority extension developers against trying to sell out to some fly-by-night operation, because
the average app developer could be facing significant risk of liability.
The concept is not to capture 100% of cases, But to reduce how "enticing" 3rd party buyout offers are likely to appear.
If Microsoft makes an extension, they can't notify Google every time some little old lady buys or sells some shares from her retirement account.
Such immaterial transactions are not a change of beneficial ownership.
and it is in turn owned by some Cayman holding company, and it is in turn owned by some, etc., there's no way to know or get reports that every entity that holds any stake has to report when it sells.
It is in fact doable, and many companies already have such terms you have to sign for certain partnerships.
APP MAY NOT allowed to be BE specified, ALTERED OR ADMINISTERED by a 3rd party is just another contractual restriction.
Or they can simply allow the whole suspicious "Cayman holding company" structure to be used by owners of apps in the first place.
Now we just need Google to update the Chrome extension policy to require
The Developer MUST notify Google prior to any sale or acquiring, disposing, or changing beneficial ownership regarding any app software And disclose to all users the sale 30 days prior to any further software updates, details of the acquirer, and any other business the acquirer has regarding Chrome-related extensions, Otherwise, the author and publisher of any updated version agree to each pay Google the sum of $10 Million dollars, in the event the original developer or acquirer is negligent in their duty to notify.
But why not adults too? There are more vaccinated adults than children
Honestly.... I don't know or remember all of what I was ever vaccinated against, Or how long each vaccine lasts.
It's not like you get an annual ticket reminding you what your vaccines are or when they expire.
I had lots of vaccines as a kid/teenager, and even if I know exactly what clinics I visited as a kid... it is doubtful there would be
any record kept for more than a few years.
Yeah that autism is caused by vaccines is an already debunked myth mostly spread by the anti vacc crowd.
We as a society need to start dragging members of the Anti Vacc crowd who spread that message into the civil and criminal courts
and lock them up and jail and have successful lawsuits against these people on charges for gross misconduct in spreading unproven claims or proven disinformation claimed to be truth causing the thousands of lost lives and millions or billions of $$$ in harm.
Yes, they have their free speech rights. No free speech does not include a freedom to recklessly spread rumors or unproven information
"as fact" with no basis for verification and be held free from consequences.
For some perspective, no browser seems to actually be fully compliant.
They are fundamentally compliant. There are some limitations, because the W3C keeps adding new standards,
and the browsers haven't provided a mature implementation of all the new features yet.
But the HTML standard wars are essentially over..... Browsers aren't going out and doing something insane like trying to work around the process, 1up the competition by adding new nonstandard features, Or create new elements under HTML5 DocType which the standard doesn't call for.
Though I don't think they'd be able to tie it into the national phone system
Like tying into the phone system is hard these days...... Teenagers are doing it with nothing more than an internet connection and a VoIP service.
Either a free one like Skype, or a more enterprisey SIP trunking service.
absolutely true that someone else can write a browser that implements HTML5 plus a proprietary tag for OfficeWebâ
No... if the DocType says HTML5, then the renderer must implement Exactly the tags, Attributes, and DOM trees present in the HTML5 standards and no others:
If they omit tags or provide additional tags or attributes, then the browser is no longer compliant with the standard and cannot claim to support HTML5.
m Gen-Y; I've walked around my entire life, in all sorts of places, and have never been approached or robbed by anyone
If you want to play that game.... I would point out, that i've been approached on multiple occasions by people asking for cash, and I've heard from 5 or 6 different friends/acquaintenances
(a majority of these acquaintenaces female...) who at some time within the past 9 or 10 years that were mugged, robbed, or attempted to be robbed under threat of violence at gunpoint at different places at different times.
It is hard to tell what the risk will be for any particular individual, and there are many factors.
It IS potentially dangerous in that all the cash you are carrying might be stolen.
Although it is also likely that in a confrontation, your $1000 Cell phone, Driver's license, Wallet, and your credit cards would all be stolen, And you would likely be subdued, tossed in a ditch, or otherwise prevented from promptly reporting the theft of said CCs, so robbers have plenty of time to spend some $$$ in your name; They may also force you to hand over your Debit card or ATM PIN numbers, and make significant withdrawals from your bank accounts.
But in theory, a less brazen robber will only go for the cash, and your $$$ in other forms will be protected because of your limited liability for unauthorized charges --- You MIGHT be able to get some banking transactions reversed, And at the very least, there will be more tangible documentation of the crime than some cash you claimed to have been carrying.
ALSO, Because cash is so liquid and easy to conceal the fact it is stolen cash..... thieves are more likely to target cash. So the more people who are carrying around a lot of cash, or the more likely potential robbers THINK or BELIEVE you might be carrying around cash AND the more vulnerable a target, the more likely it is you might become a robbery or attempted robbery victim.
How in the world do you arrogate to yourself the right to decide what belongs in a web browser or implements a 'web site'.
What is a HTML5-compliant website is defined by the HTML5 standard.
A HTML5-compliant browser is a web browser that implements the DOM.
I don't care about proprietary vendor-specific extensions in the browser....
If your hypertext content uses a proprietary extension, that is fine, BUT your content is no-longer HTML5.
Also, HTML5 as an open standard should not specify media types that require proprietary secret software to view.
No DRM media objects for the same reason HTML5 doesn't specify a tag for including Microsoft Office document .DocX file text/content inside a webpage.
but microwaves like cell and wifi don't bounce around the upper atmosphere the same way
If there's a RF range the prisons don't jam, then eventually I would expect rogue modified cellphones pairing with rogue criminal-controlled cellular base stations to be a concern....
There are some cell phone frequencies in the UHF ranges around 800mhz. Emissions in these ranges are still subject to tropospheric ducting.
EFF may find it offensive the rest of us just want shit to work, when I browse Netflix or whatever other streaming site I choose I don't want a fucking plugin and all the incompatibilities
Right.... Plugins are history. And DRM should Not be grafted into an open standard such as HTML. If Netflix insists on DRM-encoded content, only option should be to use their own custom protocol with an external viewer: Not the web browser, because they are not implementing a "Web site", at that point, they are implementing an encrypted binary blob that can only be viewed using proprietary software.
This is no Robot Lawyer. I am not sure exactly what it is to be called,
but a Robot Lawyer it is not. It is more like a "Robotic/Automated assistant for a small selection of certain legal matters that gives you a canned form or canned letter to use for the simplest situations", and
Its effectiveness depends partly on flying under the radar, because lawyers happen to often write the same kind of verbiage, and the letters they use can "Bluff the prosecution" out of pursuing further actions, that is, cause the authorities to skip over you because you're too much trouble and they'd actually have to do work to pursue you, since the canned forms make them THINK you have actually bothered with the expense to hiring lawyers, causing them to back off to avoid extra costs or adverse ruling against them.... So you can get the penalty cancelled by the court, and then the government workers don't bother to pursue the matter further, since it's not worth it in their minds.
COUGH. If they DID choose to pursue the matter, your Robotic "Lawyer" would be quickly outgunned.
Highest priority in a desktop should be UI with ability to pop up a limited system control panel to nuke bad behaving programs/processes/services.
How about "Press [BREAK] to pause the system and open a debug prompt" Which then has commands available to show process statistics,
terminate any process, set breakpoints, or Read/Modify any memory address on the system ?
That's the same the rich do with the poor: convince them that they are, somehow richer than others
Well, if you are in the US, then you are rich, because basically anyone in the US can get the 3 basic needs met (Water, Food, and Shelter), and almost everyone can access conveniences and comforts such as Telephone-based communications, Automotive vehicular transportation, Running-water based Showers and Toilets, Comfortable beds, and some form of Entertainment. Most of the poor are separated by physical barriers such as the high seas, or international boundaries, at the very least.
but that doesn't mean he didn't have significant advantages afforded to him based entirely on which womb he popped out of
Your parents' are also a predictor regarding whether you will have integrity and follow the straight and narrow path OR whether you will take up a life of crime. Perhaps we should then say it is unfair that we have prisons and criminal justice, because some people had bad parents, and thus say we need to either excuse all of these offenses, or impose a 2.5% tax on innocent people --- Every citizen will have to pay this tax as a 2.5% of their otherwise free days will have to be spent in prison, Because some people disadvantaged were destined by their parents to become prisoners at birth, therefore this "Is Unfair", And for some unknown reason, the Government has now decided one of its jobs is to fix all manner of Unfair things.
What womb you popped out of does not determine your future, because there are plenty of kids raised as adopted.
Peoples wealth can be largely affected by their parents' attitude and parenting abilities, And how their parents influence their development, however.
Maybe you should just say: We live in a meritocracy, BUT some people will not become wealthy no matter how hard they work, because they make mistakes and don't know how to recognize an admin mistakes, or didn't get the needed education, or didn't have the right drive, AND Parents can affect all these things for the better or for the worse.