That is a completely ridiculous analogy, in your case Wal-Mart would be taking away something from a specific set of people, instead of not granting some service in exchange for money. Those are completely different things.
Now I know the current law disallows it, but why shouldn't Wal-Mart be allowed to choose which customers it sells to on any grounds whatsoever?
Religious groups are allowed to discriminate, private clubs are allowed to discriminate. Why should businesses not be given that same right? It's not as if in your hypothetical situation that black people would be any worse off than before Wal-Mark turned up. They would simply not get the added benefit of being able to take part in transactions with Wal-Mart.
True, but iOS which you can license from Apple with an iPhone still belongs to Apple. If you don't want to go by Apple's rules, you can purchase an iPhone and install some other OS on it. Apple is also under no obligation to help you to use their product outside of their intended use for it either.
That's only for code that runs on iDevices. Surely Apple would allow php development on the iPad for example. Even though it isn't a very good idea at all.
From what I understand, the controls that Silverlight developers create and use in their apps can only be written in C/C++ on WP7.
Silverlight is a managed framework that runs on top of a subset of.NET. Any.NET code that runs on that particular subset can be used for Silverlight. With regular.NET, managed C++ and unsafe C# are allowed, however the subset of.NET that Silverlight runs on disallows anything unsafe, so C++ is out and so is unsafe C# (regular C# is still okay). Examples of other languages that are okay are: VB.NET, F#.
No it doesn't. I agree that mobile phones are an important target for websites, but AC was claiming that Silverlight only worked well in Windows/IE. However as anyone who has actually used Silverlight would know, wherever it is supported (and that is a lot more than just IE on Windows) it works perfectly fine.
Note that Moonlight != Silverlight. To say Moonlight/Linux sucks therefore Silverlight must suck on everything but IE on Windows is stupid, Moonlight has a completely different codebase and is still under development.
Silverlight support on anything but Windos/IE is flaky at best
Sorry but that is just FUD. Silverlight works fine on basically any browser on Windows and the same on OS X, that is, everywhere it is supported it works perfectly fine. Have you actually used Silverlight?
you can't give someone else the key and not give them the key at the same time.
You obviously don't know how one-way hashes work (encryption is a two-way or reversible hash, and what you said is true for encryption).
I think you misunderstand me. My point is that for the camera to be able to perform said signing, the camera itself must contain the private key.
Any method of attempting to conceal that key is flawed once someone else (i.e. someone who purchased the camera) is in possession of it. It may be difficult to do, but it is by no means impossible.
With TPM chips being cracked previously, after apparently being tamper-proof, even if they implemented it using an algorithm that was suitable for the job (i.e. not use SHA but ECC or RSA) it would still be possible to get the signing key. It's flawed in the same way DRM is flawed, you can't give someone else the key and not give them the key at the same time.
The article states that he hasn't said how it is filling in the gaps, it's really easy to fill in the changes in the background with a static image and this may be how he is doing it, I could achieve the same effect with a regular webcam.
Slashdot Mirror
So we should just let people who have no respect for the law decide who is right and who is wrong when it comes to the law?
What could possibly go wrong?
I don't see the point of making a yellow panels because we found yellow hornets.
Combine technology that absorbs everything but green with technology that absorbs everything but yellow, perhaps?
Which would totally work for ACs.
That is a completely ridiculous analogy, in your case Wal-Mart would be taking away something from a specific set of people, instead of not granting some service in exchange for money. Those are completely different things.
Now I know the current law disallows it, but why shouldn't Wal-Mart be allowed to choose which customers it sells to on any grounds whatsoever?
Religious groups are allowed to discriminate, private clubs are allowed to discriminate. Why should businesses not be given that same right? It's not as if in your hypothetical situation that black people would be any worse off than before Wal-Mark turned up. They would simply not get the added benefit of being able to take part in transactions with Wal-Mart.
A phone that I purchased is my own phone.
True, but iOS which you can license from Apple with an iPhone still belongs to Apple. If you don't want to go by Apple's rules, you can purchase an iPhone and install some other OS on it. Apple is also under no obligation to help you to use their product outside of their intended use for it either.
Seriously, why is this shit on Slashdot?
What would Slashdot be without the occasional bashing of each and every big software company? That's like half of the reason to be here!
Now as much as I don't like Apple, I must say that Apple is free to enter and to not enter into contracts as they please.
If he doesn't like that then he can make his own phone and his own app store, or take his business to Apple's competitors, such as Android.
he found it on street view.
He stole Google's intellectual property and sent it to his customers? That is a matter of national security!
This man must be stopped at all costs.
"Microsoft officials said the core of the opt-in feature..."
(emphasis is mine)
Defaults, yuep.
That's only for code that runs on iDevices. Surely Apple would allow php development on the iPad for example. Even though it isn't a very good idea at all.
first to do so? What can this do that a Firefox add-in cannot?
Isn't Windows XP licensed for netbooks at around $40? I doubt you will see much of a price decrease.
What would the point in that be anyway? Why not just use Android?
The only use I see for Chrome OS is for dual boot to quickly check something online.
Microsoft seem to have the view that anything that runs on a Phone 7 device will be Silverlight or else.
WP7 also supports XNA and of course HTML.
From what I understand, the controls that Silverlight developers create and use in their apps can only be written in C/C++ on WP7.
Silverlight is a managed framework that runs on top of a subset of .NET. Any .NET code that runs on that particular subset can be used for Silverlight. With regular .NET, managed C++ and unsafe C# are allowed, however the subset of .NET that Silverlight runs on disallows anything unsafe, so C++ is out and so is unsafe C# (regular C# is still okay). Examples of other languages that are okay are: VB.NET, F#.
No it doesn't. I agree that mobile phones are an important target for websites, but AC was claiming that Silverlight only worked well in Windows/IE. However as anyone who has actually used Silverlight would know, wherever it is supported (and that is a lot more than just IE on Windows) it works perfectly fine.
Note that Moonlight != Silverlight. To say Moonlight/Linux sucks therefore Silverlight must suck on everything but IE on Windows is stupid, Moonlight has a completely different codebase and is still under development.
Silverlight support on anything but Windos/IE is flaky at best
Sorry but that is just FUD. Silverlight works fine on basically any browser on Windows and the same on OS X, that is, everywhere it is supported it works perfectly fine. Have you actually used Silverlight?
New Zealand always gets the censored Australian version of games, yet has the R18 rating for some.
As for #2, TOR should be enough to get around that. However this would make #1 much worse.
my ISP has removed the dns entry
Use a different DNS server, such as Google's. 8.8.8.8 and 8.8.4.4
you can't give someone else the key and not give them the key at the same time.
You obviously don't know how one-way hashes work (encryption is a two-way or reversible hash, and what you said is true for encryption).
I think you misunderstand me. My point is that for the camera to be able to perform said signing, the camera itself must contain the private key.
Any method of attempting to conceal that key is flawed once someone else (i.e. someone who purchased the camera) is in possession of it. It may be difficult to do, but it is by no means impossible.
With TPM chips being cracked previously, after apparently being tamper-proof, even if they implemented it using an algorithm that was suitable for the job (i.e. not use SHA but ECC or RSA) it would still be possible to get the signing key. It's flawed in the same way DRM is flawed, you can't give someone else the key and not give them the key at the same time.
Aren't these just fancy encrypted telephones between superpowers? Why do they need different hotlines for different crises?
The article states that he hasn't said how it is filling in the gaps, it's really easy to fill in the changes in the background with a static image and this may be how he is doing it, I could achieve the same effect with a regular webcam.