(...) Apple invented the touchscreen phone as we know it. (...)
No they didn't. They did something else entirely, but it's so invisible that apparently nobody thinks of it. We had touchscreen smartphones well before the iPhone came out. And if you leave out the phone, we already had a comparable feature set back in 2000 with devices like the Sony Clie. None of that was revolutionary. What WAS revolutionary about the iPhone was the introduction of App Store (with the iPhone 3G). That's what made the iPhone the success it is and created the ecosystem needed to sustain it. They also introduced the iPhone at exactly the right time w.r.t. the state of battery, touchscreen and networking technology and Internet penetration. So if you're going to give credit to Apple for their inventions (which they deserve - don't get me wrong), let's do it for the right reasons: The App Store and perfect timing. The rest is just high-quality copy-catting.
Cool story, except the iphone was already successful before that. If you remember back when iphone happened (or ipod for that matter) it was basically about fashion/status. There were portable mp3 players before the ipod (many were better) but you were a loser if you didn't have an ipod. There were smartphones with touchscreens before the iphone but you were a loser if you didn't have an iphone. The fact that Apple stuff was more expensive than competitors was a selling point. Just as high prices are a selling point in fashion.
People who get hung up on what phone they are carrying are usually people who are least likely to afford an iPhone. I know several people working minimum wage jobs in Silicon Valley who are ordering the iPhone XS MAX 512GB for $350 down and $46 per month. They would be better off financially by buying a pre-owned iPhone 7 outright for $288.
You'd be better off not admitting you know them in the future;).
As long as a phone as the features you want, what difference does it make which phone had them first, or how they ended up on your phone?
People who care about this kind of stuff...I mean...honestly. It's just the technonerd version of "My dad can beat up your dad."
I think the point of TFS was simply that people DO care about this stuff. The funny part is that usually those people are as wrong as the website linked in TFS about who did what first.
Sometimes you just have to try an idea to see if it's practical, and see what software developers do it with. Being on the cutting edge means the idea may just flub out.
Yep, I agree. Coming from a guy who usually hates everything Apple (me), I think there's nothing to complain about when a company legitimately tries something innovative. Even if it doesn't work out. The constant passing off of software features as hardware features and other shenanigans I could do without.
It involves cooling the RAM chips with some kind of refrigerant spray. So yeah, you need the computer you do this with to be right in front of you and powered on and logged into at least once by some user with a key you want.
Full disk encryption is what this attack defeats. Full disk encryption is really ONLY useful to stop someone with physical control of the computer from accessing your data. Also, the details I read made this sound like a relatively easy attack to implement if you've prepped your work area reasonably. Consider that anyone doing this has already stolen a computer - perhaps by breaking into a home or business. Then they must have a computer with valuable enough data to bother going after it. They aren't going to be going after my pc, and probably not yours. Maybe a politician, banker, or someone with proprietary corporate secrets.. say a fortune 500 exec. For that kind of value as a target, this is a simple attack - compared to other attacks that might be used on high-value targets.
I don't understand. I thought the purpose in edge was just to provide users a tool to download the web browser they actually wanted to use. Has something changed?
For me that's been true for 20 years, and I also had an 8088! You must have been some rich kid with a HD, everybody else was booting from floppy.
No joke. The first time I saw a hard drive in person was on a Packard smell 386SuX many years later. Pretty sure it was 20MB but I might be remembering wrong.
www.domain.com is not the same as domain.com in DNS. They both could be configured the same, but often they often deliberately resolve to a different destination. Chrome is effectively eliminating the ability of domain owners to utilize the www. subdomain as the owner sees fit. This will most likely force those who use the www subdomain today to begin using another designation for their webservers. One would hope that the replacement would become as widely recognized as www someday but I think that is unlikely. I think that google must have an ulterior motive to go after one of the more widely used subdomains on the planet. Luckily there are plenty of other browsers out there. Hopefully this will lead to a shift in browser usage to once again balance the landscape. It's happened repeatedly over the years when a browser manufacturer did something users perceived to not be in their best interests. In fact, this phenomenon is what resulted in chrome's current market lead.
Seems like someone took a left turn in their decision making. I'm no fan of any of the censorship stuff China or USAis doing. However, access to find some particular thing on a search engine is about as far from a "human right" as you can possibly get.
Human rights are things like food, water, air... claiming otherwise just waters down the value of your opinion later.
Need to know if there are any cops around for your illegal business? Don't worry, you can just setup a wifi scanner on your phone to alert you when a cop's camera comes within range! Effective at least a couple hundred meters and probably up to a km!
Government purchase contracts and decision-making has a poor reputation for a reason. This is just yet another example in a very long list.
What kind of wifi hardware are you using? I want some! Around here at least, you'd be lucky to get 50 meters of detectable signal. Realistically usable speeds at closer to 25.
I would bet that the radios in these bodycams are decidedly low power devices, and that means low range.
Where does the Constitution authorize the creation of an Air Force, a Space Force, or to maintain standing armies? It doesn't.
Even if we assume the Constitution implicitly allows such defense spending, it doesn't mean that it's good for the country. Why not reduce defense spending and cut taxes?
While entitlement spending is larger than defense, the difference is not even close to an order of magnitude. That's just a lie. And a person can simultaneously support reduce defense spending and reforming entitlements.
This is going to be a shocker, so you might want to sit down. There are laws other than just the ones in the constitution. There, I said it. When you wake up you might want to re-read this lest you get yourself into trouble.
When you finally calm down, I'll sucker punch you again. There are rules in society that are not explicitly written into law. I know. Shocker, right? [/sarcasm]Some people's kids... sheesh!
Maybe we can finally get rid of one of the klugiest pieces of technology ever invented. Email anybody?
Others might describe it as one of the most solid and useful pieces of tech ever invented. As evidenced by the fact that it's widely popular after so many years and even those with no technical skills at all can send and receive faxes.
Personally, I prefer email. However if someone with no tech skills needs to send me a document image it's often far easier to just send a fax rather than spend an hour trying to teach the person to scan, then save in whatever format, and then send via email or other method (if the file is too large for email, often a problem). You get the idea.
But it's not entirely true. Last year, Apple came out with FaceID, a phone that has a unique screen shape, a phone with no home button that normalized gestures as the primary input method, and they raised the bar on prices and proved that people would pay for more features in the iPhoneX.
Oh, and it had more cameras, a faster CPU, a better battery, and all the rest of the usual stuff. And that was the most recent keynote. People are upgrading, which is why in its last earnings report, Apple posted record sales for the quarter, to the tune of 40+ million sales of iPhone, the new one (X) being the most popular.
Just because Samsung is in a me-too funk with the rest of the android ecosystem, doesn't mean the industry is done innovating. Evidence points out that Apple certainly isn't. Their last keynote was a smashing success.
Faceid is a feature of ios, not the iphone hardware. There's lots of new features in the latest Android, too.. but other than marketing hype, it has no place being discussed at a phone launch event.
fuckin NYC, the asshole of America, just gaping wide
That's not the issue here. The issue seems to be that the taxi lobby finally got politicians to put the smack down on their competition. Are there really cars that are dedicated to uber? Every time I've gotten a ride it's been some guy who was just earning some extra cash while he wasn't working his real job. The issue here seems to be that someone wants to turn an easy way to make a few extra bucks into a full time job.
If you just yank it, the next time you want to use it you'll have to go through "The file system on this disk may be corrupt, do you want to run CHKDSK on it" followed by several dialog boxes that need clicking.
Your idiotic "I'm going to yank it anyway" attitude just makes things worse in the long run.
Not if you're using a reasonably current version of windows. Honestly, until this idiotic thing got posted to slashdot I had forgotten about having to "eject" storage devices back in the day. Maybe it's a concern if you're using osx or some flavor of *nix. It is not a concern with windows.
Also, every usb device I own, and I have a large bag (probably 30 of various sizes) of them from tech conventions and the like... every one has an LED on it to indicate if read/write is going on. If the bright light is flashing, don't pull it. It's not rocket surgery. The article and ensuing discussion is a waste of electricity to post on the internet, and a waste of oxygen to feed the brain cells of the people thinking about it. The very definition of "slow news day" I guess.
All IOT devices should automatically cease functioning after 1 year without a firmware update. It should be the default deadpans switch to assume they are security compromised unless someone actively is maintained by them. Routers could be set up so protocol identities are increments every year and anything with an out of date protocol could be restricted in what it can do on the network.
Nobody would buy IOT devices that had to be replaced every year. Most manufacturers only offer firmware updates for a short period of time. It would be the end of IOT for anyone except enterprises that could afford to roll and maintain their own.
If you let your appliances communicate with anybody but you, you deserve what you get.
If for some incredibly stupid reason you need the company toilets and cameras and other crap connected toa network, build a separate network for them that never connects to teh intertoobz.
Much easier said than done, unless you're a company with the means and desire to roll your own device every single time. Your investors might decide it's stupidity and fire the executives, if you waste your resources here...
Many (most?) IOT devices require Internets access in order to function. Here's a more practical and common example of iot devices: IP security cameras. Few and far between are the IP cam's you can use without internet connectivity.
Another example? Streaming video player devices.. guess where they stream content from? Want a thermostat that trends your cooling data, crunches the numbers, and attempts to reduce your power consumption? it's going to send that data off to a server farm for number crunching. There's a long list.
Slashdot Mirror
(...) Apple invented the touchscreen phone as we know it. (...)
No they didn't. They did something else entirely, but it's so invisible that apparently nobody thinks of it. We had touchscreen smartphones well before the iPhone came out. And if you leave out the phone, we already had a comparable feature set back in 2000 with devices like the Sony Clie. None of that was revolutionary. What WAS revolutionary about the iPhone was the introduction of App Store (with the iPhone 3G). That's what made the iPhone the success it is and created the ecosystem needed to sustain it. They also introduced the iPhone at exactly the right time w.r.t. the state of battery, touchscreen and networking technology and Internet penetration. So if you're going to give credit to Apple for their inventions (which they deserve - don't get me wrong), let's do it for the right reasons: The App Store and perfect timing. The rest is just high-quality copy-catting.
Cool story, except the iphone was already successful before that. If you remember back when iphone happened (or ipod for that matter) it was basically about fashion/status. There were portable mp3 players before the ipod (many were better) but you were a loser if you didn't have an ipod. There were smartphones with touchscreens before the iphone but you were a loser if you didn't have an iphone. The fact that Apple stuff was more expensive than competitors was a selling point. Just as high prices are a selling point in fashion.
Conceptually, this beat them both by about 7 years.
https://www.zdnet.com/product/handspring-visorphone/
Never spoil a good slashdot story with actual facts.
People who get hung up on what phone they are carrying are usually people who are least likely to afford an iPhone. I know several people working minimum wage jobs in Silicon Valley who are ordering the iPhone XS MAX 512GB for $350 down and $46 per month. They would be better off financially by buying a pre-owned iPhone 7 outright for $288.
You'd be better off not admitting you know them in the future ;).
List of impressive smartphone innovations:
- Artificially low amounts of internal persistent storage completely out of whack with current technology coupled with refusal to provide SD expansion
That one's only an apple thing. They're thinking "different" all right.
As long as a phone as the features you want, what difference does it make which phone had them first, or how they ended up on your phone?
People who care about this kind of stuff...I mean...honestly. It's just the technonerd version of "My dad can beat up your dad."
I think the point of TFS was simply that people DO care about this stuff. The funny part is that usually those people are as wrong as the website linked in TFS about who did what first.
Why does it matter what car I drive, where I live or what phone I use? People are broken. AI will want to fix us.
Just because "people" value things differently than you do doesn't mean they are broken.
Sometimes you just have to try an idea to see if it's practical, and see what software developers do it with. Being on the cutting edge means the idea may just flub out.
Yep, I agree. Coming from a guy who usually hates everything Apple (me), I think there's nothing to complain about when a company legitimately tries something innovative. Even if it doesn't work out. The constant passing off of software features as hardware features and other shenanigans I could do without.
It involves cooling the RAM chips with some kind of refrigerant spray. So yeah, you need the computer you do this with to be right in front of you and powered on and logged into at least once by some user with a key you want.
Full disk encryption is what this attack defeats. Full disk encryption is really ONLY useful to stop someone with physical control of the computer from accessing your data. Also, the details I read made this sound like a relatively easy attack to implement if you've prepped your work area reasonably. Consider that anyone doing this has already stolen a computer - perhaps by breaking into a home or business. Then they must have a computer with valuable enough data to bother going after it. They aren't going to be going after my pc, and probably not yours. Maybe a politician, banker, or someone with proprietary corporate secrets.. say a fortune 500 exec. For that kind of value as a target, this is a simple attack - compared to other attacks that might be used on high-value targets.
and "use the same set of principles that have driven Amazon."
So slave labor, minimum wage, shit working conditions...
You beat me to it. I bet those preschool teachers are going to be hating life!
This problem is easy to solve, make a law that requires all batteries to be removable.
That solves a lot of problems, actually. Maybe some politician will grab this issue and do the right thing... hahaha, who am I kidding?
I don't understand. I thought the purpose in edge was just to provide users a tool to download the web browser they actually wanted to use. Has something changed?
For me that's been true for 20 years, and I also had an 8088! You must have been some rich kid with a HD, everybody else was booting from floppy.
No joke. The first time I saw a hard drive in person was on a Packard smell 386SuX many years later. Pretty sure it was 20MB but I might be remembering wrong.
www.domain.com is not the same as domain.com in DNS. They both could be configured the same, but often they often deliberately resolve to a different destination. Chrome is effectively eliminating the ability of domain owners to utilize the www. subdomain as the owner sees fit. This will most likely force those who use the www subdomain today to begin using another designation for their webservers. One would hope that the replacement would become as widely recognized as www someday but I think that is unlikely. I think that google must have an ulterior motive to go after one of the more widely used subdomains on the planet. Luckily there are plenty of other browsers out there. Hopefully this will lead to a shift in browser usage to once again balance the landscape. It's happened repeatedly over the years when a browser manufacturer did something users perceived to not be in their best interests. In fact, this phenomenon is what resulted in chrome's current market lead.
Stick with Apple. Buy American, support American companies and the Americans they employ, and put your money where your mouth is.
Don't you mean "Buy Chinese?" Apple phones are made in China, not America.
Seems like someone took a left turn in their decision making. I'm no fan of any of the censorship stuff China or USAis doing. However, access to find some particular thing on a search engine is about as far from a "human right" as you can possibly get.
Human rights are things like food, water, air... claiming otherwise just waters down the value of your opinion later.
Need to know if there are any cops around for your illegal business? Don't worry, you can just setup a wifi scanner on your phone to alert you when a cop's camera comes within range! Effective at least a couple hundred meters and probably up to a km!
Government purchase contracts and decision-making has a poor reputation for a reason. This is just yet another example in a very long list.
What kind of wifi hardware are you using? I want some! Around here at least, you'd be lucky to get 50 meters of detectable signal. Realistically usable speeds at closer to 25.
I would bet that the radios in these bodycams are decidedly low power devices, and that means low range.
Where does the Constitution authorize the creation of an Air Force, a Space Force, or to maintain standing armies? It doesn't.
Even if we assume the Constitution implicitly allows such defense spending, it doesn't mean that it's good for the country. Why not reduce defense spending and cut taxes?
While entitlement spending is larger than defense, the difference is not even close to an order of magnitude. That's just a lie. And a person can simultaneously support reduce defense spending and reforming entitlements.
This is going to be a shocker, so you might want to sit down. There are laws other than just the ones in the constitution. There, I said it. When you wake up you might want to re-read this lest you get yourself into trouble.
When you finally calm down, I'll sucker punch you again. There are rules in society that are not explicitly written into law. I know. Shocker, right?
[/sarcasm]Some people's kids... sheesh!
Maybe we can finally get rid of one of the klugiest pieces of technology ever invented. Email anybody?
Others might describe it as one of the most solid and useful pieces of tech ever invented. As evidenced by the fact that it's widely popular after so many years and even those with no technical skills at all can send and receive faxes.
Personally, I prefer email. However if someone with no tech skills needs to send me a document image it's often far easier to just send a fax rather than spend an hour trying to teach the person to scan, then save in whatever format, and then send via email or other method (if the file is too large for email, often a problem). You get the idea.
But it's not entirely true. Last year, Apple came out with FaceID, a phone that has a unique screen shape, a phone with no home button that normalized gestures as the primary input method, and they raised the bar on prices and proved that people would pay for more features in the iPhoneX.
Oh, and it had more cameras, a faster CPU, a better battery, and all the rest of the usual stuff. And that was the most recent keynote. People are upgrading, which is why in its last earnings report, Apple posted record sales for the quarter, to the tune of 40+ million sales of iPhone, the new one (X) being the most popular.
Just because Samsung is in a me-too funk with the rest of the android ecosystem, doesn't mean the industry is done innovating. Evidence points out that Apple certainly isn't. Their last keynote was a smashing success.
Faceid is a feature of ios, not the iphone hardware. There's lots of new features in the latest Android, too.. but other than marketing hype, it has no place being discussed at a phone launch event.
fuckin NYC, the asshole of America, just gaping wide
That's not the issue here. The issue seems to be that the taxi lobby finally got politicians to put the smack down on their competition. Are there really cars that are dedicated to uber? Every time I've gotten a ride it's been some guy who was just earning some extra cash while he wasn't working his real job. The issue here seems to be that someone wants to turn an easy way to make a few extra bucks into a full time job.
The real vulnerabilities will still be there. This is an age-old concept called "security through obscurity" and is only minimally effective.
Maybe true, but...
If you just yank it, the next time you want to use it you'll have to go through "The file system on this disk may be corrupt, do you want to run CHKDSK on it" followed by several dialog boxes that need clicking.
Your idiotic "I'm going to yank it anyway" attitude just makes things worse in the long run.
Not if you're using a reasonably current version of windows. Honestly, until this idiotic thing got posted to slashdot I had forgotten about having to "eject" storage devices back in the day. Maybe it's a concern if you're using osx or some flavor of *nix. It is not a concern with windows.
Also, every usb device I own, and I have a large bag (probably 30 of various sizes) of them from tech conventions and the like... every one has an LED on it to indicate if read/write is going on. If the bright light is flashing, don't pull it. It's not rocket surgery. The article and ensuing discussion is a waste of electricity to post on the internet, and a waste of oxygen to feed the brain cells of the people thinking about it. The very definition of "slow news day" I guess.
one should always eject before pulling out
You are doing it backwards. You're supposed to pull out before ejecting.
All IOT devices should automatically cease functioning after 1 year without a firmware update. It should be the default deadpans switch to assume they are security compromised unless someone actively is maintained by them. Routers could be set up so protocol identities are increments every year and anything with an out of date protocol could be restricted in what it can do on the network.
Nobody would buy IOT devices that had to be replaced every year. Most manufacturers only offer firmware updates for a short period of time. It would be the end of IOT for anyone except enterprises that could afford to roll and maintain their own.
If you let your appliances communicate with anybody but you, you deserve what you get.
If for some incredibly stupid reason you need the company toilets and cameras and other crap connected toa network, build a separate network for them that never connects to teh intertoobz.
Much easier said than done, unless you're a company with the means and desire to roll your own device every single time. Your investors might decide it's stupidity and fire the executives, if you waste your resources here...
Many (most?) IOT devices require Internets access in order to function. Here's a more practical and common example of iot devices: IP security cameras. Few and far between are the IP cam's you can use without internet connectivity.
Another example? Streaming video player devices.. guess where they stream content from? Want a thermostat that trends your cooling data, crunches the numbers, and attempts to reduce your power consumption? it's going to send that data off to a server farm for number crunching. There's a long list.