This is not a comment to malign the horros of systemd. Rather, I would like to point out that a significant subset of/. readers DO expect the headline to explain everything so that reading the article becomes unnecessary.
Just sayin'. But you know it's true.
One has to wonder what other subtle bugs are in systemd. Purely unintentionally, of course. No TLAs would want an opportunity to widely disseminate new bugs into vast numbers of systems.
Integrity isn't the issue. Trustworthy is the issue. Can I believe what I'm hearing? Even if the devil herself from hell says it, I may still believe what she says. Someone with no integrity may promise to stab you in the back -- and be believable. The question is, do I believe what the White House is saying. Even if I dislike the clown occupying the office. Can I believe what they say?
Spicer might recover his integrity. But he'll never recover the people's trust. There is a difference. He might do some soul searching. But that doesn't mean people will take him seriously any more. Crowd size? Please. If he can lie about that with a straight face and double down on it, he's an accomplished liar.
This is a nice effort. But it doesn't go far enough. Google, can't you please just tell me what I'm supposed to be interested in, and direct my browser to that page without any unnecessary effort or thinking on my part? Thanks!
P.S., dear Google, make Google Glass only show me what I am supposed to see. After all: Hear no evil, See no evil, Tweet no evil! Don't be evil now.
One man's security flaw is another man's way to implement Stingray?
Why the extreme secrecy about Stingray? A couple thoughts on that.
The digital cell phone system was designed when we were using Windows 3.1. The system cannot withstand 21st century attacks. There must be some fundamental weakness in the way the network operates. This cannot be corrected without significant changes throughout the network base stations and mobile equipment. Thus it is expensive and time consuming to fix over a generation or more of equipment. This vulnerability may be the very basis of how Stingray works. If the secret got out, chaos would ensue. Everyone would be building their own Stingray devices. Poor people would be spying on rich people. Therefore we see security through obscurity of the vulnerability. Thus secrecy is paramount above all else including prosecutions. How this works can never be disclosed in open court, not even under the belly of a court ordered seal. The stakes are just too high.
Another theory. Stingray involves the illegal use of stolen credentials, keys, code or other information, or violation of an NDA. Therefore Stingray itself is illegal. Use and possibly even possession of Stingray may itself may run afoul of the law. Possibly if the secret of Stingray's operation got out, it might reveal, down to a small group of individuals who stole what, or who colluded with who.
For the two foregoing reasons, don't expect Stingray to see the light of day. That is why police can't even disclose that they have, let along use Stingray. Stingray is so secret that they will let proven criminals go free rather than use Stingray evidence in court. Or they will engage in "parallel construction" to avoid disclosing Stingray. (eg, Parallel Construction: a conspiracy of the prosecution and law enforcement to commit perjury and lie to the court about what their evidence actually is and how the investigation was conducted. Withholding this vital information from the defense.)
I have no interest investing time to watch a show that goes nowhere. Gets cancelled. Or has no definite ending. Even worse, that ends on a cliffhanger.
Follow a formula like Babylon 5 used. A story with a beginning, middle and end. Having a definite ending where everyone lives happily ever after is important. In the last few episodes you can see the pieces being moved off the chessboard as everyone gets promoted or retires or whatever. It doesn't have to be a five year story arc. But it does have to be something that you can definitely pull off without cancelling it.
I've watched shows that had a well conceived first season. Obviously thought out by a single mind. Or maybe a small number of people. Excitement builds from episode to episode. It has a good season 1 ending. Then it gets a second season and goes off the rails. In season 2 the show has no planned story. The writers wander aimlessly. Eventually the writers turn to thinking about what outlandish twist can we do to a major character -- completely ruining the character's back story in previous episodes.
I know it is tempting to think that if you can drag a show on for more seasons that it makes more profit. That is true in the short term. Eventually your audiences get tired of being strung along without ever having a conclusion. Resolution. They just quit watching. Find other forms of entertainment that have a satisfying ending -- like reading a good book. In the long run, it is more profitable to have a limited pre-planned number of seasons with a story that winds up and makes everyone happy. This kind of show might be watched and re-watched for generations. Just like a good book.
Stop worrying about trying to make a show that everyone wants to watch. There is no such show. This thinking is what killed television, and later cable tv. Make a show that a certain audience will love dearly. Make another show that another audience will love. People who like particular types of shows will continue to appear as new viewers -- forever. There will always be new sci-fi viewers, for example.
You might take it as racist. It is not intended to be. The point is that there are global CA's and not all of them can be trusted. An innocent seeming CA like Honest Achmed's, could be controlled by a government that the US might consider unfriendly. I could have called the CA Joe's Bakery, Shoe Shine and Certificate Authority. But that wouldn't quite fit with a foreign nation that I wanted to use to make the point about being considered less than friendly or trustworthy to the US. Or a government that might have a reason to try to hack Google, or Apple, or Microsoft. I could have used a Chinese name and China. Or Russia. You would have called it racist nonetheless.
Electricity is the most overhyped BS on the planet.
Telephones are the most overhyped BS on the planet. People mostly use them for idle chatter. What use are they? Almost as bad as facetwit.
Automobiles are way over hyped. They'll never be as popular as the beautiful traditional horse and buggy. Autos are noisy. Smelly. Difficult to start. Unreliable. If it backfires while you are cranking it, you could break your arm. And worst of all, automobiles frighten the horses. Automobiles are the most over hyped thing ever. Don't expect anything to come of these new fangled auto mobiles.
Back to the present. AI, a type of technology, is so over hyped that it already takes away jobs that people could do.
Hey, be nice. Even straight people might feel threatened by AI. Now that Google can beat humans at purely intellectual challenges, like Go; they need AI to beat humans at physical challenges like soccer, and the locker room activities that follow. But no need to worry about the potential downsides of AI.
A guy worked at a coal mine. The coal mine closed.
So he got a job as an auto assembly line worker. His job was replaced by a robot that could do the job faster, more accurately and cheaper.
So he became a truck driver, because those trucks aren't going to drive themselves.
It is a private forum. The owners of that private forum should have already cancelled the tiny handed one's Twitter account for multiple violations of TOS. Others have been banned for far less than what the orange clown has said.
This lawsuit will legitimize the idea that American citizens can criticize the President without consequences. The reason they were blocked on Twitter was because they said unkind or unfavorable things about our Dear Leader. The Great Orange Clown simply cannot have that.
The media is so unkind. And so unfair! And people say bad things about the president. And life is unfair!
All past presidents have had bad things said about them. Look back at the things said of Obama. Or Bill Clinton. Or Republican presidents like George W Bush, or H W Bush, or Regan. That was then. Today the Great Orange Clown should not have to abide any negative remarks, thoughts, or political cartoons. This criticism must be stopped! Waaaaah! I need to have a nap before my Twitter meltdown! Waaaaah!
Google and Facebook are not redistributing anything. They are linking. Generating traffic. Maybe these news companies would like it better if Google and Facebook would never link to them ever again. We've already been through this game, more than once now, by several foreign news outlets that wanted Google to stop indexing them. Google stopped. Then those sites came back begging to be indexed.
These news organizations simply don't like the world that the 21st century has become. One where pretty much all the world's information is hyperlinked. If they don't want to be easy to find, it is to their own detriment.
Do these news companies think I am going to go to their site to browse for news if I don't find it linked from some other site first?
Slashdot Mirror
What are you saying, that if we complain loud enough we can get Microsoft to go back to Windows 95 ?
Instead of freebasing paint, can Microsoft take paint by intravenous injection?
> People who prefer the Windows ecosystem that traces its roots to DOS
> don't want to interact with a "store" to get things done.
I don't want to be accused of preferring that ecosystem.
But if Microsoft is bringing back Paint, can they please Please PLEASE bring back edlin!
And a text based clippy for DOS wouldn't be bad either.
> apps are for fones.
That's Foans. Like groans. Moans. Loans. Koans.
Example in a sentence: You can barraw mah sail foan.
This is exactly why emacs is inferior to vim.
Anyone can figure out how to quit out of vim.
Early emacs users were unable to quit out of emacs, and had to resort to rebuilding all OS and application functions using emacs lisp.
This is not a comment to malign the horros of systemd. Rather, I would like to point out that a significant subset of /. readers DO expect the headline to explain everything so that reading the article becomes unnecessary.
Just sayin'. But you know it's true.
One has to wonder what other subtle bugs are in systemd. Purely unintentionally, of course. No TLAs would want an opportunity to widely disseminate new bugs into vast numbers of systems.
Integrity isn't the issue. Trustworthy is the issue. Can I believe what I'm hearing? Even if the devil herself from hell says it, I may still believe what she says. Someone with no integrity may promise to stab you in the back -- and be believable. The question is, do I believe what the White House is saying. Even if I dislike the clown occupying the office. Can I believe what they say?
Spicer might recover his integrity. But he'll never recover the people's trust. There is a difference. He might do some soul searching. But that doesn't mean people will take him seriously any more. Crowd size? Please. If he can lie about that with a straight face and double down on it, he's an accomplished liar.
This is a nice effort. But it doesn't go far enough. Google, can't you please just tell me what I'm supposed to be interested in, and direct my browser to that page without any unnecessary effort or thinking on my part? Thanks!
P.S., dear Google, make Google Glass only show me what I am supposed to see. After all: Hear no evil, See no evil, Tweet no evil! Don't be evil now.
1985 movie: Real Genius
> Why is Comcast Using Self-driving Cars To Justify Abolishing Net Neutrality?
Because using self driving cars is more humane than the way they would prefer to kill net neutrality.
One man's security flaw is another man's way to implement Stingray?
Why the extreme secrecy about Stingray? A couple thoughts on that.
The digital cell phone system was designed when we were using Windows 3.1. The system cannot withstand 21st century attacks. There must be some fundamental weakness in the way the network operates. This cannot be corrected without significant changes throughout the network base stations and mobile equipment. Thus it is expensive and time consuming to fix over a generation or more of equipment. This vulnerability may be the very basis of how Stingray works. If the secret got out, chaos would ensue. Everyone would be building their own Stingray devices. Poor people would be spying on rich people. Therefore we see security through obscurity of the vulnerability. Thus secrecy is paramount above all else including prosecutions. How this works can never be disclosed in open court, not even under the belly of a court ordered seal. The stakes are just too high.
Another theory. Stingray involves the illegal use of stolen credentials, keys, code or other information, or violation of an NDA. Therefore Stingray itself is illegal. Use and possibly even possession of Stingray may itself may run afoul of the law. Possibly if the secret of Stingray's operation got out, it might reveal, down to a small group of individuals who stole what, or who colluded with who.
For the two foregoing reasons, don't expect Stingray to see the light of day. That is why police can't even disclose that they have, let along use Stingray. Stingray is so secret that they will let proven criminals go free rather than use Stingray evidence in court. Or they will engage in "parallel construction" to avoid disclosing Stingray. (eg, Parallel Construction: a conspiracy of the prosecution and law enforcement to commit perjury and lie to the court about what their evidence actually is and how the investigation was conducted. Withholding this vital information from the defense.)
> > "HTC said it was an error, and a fix is underway"
> With bullshit lines like that spewing forth every other day, is it any wonder people are fed up with the status quo?
What HTC really meant was: . . . a fix is underway . . . but in the meantime, you can pay us to get rid of the ads.
Dear Netflix,
I have no interest investing time to watch a show that goes nowhere. Gets cancelled. Or has no definite ending. Even worse, that ends on a cliffhanger.
Follow a formula like Babylon 5 used. A story with a beginning, middle and end. Having a definite ending where everyone lives happily ever after is important. In the last few episodes you can see the pieces being moved off the chessboard as everyone gets promoted or retires or whatever. It doesn't have to be a five year story arc. But it does have to be something that you can definitely pull off without cancelling it.
I've watched shows that had a well conceived first season. Obviously thought out by a single mind. Or maybe a small number of people. Excitement builds from episode to episode. It has a good season 1 ending. Then it gets a second season and goes off the rails. In season 2 the show has no planned story. The writers wander aimlessly. Eventually the writers turn to thinking about what outlandish twist can we do to a major character -- completely ruining the character's back story in previous episodes.
I know it is tempting to think that if you can drag a show on for more seasons that it makes more profit. That is true in the short term. Eventually your audiences get tired of being strung along without ever having a conclusion. Resolution. They just quit watching. Find other forms of entertainment that have a satisfying ending -- like reading a good book. In the long run, it is more profitable to have a limited pre-planned number of seasons with a story that winds up and makes everyone happy. This kind of show might be watched and re-watched for generations. Just like a good book.
Stop worrying about trying to make a show that everyone wants to watch. There is no such show. This thinking is what killed television, and later cable tv. Make a show that a certain audience will love dearly. Make another show that another audience will love. People who like particular types of shows will continue to appear as new viewers -- forever. There will always be new sci-fi viewers, for example.
How many kids have at least one Raspberry Pi? How many millions has the raspberry pi foundation sold again?
You might take it as racist. It is not intended to be. The point is that there are global CA's and not all of them can be trusted. An innocent seeming CA like Honest Achmed's, could be controlled by a government that the US might consider unfriendly. I could have called the CA Joe's Bakery, Shoe Shine and Certificate Authority. But that wouldn't quite fit with a foreign nation that I wanted to use to make the point about being considered less than friendly or trustworthy to the US. Or a government that might have a reason to try to hack Google, or Apple, or Microsoft. I could have used a Chinese name and China. Or Russia. You would have called it racist nonetheless.
I would have more trust in Honest Achmed's Certificate Authority of Tehran Iran.
If I run across a website with a *.google.com domain, with a certificate issued by Honest Achmed's, at least I'll know it is safe.
Bender needs a new 3D printed plastic ass that has a better designed attachment mechanism.
Rewind one hundred years.
Electricity is the most overhyped BS on the planet.
Telephones are the most overhyped BS on the planet. People mostly use them for idle chatter. What use are they? Almost as bad as facetwit.
Automobiles are way over hyped. They'll never be as popular as the beautiful traditional horse and buggy. Autos are noisy. Smelly. Difficult to start. Unreliable. If it backfires while you are cranking it, you could break your arm. And worst of all, automobiles frighten the horses. Automobiles are the most over hyped thing ever. Don't expect anything to come of these new fangled auto mobiles.
Back to the present. AI, a type of technology, is so over hyped that it already takes away jobs that people could do.
Hey, be nice. Even straight people might feel threatened by AI. Now that Google can beat humans at purely intellectual challenges, like Go; they need AI to beat humans at physical challenges like soccer, and the locker room activities that follow. But no need to worry about the potential downsides of AI.
A guy worked at a coal mine. The coal mine closed.
So he got a job as an auto assembly line worker. His job was replaced by a robot that could do the job faster, more accurately and cheaper.
So he became a truck driver, because those trucks aren't going to drive themselves.
Feel free to express any opinion or say whatever you like. Don't try to move it beyond words into the realm of real life.
It is a private forum. The owners of that private forum should have already cancelled the tiny handed one's Twitter account for multiple violations of TOS. Others have been banned for far less than what the orange clown has said.
Education might be a start. But they are stupid and proud of it! Consider the current secretary of education.
This lawsuit will legitimize the idea that American citizens can criticize the President without consequences. The reason they were blocked on Twitter was because they said unkind or unfavorable things about our Dear Leader. The Great Orange Clown simply cannot have that.
/s tag?)
The media is so unkind. And so unfair! And people say bad things about the president. And life is unfair!
All past presidents have had bad things said about them. Look back at the things said of Obama. Or Bill Clinton. Or Republican presidents like George W Bush, or H W Bush, or Regan. That was then. Today the Great Orange Clown should not have to abide any negative remarks, thoughts, or political cartoons. This criticism must be stopped! Waaaaah! I need to have a nap before my Twitter meltdown! Waaaaah!
(do I need to put an
Google and Facebook are not redistributing anything. They are linking. Generating traffic. Maybe these news companies would like it better if Google and Facebook would never link to them ever again. We've already been through this game, more than once now, by several foreign news outlets that wanted Google to stop indexing them. Google stopped. Then those sites came back begging to be indexed.
These news organizations simply don't like the world that the 21st century has become. One where pretty much all the world's information is hyperlinked. If they don't want to be easy to find, it is to their own detriment.
Do these news companies think I am going to go to their site to browse for news if I don't find it linked from some other site first?