Sounds ironic that the country from where born Conan Doyle, Agatha Christie and a lot others take out deduction and just focus in what would do an US tv show in that case with a very partial evidence.
Once cyberattacks got "legalized" by governments using Stuxnet, it became ok to launch them if you feel that you have a reason. And you don't need millons of dollars and an army to launch cyberattacks, even by competing firms, hacker groups (including the "for hire" ones) and individuals could do so.
In some sense, engineering is intelligent design, not evolution. But would be a very dumb design if just denies evidence and build blindly according to the "truth" written by someone without even math knowledge more than 2000 years ago.
The problem is, there aren't infinite ways to do or show something, and of the maybe short list, even fewer are intuitive/cheaper/practical. At some point, when all bases are taken, you just can't act because all the ways to do something (no matter how much common sense are) are closed, or act against common sense, like having 4D-shaped corners or using buttons labeled "start" to stop things.
Don't attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity. That they are dishonests, corrupt, evil, etc could keep things more or less bearable, but if they are stupid (and by media and public opinion manipulation they keep being in power) we are all at risk.
Is like putting in dvds a lot of screen time with warnings about piracy. The ones that really does piracy don't get it, and get a user better experience (or in this case, privacy), while the people that don't have to "pay" it.
You could consider suing developers that intentionally planted backdoors (even if was following NSA or other US government agency orders), but can't target the ones that by weren't aware of them, did by mistake, lack of knowledge or culture, or because things changed (i..e. having/forcing a 8 char password was "good enough" several years ago, not anymore), or even because taken assumptions no longer true by end user choice (how much portals meant for intranets with not specially strong security end being used on internet).
Also, who you sue because a bug in an open source program with a lot of contributes? or against a big corporation that put in legalese that they aren't responsible for any damage or problem that could happen for using it (that is most commercial software licenses)?
People taking advice from medical (and "medical") websites are pretty similar, internet is the ultimate app after all. But in a sense, all mass media give medical advice, sometimes just ads disguised as them. Should be all regulated? If so, what you do with other countries websites and/or media? In any case, you end in doing media control without control on your side (and that includes promoted medical advice to push products from paying companies, is not like that never happened in a way or another).
Instead of banning, giving some sort of seal of approval to good apps/websites/etc by some central authority to show that it was somewhat checked for accuracy could at least give a hint that something may be correct. Still have the potential of abuses, but at least don't limit people to picking other alternatives if they want.
That was pretty dumb from HP, launching a decent tablet with a decent OS on it, and next throwing the towel, making people investing in that ecosystem to leave and potentially to not come back ever.
In the other hand, provided that they can do decent hardware and push some innovation from their own in that area, plus the knowledge of those 2 great mobile OSs, they could still have room for some surprise (i.e. if adding to the mix running android apps in an environment that mix the best features of WebOS and Meego/Maemo)
You mean that not only Microsoft introduced a whole new concept on how to be unsafe in internet, but that also is enabled by default? And that does it specifically for the windows users that are clueless?
Hope it don't get widespread, or car makers will start to remove the safety belt because is too hard for clueless people to use it.
They can keep doing what their lobbyist tell them and openly say that fuck law, they do what they want. Or they can recognize that there is something very rotten in all the patent bussiness. Banning Apple won't be an option for them.
Is implicit in the announcement that at the very least the Chrome embedded viewer should be safer. Anyway, probably the other viewers are based in the pdf specification not in acrobat reader code, so they shouldn't share some if not all those vulnerabilities (but could have different ones)
Kill the messenger is wrong for the people that is target for the message, like the citizens of US and in general the rest of the world. Is not like they don't like the message, they already know it, just want to avoid that people know it, and warn others that could try to spread similar messages. What should be interesting is that there are US citizens that want Assagne in jail, the one that gave them some insight of what really do the people that they elected to represent them.
In Ubuntu (and probably other distributions and gnome based desktops) the default viewer is Evince, in KDE ones is Okular, and you have embedded viewers in other apps, like in google chrome. There is no need to install Adobe's unless you need some special added feature. A list of software that works with PDF can be found in Wikipedia
Slashdot Mirror
Sounds ironic that the country from where born Conan Doyle, Agatha Christie and a lot others take out deduction and just focus in what would do an US tv show in that case with a very partial evidence.
Once cyberattacks got "legalized" by governments using Stuxnet, it became ok to launch them if you feel that you have a reason. And you don't need millons of dollars and an army to launch cyberattacks, even by competing firms, hacker groups (including the "for hire" ones) and individuals could do so.
Please, don't do it with rounded wings, not sure how much it will cost to build it, but the lawsuit could be in the order of billons of dollars.
I think they misunderstood what space we are talking about in cyberspace.
In some sense, engineering is intelligent design, not evolution. But would be a very dumb design if just denies evidence and build blindly according to the "truth" written by someone without even math knowledge more than 2000 years ago.
The problem is, there aren't infinite ways to do or show something, and of the maybe short list, even fewer are intuitive/cheaper/practical. At some point, when all bases are taken, you just can't act because all the ways to do something (no matter how much common sense are) are closed, or act against common sense, like having 4D-shaped corners or using buttons labeled "start" to stop things.
Don't attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity. That they are dishonests, corrupt, evil, etc could keep things more or less bearable, but if they are stupid (and by media and public opinion manipulation they keep being in power) we are all at risk.
A well designed poll would had put CowboyNeal as president.
Is like putting in dvds a lot of screen time with warnings about piracy. The ones that really does piracy don't get it, and get a user better experience (or in this case, privacy), while the people that don't have to "pay" it.
I do not know what about what patents the incoming Patent War will be, but next one will be about patenting sticks and stones.
You could consider suing developers that intentionally planted backdoors (even if was following NSA or other US government agency orders), but can't target the ones that by weren't aware of them, did by mistake, lack of knowledge or culture, or because things changed (i..e. having/forcing a 8 char password was "good enough" several years ago, not anymore), or even because taken assumptions no longer true by end user choice (how much portals meant for intranets with not specially strong security end being used on internet).
Also, who you sue because a bug in an open source program with a lot of contributes? or against a big corporation that put in legalese that they aren't responsible for any damage or problem that could happen for using it (that is most commercial software licenses)?
the mess that hurricane could end making if they survive.
It could look good enough in smartphones and maybe tablets, but have you tried to see that logo in a desktop?
Try to use it long enough in your desktop and you will use it with your fist.
If you manage to take out semantics and feelings from images/videos/etc you could take this job, Mr. Spock
People taking advice from medical (and "medical") websites are pretty similar, internet is the ultimate app after all. But in a sense, all mass media give medical advice, sometimes just ads disguised as them. Should be all regulated? If so, what you do with other countries websites and/or media? In any case, you end in doing media control without control on your side (and that includes promoted medical advice to push products from paying companies, is not like that never happened in a way or another).
Instead of banning, giving some sort of seal of approval to good apps/websites/etc by some central authority to show that it was somewhat checked for accuracy could at least give a hint that something may be correct. Still have the potential of abuses, but at least don't limit people to picking other alternatives if they want.
That was pretty dumb from HP, launching a decent tablet with a decent OS on it, and next throwing the towel, making people investing in that ecosystem to leave and potentially to not come back ever.
In the other hand, provided that they can do decent hardware and push some innovation from their own in that area, plus the knowledge of those 2 great mobile OSs, they could still have room for some surprise (i.e. if adding to the mix running android apps in an environment that mix the best features of WebOS and Meego/Maemo)
After the next elections, dare to say that idiocracy isnt here already.
You mean that not only Microsoft introduced a whole new concept on how to be unsafe in internet, but that also is enabled by default? And that does it specifically for the windows users that are clueless?
Hope it don't get widespread, or car makers will start to remove the safety belt because is too hard for clueless people to use it.
Or at least, humans using that technology? From nuclear winter to idiocracy there is a whole range of apocalypses where technology have a major role.
They can keep doing what their lobbyist tell them and openly say that fuck law, they do what they want. Or they can recognize that there is something very rotten in all the patent bussiness. Banning Apple won't be an option for them.
A hint on how ethical are your elected officials are in Wikileaks.
Is implicit in the announcement that at the very least the Chrome embedded viewer should be safer. Anyway, probably the other viewers are based in the pdf specification not in acrobat reader code, so they shouldn't share some if not all those vulnerabilities (but could have different ones)
Kill the messenger is wrong for the people that is target for the message, like the citizens of US and in general the rest of the world. Is not like they don't like the message, they already know it, just want to avoid that people know it, and warn others that could try to spread similar messages. What should be interesting is that there are US citizens that want Assagne in jail, the one that gave them some insight of what really do the people that they elected to represent them.
In Ubuntu (and probably other distributions and gnome based desktops) the default viewer is Evince, in KDE ones is Okular, and you have embedded viewers in other apps, like in google chrome. There is no need to install Adobe's unless you need some special added feature. A list of software that works with PDF can be found in Wikipedia