I put Google as the worst. They started as a search engine and making revenue from advertising. Which isn't so bad.
They expanded into email, which seemed a reasonable way to get more advertising revenue.
Then they bought online media through Youtube, which was great for their strength in content delivery, and provided more vehicles for ad revenue.
But somewhere they stopped saying "don't be evil" and now they link your accounts in all the services they acquire, track your dns lookups, your searches, your phonecalls, your contacts, your webpages (through fonts), your map searches, your every location through traffic, they converted your email address into a social media profile which they track as ruthlessly and lucratively as Facebook ever did... They even photograph your home, document your wifi access points etc, etc.
At least Facebook never pretended to be anything other than an ad-based social media company.
"And you know cyber is becoming so big today. It’s becoming something that number of years ago, short number of years ago, wasn’t even a word. And now the cyber is so big, and you know look at what they’re doing with the internet. How they’re taking recruiting people through the internet. And part of it is the psychology because so many people think they’re winning. And you know, there’s a whole big thing. Even today, psychology — where CNN came out with a big poll. Their big poll came out today that Trump is winning. It’s good psychology, you know. It’s good psychology. I know that for a fact because people that didn’t call me yesterday, they’re calling me today. So that’s the way life works right?"
I dated a girl who looked up my information because she was an border officer. As a security professional I asked "isn't anyone watching", she replied: "yeah, that's my job".
Although there's sometimes legitimate reasons for their illegitimate searches....
Many officers are not allowed to associate with known criminals.
Unless you meant "instead of making a proper counter, he used a binary-shift-left over a 16 bit register", or "instead of making a proper counter, he stuck a plank of wood on a pile of cinder-blocks."
This is as annoying as saying "reversed" to mean "reverse engineered"
The implication is that you believe so much in the leader's vision, that you'll drink poison if they command you, I think does compare to believing in Google's vision so much that you'll sacrifice your privacy for their free, convenient apps.
"so I'm not sure just how well this actually will scale in the real world. Still, 6.2km is a useful distance for some limited applications."
FTA, there's another innovation not in the Slashdot headline or summary, except to say " the teams had slightly different set-ups and results."
One of those results seems to be that the team from China's method allows for quantum repeaters which can relay entangled particles:
"...it would allow for the creation of quantum repeaters, to propel the signal further along the network..."
"Now say Bob repeats the process with Daisy, who is 100 kilometres to his right (with another Charlie between them). At this stage, Bob has two particles, one entangled with Alice’s and the other with Daisy’s. If Bob now does a Bell State measurement on his two particles, he effectively entangles Alice’s particle with Daisy’s — stretching teleportation a full 200 kilometres."
“You can scale the whole thing up and can go, in theory, to arbitrarily long distances,” says Tittel.
But it seems that people believe they had secret agents install some super-resillient, ultra-compact, undetectable explosives which would not detonate when a 250,000 lb aircraft hit it at 400 miles an hour, nor from the fire from 10,000 gallons of aviation fuel, but would be wired for a controlled demolition so as to flatten buildings which contained people who were evacuated except for people already dying from smoke and fire?
"You certainly would not expect it to collapse in a tidy heap at the speed of gravity where the entire building becomes... "
And I know a guy who doesn't wear a seatbelt because he thinks his arms can keep his face from going through the windshield in a car accident.
Your intuition about physical processes is meaningless when dealing with materials and processes at these scales.
Without getting into the stupidity, the utter, mindblowing, holy-crap stupidity of the idea that hundreds of people sitting in offices throughout the WTC wouldn't say "HEY, you had a maintinence guy deliver a giant package and install it in the HVAC two months ago? me too! Maybe it was so that when the guberment crashed the jets into the building, it would make sure that the evacuated buildings blooo flat down! As opposd to havign the tops slide off or sides crumble like they were supposed to!"
I went with the iPhone because I didn't have to root my phone to control the communications of my own apps, and I didn't want to lock more of my life into my gmail account... that and the camera/microphone/battery life etc. I was surprised by the added stability and how I didn't feel the need to root the phone at all.
Android phones are practically subsidized by Google and most are additionally subsidized by a carrier who couldn't give a damn if you have updates or not.
On my iPhone I use offline maps, a domestic hosted mail and calendar server and duckduckgo. No Google apps, and minimal contact with the app store. It's a boring, reliable, very functional phone.
With Android, for even these basic features I would send 100% of my data to the U.S. where I have no control nor rights. Last I used Android it was difficult to *not* sync it with Google, even with your own calendaring/mail solution. Unless I go with Cyanogenmod or similar... which is a wicked time-burner.
The price difference is worth it to me. Time and privacy are expensive.
They investigated, verified the times and locations, and asked him about them. When he didn't provide a satisfactory response, or in fact any response,
Citation? You ask others for it constantly, so I'm sure you have several.
I think this provides a counterexample:
I want to be clear: the accusations of criminal sexual misconduct against me are entirely false.
Flat out denying the accusations is.. a response, right?
I'm inclined to say "meh", let Jacob step out of the project and leave it at that. The project is bigger than him, and he's done some stuff that I don't think belongs in tech conferences. Criminal? Let the courts decide, I'll assume he's innocent until then.
Testing of the ports maybe, AD probably not... but. the FOSS community is very good at implementing specifications. If the object model is sufficiently well-designed, then maybe Libreoffice, Samba, OpenLDAP, MariaDB etc, will get hooks/shims/modules/whatever for a Linux Powershell.
The system level interfaces depend on how far the abstraction goes. They demonstrate obtaining objects for running processes... much easier and more accurate than grepping for PIDs.
I think Python is a very good analogy. It has an interactive shell, but the interactivity is only really useful in edge cases like troubleshooting or learning.
I'm not saying Powershell is great. I'm saying that it has a reason to exist and despite its weaknesses, has some strengths over traditional Unix shells.
Powershell has a very steep learning curve and IMHO lacks the end-user history of traditional unix shells.
That said... doing things like having most of your OS exposed through objects for inspection and manipulation, even cells in spreadsheets or network resources has value.
You *could* do this in bash with/dev/tcp/whatever, perl, sed, python and possibly an ldap client, but the exposed methods in powershell are more stable, have fewer dependencies and are easier to understand.
The fact that it's so hard to do simple things makes it very difficult to add to your knowledge without reading a few books or taking some course on the subject, then using it daily in Windows admin work.
I always wish I knew more about using it, but... unless you're deep in this stuff, it's better to skim the capabilities and let the Windows admins figure out the details.
Interestingly, the Declaration of Human rights from 1948 explicitly mentions privacy, but the 1960 Bill of Rights makes no mention of it, nor does the later Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
These are very fundamental areas of law... I mean, I had to know this stuff for undergrad intro-to-business-law.
It's my understanding that postal services and landlines have protections in law, but there is no such thing for "new" mediums. I.e., you need a warrant to open mail or wiretap a landline, but before the privacy act, you could sell somebody's cellphone records to whomever you wanted without telling them.
You're probably also talking about the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, not the Bill of Rights. But neither contain anything about privacy other than protections against search and seizure.
Then load the ads to/dev/null to avoid detection of adblockers. Have browser identifiers stripped and cookies manipulated into randomized identities so that tracking is limited.
Eventually advertisers will question whether or not their "clicked on" ads are even being seen... and content will go back to being created by people who want to create content, not by people who are trying to sell your eyes to the highest bidder.
Slashdot Mirror
I put Google as the worst. They started as a search engine and making revenue from advertising. Which isn't so bad.
They expanded into email, which seemed a reasonable way to get more advertising revenue.
Then they bought online media through Youtube, which was great for their strength in content delivery, and provided more vehicles for ad revenue.
But somewhere they stopped saying "don't be evil" and now they link your accounts in all the services they acquire, track your dns lookups, your searches, your phonecalls, your contacts, your webpages (through fonts), your map searches, your every location through traffic, they converted your email address into a social media profile which they track as ruthlessly and lucratively as Facebook ever did... They even photograph your home, document your wifi access points etc, etc.
At least Facebook never pretended to be anything other than an ad-based social media company.
"And you know cyber is becoming so big today. It’s becoming something that number of years ago, short number of years ago, wasn’t even a word. And now the cyber is so big, and you know look at what they’re doing with the internet. How they’re taking recruiting people through the internet. And part of it is the psychology because so many people think they’re winning. And you know, there’s a whole big thing. Even today, psychology — where CNN came out with a big poll. Their big poll came out today that Trump is winning. It’s good psychology, you know. It’s good psychology. I know that for a fact because people that didn’t call me yesterday, they’re calling me today. So that’s the way life works right?"
You know about MacOS Powernap mode? https://support.apple.com/en-u...
I dated a girl who looked up my information because she was an border officer. As a security professional I asked "isn't anyone watching", she replied: "yeah, that's my job".
Although there's sometimes legitimate reasons for their illegitimate searches....
Many officers are not allowed to associate with known criminals.
"Counter" is not a noun.
Unless you meant "instead of making a proper counter, he used a binary-shift-left over a 16 bit register", or "instead of making a proper counter, he stuck a plank of wood on a pile of cinder-blocks."
This is as annoying as saying "reversed" to mean "reverse engineered"
"Are you implying that pointing out a blatant misrepresentation counts as drinking koolaid?"
The expression comes from cult leaders who gave their followers poison. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drinking_the_Kool-Aid.
The implication is that you believe so much in the leader's vision, that you'll drink poison if they command you, I think does compare to believing in Google's vision so much that you'll sacrifice your privacy for their free, convenient apps.
FTA, there's another innovation not in the Slashdot headline or summary, except to say " the teams had slightly different set-ups and results."
One of those results seems to be that the team from China's method allows for quantum repeaters which can relay entangled particles:
Between the Telegraph and Russia's online propaganda, I would expect Russia to make grand scientific claims and the Telegraph to sensationalize them.
Sad, given Russia has a history of being a leader in science, and England has a history of being a leader in journalism.
The Telegraph has a link to the (seemingly very short) paper, which doesn't appear to be restricted: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405722316301177 Displacement and other aspects of language are discussed.
Somebody crashed planes into the buildings.
But it seems that people believe they had secret agents install some super-resillient, ultra-compact, undetectable explosives which would not detonate when a 250,000 lb aircraft hit it at 400 miles an hour, nor from the fire from 10,000 gallons of aviation fuel, but would be wired for a controlled demolition so as to flatten buildings which contained people who were evacuated except for people already dying from smoke and fire?
Whatever.
"You certainly would not expect it to collapse in a tidy heap at the speed of gravity where the entire building becomes... "
And I know a guy who doesn't wear a seatbelt because he thinks his arms can keep his face from going through the windshield in a car accident.
Your intuition about physical processes is meaningless when dealing with materials and processes at these scales.
Without getting into the stupidity, the utter, mindblowing, holy-crap stupidity of the idea that hundreds of people sitting in offices throughout the WTC wouldn't say "HEY, you had a maintinence guy deliver a giant package and install it in the HVAC two months ago? me too! Maybe it was so that when the guberment crashed the jets into the building, it would make sure that the evacuated buildings blooo flat down! As opposd to havign the tops slide off or sides crumble like they were supposed to!"
I went with the iPhone because I didn't have to root my phone to control the communications of my own apps, and I didn't want to lock more of my life into my gmail account... that and the camera/microphone/battery life etc. I was surprised by the added stability and how I didn't feel the need to root the phone at all.
Android phones are practically subsidized by Google and most are additionally subsidized by a carrier who couldn't give a damn if you have updates or not.
On my iPhone I use offline maps, a domestic hosted mail and calendar server and duckduckgo. No Google apps, and minimal contact with the app store. It's a boring, reliable, very functional phone.
With Android, for even these basic features I would send 100% of my data to the U.S. where I have no control nor rights. Last I used Android it was difficult to *not* sync it with Google, even with your own calendaring/mail solution. Unless I go with Cyanogenmod or similar... which is a wicked time-burner.
The price difference is worth it to me. Time and privacy are expensive.
Seems a bit odd to me. to say:
I think this provides a counterexample:
http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1soorlp
Flat out denying the accusations is.. a response, right?
I'm inclined to say "meh", let Jacob step out of the project and leave it at that. The project is bigger than him, and he's done some stuff that I don't think belongs in tech conferences. Criminal? Let the courts decide, I'll assume he's innocent until then.
The Eye of Sauron is a good analogy for Pocket and other stupid ideas. Maybe it can sear with flames when it sends your data away.
Testing of the ports maybe, AD probably not... but. the FOSS community is very good at implementing specifications. If the object model is sufficiently well-designed, then maybe Libreoffice, Samba, OpenLDAP, MariaDB etc, will get hooks/shims/modules/whatever for a Linux Powershell.
The system level interfaces depend on how far the abstraction goes. They demonstrate obtaining objects for running processes... much easier and more accurate than grepping for PIDs.
https://github.com/PowerShell/PowerShell/tree/master/docs/learning-powershell
Their grep example is kind of ridiculous:
grep -Rin "sometext" --include="*.cs"
Becomes:
Get-ChildItem -Recurse -Filter *.cs | Select-String -Pattern "sometext"
But then look at stuff like their debugging and breakpoints: https://github.com/PowerShell/PowerShell/blob/master/docs/learning-powershell/debugging-from-commandline.md
There's a lot of hard work and cool ideas in there. It would be a mistake to ignore it because the syntax is awkward and MS is behind it.
I think Python is a very good analogy. It has an interactive shell, but the interactivity is only really useful in edge cases like troubleshooting or learning.
I'm not saying Powershell is great. I'm saying that it has a reason to exist and despite its weaknesses, has some strengths over traditional Unix shells.
Powershell has a very steep learning curve and IMHO lacks the end-user history of traditional unix shells.
That said... doing things like having most of your OS exposed through objects for inspection and manipulation, even cells in spreadsheets or network resources has value.
You *could* do this in bash with /dev/tcp/whatever, perl, sed, python and possibly an ldap client, but the exposed methods in powershell are more stable, have fewer dependencies and are easier to understand.
The fact that it's so hard to do simple things makes it very difficult to add to your knowledge without reading a few books or taking some course on the subject, then using it daily in Windows admin work.
I always wish I knew more about using it, but... unless you're deep in this stuff, it's better to skim the capabilities and let the Windows admins figure out the details.
Wikipedia says otherwise and provides sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_of_person
Interestingly, the Declaration of Human rights from 1948 explicitly mentions privacy, but the 1960 Bill of Rights makes no mention of it, nor does the later Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
These are very fundamental areas of law... I mean, I had to know this stuff for undergrad intro-to-business-law.
I think you're talking about the Criminal code of Canada, not the "Bill of Rights".
http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/page-40.html#h-61
Details are important if you're not going to cite references and are going to tell a "Yank" to go Google something about Canadian law.
I would love to know what "Supreme Court" ruling you're referring to, but I'm guessing it doesn't exist.
The Bill of Rights has nothing about privacy: http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-12.3/FullText.html
The privacy commissioner herself had her cellphone records sold to a reporter because there were no such protections in law.
https://www.priv.gc.ca/cf-dc/2007/372_20070709_e.asp
It's my understanding that postal services and landlines have protections in law, but there is no such thing for "new" mediums. I.e., you need a warrant to open mail or wiretap a landline, but before the privacy act, you could sell somebody's cellphone records to whomever you wanted without telling them.
You're probably also talking about the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, not the Bill of Rights. But neither contain anything about privacy other than protections against search and seizure.
Details on the current state of privacy law in Canada can be found on the Privacy Commissioner's website... https://www.priv.gc.ca/resource/fs-fi/02_05_d_15_e.asp
Please., please correct me if I'm wrong. I would love to see this Supreme Court decision.
Yep, apply signature-based detection.
Then load the ads to /dev/null to avoid detection of adblockers. Have browser identifiers stripped and cookies manipulated into randomized identities so that tracking is limited.
Eventually advertisers will question whether or not their "clicked on" ads are even being seen... and content will go back to being created by people who want to create content, not by people who are trying to sell your eyes to the highest bidder.
"Speak way understand better this fucking you if?"
"fucking" English isn't my first language, I think I messed it up. Sorry about that.
Otherwise, *whoosh*.
Cue, as "Cue the haters to queue their abuse."
Or in "fucking english", that would be "Cue, as in fucking queue the goddam haters to queue their dumfuck asses up to shit their abuse."
And as a non-US Person, you have no right to privacy.
A decade old version of Office is better than a recent version of Office.
LO has been getting progressively better. Office has been getting progressively worse.