The app also needs to be installed on a smartphone, which you can also lose/forget. If the app allows you to log in from arbitrary devices, its just passwords again.
use u2f, its the best authentication token on the market. Either as second factor, or as lone factor. It doesn't enforce any lock-in at all, and its experience is just like keys: you have cheap tiny things you stick into holes (please spare me with any childish dick/buttplug/etc comparisons).
If they only need to survive online attacks, the 8 character limit is enough for Passwords. However you would need to add some meaningful brute-force and weak pw recognition.
The birthday paradox is more than that. It also includes that the probability that you are close to some other planet is far more smaller than the probability that there is some 2 close planets. So the ideas are related.
and make it possible to use your smartphones with OS'es other than yours. That should also include your stylus input, for which you are currently market leader. I'd have almost bought one of your devices, but when I found out CM doesn't support it because of driver problems I gave it back.
There is no neutral backronym for DRM -- just like "movie pirates" or "movie freeeloaders" both terms show your position towards the topic. Best is to use DRM.
DRM is not harmful for things that are popular. Popular things get copied anyway. However I dont think this is popular enough to motivate somebody to break the DRM.
I agree. As much as I'm a fan of WebRTC and despise the walled gardens of facebook, whatsapp, google hangouts and friends, I don't think firefox should add this to their browser. Rather they should publish their own chat program, either as separate addon or as separate program. As a browser, firefox should be a platform that enables higher-level programs to bring services to its users.
So, where do we stop? 50% black 50% white? 30% muslim 30% christ, 30% jew and 10% mormon? Your your criticism is right, but your proposed solution doesn't fit completely.
I don't say that quotes aren't a bad thing for "seeding" females into previously male-dominated groups. But they are no means that should be permanently in force. Otherwise you make the difference between male and female matter, which is exactly what you wanted to prevent.
One of the reasons qoutes are a bad idea is that you needed to implement a binary gender model. You know that that model is just simply wrong.
unless I use a screen-keyboard, I need to change my hands from the keyboard to the mouse and back again for this "one-click-experience". Thats stupid. My setup has "one keypress search" (ok actually two if you count whitespace), which is far more better. I use an already existing feature. My most important search sites get such shortcuts. My current prefixes are:
w : en.wikipedia.org s: en.wiktionary.org d: duckduckgo.com a: web.archive.org (link down? just paste URL, pos1 and a + space) g: google.com y: youtube.com
Best thing is, it isn't cluttered up with all that ebay or other sites. Disadvantage of course is that I have to set it up on each computer I use firefox on.
Yes you can monitor stuff even with TLS, but that's far less than without encryption. So my company knows that my smartphone connects to whattsapp.com on port 443 and exchanges 2kb of information.
A company should be abled to offer any services they want, but they should have to make sure they don't create lock-ins, eg through their own proprietary standards. If whattsapp users could communicate with skype chat users, we'd get rid of lots of problems. Its like with energy. There are lots of devices, but they all work with one energy grid, at least with the EU connector. And still, there are only a few large energy companies running most of the power plants. But when I have to buy new devices the moment I switch the energy company, I think twice before the switch.
One of the problems I have with nuclear fission technology is the fact that old plants are still on-line. With new plants we know how to make them secure.
In firefox, you have various options to disable parts of HTML5: webgl.disabled: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/s... network.websocket.enabled full-screen-api.enabled... And if there is demand to disable HTML5 for certain websites on a click-to-play basis, either somebody will write an addon or the browser does it already itself. For example getusermedia asks for your permission before giving access to the camera.
Actionscript is only a language just like javascript too. Its only the APIs that make Actionscript as powerful as it is. And lot of those are still proprietary.
but the platform was intentionally designed to make it impossible for security reasons.
Perhaps thats true for some technologies, but as user agents didn't add those features to the web, all of those shiny features landed in flash or silverlight and ended up being less secure and more broken than before. Soon every website told you to install flash because it was so new and so cool.
So browser vendors had the choice: either add the features to the browsers themselfes, or rely on one company (Adobe, silverlight came later) and their "Browser inside a Browser".
Of course HTML5 is less secure, and especially WebGL allows the web (traditionally a very dangerous place) to access the graphics card without a dense safety net. But otherwise you would have unity web player or other technologies, which are basically punching holes exactly there where you build your safety net.
HTML5 isn't less secure because people wanted it to be less secure. They wanted to obsolete plugins, but still meet the Web's users demands. Do you have flash installed?
Slashdot Mirror
The app also needs to be installed on a smartphone, which you can also lose/forget. If the app allows you to log in from arbitrary devices, its just passwords again.
Oh I've forgotten U2F's best point: its cheap.
use u2f, its the best authentication token on the market. Either as second factor, or as lone factor. It doesn't enforce any lock-in at all, and its experience is just like keys: you have cheap tiny things you stick into holes (please spare me with any childish dick/buttplug/etc comparisons).
If they only need to survive online attacks, the 8 character limit is enough for Passwords. However you would need to add some meaningful brute-force and weak pw recognition.
The birthday paradox is more than that. It also includes that the probability that you are close to some other planet is far more smaller than the probability that there is some 2 close planets. So the ideas are related.
So whats new?
Reminds me of good old pacman level counter: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
and make it possible to use your smartphones with OS'es other than yours. That should also include your stylus input, for which you are currently market leader. I'd have almost bought one of your devices, but when I found out CM doesn't support it because of driver problems I gave it back.
http://newsroom.intel.com/comm...
The customizable platform will be available to research and technology communities by January of next year.
However that still doesn't mean it will be open source as the newspapers claim.
And after that its only a small step to an atmel microcontroller: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...
There is no neutral backronym for DRM -- just like "movie pirates" or "movie freeeloaders" both terms show your position towards the topic. Best is to use DRM.
DRM is not harmful for things that are popular. Popular things get copied anyway. However I dont think this is popular enough to motivate somebody to break the DRM.
In fact, encryption is mandatory for webrtc: http://sporadicdispatches.blog...
However, dear AC, they prefer DTLS-SRTP instead.
I agree. As much as I'm a fan of WebRTC and despise the walled gardens of facebook, whatsapp, google hangouts and friends, I don't think firefox should add this to their browser. Rather they should publish their own chat program, either as separate addon or as separate program. As a browser, firefox should be a platform that enables higher-level programs to bring services to its users.
So, where do we stop? 50% black 50% white? 30% muslim 30% christ, 30% jew and 10% mormon? Your your criticism is right, but your proposed solution doesn't fit completely.
I don't say that quotes aren't a bad thing for "seeding" females into previously male-dominated groups. But they are no means that should be permanently in force. Otherwise you make the difference between male and female matter, which is exactly what you wanted to prevent.
One of the reasons qoutes are a bad idea is that you needed to implement a binary gender model. You know that that model is just simply wrong.
iarchive! archive.org
First I've thought this would be a portugese exclamation mark then I realized it got displayed the right way, so its most likely no unicode.
unless I use a screen-keyboard, I need to change my hands from the keyboard to the mouse and back again for this "one-click-experience". Thats stupid. My setup has "one keypress search" (ok actually two if you count whitespace), which is far more better. I use an already existing feature. My most important search sites get such shortcuts. My current prefixes are:
w : en.wikipedia.org
s: en.wiktionary.org
d: duckduckgo.com
a: web.archive.org (link down? just paste URL, pos1 and a + space)
g: google.com
y: youtube.com
Best thing is, it isn't cluttered up with all that ebay or other sites. Disadvantage of course is that I have to set it up on each computer I use firefox on.
Yes you can monitor stuff even with TLS, but that's far less than without encryption. So my company knows that my smartphone connects to whattsapp.com on port 443 and exchanges 2kb of information.
The network shouldn't matter unless you count installing some shiny cisco app or accepting companie's CA as "network setup".
A company should be abled to offer any services they want, but they should have to make sure they don't create lock-ins, eg through their own proprietary standards. If whattsapp users could communicate with skype chat users, we'd get rid of lots of problems. Its like with energy. There are lots of devices, but they all work with one energy grid, at least with the EU connector. And still, there are only a few large energy companies running most of the power plants. But when I have to buy new devices the moment I switch the energy company, I think twice before the switch.
It seems it does matter, at least for Tablizer.
One of the problems I have with nuclear fission technology is the fact that old plants are still on-line. With new plants we know how to make them secure.
No, this law should have tabs!
In firefox, you have various options to disable parts of HTML5: ...
webgl.disabled: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/s...
network.websocket.enabled
full-screen-api.enabled
And if there is demand to disable HTML5 for certain websites on a click-to-play basis, either somebody will write an addon or the browser does it already itself. For example getusermedia asks for your permission before giving access to the camera.
Actionscript is only a language just like javascript too. Its only the APIs that make Actionscript as powerful as it is. And lot of those are still proprietary.
but the platform was intentionally designed to make it impossible for security reasons.
Perhaps thats true for some technologies, but as user agents didn't add those features to the web, all of those shiny features landed in flash or silverlight and ended up being less secure and more broken than before. Soon every website told you to install flash because it was so new and so cool.
So browser vendors had the choice: either add the features to the browsers themselfes, or rely on one company (Adobe, silverlight came later) and their "Browser inside a Browser".
Of course HTML5 is less secure, and especially WebGL allows the web (traditionally a very dangerous place) to access the graphics card without a dense safety net. But otherwise you would have unity web player or other technologies, which are basically punching holes exactly there where you build your safety net.
HTML5 isn't less secure because people wanted it to be less secure. They wanted to obsolete plugins, but still meet the Web's users demands. Do you have flash installed?