"It holds a smart phone in front of your eyes" isn't enough to enforce a patent. Frankly, I'm sick of seeing patent applications where the thing being claimed isn't a design at all, but a vague description of a whole class of products that share some basic characteristics.
For each project you could generate a parser for a new programming language with procedurally generated characteristics, and use that to write your program. For example, it could make up a object oriented language where all variable names are required to be nonalphanumeric, and all of the operators are letters. Or a language where every variable is really just a FIFO queue. Or a language where you have to use sockets instead of function calls, with recursion being performed via the loopback interface. Maybe there is a builtin language keyword for reading from a database connection and posting the result to a twitter feed. The possibilities are endless.
Tunnels of Doom baby. Gaming has never reached those giddy heights since. I had a floppy disk expansion box for that sucker. Not just procedural dungeons, but loadable scenarios and save games.
I also think it's funny that being off only 3 orders of magnitude is considered a "pretty good" model. It was like our "pretty good" model of light propagation pre-Einstein; the math just didn't work out.
Just because you can't read the traffic in a packet sniffer doesn't mean it's secure, and NMAP doesn't always tell the story because port-knocking is a thing.
MIcrosoft isn't a closed system; they have to deal with unpredictable interactions with third-party software in addition to the number of possible states their own software could be in. Critical systems like a car are just designed differently. There isn't going to be third-party software running on the automatic transmission controller. That being said, OTA updates to vehicle firmware is second only to ATM's in terms of its attractiveness both to criminals and government agencies. I can only say beware.
If you read the original story, he has already been suspended three times prior to this incident. You'll get a laugh out of the reasons for the other suspensions as well.
"We understand the value of encryption and the importance of security,"
No, they don't. The hearings regarding the rollout of healthcare.gov provided clear evidence of that. At best, you could say they care about their own security.
I can't imagine where someone would have gotten the idea to put explosives on a flying drone. It would take a very sick mind to design such a thing, to say nothing of unleashing it on civilians outside a combat zone. The very notion is vicious and cowardly---we are seeing the new face of evil in our modern era. Is there no end to what violent extremists will do?
They are the problem if their IP's are flagged due to abuse. I doubt Comcast will address it before your term is up, but who knows. In that case, it's either use a smart host (which Comcast itself may offer) or switch ISP's and terminate the contract. If Comcast does not address spammy senders, then unfortunately their customers end up being collateral damage. My advice is move your server stuff to a cloud service at the earliest opportunity. My second advice is to never host an MTA yourself. I am saying both of these things from personal experience, especially if you are not familiar with the reputation databases. The internet is slowly turning into a @(#@ war zone and MTA's are in the trenches with the hot lead whizzing overhead. If you wanna stay in the trenches that's fine, but better grab a helmet.
Incorrect. They are not a simple intercept station. From reading the article, these appear to be airborne Stingrays. In other words, they initiate communication with many phones in a geographic area in order to trick them into authenticating with their equipment as though it's an actual cell tower. There's no reason to use these for ordinary law enforcement wiretaps; they can simply get a wiretrap warrant and go to the phone company. Stingray's largely bypass the subpoena process, and so do not have the same reporting requirements. They also scoop up lots of data that would not ordinarily be available in a legal wiretap, such as other phone conversations in the vicinity, which are still collected incidentally.
The main reason for using these is if you want to wiretap someone, but you have no idea what phone they are using, so you grab all the phones in an area and force them to use your equipment as a base station. Then you sift through the conversations until you find the person you're looking for. In other words, a general warrant. It's the electronic equivalent of what they did in Boston after the marathon bombing; door-to-door searches etc. It's understandable why they would want to keep that sort of thing a secret. If they're doing it a lot, it would make voters extremely unhappy. The same sort of thing is theoretically possible by going through the company, but they would have to get a court to authorize it on a general population.
That's fair to say. However, the 1934 Communications Act is a great deal more narrow in construction than the First Amendment, while simultaneously being much more wordy. Simplicity is _powerful_. As an aside (and not directly to your point), I do not have my right to speech because the Constitution provided it. The Constitution merely acknowledged a human right which already existed. The Constitution prohibits the U.S. government (which was formed upon condition of accepting this right) from abridging it. That's an important difference.
This particular issue is being driven by a relatively small number of very powerful stakeholders who are heavily invested both in the public sector and in politics generally. While bypassing Congress might seem expedient, I would argue you have a much better shot at getting actual "neutrality" with more eyes on the legislation, rather than a few. With regard to what Wheeler is proposing, I agree it's bad. The WH has the ability to make it a LOT worse, with almost no one knowing anything about it until the thing is done. The 1996 Act wasn't perfect, but it did a lot of really good things. It shows what Congress is capable of doing, when they are willing.
It's actually very difficult to determine what the President is personally responsible for. Very _difficult_, indeed. I will leave it at that.
BTW, I didn't say programming. I said building, as in approving project timelines, setting functional requirements, determining and accepting liability for known defects. The President's public appearances led me and many others to believe he was deeply involved, up to the point it became clear that it was a mess, which was after the go-live. Then I read news reports about how he hadn't talked to Sebelius about it for a long time, and so was out of the loop. Very strange. As was Henry Chao's testimony at the Oversight Committee.
In any case, he would not be personally responsible for any failures resulting in future rule-making either, since others would simply be implementing the specifics of his vision, not he personally. He isn't an _expert_ after all. However, given that FCC put a temporary hold on their rule-making process after his announcement, it seems clear the President hasn't been communicating his plans fully with FCC. That suggests an edict is coming, since if he had solicited their input they might have had a heads up he was planning to do this and would not have wasted all of that effort on a public comment and review period.
But believe what you will. You will have to live with the result, same as I.
Obamacare project managers put the website into production knowing they had only 60% functionality and a broken security model, to the point where they had to sign an addendum absolving the federal contractor from liability. Polling officials can't even calibrate a voting machine touch screen correctly in some cases. Many people believe you shouldn't even have to provide any identification to vote, as it theoretically disenfranchises people who can't afford IDs. Good luck implementing online voting.
Actually, in most cases a DLP is a "blinking light box" and that's about it. The CISO guy can walk into the cold server room, hmmmm to himself and feel warm all over watching the lights blink, then check his little box and go grab a frappi.
All an HR guy who can't stop clicking @#$t has to do is log into the corporate VPN and download a password-protected Excel file with social security numbers to his virus-infected laptop and away we go. The fancy blinking light box will be no match for the clever Excel encryption, but the keylogger on said laptop will have no such problem. All ur ssn's r belong 2 us. Millions of dollars of security down the toilet. Grown men throwing tantrums. Hair loss. Class-action settlements. Lifelock commercials. Next time we will do better. In accordance with established best practices and under vigorous, relentless oversight, we will buy a much bigger blinking light box.
Slashdot Mirror
"It holds a smart phone in front of your eyes" isn't enough to enforce a patent. Frankly, I'm sick of seeing patent applications where the thing being claimed isn't a design at all, but a vague description of a whole class of products that share some basic characteristics.
For each project you could generate a parser for a new programming language with procedurally generated characteristics, and use that to write your program. For example, it could make up a object oriented language where all variable names are required to be nonalphanumeric, and all of the operators are letters. Or a language where every variable is really just a FIFO queue. Or a language where you have to use sockets instead of function calls, with recursion being performed via the loopback interface. Maybe there is a builtin language keyword for reading from a database connection and posting the result to a twitter feed. The possibilities are endless.
Just think how big a dungeon you can fit in 16 GB.
Tunnels of Doom baby. Gaming has never reached those giddy heights since. I had a floppy disk expansion box for that sucker. Not just procedural dungeons, but loadable scenarios and save games.
I also think it's funny that being off only 3 orders of magnitude is considered a "pretty good" model. It was like our "pretty good" model of light propagation pre-Einstein; the math just didn't work out.
Except if the carrier forces the update. Which happens, regardless of what you attempt to do or not do.
The problem is, I can't tell whether you're joking.
Just because you can't read the traffic in a packet sniffer doesn't mean it's secure, and NMAP doesn't always tell the story because port-knocking is a thing.
MIcrosoft isn't a closed system; they have to deal with unpredictable interactions with third-party software in addition to the number of possible states their own software could be in. Critical systems like a car are just designed differently. There isn't going to be third-party software running on the automatic transmission controller. That being said, OTA updates to vehicle firmware is second only to ATM's in terms of its attractiveness both to criminals and government agencies. I can only say beware.
That has to be one of the best comments I have ever read on Slashdot.
Well, in Saudi Arabia it is death by beheading.
If you read the original story, he has already been suspended three times prior to this incident. You'll get a laugh out of the reasons for the other suspensions as well.
"We understand the value of encryption and the importance of security,"
No, they don't. The hearings regarding the rollout of healthcare.gov provided clear evidence of that. At best, you could say they care about their own security.
I can't imagine where someone would have gotten the idea to put explosives on a flying drone. It would take a very sick mind to design such a thing, to say nothing of unleashing it on civilians outside a combat zone. The very notion is vicious and cowardly---we are seeing the new face of evil in our modern era. Is there no end to what violent extremists will do?
Chinese remainder theorem
You forgot the part about cutting your utility costs by 90% using this one weird trick.
Apparently the red X has a *totally* different connotation on dating sites.
To get dates you would need an RTC, but they come in several form factors.
They're remaking Hunt the Wumpus. It's called Evolve.
They are the problem if their IP's are flagged due to abuse. I doubt Comcast will address it before your term is up, but who knows. In that case, it's either use a smart host (which Comcast itself may offer) or switch ISP's and terminate the contract. If Comcast does not address spammy senders, then unfortunately their customers end up being collateral damage. My advice is move your server stuff to a cloud service at the earliest opportunity. My second advice is to never host an MTA yourself. I am saying both of these things from personal experience, especially if you are not familiar with the reputation databases. The internet is slowly turning into a @(#@ war zone and MTA's are in the trenches with the hot lead whizzing overhead. If you wanna stay in the trenches that's fine, but better grab a helmet.
Incorrect. They are not a simple intercept station. From reading the article, these appear to be airborne Stingrays. In other words, they initiate communication with many phones in a geographic area in order to trick them into authenticating with their equipment as though it's an actual cell tower. There's no reason to use these for ordinary law enforcement wiretaps; they can simply get a wiretrap warrant and go to the phone company. Stingray's largely bypass the subpoena process, and so do not have the same reporting requirements. They also scoop up lots of data that would not ordinarily be available in a legal wiretap, such as other phone conversations in the vicinity, which are still collected incidentally. The main reason for using these is if you want to wiretap someone, but you have no idea what phone they are using, so you grab all the phones in an area and force them to use your equipment as a base station. Then you sift through the conversations until you find the person you're looking for. In other words, a general warrant. It's the electronic equivalent of what they did in Boston after the marathon bombing; door-to-door searches etc. It's understandable why they would want to keep that sort of thing a secret. If they're doing it a lot, it would make voters extremely unhappy. The same sort of thing is theoretically possible by going through the company, but they would have to get a court to authorize it on a general population.
That's fair to say. However, the 1934 Communications Act is a great deal more narrow in construction than the First Amendment, while simultaneously being much more wordy. Simplicity is _powerful_. As an aside (and not directly to your point), I do not have my right to speech because the Constitution provided it. The Constitution merely acknowledged a human right which already existed. The Constitution prohibits the U.S. government (which was formed upon condition of accepting this right) from abridging it. That's an important difference. This particular issue is being driven by a relatively small number of very powerful stakeholders who are heavily invested both in the public sector and in politics generally. While bypassing Congress might seem expedient, I would argue you have a much better shot at getting actual "neutrality" with more eyes on the legislation, rather than a few. With regard to what Wheeler is proposing, I agree it's bad. The WH has the ability to make it a LOT worse, with almost no one knowing anything about it until the thing is done. The 1996 Act wasn't perfect, but it did a lot of really good things. It shows what Congress is capable of doing, when they are willing.
It's actually very difficult to determine what the President is personally responsible for. Very _difficult_, indeed. I will leave it at that. BTW, I didn't say programming. I said building, as in approving project timelines, setting functional requirements, determining and accepting liability for known defects. The President's public appearances led me and many others to believe he was deeply involved, up to the point it became clear that it was a mess, which was after the go-live. Then I read news reports about how he hadn't talked to Sebelius about it for a long time, and so was out of the loop. Very strange. As was Henry Chao's testimony at the Oversight Committee. In any case, he would not be personally responsible for any failures resulting in future rule-making either, since others would simply be implementing the specifics of his vision, not he personally. He isn't an _expert_ after all. However, given that FCC put a temporary hold on their rule-making process after his announcement, it seems clear the President hasn't been communicating his plans fully with FCC. That suggests an edict is coming, since if he had solicited their input they might have had a heads up he was planning to do this and would not have wasted all of that effort on a public comment and review period. But believe what you will. You will have to live with the result, same as I.
Obamacare project managers put the website into production knowing they had only 60% functionality and a broken security model, to the point where they had to sign an addendum absolving the federal contractor from liability. Polling officials can't even calibrate a voting machine touch screen correctly in some cases. Many people believe you shouldn't even have to provide any identification to vote, as it theoretically disenfranchises people who can't afford IDs. Good luck implementing online voting.
Actually, in most cases a DLP is a "blinking light box" and that's about it. The CISO guy can walk into the cold server room, hmmmm to himself and feel warm all over watching the lights blink, then check his little box and go grab a frappi. All an HR guy who can't stop clicking @#$t has to do is log into the corporate VPN and download a password-protected Excel file with social security numbers to his virus-infected laptop and away we go. The fancy blinking light box will be no match for the clever Excel encryption, but the keylogger on said laptop will have no such problem. All ur ssn's r belong 2 us. Millions of dollars of security down the toilet. Grown men throwing tantrums. Hair loss. Class-action settlements. Lifelock commercials. Next time we will do better. In accordance with established best practices and under vigorous, relentless oversight, we will buy a much bigger blinking light box.