Ah yes, your periodic flavor of Microsoft schizophrenia... Force people to pay subscription for Office, push ads in every nook and cranny of your OS, make more product lineups no one cares for, be the first to introduce hated intrusive privacy destroying telemetry features right on the core of Windows, use some of the dirtiest tactics on the book to fool costumers into upgrading their OS version to the latest... I've never seen such an impressive implosion showcase.
They took a sample of old people and separated those who drank artificially sweetened drinks not taking anything else in consideration - lifestyle, diets, etc. It's weak correlation that could end up disproven in the long run. This is not something worth publishing.
Anyone who thinks Apple cares about recycling is completely blind to what is really happening behind the scenes.
Not only Apple does not recycle crap, they also are actively spending money via lobbying to kill stuff like the right to repair bill which would help independent repair shops to fix iPhones, Macs and whatnot and prolong their lives. The "official repair" Apple does usually ammounts to throwing away easily repairable units to force costumers to buy refurbished models or newer ones, and they are constantly pushing towards strategies to block independent repair efforts with stuff like error 53 and the more recent software blocking of fingerprint reader replacement on the iPhone 7.
With crap like eliminating "legacy ports" like the headphone jack due to them being "corageous", they've effectively pushed more bluetooth headsets and more dongles into the market which has even more toxic and non-recyclable materials that will be purchased in greater number and will be replaced or lost in a more constant rate, instead of regular headphones that requires less electronic parts.
But the company couldn't care less as long as they are making truckloads of money, which is something most corporations do anyways. It's just damn insulting that they keep trying to push this bullshit and that parts of the press swallow it whole. F*cking predatory company that keeps feeding on public misinformation.
It's known that there are no easy ways of disassembling and reusing old phones component parts to make new ones because it just costs too much more to recover whatever materials were used, but they have no qualms on feeding on regular costumers lack of knowledge on this to paint themselves as a good company that is trying to do "something" about it. Protip for those who don't know about this: it'll result in nothing, and they already know it. It's a token effort. There are no good ways of harvesting raw materials for eWaste to make new components in a financially viable manner, because if there was everyone would be doing it.
Currently, anyone that is well informed or an active part of the problem know full well that the best way of generating less waste is to use electronics for as long as possible. If smartphone companies really wanted to generate less electronic waste, they'd change release schedules and development time to force consumers to keep their damn phones for a longer period of time, plus do as much as possible to keep older units working instead of making them useless after a certain ammount of OS updates. Another way is to make the architecture more open and standardized so that electronics can be used in multiple ways - like old desktops and laptops that you can install some Linux distro and use as an HTPC or something. Of course, Apple stuff is the harderst type of hardware to do something like that.
The only thing Apple really has on their favor is that even older laptops and desktops retain some value in the used market, and some of it's users keeps their stuff even years after they purchased it. But make no mistake. If Apple could find a way to avoid that without a huge fanbase backlash, they would.
I don't see why regulatory agencies shouldn't be able to test products.... IF they are doing it properly though.
Because if Subway is right on this one, and it sounds like they are, they have all the rights to sue CBC for it, and this isn't only to the benefit of Subway, but also to the benefit of the public. https://arstechnica.com/scienc...
Basically, if the ArsTechnica article is right, CBC used a bad method to jump into a conclusion and premeditated an article about it for some reason. That reason could be pure incompetence or perhaps something worse, but it certainly damaged the fast food chain reputation for no good reason.
Rebuilding that sort of reputation can be extremely costly, and the fast food chain could lose far more than 210 million for it. Unfounded rumors usually already cost far more than that for other fast food chains, a regulatory agency going out of it's way to publish something like that can be far more damaging.
Sometimes, I dunno what Microsoft is thinking. RT is still plenty fresh on people's minds, Windows Store is a complete failure both to attract an userbase and to attract developers (despite being shoved down people's throats since Windows 8.0), most of the complaints about Windows 10 right now have exactly to do with privacy, telemetry and the OS basically working as spyware, I think lots of people still remember how Microsoft tried to forcibly scale back and cut down free OneDrive plans, the ad everywhere scandal is still plenty recent, and yet they come up with a new product line that possibly combines ALL of those in one big shitcake.
It's like someone there just though: Hey guyze, let's pick up all the most notorious and recent complaints about Windows, pack it up in a single product, and see if it sells! Genius product development at work here!
And they are trying to push this in against a device that had none of those issues in the past. I know plenty of people don't like Chromebooks a whole lot, but if anything, it had humble prototype like starts and has been on a steady development frame that works plenty well for schools and whatnot.
Eh, I don't buy the argument. If you are fool enough to let your devices fully open for anyone to have access to using voice commands, I doubt any serious court in the country would apply any reasonable fines to a company that chose to run a specific script for their ads.
Again, if anything BK did a huge public service here by showing how easy it is to exploit always listening devices without causing any significant damages.
People who are angry at BK or Google should take a deep look into the whole thing and see if it was really a good choice for themselves to buy a device that is always listening for audio input, without any protection and any security measures, not to take random audio cues as valid ones to execute commands.
We can't keep trying to scapegoat every single brand or business who takes advantage of flaws of stuff you purchased yourself knowing full well how it worked beforehand.
Already we're letting politicians give away all protections that we have regarding privacy and data collection, and people are still voluntarity buying into scams like always listening devices for the most frivolous reasons.
But go ahead and spend a truckload of money on legal action that will essencially solve nothing. Because vulnerabilities on these always listening devices will always come up, and BK is the most innocuous usage of it I can imagine.
Wanna do something to make a difference? Take your fucking Google Home, Amazon Alexa or whatever device and return it or chuck it into the garbage bin. Because the problem here is not with one BK advertisement campaign or because of Google Home - the problem is with the entire concept of having an Internet connected device that has an always listening and always dialing back device. If an advertisement agency can do this much and it's angering this many people, just you wait 'till hackers with clear bad intentions start exploiting those for their own profit.
What this ammounts to is the same issue several politicians have: there are too many people in representative positions that are completely disconnected with reality and will rule and give justifications for their actions that are incompatible with the reality of the nation they are supposed to represent.
If all we have are old rich white priviledged people in power, the interests that will be addressed are those of old rich white priviledged people. Of course for him Internet is something that can be optional because he doesn't care about getting a job, getting education for the modern era, dealing with everyday problems the plebs needs to, nor care for adapting himself to a modern age he has no need to care for. He can spend whatever is left of his decrepit life with family and friends he already has, spending all the money he has exploited from others and whatnot.
Give me a job like his, a salary like his, a routine like his and a life expectancy like his and I also wouldn't care about having an Internet connection or not. It's just too sad that we have congressmen who cannot see beyond their own needs and their own personal perspectives. It's alarming how many politicians cannot get out of their own bubble to reflect on what is most important for his constituents. Corruption and lobbying aside, we're looking at bigger cultural problems here where we cannot elect people who are able to represent adequately.
Cases like his are why culture, law and policies get pushed back to half a century ago and never progress. The rule of a priviledged minority disconnected with reality. The problem this time is that we're on the frontier of a paradigm shift, and if we can't get law and policies to follow the significant changes that are happening around us, we'll get trampled by it. This is akim to the nuclear age. We have an extremely powerful tool in our hands that is about to be misused and subverted by the wishes of a powerful minority because people in power have no idea of the true consequences of mishandling it.
How does an inmate goes about building a computer "from parts" as if you could join copper pipes, rocks and whatnot together and magically transform it into a computer? That's not how it works! xD
Did the inmates have access to electronics recycling centers or something? Were people smuggling RAM chips, CPUs and whatnot inside somehow? This story is so weird...
I'll give people the benefit of doubt, but it sounds like a whole ton of commenters here are going on with guesswork.
First of all, no, it's not easy in any way shape or form to create a rogue touch ID reader that would "send signals" allowing the iPhone 7 to be unlocked. It'd already be plenty hard for someone to open up a phone and replace it surreptiously, let alone coming up with new hardware that would be compatible.
Basically, it works like a very specific and proprietary camera/microscope. It detects fine detailed fingerprint information, converts it into code and sends it to the SoC to be processed via software. Nothing is processed on the button itself, and even if it was, you wouldn't be able to easily figure out what it did - or it'd be unsecure by definition.
But again, the hardware is very proprietary. You'd probably need insider knowledge of production to even come close to making something that would work like it, and it'd be expensive as hell to reproduce one. The companies that makes these things have secretive processes that not only would be incredibly hard to figure out, it'd be outright impossible to reproduce without proper technologies.
Do people even realize how much easier it'd be to just chop up someone's finger and bypass the whole thing anyways?
Even if you couldn't go to such extremes, it'd be easier for hackers and malicious actors to try to reproduce an entire detailed human finger complete with ridges, pores and whatnot (at it's current stage) than creating some rogue device that could bypass the security enclave somehow. And you cannot retrieve information from previous fingerprints used for authentication because they are encrypted in the phone storage, not in the reader.
The only likely scenario where Touch ID could be used to steal fingerprints, depending a lot on how it works, would be to use an original unit modified to store readouts, and then creating new hardware that would send those into the system. But that's quite unlikely... if not outright impossible. Again, it depends on how exactly the reader works. Note though how no one every did anything like this, because it just doesn't make sense. iPhones will always have easier vulnerabilities to explore to retrieve data.
It's always good to note though that fingerprint sensors should NEVER be used as the sole authentication method if you have sensitive information inside the phone. Because, like I said, it's a matter of finding a way to make a very detailed reproduction of your finger. With 3D print technology and camera technology always improving, it'll be doable at some point in time. It was already done for the iPhone 6, though not something that just anyone could do: http://www.cultofmac.com/29688...
Apple is already facing a class action lawsuit regarding the so called Error 53, related to iPhone 6 bricking the phone if the Touch ID was replaced, so it really doesn't look good for them to repeat the whole deal for the iPhone 7. https://www.macrumors.com/2016... Australia's consumer protection agency also just filled a lawsuit: http://www.ubergizmo.com/2017/...
And you know, the company has backtracked because the very same excuses some commenters are making here were not enoug
Simple question, is this an optional feature or is it being forced on users? If it's optional, no problems... anyone who's creeped by it can just ignore. If it's either opt-out or forced, then the strategy is obvious: to profit from user conversations and sell ads.
I mean, what their aim is, not what they actually are. Seems to also be the target of many other chinese giants, like Le Eco with it's crazy event.
I can't imagine working conditions and whatnot being good at all... though US based companies probably don't have it any better. But Xiaomi is among the companies that have been expanding their lines of electronics at an alarming rate, and really coming up with some amazing stuff for the prices... smartphones, drones, sports cameras, you name it.
Smartphones are plenty decent, they have models that goes right up to the mid-ranger flagship killers of last year. I've heard people saying nice stuff about their drones too, though they probably are nowhere near DJI quality. The Yi cameras sound like a very good proposition versus GoPro. And also, the whole bezel less thing about this year models of Android phones? Xiaomi Mi Mix lead this up, and it's still a very attractive piece... even though you just can't find it to buy.
It was out november last year chinese market only with limited units, but it had most specs big brand smartphones this year have, and their bezel less technology still is more advanced in some areas than what's coming out now.
At this point, I dunno if Ajit really thinks the entire US population are composed solely on completely ignorant people with low IQs and pretends he doesn't know better by trying to come up with this cringeworthy "I actually know nothing about what I'm talking" poorly thought out excuse, or if he simply is THIS dumb. Doesn't help that he has one of the most punchable faces in the universe too.
Statistics of usage have NOTHING to do with monopolistic practices. It's about choice. Everyone and anyone who uses Google for search right now can change to another search engine if they feel uncomfortable with it. In fact, anyone reading this should do so. Go to duckduckgo.com, install their plugin, and you'll never end up at google.com again.
As for ISPs, it is the reality for tons and tons of people that they only have one or two choices where they live, and most of the times these companies will collude on pricing, schemes like data collection and whatnot to exploit their users further leaving them no choice but to accept whatever crap that is thrown at consumers.
I don't even have to live in the US to understand this. Moving out of your home to another state or area just so you can change providers is quite obviously way more challenging, when not outright impossible, than typing a different URL in the search bar, and it's useless to do so when it's expected that ISPs will copy the worst practices from one another when they realize how profitable it could be for them.
Furthermore, the role of the FCC and the FTC should be to protect consumer's rights, not to side with companies to let them unfairly profit from consumers even more than they already do. If a law or regulation is not comprehensive or fair enough, you first draft and pass one that is better for consumers overall before killing what little protection we could have.
You guys can stop worrying about terrorism and war in US's near future... if this is an example of what politicians have to say after majorly screwing up the entire US population so that ISPs can effectively spy on all of you, the US won't need enemies to implode itself. And it's not that I'm criticizing... I live in a country which was imploded by politicians corruption just as well.
It's dying already, but Microsoft doesn't NEED to put anything out of it's misery...
The truth is that despite Windows Mobile completely failing to compete against Android or iOS, they did manage to get a bit of the low end market, particularly in a few developing countries.
You know, I had a Lumia 1020, and despite all it's pitfalls and problems (which was why I jumped to Android right after it), it still is a perfectly functional phone.
Apps are either abandoned, outdated or alternative versions because devs refuses to work in ports that will have such a low userbase, the promises of the platform getting better overtime particularly from rabid Microsoft fans gets tiring pretty fast, community is kinda toxic, and rather than a matter of being third to receive every new app (like Android users expect to be second), it's a matter of not expecting to receive anything new at all.
On the upside though, it is a solid, relatively secure and locked down platform. The basics of what most people use is there, even if sometimes in an incomplete or outdated shape or form (apps like WhatsApp, Facebook, Google suite among others). For a time, there was some pretty interesting Microsoft experimentation around the camera and some other stuff. It's an interesting route to go with for those wanting an alternative platform that forces you to keep things to a minimum (something between Symbian and iOS).
Microsoft will just keep rolling with it up to whatever time they finally come out with the next gen of Surface/Continuum phones, if that ever happens knowing how slow and hesitant Microsoft is. And then, they'll promptly abandon Windows Mobile 10 just like they did it with Windows Mobile 7.
Would I recommend the platform to anyone these days? Nope. It's moribund. Flies and vultures are flying over it. Even the market that the platform had some penetration is shrinking fast. Android is fast becoming the king of low end market, and chinese brands will quickly take the position over the coming years, if they don't take the mid and high end position too.
Microsoft "graced" some of the developing countries with it's presence in the low end smartphone market, but they remain absent as a company with a functional, official product line for some reason (they don't bring Surface products to Brazil officially, their online store stuff directly links to some other retail store filled with outdated 3rd party crap, it has nothing about new stuff like Hololens or Surface Studio, they pretty much treat the country as dumping grounds for cheap outdated crap).
As a tech brand, Microsoft and several others failed to catch on in developing countries because they keep shoving outdated stuff to us whilst ignoring that we're plenty aware of what's going on outside the country. That is, for hardware... software like Windows and Office probably still are kings in install base, even if most of it is pirated. Meanwhile, chinese brands among a few others just knows that in order to build traction in developing countries, you need a presence here and you need to release your latest brand new stuff in order to have real presence, even if most of the country don't have the money to pay for those. It's about brand presence.
Back on topic, I think Microsoft needs Windows 10 Mobile to keep going 'till it dies of old age not to add insult to injury. It'll already be bad enough to make the shift for another mobile version, or the full Windows 10 version that works on mobile with Continuum, by itself. But if they just kill Windows 10 Mobile out of nowhere abandoning the few people who are still hanging on a thread out there, then they'll lose even those. If we were to backtrack sometime ago, truth is, Microsoft should've stopped in Windows Mobile 8.1. It should've gone from there directly to Windows 10 without the Mobile part, with a new Surface Phone and the Continuum thing. But they didn't, and lost the opportunity. Remediation time.
This sounds like a huge oversimplification of the problems, if not outright scapegoating.
OBVIOUSLY it had nothing to do with Steve Jobs' post (which is 7 yrs old now), and I also don't think it not being on iOS had anything to do with it too. Just look from the market perspective. If Flash was any good and worked well on anything other than iOS, it would still have market domination and would still thrive on the web, regardless of it working on iOS or not.
I dunno why people keep hammering on Apple and iOS, but let's not forget that worldwide iOS doesn't have even 15% of the market while Android holds up 80% or more. If you have a standard or app that does not work on iOS does that automagically mean you are bound to fail? Of course not. That's a very naive when not brainwashed way of seeing things. It'd work on Android, Windows PCs, Macs, Linux... basically any web connected device that wasn't an iPad or iPhone.
Flash killed Flash, and no, it was not because Adobe gracefully accepted it's demise, it's because Flash has inherent problems that could not be solved even after over a decade of Macromedia and Adobe trying to fix. From the annoying update scheme to constant security issues, extremely inefficient runtime, how it bogged down CPUs and hogged memory, plus a bunch of other stuff, came competitive alternatives to solve most of it's problems.
It took quite a while too.
Flash was also proprietary, development of it was handled by a single company, and there was no independent analysis and control of it.
Don't get me wrong, Flash was great back in it's early days, no doubt it's the foundation of many great things that can be done on the Internet nowadays, and it has a place in Internet history. But the adoption and needs of modern Internet outpaced it, and we need something more robust, lightweight, open, well thought out and better adapted to today's needs.
Back then when Jobs made his post, I commented on how a whole lot of websites still used Flash, how I knew that wasn't a perfect scenario, but how Jobs' statement would essencially change nothing in several years. I stand by my comment. We're now getting close to a decade after the fact, and we're finally seeing most of big services going for HTML5 and other technologies. But there are still websites out there using Flash, and fundamentally, HTML5 can't do everything Flash did - you need other plugins for that.
And here's the thing: an entire subculture died with Flash. As HTML5 cannot completely replace it, and other technologies are either not as intuitive, or depends on plugin install, and never had the wide adoption and experimental nature of Flash, we don't see stuff like those weird flash animations and games nowadays much anymore.
Is it just me or there has been a whole number of corporations and businesses that are basically the epitome of anti-free software as they can be becoming platinum, gold, silver and whatnot members of the Linux Foundation?
Just auction it off to private corp or at least some country that cares a bit more about science. Of course, if we have any hope of surviving a trip to another planet and finding out ways of doing so, the ISS is an invaluable asset that should keep going... but as long as we have people in power who cannot understand simple concepts like that, it's just better to let other people take control and give it a better shot.
Slashdot Mirror
Ah yes, your periodic flavor of Microsoft schizophrenia...
Force people to pay subscription for Office, push ads in every nook and cranny of your OS, make more product lineups no one cares for, be the first to introduce hated intrusive privacy destroying telemetry features right on the core of Windows, use some of the dirtiest tactics on the book to fool costumers into upgrading their OS version to the latest... I've never seen such an impressive implosion showcase.
RT, only shittier, and partially banked by selling your data.
NOTHING has been proved. Not even "may be tied".
They took a sample of old people and separated those who drank artificially sweetened drinks not taking anything else in consideration - lifestyle, diets, etc.
It's weak correlation that could end up disproven in the long run. This is not something worth publishing.
Anyone who thinks Apple cares about recycling is completely blind to what is really happening behind the scenes.
Not only Apple does not recycle crap, they also are actively spending money via lobbying to kill stuff like the right to repair bill which would help independent repair shops to fix iPhones, Macs and whatnot and prolong their lives.
The "official repair" Apple does usually ammounts to throwing away easily repairable units to force costumers to buy refurbished models or newer ones, and they are constantly pushing towards strategies to block independent repair efforts with stuff like error 53 and the more recent software blocking of fingerprint reader replacement on the iPhone 7.
With crap like eliminating "legacy ports" like the headphone jack due to them being "corageous", they've effectively pushed more bluetooth headsets and more dongles into the market which has even more toxic and non-recyclable materials that will be purchased in greater number and will be replaced or lost in a more constant rate, instead of regular headphones that requires less electronic parts.
But the company couldn't care less as long as they are making truckloads of money, which is something most corporations do anyways. It's just damn insulting that they keep trying to push this bullshit and that parts of the press swallow it whole. F*cking predatory company that keeps feeding on public misinformation.
It's known that there are no easy ways of disassembling and reusing old phones component parts to make new ones because it just costs too much more to recover whatever materials were used, but they have no qualms on feeding on regular costumers lack of knowledge on this to paint themselves as a good company that is trying to do "something" about it. Protip for those who don't know about this: it'll result in nothing, and they already know it. It's a token effort. There are no good ways of harvesting raw materials for eWaste to make new components in a financially viable manner, because if there was everyone would be doing it.
Currently, anyone that is well informed or an active part of the problem know full well that the best way of generating less waste is to use electronics for as long as possible. If smartphone companies really wanted to generate less electronic waste, they'd change release schedules and development time to force consumers to keep their damn phones for a longer period of time, plus do as much as possible to keep older units working instead of making them useless after a certain ammount of OS updates. Another way is to make the architecture more open and standardized so that electronics can be used in multiple ways - like old desktops and laptops that you can install some Linux distro and use as an HTPC or something. Of course, Apple stuff is the harderst type of hardware to do something like that.
The only thing Apple really has on their favor is that even older laptops and desktops retain some value in the used market, and some of it's users keeps their stuff even years after they purchased it. But make no mistake. If Apple could find a way to avoid that without a huge fanbase backlash, they would.
I don't see why regulatory agencies shouldn't be able to test products.... IF they are doing it properly though.
Because if Subway is right on this one, and it sounds like they are, they have all the rights to sue CBC for it, and this isn't only to the benefit of Subway, but also to the benefit of the public.
https://arstechnica.com/scienc...
Basically, if the ArsTechnica article is right, CBC used a bad method to jump into a conclusion and premeditated an article about it for some reason. That reason could be pure incompetence or perhaps something worse, but it certainly damaged the fast food chain reputation for no good reason.
Rebuilding that sort of reputation can be extremely costly, and the fast food chain could lose far more than 210 million for it. Unfounded rumors usually already cost far more than that for other fast food chains, a regulatory agency going out of it's way to publish something like that can be far more damaging.
We'll see how it goes.
Because RT worked so so well AMIRITE? :P
Sometimes, I dunno what Microsoft is thinking. RT is still plenty fresh on people's minds, Windows Store is a complete failure both to attract an userbase and to attract developers (despite being shoved down people's throats since Windows 8.0), most of the complaints about Windows 10 right now have exactly to do with privacy, telemetry and the OS basically working as spyware, I think lots of people still remember how Microsoft tried to forcibly scale back and cut down free OneDrive plans, the ad everywhere scandal is still plenty recent, and yet they come up with a new product line that possibly combines ALL of those in one big shitcake.
It's like someone there just though: Hey guyze, let's pick up all the most notorious and recent complaints about Windows, pack it up in a single product, and see if it sells! Genius product development at work here!
And they are trying to push this in against a device that had none of those issues in the past. I know plenty of people don't like Chromebooks a whole lot, but if anything, it had humble prototype like starts and has been on a steady development frame that works plenty well for schools and whatnot.
Eh, I don't buy the argument. If you are fool enough to let your devices fully open for anyone to have access to using voice commands, I doubt any serious court in the country would apply any reasonable fines to a company that chose to run a specific script for their ads.
Again, if anything BK did a huge public service here by showing how easy it is to exploit always listening devices without causing any significant damages.
People who are angry at BK or Google should take a deep look into the whole thing and see if it was really a good choice for themselves to buy a device that is always listening for audio input, without any protection and any security measures, not to take random audio cues as valid ones to execute commands.
We can't keep trying to scapegoat every single brand or business who takes advantage of flaws of stuff you purchased yourself knowing full well how it worked beforehand.
Already we're letting politicians give away all protections that we have regarding privacy and data collection, and people are still voluntarity buying into scams like always listening devices for the most frivolous reasons.
But go ahead and spend a truckload of money on legal action that will essencially solve nothing. Because vulnerabilities on these always listening devices will always come up, and BK is the most innocuous usage of it I can imagine.
Wanna do something to make a difference? Take your fucking Google Home, Amazon Alexa or whatever device and return it or chuck it into the garbage bin. Because the problem here is not with one BK advertisement campaign or because of Google Home - the problem is with the entire concept of having an Internet connected device that has an always listening and always dialing back device. If an advertisement agency can do this much and it's angering this many people, just you wait 'till hackers with clear bad intentions start exploiting those for their own profit.
What this ammounts to is the same issue several politicians have: there are too many people in representative positions that are completely disconnected with reality and will rule and give justifications for their actions that are incompatible with the reality of the nation they are supposed to represent.
If all we have are old rich white priviledged people in power, the interests that will be addressed are those of old rich white priviledged people. Of course for him Internet is something that can be optional because he doesn't care about getting a job, getting education for the modern era, dealing with everyday problems the plebs needs to, nor care for adapting himself to a modern age he has no need to care for. He can spend whatever is left of his decrepit life with family and friends he already has, spending all the money he has exploited from others and whatnot.
Give me a job like his, a salary like his, a routine like his and a life expectancy like his and I also wouldn't care about having an Internet connection or not. It's just too sad that we have congressmen who cannot see beyond their own needs and their own personal perspectives. It's alarming how many politicians cannot get out of their own bubble to reflect on what is most important for his constituents. Corruption and lobbying aside, we're looking at bigger cultural problems here where we cannot elect people who are able to represent adequately.
Cases like his are why culture, law and policies get pushed back to half a century ago and never progress. The rule of a priviledged minority disconnected with reality. The problem this time is that we're on the frontier of a paradigm shift, and if we can't get law and policies to follow the significant changes that are happening around us, we'll get trampled by it. This is akim to the nuclear age. We have an extremely powerful tool in our hands that is about to be misused
and subverted by the wishes of a powerful minority because people in power have no idea of the true consequences of mishandling it.
I wanna see a scenario where all the companies involved go for a counter suit and refuses to settle.
https://www.file-extensions.or...
How does an inmate goes about building a computer "from parts" as if you could join copper pipes, rocks and whatnot together and magically transform it into a computer? That's not how it works! xD
Did the inmates have access to electronics recycling centers or something? Were people smuggling RAM chips, CPUs and whatnot inside somehow? This story is so weird...
As should be possible to do by any individual who is forced into arbitration, not just huge powerful companies like Alphabet/Google.
Going there to download some sick axelfoley.mod
I'll give people the benefit of doubt, but it sounds like a whole ton of commenters here are going on with guesswork.
First of all, no, it's not easy in any way shape or form to create a rogue touch ID reader that would "send signals" allowing the iPhone 7 to be unlocked.
It'd already be plenty hard for someone to open up a phone and replace it surreptiously, let alone coming up with new hardware that would be compatible.
Do you guys even know how the TouchID reader works? Well, neither do I of course... it's proprietary. But here's an overview:
http://edition.cnn.com/2013/12...
http://edition.cnn.com/2013/09...
https://support.apple.com/en-u...
Basically, it works like a very specific and proprietary camera/microscope. It detects fine detailed fingerprint information, converts it into code and sends it to the SoC to be processed via software.
Nothing is processed on the button itself, and even if it was, you wouldn't be able to easily figure out what it did - or it'd be unsecure by definition.
But again, the hardware is very proprietary. You'd probably need insider knowledge of production to even come close to making something that would work like it, and it'd be expensive as hell to reproduce one. The companies that makes these things have secretive processes that not only would be incredibly hard to figure out, it'd be outright impossible to reproduce without proper technologies.
Do people even realize how much easier it'd be to just chop up someone's finger and bypass the whole thing anyways?
Even if you couldn't go to such extremes, it'd be easier for hackers and malicious actors to try to reproduce an entire detailed human finger complete with ridges, pores and whatnot (at it's current stage) than creating some rogue device that could bypass the security enclave somehow.
And you cannot retrieve information from previous fingerprints used for authentication because they are encrypted in the phone storage, not in the reader.
The only likely scenario where Touch ID could be used to steal fingerprints, depending a lot on how it works, would be to use an original unit modified to store readouts, and then creating new hardware that would send those into the system. But that's quite unlikely... if not outright impossible. Again, it depends on how exactly the reader works. Note though how no one every did anything like this, because it just doesn't make sense. iPhones will always have easier vulnerabilities to explore to retrieve data.
It's always good to note though that fingerprint sensors should NEVER be used as the sole authentication method if you have sensitive information inside the phone. Because, like I said, it's a matter of finding a way to make a very detailed reproduction of your finger. With 3D print technology and camera technology always improving, it'll be doable at some point in time.
It was already done for the iPhone 6, though not something that just anyone could do:
http://www.cultofmac.com/29688...
Apple is already facing a class action lawsuit regarding the so called Error 53, related to iPhone 6 bricking the phone if the Touch ID was replaced, so it really doesn't look good for them to repeat the whole deal for the iPhone 7.
https://www.macrumors.com/2016...
Australia's consumer protection agency also just filled a lawsuit:
http://www.ubergizmo.com/2017/...
And you know, the company has backtracked because the very same excuses some commenters are making here were not enoug
Simple question, is this an optional feature or is it being forced on users?
If it's optional, no problems... anyone who's creeped by it can just ignore.
If it's either opt-out or forced, then the strategy is obvious: to profit from user conversations and sell ads.
Remember when Twitter shut down access to 3rd party access?
http://www.digitaltrends.com/m...
https://www.independent.co.uk/...
http://www.idownloadblog.com/2...
http://news.softpedia.com/news...
http://www.eweek.com/developme...
I mean, what their aim is, not what they actually are.
Seems to also be the target of many other chinese giants, like Le Eco with it's crazy event.
I can't imagine working conditions and whatnot being good at all... though US based companies probably don't have it any better.
But Xiaomi is among the companies that have been expanding their lines of electronics at an alarming rate, and really coming up with some amazing stuff for the prices... smartphones, drones, sports cameras, you name it.
Smartphones are plenty decent, they have models that goes right up to the mid-ranger flagship killers of last year. I've heard people saying nice stuff about their drones too, though they probably are nowhere near DJI quality. The Yi cameras sound like a very good proposition versus GoPro. And also, the whole bezel less thing about this year models of Android phones? Xiaomi Mi Mix lead this up, and it's still a very attractive piece... even though you just can't find it to buy.
It was out november last year chinese market only with limited units, but it had most specs big brand smartphones this year have, and their bezel less technology still is more advanced in some areas than what's coming out now.
At this point, I dunno if Ajit really thinks the entire US population are composed solely on completely ignorant people with low IQs and pretends he doesn't know better by trying to come up with this cringeworthy "I actually know nothing about what I'm talking" poorly thought out excuse, or if he simply is THIS dumb. Doesn't help that he has one of the most punchable faces in the universe too.
Statistics of usage have NOTHING to do with monopolistic practices. It's about choice. Everyone and anyone who uses Google for search right now can change to another search engine if they feel uncomfortable with it. In fact, anyone reading this should do so. Go to duckduckgo.com, install their plugin, and you'll never end up at google.com again.
As for ISPs, it is the reality for tons and tons of people that they only have one or two choices where they live, and most of the times these companies will collude on pricing, schemes like data collection and whatnot to exploit their users further leaving them no choice but to accept whatever crap that is thrown at consumers.
I don't even have to live in the US to understand this. Moving out of your home to another state or area just so you can change providers is quite obviously way more challenging, when not outright impossible, than typing a different URL in the search bar, and it's useless to do so when it's expected that ISPs will copy the worst practices from one another when they realize how profitable it could be for them.
Furthermore, the role of the FCC and the FTC should be to protect consumer's rights, not to side with companies to let them unfairly profit from consumers even more than they already do. If a law or regulation is not comprehensive or fair enough, you first draft and pass one that is better for consumers overall before killing what little protection we could have.
You guys can stop worrying about terrorism and war in US's near future... if this is an example of what politicians have to say after majorly screwing up the entire US population so that ISPs can effectively spy on all of you, the US won't need enemies to implode itself. And it's not that I'm criticizing... I live in a country which was imploded by politicians corruption just as well.
Look at the f*cking thing and see how reasonable it is:
https://technet.microsoft.com/...
It's completely ridiculous. Windows 10 is basically spyware disguised as an OS at this point.
...and raise you a poorly thought out reactive measure that will make people avoid the product as the plague that it truly is.
It's dying already, but Microsoft doesn't NEED to put anything out of it's misery...
The truth is that despite Windows Mobile completely failing to compete against Android or iOS, they did manage to get a bit of the low end market, particularly in a few developing countries.
You know, I had a Lumia 1020, and despite all it's pitfalls and problems (which was why I jumped to Android right after it), it still is a perfectly functional phone.
Apps are either abandoned, outdated or alternative versions because devs refuses to work in ports that will have such a low userbase, the promises of the platform getting better overtime particularly from rabid Microsoft fans gets tiring pretty fast, community is kinda toxic, and rather than a matter of being third to receive every new app (like Android users expect to be second), it's a matter of not expecting to receive anything new at all.
On the upside though, it is a solid, relatively secure and locked down platform. The basics of what most people use is there, even if sometimes in an incomplete or outdated shape or form (apps like WhatsApp, Facebook, Google suite among others). For a time, there was some pretty interesting Microsoft experimentation around the camera and some other stuff. It's an interesting route to go with for those wanting an alternative platform that forces you to keep things to a minimum (something between Symbian and iOS).
Microsoft will just keep rolling with it up to whatever time they finally come out with the next gen of Surface/Continuum phones, if that ever happens knowing how slow and hesitant Microsoft is. And then, they'll promptly abandon Windows Mobile 10 just like they did it with Windows Mobile 7.
Would I recommend the platform to anyone these days? Nope. It's moribund. Flies and vultures are flying over it. Even the market that the platform had some penetration is shrinking fast. Android is fast becoming the king of low end market, and chinese brands will quickly take the position over the coming years, if they don't take the mid and high end position too.
Microsoft "graced" some of the developing countries with it's presence in the low end smartphone market, but they remain absent as a company with a functional, official product line for some reason (they don't bring Surface products to Brazil officially, their online store stuff directly links to some other retail store filled with outdated 3rd party crap, it has nothing about new stuff like Hololens or Surface Studio, they pretty much treat the country as dumping grounds for cheap outdated crap).
As a tech brand, Microsoft and several others failed to catch on in developing countries because they keep shoving outdated stuff to us whilst ignoring that we're plenty aware of what's going on outside the country. That is, for hardware... software like Windows and Office probably still are kings in install base, even if most of it is pirated. Meanwhile, chinese brands among a few others just knows that in order to build traction in developing countries, you need a presence here and you need to release your latest brand new stuff in order to have real presence, even if most of the country don't have the money to pay for those. It's about brand presence.
Back on topic, I think Microsoft needs Windows 10 Mobile to keep going 'till it dies of old age not to add insult to injury. It'll already be bad enough to make the shift for another mobile version, or the full Windows 10 version that works on mobile with Continuum, by itself. But if they just kill Windows 10 Mobile out of nowhere abandoning the few people who are still hanging on a thread out there, then they'll lose even those. If we were to backtrack sometime ago, truth is, Microsoft should've stopped in Windows Mobile 8.1. It should've gone from there directly to Windows 10 without the Mobile part, with a new Surface Phone and the Continuum thing. But they didn't, and lost the opportunity. Remediation time.
The CIA and the TV manufacturers are already watching you fap, why not open the priviledge to others?
This sounds like a huge oversimplification of the problems, if not outright scapegoating.
OBVIOUSLY it had nothing to do with Steve Jobs' post (which is 7 yrs old now), and I also don't think it not being on iOS had anything to do with it too.
Just look from the market perspective. If Flash was any good and worked well on anything other than iOS, it would still have market domination and would still thrive on the web, regardless of it working on iOS or not.
I dunno why people keep hammering on Apple and iOS, but let's not forget that worldwide iOS doesn't have even 15% of the market while Android holds up 80% or more. If you have a standard or app that does not work on iOS does that automagically mean you are bound to fail? Of course not. That's a very naive when not brainwashed way of seeing things. It'd work on Android, Windows PCs, Macs, Linux... basically any web connected device that wasn't an iPad or iPhone.
Flash killed Flash, and no, it was not because Adobe gracefully accepted it's demise, it's because Flash has inherent problems that could not be solved even after over a decade of Macromedia and Adobe trying to fix. From the annoying update scheme to constant security issues, extremely inefficient runtime, how it bogged down CPUs and hogged memory, plus a bunch of other stuff, came competitive alternatives to solve most of it's problems.
It took quite a while too.
Flash was also proprietary, development of it was handled by a single company, and there was no independent analysis and control of it.
Don't get me wrong, Flash was great back in it's early days, no doubt it's the foundation of many great things that can be done on the Internet nowadays, and it has a place in Internet history. But the adoption and needs of modern Internet outpaced it, and we need something more robust, lightweight, open, well thought out and better adapted to today's needs.
Back then when Jobs made his post, I commented on how a whole lot of websites still used Flash, how I knew that wasn't a perfect scenario, but how Jobs' statement would essencially change nothing in several years. I stand by my comment. We're now getting close to a decade after the fact, and we're finally seeing most of big services going for HTML5 and other technologies. But there are still websites out there using Flash, and fundamentally, HTML5 can't do everything Flash did - you need other plugins for that.
And here's the thing: an entire subculture died with Flash. As HTML5 cannot completely replace it, and other technologies are either not as intuitive, or depends on plugin install, and never had the wide adoption and experimental nature of Flash, we don't see stuff like those weird flash animations and games nowadays much anymore.
Is it just me or there has been a whole number of corporations and businesses that are basically the epitome of anti-free software as they can be becoming platinum, gold, silver and whatnot members of the Linux Foundation?
Just auction it off to private corp or at least some country that cares a bit more about science.
Of course, if we have any hope of surviving a trip to another planet and finding out ways of doing so, the ISS is an invaluable asset that should keep going... but as long as we have people in power who cannot understand simple concepts like that, it's just better to let other people take control and give it a better shot.