Apple make a pretty good bluetooth keyboard (if you like Apple's other keyboards). I really, really wish they'd allow you to attach a mouse, or even apple's own bluetooth trackpad which would perfectly allow you to do all the touch stuff.
Seriously though, the keyboard is great and pairs nicely with the iPad. The biggest problem I have experienced is that you have little or no keyboard shortcuts. Apple want you to use touch with your iPad unless you have a cursor in a text box. The other downside of a parent using the iPad as their sole computer is that there's no remote support that I'm aware of. You cannot connect to the iPad via VNC and show her how to achieve something.
Still, with the likes of AirPrint available (and you could put together a raspberry pi or other cheap computer to run airprint on her existing printer) you can achieve pretty much anything you need to for an average home user in a single, small, hard to break device.
And this seems to be the problem with the USB sticks. When I was searching it looked like you don't get hardware assisted playback with XBMC on them.
So the article seems to say they're better for media centers, yet the primary media center software wouldn't work well? The reviewer doesn't seem to say they're actually running XBMC or similar on one of the devices. If someone is running it successfully, with workable HD playback over wifi, I'd love to hear about it.
Most the reviews I saw also mentioned the wifi support was woeful, with frequent freezes. WiFi is nice, but only if it's reliable and a reliable network connection is essential for a media player.
I was really keen to buy one of these cheap sticks, and the initial specs did look good. But as I read the reviews from folk who actually own them I saw a lot of disappointment. It looks like, for now at least, the price is too cheap to deliver a reliable product.
Really you should have no concern with someone else getting your social security number. The only reason you're concerned about keeping it private is because the finance industry have misused it as a secret personal identifier for decades.
As for your credit score, that's private information created and held by private corporations. Why do you think that has any relevance to freedom of information?
Medical information is much the same. That's between you, your doctor and your insurance company. I don't think you need to provide details of medical treatments to the government, or request government permission in advance to be allowed the treatment.
SOME users experience fatigue and click themselves into deep shit, others pay attention and click themselves out of it.
How many extensions do you think the average user wants/needs? I really don't see fatigue being much of an issue with browser extensions. A user should only be seeing a couple of warnings a year.
If the click through presents a warning and defaults to No, then users are much more likely to opt-out, clicking themselves to safety. Even better if there's a 'don't let this site bother me again' option.
has anything better to do. Who cares about the fiscal cliff?
Because everyone has to do the same thing for one person to be doing anything? I think your logic is flawed.
Are you really suggesting the folk in the national academies of science who would research something like video games and their effect on the mental health of children are going to be used in solving the fiscal cliff?
Seriously, if you're so confident there will be no link I can't understand why you would be afraid of some of the nation's best scientists looking at the question.
If you want to have a reasoned debate you cannot selectively use facts.
Wikipedia tells me that for the past five years, Switzerland has only permitted 2,000 of those with military issue weapons to store ammunition at home. Prior to that the ammunition was strictly audited. It's hard to kill using a gun with no bullets. Prior to 2007, the auditing requirement would make use of the weapon rare.
You also neglect to mention that the weapons are issued to civilians who have undergone military training. This is not like turning up at Walmart and buying a semi-automatic.
Comparing gun use in Switzerland to that in the US is like comparing chalk and cheese. Unless you're suggesting as a solution to gun crime that everyone of age should be conscripted to receive military training and the government should be allowed in private homes to audit your weapons?
Presumably if you trust self-signed certificates, anyone can launch a MITM attack against your server with a self-signed certificate. Google would trust the self-signed certificate as being your own and then relinquish your login credentials when it attempts to retrieve the mail.
Now the MITM has to at least get a certificate from a trusted source that will have to, at a minimum, perform some sort of domain validation.
The increase in security may not be huge, but there's certainly some gain in security from this, and well worth the few dollars that a domain authenticated certificate costs.
Surely if you discovered computers important to national security were unprotected, were using default passwords allowing easy access, or hadn't been appropriately patched and maintained, you would have to treat these machines as potentially compromised whether or not you know someone had accessed them.
As a result, all the costs you mention, other than the legal ones, would necessarily have to be incurred anyway.
Are you basically saying IF I did set up the business account, to make sure I was not logged into that business FB account when browsing around from one of my computers?
I was replying on the presumption that you have no way to avoid a FB account in the line of work you want to pursue and that you'd like to protect your privacy as much as possible.
Assuming that's the case, I'd make sure I was logged out of the account. Others have suggested there might be plugins that can help by blocking these links from third party websites, and I think that too would be worth your exploring.
Social networks can only build a picture of you based upon what you give them. The trouble is that it's very very easy to not even realize you're giving them vast quantities of personal information as you browse third party websites.
Sure, but that is quite different than doing the searching for him. Which is what the GP described.
It was a hypothetical. Surely it doesn't take too many of your brain cycles to figure out a hundred ways that scenario could arise.
Lets say they're looking for information about Steve Jobs on your computer and ask you what kind of cancer he had. You say 'prostate' and they fire that into Google images. Without filtering that could easily through up a host of images.
Let's say they're researching a celebrity who happens to have had paparazzi shots of them stark naked leaked to the world, or some former partner sold a video. Again pictures might appear.
All stuff that yes, you could easily explain to your kids, but is also stuff which could easily and quickly be misconstrued, especially when it's being retold to other parents or school officials who may be mandated by law to tell authorities.
As for the suggesting there's nothing lower than moderate, that's to portray the change in such a way as to fundamentally distort it. The images are still available, but you need to be use keywords that make it clear that's what you're looking for. Search for a photo of someone famous, you get face pics, or publicity shots. Search for them 'naked' and if google has it, google lets you see it.
I really don't see why you think this is censorship or a big deal.
What, you don't think your 13 year old is smart enough to find the porn he or she wants? You're not protecting anyone from anything. Your prudery is probably more harmful than the porn you're so afraid of.
So let's say you're helping your 13 year old with two of their friends of a similar age on a group homework project.
You're at the computer with them, looking for an image to use via google image search. Thanks to the lack of filtering you endorse, your search for anatomical images for their science project is also interspersed with some images that have a slightly different educational function.
The other kids then report to their parents that you showed them porn on your computer. Next thing you know you're being visited by the police who seize your computer, laptop and iPad. Next, child services have taken away your kids. Your name is muck, you lose your job as a result of the press attention and you need to remortgage the house to clear the whole mess up.
Zimbra is really really good. The only reason I am not using it is because of the resources it demands to work well. I did manage an enterprise Zimbra set up for a good number of years though. Their enterprise support was also very good.
You can run it in a VM, but I'd strongly recommend you are able to devote two cores to it and 4GB of RAM.
That said it's a fantastic piece of work, and really shows what a web interface can be like. It also supports CalDav and CardDav so you can get native syncing of calendar and contacts on iOS devices as well as the regular email through IMAP.
I'm surprised Yahoo sold them off. maybe they thought the web interface was too complicated for their client market. I can only guess that Google were not interested because of the resource demands mean it would never scale to their gmail client base.
I really haven't used a desktop client for email in years. Where's the gain for the user?
I want my mail and calendar wherever I am. So why keep multiple copies of gigabytes of mail on multiple machines. I just don't see the gain for the average user. I think the lack of demand from users who are moving to webmail is why the Thunderbird is getting less developer attention.
What I'd really like to see is improvement in the webmail interfaces available to us. Gmail is fast, but I find the interface limiting and clunky. The best I have experienced was Zimbra, but it really prefers to be run on a standalone machine and is pretty resource intensive.
Perhaps mass production of the chips is necessary to bring the cost down to a profitable level.
It's like producing a drug. The first pill might cost $1 billion, while the second pill costs $1. Making one chip costs $1 billion, but make 1,000 and they're $1 million each.
I'd imagine chip production is somewhat similar. Of course, having more chips will result in some devaluation of the currency since more can be produced, but as long as the devaluation is less than the amount saved by mass-producing the chips then it's still worthwhile.
I looked into encryption for a game I'm working on. I think that's a good example of the "opportunistic encryption" you speak of.
IPSec Programs like FreeS/WAN whic hwas followed by Openswan and Strongswan take care of this automatically. If both endpoints have this set up, the traffic will be automatically encrypted. No further user intervention is necessary.
I often wonder why we don't see more take up of opportunistic encryption.
While it's obviously not a solution to keep things secret that need to be secure, it would surely present a significant obstacle to deep packet inspection unless ISPs were to deliberately interfere with the security negotiation.
ey troll, like Apple or not they're addressing a glaring problem by bringing out the retina display.
That or they're creating the problem by purchasing every high resolution computer display available on the wholesale market for their own devices, making them prohibitively expensive for other manufacturers.
Most sites don't bother because only a small minority does it and that small minority tends to be disproportionately made up of the kooky anti-consumerist crowd anyway, who aren't worth advertising to due to their hatred of advertising in general. If ad blocking ever went mainstream you'd see more sites tying content to ads explicitly.
Perhaps they don't bother because the cost of entering an arms race would be too high. If any major site were to block adblock users, you would expect the plugin to quickly route around their attempts.
Actually that's not a good link, sorry. It looks like they were doing more than simple sharing. I can't find a US case of criminal conviction for plain file sharing, though that might be because the civil penalties are so huge, and the burden is lower for the record companies to prevail.
Cases do exist overseas. There are cases in the UK, and this BBC article suggests Japan has treated it as a criminal offense for a couple of years, but will now start invoking penalties: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-19767970
Actually I am not aware of a single country in the world where uploading a file in a p2p program at home has been judged by any court as a criminal offence (at least yet).
Your quote says nothing about the file-sharing that was alleged to have taken place not being potentially criminal and therefore worthy of police investigation.
File-sharing is what is alleged to have taken place (read the source article form Torrent Freak). File sharing is punishable as a crime in Finland (and across the EU) and therefore is investigated by the police.
Slashdot Mirror
Apple make a pretty good bluetooth keyboard (if you like Apple's other keyboards). I really, really wish they'd allow you to attach a mouse, or even apple's own bluetooth trackpad which would perfectly allow you to do all the touch stuff.
Seriously though, the keyboard is great and pairs nicely with the iPad. The biggest problem I have experienced is that you have little or no keyboard shortcuts. Apple want you to use touch with your iPad unless you have a cursor in a text box. The other downside of a parent using the iPad as their sole computer is that there's no remote support that I'm aware of. You cannot connect to the iPad via VNC and show her how to achieve something.
Still, with the likes of AirPrint available (and you could put together a raspberry pi or other cheap computer to run airprint on her existing printer) you can achieve pretty much anything you need to for an average home user in a single, small, hard to break device.
And this seems to be the problem with the USB sticks. When I was searching it looked like you don't get hardware assisted playback with XBMC on them.
So the article seems to say they're better for media centers, yet the primary media center software wouldn't work well? The reviewer doesn't seem to say they're actually running XBMC or similar on one of the devices. If someone is running it successfully, with workable HD playback over wifi, I'd love to hear about it.
Most the reviews I saw also mentioned the wifi support was woeful, with frequent freezes. WiFi is nice, but only if it's reliable and a reliable network connection is essential for a media player.
I was really keen to buy one of these cheap sticks, and the initial specs did look good. But as I read the reviews from folk who actually own them I saw a lot of disappointment. It looks like, for now at least, the price is too cheap to deliver a reliable product.
Really you should have no concern with someone else getting your social security number. The only reason you're concerned about keeping it private is because the finance industry have misused it as a secret personal identifier for decades.
As for your credit score, that's private information created and held by private corporations. Why do you think that has any relevance to freedom of information?
Medical information is much the same. That's between you, your doctor and your insurance company. I don't think you need to provide details of medical treatments to the government, or request government permission in advance to be allowed the treatment.
How many extensions do you think the average user wants/needs? I really don't see fatigue being much of an issue with browser extensions. A user should only be seeing a couple of warnings a year.
If the click through presents a warning and defaults to No, then users are much more likely to opt-out, clicking themselves to safety. Even better if there's a 'don't let this site bother me again' option.
Because everyone has to do the same thing for one person to be doing anything? I think your logic is flawed.
Are you really suggesting the folk in the national academies of science who would research something like video games and their effect on the mental health of children are going to be used in solving the fiscal cliff?
Seriously, if you're so confident there will be no link I can't understand why you would be afraid of some of the nation's best scientists looking at the question.
If you want to have a reasoned debate you cannot selectively use facts.
Wikipedia tells me that for the past five years, Switzerland has only permitted 2,000 of those with military issue weapons to store ammunition at home. Prior to that the ammunition was strictly audited. It's hard to kill using a gun with no bullets. Prior to 2007, the auditing requirement would make use of the weapon rare.
You also neglect to mention that the weapons are issued to civilians who have undergone military training. This is not like turning up at Walmart and buying a semi-automatic.
Comparing gun use in Switzerland to that in the US is like comparing chalk and cheese. Unless you're suggesting as a solution to gun crime that everyone of age should be conscripted to receive military training and the government should be allowed in private homes to audit your weapons?
Presumably if you trust self-signed certificates, anyone can launch a MITM attack against your server with a self-signed certificate. Google would trust the self-signed certificate as being your own and then relinquish your login credentials when it attempts to retrieve the mail.
Now the MITM has to at least get a certificate from a trusted source that will have to, at a minimum, perform some sort of domain validation.
The increase in security may not be huge, but there's certainly some gain in security from this, and well worth the few dollars that a domain authenticated certificate costs.
Surely if you discovered computers important to national security were unprotected, were using default passwords allowing easy access, or hadn't been appropriately patched and maintained, you would have to treat these machines as potentially compromised whether or not you know someone had accessed them.
As a result, all the costs you mention, other than the legal ones, would necessarily have to be incurred anyway.
I was replying on the presumption that you have no way to avoid a FB account in the line of work you want to pursue and that you'd like to protect your privacy as much as possible.
Assuming that's the case, I'd make sure I was logged out of the account. Others have suggested there might be plugins that can help by blocking these links from third party websites, and I think that too would be worth your exploring.
Social networks can only build a picture of you based upon what you give them. The trouble is that it's very very easy to not even realize you're giving them vast quantities of personal information as you browse third party websites.
See all those sites you visit with a facebook like button. Those images are usually served from facebook, not the site you're visiting.
So, unless you're careful with your privacy settings, you are likely reporting a huge amount of your browsing to facebook.
At the very least, I'd recommend logging out of facebook when you're done and trying to browse with 3rd party cookies disabled.
It was a hypothetical. Surely it doesn't take too many of your brain cycles to figure out a hundred ways that scenario could arise.
Lets say they're looking for information about Steve Jobs on your computer and ask you what kind of cancer he had. You say 'prostate' and they fire that into Google images. Without filtering that could easily through up a host of images.
Let's say they're researching a celebrity who happens to have had paparazzi shots of them stark naked leaked to the world, or some former partner sold a video. Again pictures might appear.
All stuff that yes, you could easily explain to your kids, but is also stuff which could easily and quickly be misconstrued, especially when it's being retold to other parents or school officials who may be mandated by law to tell authorities.
As for the suggesting there's nothing lower than moderate, that's to portray the change in such a way as to fundamentally distort it. The images are still available, but you need to be use keywords that make it clear that's what you're looking for. Search for a photo of someone famous, you get face pics, or publicity shots. Search for them 'naked' and if google has it, google lets you see it.
I really don't see why you think this is censorship or a big deal.
So let's say you're helping your 13 year old with two of their friends of a similar age on a group homework project.
You're at the computer with them, looking for an image to use via google image search. Thanks to the lack of filtering you endorse, your search for anatomical images for their science project is also interspersed with some images that have a slightly different educational function.
The other kids then report to their parents that you showed them porn on your computer. Next thing you know you're being visited by the police who seize your computer, laptop and iPad. Next, child services have taken away your kids. Your name is muck, you lose your job as a result of the press attention and you need to remortgage the house to clear the whole mess up.
If you're going to keep the mail on the server, what's the point of a local binary as your interface to it?
Zimbra is really really good. The only reason I am not using it is because of the resources it demands to work well. I did manage an enterprise Zimbra set up for a good number of years though. Their enterprise support was also very good.
You can run it in a VM, but I'd strongly recommend you are able to devote two cores to it and 4GB of RAM.
That said it's a fantastic piece of work, and really shows what a web interface can be like. It also supports CalDav and CardDav so you can get native syncing of calendar and contacts on iOS devices as well as the regular email through IMAP.
I'm surprised Yahoo sold them off. maybe they thought the web interface was too complicated for their client market. I can only guess that Google were not interested because of the resource demands mean it would never scale to their gmail client base.
I really haven't used a desktop client for email in years. Where's the gain for the user?
I want my mail and calendar wherever I am. So why keep multiple copies of gigabytes of mail on multiple machines. I just don't see the gain for the average user. I think the lack of demand from users who are moving to webmail is why the Thunderbird is getting less developer attention.
What I'd really like to see is improvement in the webmail interfaces available to us. Gmail is fast, but I find the interface limiting and clunky. The best I have experienced was Zimbra, but it really prefers to be run on a standalone machine and is pretty resource intensive.
The cost to the United States of the Afghan and Iraq wars in 2011 was $160 billion. A further $120 billion will be incurred this year.
Perhaps mass production of the chips is necessary to bring the cost down to a profitable level.
It's like producing a drug. The first pill might cost $1 billion, while the second pill costs $1. Making one chip costs $1 billion, but make 1,000 and they're $1 million each.
I'd imagine chip production is somewhat similar. Of course, having more chips will result in some devaluation of the currency since more can be produced, but as long as the devaluation is less than the amount saved by mass-producing the chips then it's still worthwhile.
IPSec Programs like FreeS/WAN whic hwas followed by Openswan and Strongswan take care of this automatically. If both endpoints have this set up, the traffic will be automatically encrypted. No further user intervention is necessary.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opportunistic_encryption
I often wonder why we don't see more take up of opportunistic encryption.
While it's obviously not a solution to keep things secret that need to be secure, it would surely present a significant obstacle to deep packet inspection unless ISPs were to deliberately interfere with the security negotiation.
Here's my two drives
CDROM model sensed sensed: Optiarc DVD RW AD-7170A 1.02
Checking for SCSI emulation...
Drive is ATAPI (using SG_IO host adaptor emulation)
Checking for MMC style command set...
Drive is MMC style
DMA scatter/gather table entries: 1
table entry size: 524288 bytes
maximum theoretical transfer: 222 sectors
Setting default read size to 27 sectors (63504 bytes).
Verifying CDDA command set...
Expected command set reads OK.
Attempting to set cdrom to full speed...
drive returned OK.
=================== Checking drive cache/timing behavior ===================
Seek/read timing:
[57:07.32]: 26ms seek, 0.34ms/sec read [39.8x]
[50:00.00]: 24ms seek, 0.37ms/sec read [36.0x]
[40:00.00]: 22ms seek, 0.41ms/sec read [32.7x]
[30:00.00]: 32ms seek, 0.44ms/sec read [30.0x]
[20:00.00]: 34ms seek, 0.48ms/sec read [27.7x]
[10:00.00]: 45ms seek, 0.56ms/sec read [23.8x]
[00:00.00]: 47ms seek, 0.70ms/sec read [18.9x]
Analyzing cache behavior...
Approximate random access cache size: 4 sector(s)
Drive cache tests as contiguous
Drive readahead past read cursor: 498 sector(s)
Cache tail rollbehind: 3 sector(s)
Cache tail granularity: 1 sector(s)
Cache size (considering rollbehind) too small to test cache speed.
Drive tests OK with Paranoia.
DRIVE TWO
CDROM model sensed sensed: ATAPI iHOS104 WL0B
Checking for SCSI emulation...
Drive is ATAPI (using SG_IO host adaptor emulation)
Checking for MMC style command set...
Drive is MMC style
DMA scatter/gather table entries: 1
table entry size: 524288 bytes
maximum theoretical transfer: 222 sectors
Setting default read size to 27 sectors (63504 bytes).
Verifying CDDA command set...
Expected command set reads OK.
Attempting to set cdrom to full speed...
drive returned OK.
=================== Checking drive cache/timing behavior ===================
Seek/read timing:
[75:33.51]: 44ms seek, 0.39ms/sec read [34.0x]
[70:00.00]: 51ms seek, 0.41ms/sec read [32.7x]
[60:00.00]: 51ms seek, 0.43ms/sec read [30.7x]
[50:00.00]: 47ms seek, 0.47ms/sec read [28.5x]
[40:00.00]: 44ms seek, 0.51ms/sec read [26.4x]
[30:00.00]: 46ms seek, 0.56ms/sec read [23.9x]
[20:00.00]: 48ms seek, 0.62ms/sec read [21.6x]
[10:00.00]: 43ms seek, 0.74ms/sec read [18.1x]
[00:00.00]: 49ms seek, 0.93ms/sec read [14.4x]
Analyzing cache behavior...
Approximate random access cache size: 27 sector(s)
Drive cache tests as contiguous
Drive readahead past read cursor: 613 sector(s)
Cache tail cursor tied to read curs
That or they're creating the problem by purchasing every high resolution computer display available on the wholesale market for their own devices, making them prohibitively expensive for other manufacturers.
Perhaps they don't bother because the cost of entering an arms race would be too high. If any major site were to block adblock users, you would expect the plugin to quickly route around their attempts.
Actually that's not a good link, sorry. It looks like they were doing more than simple sharing. I can't find a US case of criminal conviction for plain file sharing, though that might be because the civil penalties are so huge, and the burden is lower for the record companies to prevail.
Cases do exist overseas. There are cases in the UK, and this BBC article suggests Japan has treated it as a criminal offense for a couple of years, but will now start invoking penalties: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-19767970
First US convictions for illegal file sharing. These are felony convictions.
Google shows other criminal convictions overseas.
Your quote says nothing about the file-sharing that was alleged to have taken place not being potentially criminal and therefore worthy of police investigation.
File-sharing is what is alleged to have taken place (read the source article form Torrent Freak). File sharing is punishable as a crime in Finland (and across the EU) and therefore is investigated by the police.