This is such bullshit! In the alternative universe where Windows 7 was ready on the day Vista came out, software drivers for W7 would have been as unavailable as they were for Vista. All sorts of software that required users to have full admin permissions would have been broken by W7 UAC as it was by Vista's UAC. All PCs sold with 512MB or 1GB RAM would have still be slow compared to XP.
Only 1 or 2 years down the line when OEMs had caught up and released proper drivers, when PCs were being sold with 2GB+ RAM and when people learned to separate normal from admin users did Windows Vista/7/8 become less of a nuisance. It had very little to do with Windows 7 being so awesome.
Um, except, Win7 has a Windows XP compatibility mode. When I upgraded from XP to 7, everything worked. Some things in compatibility, some native. With the single exception of an old scanner that wouldn't work in Vista either. (I gave the scanner to my daughter, who still runs XP.)
As far as drivers are concerned, I think Vista was Microsoft's first indication that their hold on the industry was starting to slip.
Vista had more problems than just drivers. Even simple operations like file transfers were buggered up. They did eventually fix it, but it shouldn't have happened in the first place.
Windows 7 isn't awesome. It's an incremental improvement over XP and what Vista should have been. Especially considering the development time.
>....says Tim Rains, the director of Microsoft's Trustworthy Computing group.
Not to put too fine a point on it, but it's his job to say that, whether it's true or not. Windows 8 needs a shot in the arm, and upgrades from a bunch of panicked XP users is literally money in the bank.
I'm still trying to wrap my head around "Microsoft should transition" and "linux" in the same sentence. Microsoft wants all those XP users to upgrade to Windows 8. Nothing less will do.
A mechanism that can kill cell phones, known to local police forces, and presumably to cellular service providers and probably others, might be very interesting to criminals and foreign powers, as a way to increase chaos and reduce response during a major crime or terrorist event. And you know that eventually the code or technique or whatever will eventually fall into criminal or enemy hands. It's too good a secret not to sell to someone. So, never mind trusting our government not to use this for nefarious purposes, we should also think about what nefarious people outside the government or belonging to some other government would do with it.
I have a Golden who lives inside with me (he has a doggie door he can open himself if he needs out) and most of the time I am at home he follows me around the house carrying a toy (currently a knotted rope we use for tugging play). When I work on the computer at home he lies across my feet. He sleeps in my bed, sits on the couch next to me when I read, and inspires me to nightly walks. I can't imagine a better companion.
On the other hand, we once rescued a lab mix with scars around her neck from being chained outside without a collar. (The chain wrapped around her neck and tied off with a piece of wire.) So yeah, if you're up for treating a dog as a companion, get a dog. If you're going to treat the dog as furniture, do all of us a favor and take the pill instead.
...are scenarios other than theft where the government might find it prudent to trip the kill switch on one or more cell phones. If mine is stolen, I'd rather just get another one.
I mean, is this a thing? Is cell phone theft so rampant and costly that mandatory kill switches are a viable solution?
My previous laptop had an actual hardware killswitch that physically broke the connection between the camera and the USB bus, and a similar one for the wifi. My current one doesn't, it just has a key combination that disables the camera, presumably in software. This is stupid.
I'm actually wondering why this (a physical kill switch) isn't a required thing by businesses such as, oh, gyms, and companies concerned about corporate espionage. Awhile back there was a push in some companies to only issue company phones without cameras, but that seems to have fallen by the wayside.
There is a huge amount of information to collect based on subjects' reactions to these requests for DNA. At the very least, the cops must be compiling a naughty/nice list indexed to license plate based on who accepts a cheek swab. Making the link from license plate to individual is pretty easy, especially if they're also taking video of their proceedings. People are forced to play the game and there's no way to win.
That was my thought, also. So you're driving home at 2:00 AM from a late night code hacking marathon, the cop checks your plate, which is common practice for cars on the road late at night, [1] sees that you declined an optional cheek swab 3 months ago, and pulls you over for "weaving". It's easy to imagine getting extra scrutiny in the future for declining a swab now.
[1] I worked nights for an 18 month contract once, going home in the wee hours, and was pulled over... oh, maybe eight or nine times during that stint, for really bizarre reasons, including "weaving" and not signaling a lane change when two lanes converged into one. (Seriously?) They'd check my papers, and let me go. I finally asked an officer, respectfully, why this was happening so often, and in a rare moment of candor, he said they consider a single car late at night to be a warning sign, and "we have to pull you over for something" in order to check you out.
It has to do with TOR insofar as they knew the threat came from the Tor network, so they looked at campus network logs for anybody who happened to be connecting to TOR during that time period.
Granted, but the important thing is "during that time period". When analyzing encrypted messages, you can get valuable information just by the timing of messages, even if you can't read their content. He could have used any anonymizing service or technique -- it was the timing that tripped him up. That, and he was stupid enough to use the campus wifi, thinking his use of TOR would be enough to prevent identification.
I suspect it wasn't hard to figure out. Bomb threats before exams are fairly common, historically. Therefore, there's a high likelihood that the perp is a student. Therefore, high likelihood that the threat originated on campus. Examination of router logs during the time in question then becomes the most likely first step. And it paid off. This doesn't really have anything to do with TOR. It has to do with an individual student understanding just enough about how the internet works to make a half assed and ultimately fruitless attempt to cover his tracks.
> Their study, in mice, suggests that supplementing an infant's diet with the right mix of bacteria might help prevent allergies — even without a pet pooch.
A part of me says don't take pills, go out and get a dog. There are enough of them who need homes. And then there's another part of me that says, if you're getting a dog just to prevent allergies, maybe you should take the pill instead.
We had three large dogs when our daughter was born. The dogs lived inside and were well socialized, and daughter became just another member of the pack. Although this is only one data point, it's interesting that she has no allergies (I have severe allergies to pollen and cats) and was hardly ever sick. We put it down to her immune system getting exercised at an early age.
Yeah... it makes me so tired. I'm neither republican nor democrat. (Although I do register one or t'other, switching back and forth depending on who has the most interesting primary.) It's not about who was right, it's about my insurance becoming more costly and my deductible being substantially higher. But try to mention that and you're shouted down, because Obamacare is so much cheaper and more available. Even the media completely misses the point, that not only does Obamacare eliminate "sub standard" plans, it also eliminates plans that are "too good", by imposing a 40% "cadillac tax". (What company would even try to afford that? Besides Google, I mean.) What we had was better than anything I've yet seen reported as available on the website. (I haven't tried to go there; I understand it's down for repairs.)
Um, not really. I'm not a cat person, but even I have to admit that cats also work. TFA even makes this point -- that cats were domesticated to kill vermin. A task they still perform today.
Our last cat, though, what a slacker. He'd wait for the trap to SNAP and then steal the payload. Or, about half of it.
Slashdot Mirror
First...
to upgrade!
To Linux, I hope?
Certainly not Windows 8. I won't be Vista'd again.
If Vista had been more like Windows 7
This is such bullshit! In the alternative universe where Windows 7 was ready on the day Vista came out, software drivers for W7 would have been as unavailable as they were for Vista. All sorts of software that required users to have full admin permissions would have been broken by W7 UAC as it was by Vista's UAC. All PCs sold with 512MB or 1GB RAM would have still be slow compared to XP.
Only 1 or 2 years down the line when OEMs had caught up and released proper drivers, when PCs were being sold with 2GB+ RAM and when people learned to separate normal from admin users did Windows Vista/7/8 become less of a nuisance. It had very little to do with Windows 7 being so awesome.
Um, except, Win7 has a Windows XP compatibility mode. When I upgraded from XP to 7, everything worked. Some things in compatibility, some native. With the single exception of an old scanner that wouldn't work in Vista either. (I gave the scanner to my daughter, who still runs XP.)
As far as drivers are concerned, I think Vista was Microsoft's first indication that their hold on the industry was starting to slip.
Vista had more problems than just drivers. Even simple operations like file transfers were buggered up. They did eventually fix it, but it shouldn't have happened in the first place.
Windows 7 isn't awesome. It's an incremental improvement over XP and what Vista should have been. Especially considering the development time.
Get on with the new world. In fact, do it on a Mac & switch between or run XP, Win7, etc simultaneously. Get real.
> ....says Tim Rains, the director of Microsoft's Trustworthy Computing group.
Not to put too fine a point on it, but it's his job to say that, whether it's true or not. Windows 8 needs a shot in the arm, and upgrades from a bunch of panicked XP users is literally money in the bank.
I'm still trying to wrap my head around "Microsoft should transition" and "linux" in the same sentence. Microsoft wants all those XP users to upgrade to Windows 8. Nothing less will do.
To be properly alarmist, there should be a profit motive, like selling advertising time.
"Kill switch" sounds cooler to politicians.
A mechanism that can kill cell phones, known to local police forces, and presumably to cellular service providers and probably others, might be very interesting to criminals and foreign powers, as a way to increase chaos and reduce response during a major crime or terrorist event. And you know that eventually the code or technique or whatever will eventually fall into criminal or enemy hands. It's too good a secret not to sell to someone. So, never mind trusting our government not to use this for nefarious purposes, we should also think about what nefarious people outside the government or belonging to some other government would do with it.
Well, yeah.
I have a Golden who lives inside with me (he has a doggie door he can open himself if he needs out) and most of the time I am at home he follows me around the house carrying a toy (currently a knotted rope we use for tugging play). When I work on the computer at home he lies across my feet. He sleeps in my bed, sits on the couch next to me when I read, and inspires me to nightly walks. I can't imagine a better companion.
On the other hand, we once rescued a lab mix with scars around her neck from being chained outside without a collar. (The chain wrapped around her neck and tied off with a piece of wire.) So yeah, if you're up for treating a dog as a companion, get a dog. If you're going to treat the dog as furniture, do all of us a favor and take the pill instead.
Right, exactly, which makes me wonder if there isn't some other purpose to this bill.
I mean, is this a thing? Is cell phone theft so rampant and costly that mandatory kill switches are a viable solution?
I appreciate where you're coming from. But if you carry a gun, in most states, the cop will know ahead of time.
My previous laptop had an actual hardware killswitch that physically broke the connection between the camera and the USB bus, and a similar one for the wifi. My current one doesn't, it just has a key combination that disables the camera, presumably in software. This is stupid.
I'm actually wondering why this (a physical kill switch) isn't a required thing by businesses such as, oh, gyms, and companies concerned about corporate espionage. Awhile back there was a push in some companies to only issue company phones without cameras, but that seems to have fallen by the wayside.
Duct. Tape.
And also: "and there was a case in the news where a woman had nude pictures taken of her without her knowledge". Heh heh. Those zany FBI analysts...
Brilliant. That's it. It's the explanation that fits all the facts. Compiling a database of drivers who decline to be swabbed is only a bonus.
Mod up.
There is a huge amount of information to collect based on subjects' reactions to these requests for DNA. At the very least, the cops must be compiling a naughty/nice list indexed to license plate based on who accepts a cheek swab. Making the link from license plate to individual is pretty easy, especially if they're also taking video of their proceedings. People are forced to play the game and there's no way to win.
That was my thought, also. So you're driving home at 2:00 AM from a late night code hacking marathon, the cop checks your plate, which is common practice for cars on the road late at night, [1] sees that you declined an optional cheek swab 3 months ago, and pulls you over for "weaving". It's easy to imagine getting extra scrutiny in the future for declining a swab now.
[1] I worked nights for an 18 month contract once, going home in the wee hours, and was pulled over... oh, maybe eight or nine times during that stint, for really bizarre reasons, including "weaving" and not signaling a lane change when two lanes converged into one. (Seriously?) They'd check my papers, and let me go. I finally asked an officer, respectfully, why this was happening so often, and in a rare moment of candor, he said they consider a single car late at night to be a warning sign, and "we have to pull you over for something" in order to check you out.
Is that before or after the guy
shoots you?
This doesn't really have anything to do with TOR.
It has to do with TOR insofar as they knew the threat came from the Tor network, so they looked at campus network logs for anybody who happened to be connecting to TOR during that time period.
Granted, but the important thing is "during that time period". When analyzing encrypted messages, you can get valuable information just by the timing of messages, even if you can't read their content. He could have used any anonymizing service or technique -- it was the timing that tripped him up. That, and he was stupid enough to use the campus wifi, thinking his use of TOR would be enough to prevent identification.
I suspect it wasn't hard to figure out. Bomb threats before exams are fairly common, historically. Therefore, there's a high likelihood that the perp is a student. Therefore, high likelihood that the threat originated on campus. Examination of router logs during the time in question then becomes the most likely first step. And it paid off. This doesn't really have anything to do with TOR. It has to do with an individual student understanding just enough about how the internet works to make a half assed and ultimately fruitless attempt to cover his tracks.
> Their study, in mice, suggests that supplementing an infant's diet with the right mix of bacteria might help prevent allergies — even without a pet pooch.
A part of me says don't take pills, go out and get a dog. There are enough of them who need homes. And then there's another part of me that says, if you're getting a dog just to prevent allergies, maybe you should take the pill instead.
We had three large dogs when our daughter was born. The dogs lived inside and were well socialized, and daughter became just another member of the pack. Although this is only one data point, it's interesting that she has no allergies (I have severe allergies to pollen and cats) and was hardly ever sick. We put it down to her immune system getting exercised at an early age.
Yeah... it makes me so tired. I'm neither republican nor democrat. (Although I do register one or t'other, switching back and forth depending on who has the most interesting primary.) It's not about who was right, it's about my insurance becoming more costly and my deductible being substantially higher. But try to mention that and you're shouted down, because Obamacare is so much cheaper and more available. Even the media completely misses the point, that not only does Obamacare eliminate "sub standard" plans, it also eliminates plans that are "too good", by imposing a 40% "cadillac tax". (What company would even try to afford that? Besides Google, I mean.) What we had was better than anything I've yet seen reported as available on the website. (I haven't tried to go there; I understand it's down for repairs.)
Um, not really. I'm not a cat person, but even I have to admit that cats also work. TFA even makes this point -- that cats were domesticated to kill vermin. A task they still perform today.
Our last cat, though, what a slacker. He'd wait for the trap to SNAP and then steal the payload. Or, about half of it.