> Unusable security is bad security, as the user will work around it, usually in a manner breaking that security. Good security is usable security.
I just laughed out loud (and everyone looked at me...). That is absolutely true, and reminds me of a nightmare place I worked where their idea of unbreakable password security is to put onerous rules in place (mandatory mix of capitals and special characters -- like the low entropy example in the xkcd comic) and set password aging to 30 days.
So everyone had to fabricate and memorize a new password every 30 days that was difficult to memorize practically by definition. The user community came up with two solutions:
Solution one: A yellow sticky under the keyboard. This became so widespread that we admins could reliably flip the keyboard to unlock a user's screen if they were not at their desk.
Solution two: Someone discovered that the series 01January 02February 03March 04April [...] met the criteria and was absurdly easy to remember. Word spread. After awhile, if we didn't see the yellow sticky, the next thing to try was 09September.
In summary, the very rules put in place to provide security resulted in security universally being almost completely circumvented. (I say "almost" because a yellow sticky has the advantage in that you need physical access to the office in order to break in, and the facilities were protected by other means. There were, however, ways around that as well, but that's another story.)
> Microsoft's "Passport" gave us the promise of a single web sign-on. What happened to that idea?
What happened in my case is that I wouldn't trust Microsoft with anything that critical. Regardless of the reason (and there are more than one, not all having to do with the products themselves), Microsoft products get a zero day intrusion, what, once a week?
Would I trust *anyone* with a set of credentials I use everywhere? Um,.... no. Not anyone. Not my bank, certainly not the government, not Google, not Apple, not Symantec, not... hmm I've run out of examples.
And so, I maintain a list of passwords consisting of random keystrokes for any online service that has the potential to damage me either financially or professionally. I remember the ones I use often, and the rest are in a PGP encrypted list on my phone. (The PGP password being another random string that I have memorized through long familiarity.)
My bank is a small credit union, which probably isn't any more secure than Chase, for example, but is a less likely target because the payout is so small.
In theory single sign-on might be doable with private/public keys, where you could generate the keys yourself and not have to rely on the honesty and diligence of a third party or worry about a government operator selling the back-door keys to the Russian Mafia. But I don't see that ever being practical for the unwashed public. They just want to type in their grandmother's maiden name for everything. And they can probably do that now. (Shudder.)
No line-level audio, no HDMI, no composite video, and so on. In case you missed it, Apple has a cult following in AV.
Dedicated lines for audio and video -- how quaint.
Over in not-Apple-land, we've been doing video and audio digitally over USB for quite awhile. And with USB 3.0, at peak speeds of 5 GB/sec, there's really little reason not to.
For really REALLY low end peripherals, like the aftermarket ipod boom boxes you buy at Big Lots, (well, maybe not you, but the people who buy anything form Big Lots) from TFA, the audio connector will be on the bottom, next to the data connector, which is (ostensibly) why they redesigned the connector in the first place. So, if you really did want to go the analog cheap route, there is still a way to do it without wasting lines in the data connector on dedicated analog audio.
And really, shouldn't cult AV followers be all digital... by now? I mean, geeze. 2003 is calling -- they want their monster cables back.
And... ok ok ok.... you want a dedicated audio-video connector. There is this thing, it's called a STANDARD, for micro-HDMI. My phone, which was built in 2010, has one next to the micro USB which handles charging and data. The docking station has two connectors right next to each other. The phone snaps in, and connects HDMI to the TV and USB to the media center. (Which isn't totally necessary because the media center can play media directly off the phone over USB but never mind.) This also means that I can use conventional, buy-anywhere cables for data, charging, and HDMI a/v.
But of course, this would mean the cable wouldn't be white and trendy.
Is it possible that it only seems like the best part of the movie, because it's the part you didn't watch? Sorry, I'm just discouraged at the dreck that passes for "blockbusters" these days.
...that all new superhero movies for the next few years will be tame and mushy, non-provocative, non-political. It's a liability issue. (See point 3 in the lawsuit.)
> Except that it is, of course. Gore sponsored the Information Infrastructure and Technology Act of 1992, which opened NSFNET to commercial development.
So.... if the internet was created sometime after 1992, what was I using in 1984? Again, he didn't CREATE the internet. He co-wrote a bill to help fund something that already existed. His statement is total pants.
And again, it's entirely possible that he did not mean to say that, but in the passion of the moment blew his lines. He *did* help in some measurable fashion in funding the backbone of the (then existing) internet. But I don't imagine even Al Gore himself continues to insist that he created the internet.
Slashdot Mirror
You're supposed to buy a 4s when it comes out and then buy a 5 when it comes out. It's the business model, dude.
So, -- let's be honest now -- how many of you clicked on TFA to see if there were photos of the problem areas?
Yeah, I know. Nuke plants explode all the time, just like in the movies.
I like it!
Yeah. (sarcastic) Thanks a lot, Irwin Allen.
They could be.
Yeah. And where's my flying car?
Wait, we are.
> Nerds care about choice, and nerds are such a tiny minority of people that nobody else much cares what the hell they think.
Really? And ... exactly how many Android phones were sold last year?
Thassa lotta nerds. Must be breeding like rabbits.
Nerrrrrrrds!!!
Hm. Ok. Different companies, different procedures, I guess.
Great questions. I suspect that it won't matter for the lawsuit, though.
> Unusable security is bad security, as the user will work around it, usually in a manner breaking that security. Good security is usable security.
I just laughed out loud (and everyone looked at me...). That is absolutely true, and reminds me of a nightmare place I worked where their idea of unbreakable password security is to put onerous rules in place (mandatory mix of capitals and special characters -- like the low entropy example in the xkcd comic) and set password aging to 30 days.
So everyone had to fabricate and memorize a new password every 30 days that was difficult to memorize practically by definition. The user community came up with two solutions:
Solution one: A yellow sticky under the keyboard. This became so widespread that we admins could reliably flip the keyboard to unlock a user's screen if they were not at their desk.
Solution two: Someone discovered that the series 01January 02February 03March 04April [...] met the criteria and was absurdly easy to remember. Word spread. After awhile, if we didn't see the yellow sticky, the next thing to try was 09September.
In summary, the very rules put in place to provide security resulted in security universally being almost completely circumvented. (I say "almost" because a yellow sticky has the advantage in that you need physical access to the office in order to break in, and the facilities were protected by other means. There were, however, ways around that as well, but that's another story.)
Life will find a way.
> Someone mentioned the very good point that Facebook is TRYING to become the single signon king. However, nobody trusts Facebook.
Exactly. Replace Facebook with any corporate or government entity of your choice. Same answer.
> Microsoft's "Passport" gave us the promise of a single web sign-on. What happened to that idea?
What happened in my case is that I wouldn't trust Microsoft with anything that critical. Regardless of the reason (and there are more than one, not all having to do with the products themselves), Microsoft products get a zero day intrusion, what, once a week?
Would I trust *anyone* with a set of credentials I use everywhere? Um,.... no. Not anyone. Not my bank, certainly not the government, not Google, not Apple, not Symantec, not... hmm I've run out of examples.
And so, I maintain a list of passwords consisting of random keystrokes for any online service that has the potential to damage me either financially or professionally. I remember the ones I use often, and the rest are in a PGP encrypted list on my phone. (The PGP password being another random string that I have memorized through long familiarity.)
My bank is a small credit union, which probably isn't any more secure than Chase, for example, but is a less likely target because the payout is so small.
In theory single sign-on might be doable with private/public keys, where you could generate the keys yourself and not have to rely on the honesty and diligence of a third party or worry about a government operator selling the back-door keys to the Russian Mafia. But I don't see that ever being practical for the unwashed public. They just want to type in their grandmother's maiden name for everything. And they can probably do that now. (Shudder.)
No line-level audio, no HDMI, no composite video, and so on. In case you missed it, Apple has a cult following in AV.
Dedicated lines for audio and video -- how quaint.
Over in not-Apple-land, we've been doing video and audio digitally over USB for quite awhile. And with USB 3.0, at peak speeds of 5 GB/sec, there's really little reason not to.
For really REALLY low end peripherals, like the aftermarket ipod boom boxes you buy at Big Lots, (well, maybe not you, but the people who buy anything form Big Lots) from TFA, the audio connector will be on the bottom, next to the data connector, which is (ostensibly) why they redesigned the connector in the first place. So, if you really did want to go the analog cheap route, there is still a way to do it without wasting lines in the data connector on dedicated analog audio.
And really, shouldn't cult AV followers be all digital... by now? I mean, geeze. 2003 is calling -- they want their monster cables back.
And... ok ok ok.... you want a dedicated audio-video connector. There is this thing, it's called a STANDARD, for micro-HDMI. My phone, which was built in 2010, has one next to the micro USB which handles charging and data. The docking station has two connectors right next to each other. The phone snaps in, and connects HDMI to the TV and USB to the media center. (Which isn't totally necessary because the media center can play media directly off the phone over USB but never mind.) This also means that I can use conventional, buy-anywhere cables for data, charging, and HDMI a/v.
But of course, this would mean the cable wouldn't be white and trendy.
So,,,,, to take just one of your examples, did you miss the first 20 minutes of Iron Man?
Remind me not to see a movie at your house...
Is it possible that it only seems like the best part of the movie, because it's the part you didn't watch? Sorry, I'm just discouraged at the dreck that passes for "blockbusters" these days.
You still can't pause the movie to go to the bathroom. And the drinks are damned expensive.
And dead at the box office. Fucking A.
Agreed. At home the floors aren't sticky, you don't have to rub shoulders with a stranger, and you can have beer.
Of course (slaps head) because that would be... bad... for, I dunno, some reason.
"Starting the boom" != "Creating the smartphone". Is critical thinking truly dead?
> Except that it is, of course. Gore sponsored the Information Infrastructure and Technology Act of 1992, which opened NSFNET to commercial development.
So.... if the internet was created sometime after 1992, what was I using in 1984? Again, he didn't CREATE the internet. He co-wrote a bill to help fund something that already existed. His statement is total pants.
And again, it's entirely possible that he did not mean to say that, but in the passion of the moment blew his lines. He *did* help in some measurable fashion in funding the backbone of the (then existing) internet. But I don't imagine even Al Gore himself continues to insist that he created the internet.