Of course not very long. It NEVER takes very long. You don't need DRM. If you for some insane reason decide you must spend money on DRM, make sure you use DRM that will anger the minimum number of purchasers. If you are including online-based DRM make sure there's some advantage to purchasing the software to offset the disadvantage of having DRM.
Steam works because they follow these principles with their DRM. It rarely causes problems for legit purchasers, and it has several advantages for buying the real thing: steam "community", update integration, voice coms integration, etc. While the initial launch was terrible and slow the service has since been improved, and it now functions quite well at adding significant value. For some people the added value won't offset the ethical compromise of using DRM, but for others it will.
Make sure the "reasonable number" is unreasonably large if you must limit reinstalls. If the software can only be installed 5 times I probably won't buy it, if it can be installed 128 times I'd have much less of an issue with it. It's a small enough number that it won't be a significant source of piracy (someone will take the effort to crack the activation) and large enough that few people (if any) will run into it in normal use.
Also tie the activation to updates. Make it so that the legitimate purchasers get something the pirates don't in exchange for their money.
No, he's saying that we should be adding seat belts and anti-lock breaks and eventually self-driving cars to eliminate the need for the user to focus on safety in driving. He's arguing that the safety should be built into the system, and not rely on the judgement of the user. That's the exact opposite of your example.
"Do one thing perfectly" works well in some hardware, worse in other cases. Cameras are a case where the physics dictates the size of the optics needed for certain capabilities, so to get eg good telephoto capability or good low-light capability one needs a dedicated lens.
Likewise with printers. Sure an inkjet all-in-one printer/scanner/copier/fax is nice, but there are still uses for large format printers & scanners, and high-volume copiers. They're just not needed for the average household, so the specialized devices are relegated to the businesses and hobbyists that need them.
Your brain is probably the best bet. An easy way to think about it is imagine a society with more advanced medical technology, what parts of the body could be made prosthetic? We can already make limbs, glass eyes are old, dialysis can keep one alive without kidneys, there are artificial hearts and lungs, insulin can be produced synthetically, liver replacements are being worked on, etc. But there are no plans or ways to make a prosthetic brain.
It's not terribly useful as an authentication factor unless you have people submit to an MRI, but it really is what makes you who you are.
No, it's something you have. Your finger is something you have. Your eyes are something you have. They can be removed. It's just a matter of how much effort the attacker is willing to put in to get that something you have. Depending on the kindness of your attackers is never a good security strategy.
The very ability to duplicate fingerprints by making fake fingers is a clear example that a biometric is just another something you have.
Confusing biometrics with being something you are is a common mistake.
Biometrics aren't a replacement for passwords, they're a replacement for USERNAMES. They provide a "something you have" factor to authentication, there still needs to be a "something you know."
Like usernames they aren't secret. They don't need to be secret, and they can be copied without ruining the security of the system. They don't need to be changed, and are unique to each user. Biometrics are great when used as usernames, and a security nightmare waiting to happen when used as a password.
No one is saying that being open source makes your software invulnerable, just that it makes exploitation harder. Being open source is necessary but not sufficient for a software package to be considered secure. In this context open source can simply mean that the source is available to the customers and their auditors only, not the whole world.
No, because most of the mass doesn't come from the Higgs field.
Specifically, most of the mass of ordinary matter comes from the nuclei of atoms. Those are composed of protons and neutrons, which are in turn composed of a mix of quarks, anti-quarks, and gluons, with 3 "extra" quarks. The Higgs field gives mass to the quarks and anti-quarks (including the extras) but most of the mass of the particle is due to the binding energy of the strong force interaction between the constituent parts. So reducing the strength with which the Higgs field acts wouldn't substantially reduce the mass of the spaceship.
Even if you could lower the mass you couldn't make it 0 or negative, so you'd end up taking infinite energy anyway.
I know of one site on the entire internet with a policy towards ads that I find acceptable. That site is krebsonsecurity.com. He doesn't use flash ads, and manually reviews what ads will be shown to prevent malware ads from appearing. He has caught several such ads in the past, often after he posts information about criminal scam rings and such.
If you're not willing to take the effort to prevent malware being served by the ads on your page, then I'll take the effort to do so by blocking all ads. If you're not able to distinguish malware ads from normal ads, then I'll take the safe path by blocking all ads. If you do ensure your ads are all legitimate and aren't overly annoying (no sound) then I won't block them.
No, it's a sudden acceleration that kills. If you're stopped and a semi plows into you at 65mph you'll be just as dead as if you hit a brick wall while moving 65mph. That's also why going slowly can be dangerous, eg in San Diego the average speed on the I-5 southbound (not during rush hour) is about 75-80mph. If you drive 55mph you're much more likely to be hit from behind and injured than if you drove at or near the average speed.
Actually, even if it is deterministic there can be problems with no solutions, such as the Halting Problem. Predicting the future in all cases is impossible, even in a fully deterministic universe.
Chaotic systems have attractors. Chaotic systems will be mostly stable around the attractors, it's the details (where around the attractor they are) that vary.
Both statements are statements of intent, yours is clearer but longer. Since it's a headline it's traditional to remove "excess" words that won't significantly detract from the meaning.
I have birds. It's quite handy as bedding, and plentiful enough that I can change every day (or more often if needed). I've never actually looked at the things for longer than it takes to tear out a few pages though.
I use Java for Wuala, Falstad's circuit simulator, Freenet, Minecraft, Minecraft Structure Planner, and Enigma's LoL Item Changer. 3 of those are games or related to games, so not totally necessary. Freenet I run out of a sense of patriotism/civic duty as a US citizen, Wuala could be replaced by Spideroak or similar, and Falstad's circuit sim is just for helping people learn about circuits without needing to teach them LTSPICE or similar first.
I use the Java plugin for absolutely nothing. I've not once run into anything useful that requires it. I've kept it disabled for a long, long time.
Firefox 19. Tools -> Options -> Security: Warn me when sites try to install add-ons checkbox. Exceptions button. Block reported attack sites checkbox. Block reported web forgeries checkbox. Passwords section.
Nothing to allow disabling Java. Chrome has no "Security" panel or section of its options. So, which browser are you using, or are you too much of a "stupid twat" to know that two of the top three browsers (at least, I don't have IE installed) don't have the option you're describing in the location you're describing?
Slashdot Mirror
Of course not very long. It NEVER takes very long.
You don't need DRM.
If you for some insane reason decide you must spend money on DRM, make sure you use DRM that will anger the minimum number of purchasers.
If you are including online-based DRM make sure there's some advantage to purchasing the software to offset the disadvantage of having DRM.
Steam works because they follow these principles with their DRM. It rarely causes problems for legit purchasers, and it has several advantages for buying the real thing: steam "community", update integration, voice coms integration, etc. While the initial launch was terrible and slow the service has since been improved, and it now functions quite well at adding significant value. For some people the added value won't offset the ethical compromise of using DRM, but for others it will.
Make sure the "reasonable number" is unreasonably large if you must limit reinstalls. If the software can only be installed 5 times I probably won't buy it, if it can be installed 128 times I'd have much less of an issue with it. It's a small enough number that it won't be a significant source of piracy (someone will take the effort to crack the activation) and large enough that few people (if any) will run into it in normal use.
Also tie the activation to updates. Make it so that the legitimate purchasers get something the pirates don't in exchange for their money.
Infowars is about as reliable a news source as the Onion, and for the same reasons.
No, he's saying that we should be adding seat belts and anti-lock breaks and eventually self-driving cars to eliminate the need for the user to focus on safety in driving. He's arguing that the safety should be built into the system, and not rely on the judgement of the user. That's the exact opposite of your example.
"Do one thing perfectly" works well in some hardware, worse in other cases. Cameras are a case where the physics dictates the size of the optics needed for certain capabilities, so to get eg good telephoto capability or good low-light capability one needs a dedicated lens.
Likewise with printers. Sure an inkjet all-in-one printer/scanner/copier/fax is nice, but there are still uses for large format printers & scanners, and high-volume copiers. They're just not needed for the average household, so the specialized devices are relegated to the businesses and hobbyists that need them.
Your brain is probably the best bet.
An easy way to think about it is imagine a society with more advanced medical technology, what parts of the body could be made prosthetic? We can already make limbs, glass eyes are old, dialysis can keep one alive without kidneys, there are artificial hearts and lungs, insulin can be produced synthetically, liver replacements are being worked on, etc. But there are no plans or ways to make a prosthetic brain.
It's not terribly useful as an authentication factor unless you have people submit to an MRI, but it really is what makes you who you are.
No, it's something you have. Your finger is something you have. Your eyes are something you have. They can be removed. It's just a matter of how much effort the attacker is willing to put in to get that something you have. Depending on the kindness of your attackers is never a good security strategy.
The very ability to duplicate fingerprints by making fake fingers is a clear example that a biometric is just another something you have.
Confusing biometrics with being something you are is a common mistake.
NO!
Biometrics aren't a replacement for passwords, they're a replacement for USERNAMES. They provide a "something you have" factor to authentication, there still needs to be a "something you know."
Like usernames they aren't secret. They don't need to be secret, and they can be copied without ruining the security of the system. They don't need to be changed, and are unique to each user. Biometrics are great when used as usernames, and a security nightmare waiting to happen when used as a password.
No one is saying that being open source makes your software invulnerable, just that it makes exploitation harder. Being open source is necessary but not sufficient for a software package to be considered secure. In this context open source can simply mean that the source is available to the customers and their auditors only, not the whole world.
No, because most of the mass doesn't come from the Higgs field.
Specifically, most of the mass of ordinary matter comes from the nuclei of atoms. Those are composed of protons and neutrons, which are in turn composed of a mix of quarks, anti-quarks, and gluons, with 3 "extra" quarks. The Higgs field gives mass to the quarks and anti-quarks (including the extras) but most of the mass of the particle is due to the binding energy of the strong force interaction between the constituent parts. So reducing the strength with which the Higgs field acts wouldn't substantially reduce the mass of the spaceship.
Even if you could lower the mass you couldn't make it 0 or negative, so you'd end up taking infinite energy anyway.
I know of one site on the entire internet with a policy towards ads that I find acceptable. That site is krebsonsecurity.com. He doesn't use flash ads, and manually reviews what ads will be shown to prevent malware ads from appearing. He has caught several such ads in the past, often after he posts information about criminal scam rings and such.
If you're not willing to take the effort to prevent malware being served by the ads on your page, then I'll take the effort to do so by blocking all ads.
If you're not able to distinguish malware ads from normal ads, then I'll take the safe path by blocking all ads.
If you do ensure your ads are all legitimate and aren't overly annoying (no sound) then I won't block them.
Android has a hosts file, located at /etc/hosts as you would expect for any other Linux distro.
In a proper S-expression of course!
No, it's a sudden acceleration that kills. If you're stopped and a semi plows into you at 65mph you'll be just as dead as if you hit a brick wall while moving 65mph. That's also why going slowly can be dangerous, eg in San Diego the average speed on the I-5 southbound (not during rush hour) is about 75-80mph. If you drive 55mph you're much more likely to be hit from behind and injured than if you drove at or near the average speed.
Actually, even if it is deterministic there can be problems with no solutions, such as the Halting Problem. Predicting the future in all cases is impossible, even in a fully deterministic universe.
Chaotic systems have attractors. Chaotic systems will be mostly stable around the attractors, it's the details (where around the attractor they are) that vary.
Banana!
Both statements are statements of intent, yours is clearer but longer. Since it's a headline it's traditional to remove "excess" words that won't significantly detract from the meaning.
I have birds. It's quite handy as bedding, and plentiful enough that I can change every day (or more often if needed). I've never actually looked at the things for longer than it takes to tear out a few pages though.
What's an "article"?
I should add that PLOS isn't perfect, and that as more journals come into existence there will be those with greater discrimination and more prestige.
But some open-access journals ARE prestigious enough, or rapidly gaining prestige, such as PLOS ONE.
I use Java for Wuala, Falstad's circuit simulator, Freenet, Minecraft, Minecraft Structure Planner, and Enigma's LoL Item Changer. 3 of those are games or related to games, so not totally necessary. Freenet I run out of a sense of patriotism/civic duty as a US citizen, Wuala could be replaced by Spideroak or similar, and Falstad's circuit sim is just for helping people learn about circuits without needing to teach them LTSPICE or similar first.
I use the Java plugin for absolutely nothing. I've not once run into anything useful that requires it. I've kept it disabled for a long, long time.
Your C code still relies on the standard library and your compiler to be secure.
Firefox 19. Tools -> Options -> Security:
Warn me when sites try to install add-ons checkbox. Exceptions button.
Block reported attack sites checkbox.
Block reported web forgeries checkbox.
Passwords section.
Nothing to allow disabling Java.
Chrome has no "Security" panel or section of its options.
So, which browser are you using, or are you too much of a "stupid twat" to know that two of the top three browsers (at least, I don't have IE installed) don't have the option you're describing in the location you're describing?