It could have been possible maybe. In a 20th century history elective in college, our professor had us read one of those "everything you know about ww2 is wrong" books. The author posited that the bulk of what gets into mass media... Patton and the 3rd army, the atomic bombs, The French resistance, the Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare, the Doolittle raid, MacArthur's island-hopping strategy, the USS Enterprise, the involvement of the various other allied powers, etc... was mostly just miscellanea. Rather, his position was that what won the war was 1/3rd Bletchley Park, 1/3rd American manufacturing, and 1/3rd the previously-mentioned miscellaneous.
The conclusion was that without the US factories, *maybe* the UK could have used Ultra to most effectively utilize its limited resources and still pull off a win. And, without the UK codebreakers, *maybe* the US could have simply constructed so much more war materiel than Germany's and Japan's navies could sink that we'd have eventually just Zerg rushed them and won anyway. But it was the combination of the codebreakers and factories that really secured the allied victory. The argument, especially since more and more about Ultra and Magic that had never been known before was reaching the public eye at the time, was fairly compelling.
I really suspect that the bulk of the anti-user slashdotters (And anti-Uber people win general) live in places where they drive to work, don'r go out drinking or clubbing (Assuming the latter are even available out in the suburbs.), and never had to rely on taxies; except maybe a couple of times a year to go to and from the airport. That, or they're too young to remember the days before Uber & Lyft, when it was taxis or MUNI's "Owl" service, or nothing. So they just don't know just how terrible traditional taxies are. I, OTOH, have lived in a city where taxis are the occasional necessity since well before Uber existed; and had to suffer the awfulness of cabbies for many years. Then things changed. I started using Uber when they still called themselves Ubercab, were available only in San Francisco, and the only option was the black car service the ran about 50% more expensive then the taxis they replaced. And I never looked back.
And traditional taxis are really just bloody awful. If traditional taxis were not so spectacularly craptacular, Uber, Lyft, and the like would never have gotten a foothold in the first place. And the taxi corporations are just bad as Uber ever has been. And they've been at their shenanigans for a good half-century, or linger, before Uber was even a thing. It's just that Uber's problems came to light in the social media era; where the taxis have buried the worst of their misdeeds (Bribing politicians into erecting barriers to entry like the medallions, for example.) in the annals of history.
For my part, if my choice is between a scummy company where the car actually shows up when I summon it, the drivers never (and don't have the option to) try to run the "my credit card machine is broken, cash only" scam, who don't bitch (or refuse to take me at all) if I need to go out to the avenues, who will actually pick me up in those same avenues, and whose cars have never smelt of smoke, pee, or vomit; versus an equally scummy company where none of that is true, and which has been scummily abusing the public since before I was born; I'll take the former every time.
> these cached thumbnails are stored on non- > encrypted hard drives,... content stored on > encrypted containers.
This does not make sense. If the hard drives are encrypted by FileVault; the storage location for these thumbnails would be encrypted too. Where else is this cache supposed to live? I'm pretty sure that Apple does not add an extra, secret, non-encrypted drive to everyone's Macs so as to cache these silly little images. And as if the summary weren't bad enough, it gets worse when you read the article. QuickLook isn't new, as they claim. It was introduced as part of Leopard, more than a decade ago. And a quick check on my CLI shows that TEMPDIR is very much part of my encrypted root volume. I'm thinking these people are not the "macOS security experts" they claim to be; and msmash failed as an editor in not properly vetting the article he chose to post.
... Whites represent 52.5% (and falling) of the relevant population. Considering margins of error and rounding, that puts Google's 53.1% white vs. 46.9% minorities pretty much exactly where they ought to be on race; with the male vs. female percentages being the only remaining trouble point on the diversity front... that's evident in the diversity report and with regard to the categories on which they provide data anyway. They've not, I see, provided data on the age demographics or the sexual orientations of their employees. So they could very well be guilty of, and covering up, ageism and homophobia. But without numbers, there's no real way to be sure as yet.
Apple may be on the egregious side. But they're far from the only offender here. *Everyone* seems to be letting their real computers stagnate in favor of gadgets. And I suspect that it's not even the fault of any of them; but a result of Intel's recent trend of sitting around with their thumbs up their bums.
About three years ago, I bought a top-end iMac with a core i7 CPU that tops out "turbo boost"ing at 4Ghz. Leaving aside "pro" model and Xeons, the top-end iMac now is an i7 @ 4.2Ghz... which you would think would say something bad about Apple. But a quick check for the top-end consumer non-Xeon HP and Dell machines that I could find, turns up machines specced at core i7s topping out at most 4.6hz. That's better; but not by much. Granted, an i7 @ 4Ghz today is not quite the same thing as an i7 @ 4Ghz from three years ago. But the improvements are fairly incremental and underwhelming yawners... especially considering we've had two full 18-month Moore cycles in the meantime. The Intel of old would have improved its product lineup considerably more than they have bothered to do these last 36 months.
Perhaps this is the root of the persistent rumors of Apple switching to its own ARM-based chip designs? After all, that's pretty much how Apple wound up on Intel in the first place... IBM was letting the PPC G5 stagnate and Motorola pretty much checked out entirely.
Better yet: Just don't give out anything at all to randoms who harass you on the street or sidewalk. And in that, I include those students that outfits like Greenpeace, Planned Parenthood, and the HRC send out to bother people for money on the sidewalks. I use these as my examples because I actually agree fairly wholeheartedly with their agendas, but despise this method. Also included are the people who harass outside of storefronts for signatures for whatever ballot proposition committee is paying them. This particular behavior is obnoxious as all hell and should not at all be encouraged. And they won't stop until people stop handing out money, signatures, and whatever else they manage to score.
Better to decide on your own time and under no pressure what charitable causes you care about the most. Then do your research to pick a set of organizations that support those causes in a manner you find most ethical and efficient; and donate to them privately. That way your chances of getting scammed are minimized and your money will be used more effectively.
Doesn't that just lead to the lawyers just going after whoever in that chain had the deepest pockets rather than the party that actually screwed up?
... Because that's absolutely what would happen here in the US if that sort of system were allowed. If this sort of lawsuit were allowed to go the other way here; it would be a field day for manufacturers to design, build, and sell absolute janky garbage across the board. And they'd *never* face any consequences because the party with the deepest pockets will almost undoubtedly be Amazon or Walmart or Best Buy or similar.
At best, that strikes me as counterproductive if you actually want to meet defective garbage off the market. And, personally, it comes off as fundamentally unfair to me on a personal level. If *I* legitimately screw up; yeah call me out on it and I'll own up to my own mistakes. Try to blame me for someone else's malfeasance? I will absolutely fight you tooth and nail with every resource at my disposal and I will have nothing but eternal enmity towards you forever.
> The real facts don't matter, just my perception of a > threat.
And that's a huge problem and a legal standard that needs to be disposed of. How do you prove a perception or belief? Until and unless we evolve telepathy, or can build a mind-reading machine; claims of perception or belief in a supposed threat are impossible-to-prove garbage. And PROOF beyond a reasonable doubt, not belief of any kind, is supposed to be the legal standard before the state can judge someone guilty and punish him in any way. And I'd bloody well argue that for execution, the "beyond a reasonable doubt" part should go away... 100% incontrovertibly proven facts without the smallest shred of doubt, or GTFO.
Which need to go away immediately and forever. Leaving aside the question of whether the death penalty should exist at all; the standard for the state to execute a citizen is supposed to be "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" that the executed. And that's only ever supposed to happen after the due process of a jury trial. Hopped up thugs with the delusion that real life should be a Judge Dredd comic where their word and whim is the law and that trials and juries are unnecessary have no business wearing a badge, or in the service of the public in any capacity.
While the caller is certainly an asshat who needs to be locked up; at the end of the day, he's not the one who made the decision to pull the trigger and shoot the victim. The shooting officer damn well *SHOULD* be locked away forever. And his superiors up the reporting chain should all be dishonorably discharged w/ any and all benefits forfeited.
Is it to raise a teen to be a safe and responsible internet/smartphone/computer/technology-in-general user? Then they should be taught good information security habits as early as possible; starting with proper password discipline beginning with: "Never, but NEVER give your password to anyone under any circumstances."; continuing along to how important 2-factor and encryption are;, and including malware avoidance and removal. Seriously... we already entrust a huge portion of our lives to our computers and cell phones. And the value of that data is going to do nothing but increase. Good infosec habits are a damn valuable lesson that will do a child much more good than... well... What lesson DOES it teach when you force spyware upon them?
And then there's the other possible parental goal in play here: Feeding their own ego by exerting power against someone who is in no position to resist. These are contemptible creatures. And I really must disagree with your professed leniency towards them.
I suppose there's a third possibility in that some parents might place the spyware on their teens' phones as a lesson; and the ones who discover and remove it are rewarded. But that seems a somewhat ad hoc and suboptimal way to get the point across.
Spyware (Because that's what this is.) that requires you to specifically compromise your target by intentionally disabling security features; is, in turn, itself insecure? And people are shocked by this?
Sorry, but I really can't conjure up any sympathy here. This is not a case of someone just screwing up and getting pwned. This is an intentional and malicious attack (and a particularly stupid one at that) that just happened to backfire. Every bad thing that might happen... to either the company or the parents... is richly deserved.
> iOS backs everything up to iCloud, like it or not, so > LEOs dumping the device is not really an issue > compared to them just asking for a copy of the files > fresh from a backup server.
1) You can turn that function off.
2) To get at the data stored in iCloud, the police have to goto a judge for a subpoena or warrant; which can then be contested. That's a world apart from building a backdoor into the device, which the police are then able to use extrajudicially. We need more oversight and less power in the hands of the police; not less and more. And, case in point: there was ZERO controversy about the FBI subpoenaing the data stored in iCloud and Apple handing it over. Handing over what you have is one thing. Apple's objection was at the prospect of being forced to engineer a backdoor into the iPhone, ACTIVELY becoming agents, in fact if not name, of the FBI.. Being forced to actively collaborate is something else entirely.
3) Seriously... in what world do real criminals and terrorists set up AppleIDs, iCloud accounts, and data backups on the phones which they actually use to plot their nefarious schemes anyway? That's like leaving your master plan on a 3.5" floppy on your desk blotter, labeled "Operation Impending Doom", the password written on a post-it next to the disk, and the password being pa55w0rd. Hell... even kids making prank calls use burner (non-smart)phones bought with cash these days.
You can use it to create your own device profile, with considerably more stringent rules than the default options in the on-device menu. It's may not offer as much granularity as you prefer; but it's a good step up from the defaults. I think you can lower the number of failed login attempts down to 2. You can make complex passcodes mandatory and force aging and rotation. Theres a long laundry list of features you can disable. Hell, you could even force all internet traffic to go through a designated VPN, should you so desire.
I do have to say the interface is obtuse and unintuitive though. It's definitely not one of the software jewels in Apple's crown. But it gets the job done.
My default is to turn on logging on everything that has it; see about adding it to things that don't; dump it all into Splunk or ELK; and keep it forever.
Simple: We have security obligations to Japan. When we took over and occupied their country following WW2; we took it upon ourselves to write their new constitution for them. Said constitution placed severe restrictions on the size and composition of any future military they'd rebuild. And the missions they're allowed to undertake are similarly restricted. In return, we took upon ourselves the obligation to assure their security. North Korea is just across the sea from Japan, of course. And they've launched missiles into Japanese airspace of late. So I think it's safe to say that NK is a belligerent toward Japan. China has maintained belligerency towards Japan for about as long as I can remember, as well. Just a couple of years ago, they started intercepting and threatening Japanese airliners in International airspace... until the Air Force sent a few B-52s through those same air lanes to show what's up. And China has been trying to muscle in on the Senkaku islands, like they are the Spratlys, for many years as well. Russia, for that matter, is actually still *occupying* some of Japan's northern islands. So yeah, there's a quite legitimate obligation and need for a US presence at least in and around Japan.
A few decades later, President Carter signed into law the Taiwan Relations Act; which requires less comprehensive, but still binding, commitment to the defense of that nation as well. And I don't think rapacity and ambitions towards Taiwan need a reminder.
Well... I can't think of any reason to dislike T-Mobile. In fact, I have them as my carrier now. I've been nothing but happy since switching. And I'm very much dismayed at the prospect now of going back to AT&T. Sprint, on the other hand; if you don't yet hate them with a burning passion... their network, their choice of available phone hardware, their billing system, their customer service people, their CEO, the whole shebang (Hell, even their HQ campus in Overland Park is rage-inducing.)... it's all but certainly only because you've really just not gotten the chance to know them.
I'm really, Really, REALLY hoping for this one to be blocked.
No, I don't mean complain to Amazon about the price increase. I mean just go ahead and 1) Subscribe to Prime. Then, 2) Whenever a package is late or the contents are damaged, call in and complain. The email route will sometimes work too; but you'll have better results calling in and talking to a human. A few words to the rep, especially about how "this has become a pattern lately" or in November and December "this is very troubling during holiday shopping time", will net you a free month of Prime, and sometimes even a $5 or $10 credit to your account.
About three years ago, the reliability of Prime shipping dropped dramatically. I don't know exactly what happened. My guess would be that they're saving money by routing more shipping away from FedEx and UPS towards OnTrac and USPS. But I've had more late packages in the last three years than I think I had in the previous ten. So, taking my free months and account credits for late or damaged packaged into account; I think I've been paying more like $30-$40 per year for Prime. And even with the issues it's suffered as late; it's totally worth it at this price.
It's actually fairly unlikely that Apple cares about Shazam as a user-facing app at all. It's really much more likely that they want the dataset, the backend software, and maybe the development team, as a hedge against their current reliance on Gracenote.
Oh? If Steve Jobs is somehow managing to still "manipulate his followers and remoras", for his personal gain or any other reason... from beyond the grave... then perhaps it's entirely justified to treat him as a revered figure and for Apple to be tax-exempt. After all, we've extended that courtesy to the last guy documented to have pulled off that feat for about two millennia now.
He should also be required to call... by hand, on an old-school rotary-dial phone... every single person he robocalled, personally apologize, accept any verbal abuse received, and express his total agreement with said abuse, before moving on to the next offended party. And just to add in a bit of extra poetic justice; he should be required to issue these apologies to those people in alphabetical order.
> It's not a flaw, it's a feature. It permits employees of > legitimate businesses to show a different callback > number (e.g. customer service) rather than their > personal extensions.
Well, I'd say that's a "feature" that's outlived its usefulness.
I get multiple number-spoofed scam calls every DAY at this point. Sure, every new number goes into my block list. But that doesn't stop the scammers setting their robocaller to just use the next number in the exchange. Meanwhile, I'm pretty sure I've only received two real business calls, with a legitimately-spoofed callback number, in the entire last *year*. Both of these were appointment reminders from my ophthalmologist's practice. And while that's a nice courtesy... I guess in theory... it's really superfluous, since those appointments went right into Fantastical when I made them, and I'd already gotten notified that they were forthcoming. So yeah... it'd totally be well worth giving up those appointment reminders, to get CallerID fixed to be non-fakable and drop the hammer on the telephone spammers.
Hell... thats half the reason I'm still resentful that the nerd-hating hipster brigade managed to so effectively torpedo Google Glass. Sure, it was half-baked and over priced as released. But it was the obvious first step towards Terminator & Predator vision, dammit. Realistically, IR & UV cameras plus ultrasound and maybe LIDAR, all feeding into a A/R HUD overlay, is a bit more realistic than contacts that do magic things with the EM spectrum, I would think.
(Unless, perhaps, those contacts are a miniature LDC display themselves. And maybe they can double as the eye-tracking component. But I'm not sure how you realistically generate the data to be displayed without a camera in the mix somewhere.)
Nope. It's remained in the news, as the story has developed. The police released the body camera footage from their earlier encounter with her a few days ago... that made the Friday news. And just this morning, there was a segment on KCBS about possible possible security changes at company campuses as as result of the shooting. But hey... carry on... and don't let a little thing like facts get in the way of your narrative.
Slashdot Mirror
It could have been possible maybe. In a 20th century history elective in college, our professor had us read one of those "everything you know about ww2 is wrong" books. The author posited that the bulk of what gets into mass media... Patton and the 3rd army, the atomic bombs, The French resistance, the Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare, the Doolittle raid, MacArthur's island-hopping strategy, the USS Enterprise, the involvement of the various other allied powers, etc... was mostly just miscellanea. Rather, his position was that what won the war was 1/3rd Bletchley Park, 1/3rd American manufacturing, and 1/3rd the previously-mentioned miscellaneous.
The conclusion was that without the US factories, *maybe* the UK could have used Ultra to most effectively utilize its limited resources and still pull off a win. And, without the UK codebreakers, *maybe* the US could have simply constructed so much more war materiel than Germany's and Japan's navies could sink that we'd have eventually just Zerg rushed them and won anyway. But it was the combination of the codebreakers and factories that really secured the allied victory. The argument, especially since more and more about Ultra and Magic that had never been known before was reaching the public eye at the time, was fairly compelling.
Also it's not a book, as the AC claims; just a short story. But hey... "alternative facts" and all that.
I really suspect that the bulk of the anti-user slashdotters (And anti-Uber people win general) live in places where they drive to work, don'r go out drinking or clubbing (Assuming the latter are even available out in the suburbs.), and never had to rely on taxies; except maybe a couple of times a year to go to and from the airport. That, or they're too young to remember the days before Uber & Lyft, when it was taxis or MUNI's "Owl" service, or nothing. So they just don't know just how terrible traditional taxies are. I, OTOH, have lived in a city where taxis are the occasional necessity since well before Uber existed; and had to suffer the awfulness of cabbies for many years. Then things changed. I started using Uber when they still called themselves Ubercab, were available only in San Francisco, and the only option was the black car service the ran about 50% more expensive then the taxis they replaced. And I never looked back.
And traditional taxis are really just bloody awful. If traditional taxis were not so spectacularly craptacular, Uber, Lyft, and the like would never have gotten a foothold in the first place. And the taxi corporations are just bad as Uber ever has been. And they've been at their shenanigans for a good half-century, or linger, before Uber was even a thing. It's just that Uber's problems came to light in the social media era; where the taxis have buried the worst of their misdeeds (Bribing politicians into erecting barriers to entry like the medallions, for example.) in the annals of history.
For my part, if my choice is between a scummy company where the car actually shows up when I summon it, the drivers never (and don't have the option to) try to run the "my credit card machine is broken, cash only" scam, who don't bitch (or refuse to take me at all) if I need to go out to the avenues, who will actually pick me up in those same avenues, and whose cars have never smelt of smoke, pee, or vomit; versus an equally scummy company where none of that is true, and which has been scummily abusing the public since before I was born; I'll take the former every time.
> these cached thumbnails are stored on non- ... content stored on
> encrypted hard drives,
> encrypted containers.
This does not make sense. If the hard drives are encrypted by FileVault; the storage location for these thumbnails would be encrypted too. Where else is this cache supposed to live? I'm pretty sure that Apple does not add an extra, secret, non-encrypted drive to everyone's Macs so as to cache these silly little images. And as if the summary weren't bad enough, it gets worse when you read the article. QuickLook isn't new, as they claim. It was introduced as part of Leopard, more than a decade ago. And a quick check on my CLI shows that TEMPDIR is very much part of my encrypted root volume. I'm thinking these people are not the "macOS security experts" they claim to be; and msmash failed as an editor in not properly vetting the article he chose to post.
I don't know where you get that 62% number. But according to wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_Bay_Area#Demographics
Apple may be on the egregious side. But they're far from the only offender here. *Everyone* seems to be letting their real computers stagnate in favor of gadgets. And I suspect that it's not even the fault of any of them; but a result of Intel's recent trend of sitting around with their thumbs up their bums.
About three years ago, I bought a top-end iMac with a core i7 CPU that tops out "turbo boost"ing at 4Ghz. Leaving aside "pro" model and Xeons, the top-end iMac now is an i7 @ 4.2Ghz... which you would think would say something bad about Apple. But a quick check for the top-end consumer non-Xeon HP and Dell machines that I could find, turns up machines specced at core i7s topping out at most 4.6hz. That's better; but not by much. Granted, an i7 @ 4Ghz today is not quite the same thing as an i7 @ 4Ghz from three years ago. But the improvements are fairly incremental and underwhelming yawners... especially considering we've had two full 18-month Moore cycles in the meantime. The Intel of old would have improved its product lineup considerably more than they have bothered to do these last 36 months.
Perhaps this is the root of the persistent rumors of Apple switching to its own ARM-based chip designs? After all, that's pretty much how Apple wound up on Intel in the first place... IBM was letting the PPC G5 stagnate and Motorola pretty much checked out entirely.
Better yet: Just don't give out anything at all to randoms who harass you on the street or sidewalk. And in that, I include those students that outfits like Greenpeace, Planned Parenthood, and the HRC send out to bother people for money on the sidewalks. I use these as my examples because I actually agree fairly wholeheartedly with their agendas, but despise this method. Also included are the people who harass outside of storefronts for signatures for whatever ballot proposition committee is paying them. This particular behavior is obnoxious as all hell and should not at all be encouraged. And they won't stop until people stop handing out money, signatures, and whatever else they manage to score.
Better to decide on your own time and under no pressure what charitable causes you care about the most. Then do your research to pick a set of organizations that support those causes in a manner you find most ethical and efficient; and donate to them privately. That way your chances of getting scammed are minimized and your money will be used more effectively.
Okay... honest and serious question here:
Doesn't that just lead to the lawyers just going after whoever in that chain had the deepest pockets rather than the party that actually screwed up?
... Because that's absolutely what would happen here in the US if that sort of system were allowed. If this sort of lawsuit were allowed to go the other way here; it would be a field day for manufacturers to design, build, and sell absolute janky garbage across the board. And they'd *never* face any consequences because the party with the deepest pockets will almost undoubtedly be Amazon or Walmart or Best Buy or similar.
At best, that strikes me as counterproductive if you actually want to meet defective garbage off the market. And, personally, it comes off as fundamentally unfair to me on a personal level. If *I* legitimately screw up; yeah call me out on it and I'll own up to my own mistakes. Try to blame me for someone else's malfeasance? I will absolutely fight you tooth and nail with every resource at my disposal and I will have nothing but eternal enmity towards you forever.
> Have they never heard "If it aint broke, don't fix it"?
You obviously don't remember Hotmail; before gates and company sank their fangs into it, that is.
> The real facts don't matter, just my perception of a
> threat.
And that's a huge problem and a legal standard that needs to be disposed of. How do you prove a perception or belief? Until and unless we evolve telepathy, or can build a mind-reading machine; claims of perception or belief in a supposed threat are impossible-to-prove garbage. And PROOF beyond a reasonable doubt, not belief of any kind, is supposed to be the legal standard before the state can judge someone guilty and punish him in any way. And I'd bloody well argue that for execution, the "beyond a reasonable doubt" part should go away... 100% incontrovertibly proven facts without the smallest shred of doubt, or GTFO.
> Police have the "reasonable belief" clause.
Which need to go away immediately and forever. Leaving aside the question of whether the death penalty should exist at all; the standard for the state to execute a citizen is supposed to be "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" that the executed. And that's only ever supposed to happen after the due process of a jury trial. Hopped up thugs with the delusion that real life should be a Judge Dredd comic where their word and whim is the law and that trials and juries are unnecessary have no business wearing a badge, or in the service of the public in any capacity.
While the caller is certainly an asshat who needs to be locked up; at the end of the day, he's not the one who made the decision to pull the trigger and shoot the victim. The shooting officer damn well *SHOULD* be locked away forever. And his superiors up the reporting chain should all be dishonorably discharged w/ any and all benefits forfeited.
Well, that depends. What is the parent's goal?
Is it to raise a teen to be a safe and responsible internet/smartphone/computer/technology-in-general user? Then they should be taught good information security habits as early as possible; starting with proper password discipline beginning with: "Never, but NEVER give your password to anyone under any circumstances."; continuing along to how important 2-factor and encryption are;, and including malware avoidance and removal. Seriously... we already entrust a huge portion of our lives to our computers and cell phones. And the value of that data is going to do nothing but increase. Good infosec habits are a damn valuable lesson that will do a child much more good than... well... What lesson DOES it teach when you force spyware upon them?
And then there's the other possible parental goal in play here: Feeding their own ego by exerting power against someone who is in no position to resist. These are contemptible creatures. And I really must disagree with your professed leniency towards them.
I suppose there's a third possibility in that some parents might place the spyware on their teens' phones as a lesson; and the ones who discover and remove it are rewarded. But that seems a somewhat ad hoc and suboptimal way to get the point across.
Spyware (Because that's what this is.) that requires you to specifically compromise your target by intentionally disabling security features; is, in turn, itself insecure? And people are shocked by this?
Sorry, but I really can't conjure up any sympathy here. This is not a case of someone just screwing up and getting pwned. This is an intentional and malicious attack (and a particularly stupid one at that) that just happened to backfire. Every bad thing that might happen... to either the company or the parents... is richly deserved.
> iOS backs everything up to iCloud, like it or not, so
> LEOs dumping the device is not really an issue
> compared to them just asking for a copy of the files
> fresh from a backup server.
1) You can turn that function off.
2) To get at the data stored in iCloud, the police have to goto a judge for a subpoena or warrant; which can then be contested. That's a world apart from building a backdoor into the device, which the police are then able to use extrajudicially. We need more oversight and less power in the hands of the police; not less and more. And, case in point: there was ZERO controversy about the FBI subpoenaing the data stored in iCloud and Apple handing it over. Handing over what you have is one thing. Apple's objection was at the prospect of being forced to engineer a backdoor into the iPhone, ACTIVELY becoming agents, in fact if not name, of the FBI.. Being forced to actively collaborate is something else entirely.
3) Seriously... in what world do real criminals and terrorists set up AppleIDs, iCloud accounts, and data backups on the phones which they actually use to plot their nefarious schemes anyway? That's like leaving your master plan on a 3.5" floppy on your desk blotter, labeled "Operation Impending Doom", the password written on a post-it next to the disk, and the password being pa55w0rd. Hell... even kids making prank calls use burner (non-smart)phones bought with cash these days.
Check out Apple Configurator 2:
https://itunes.apple.com/us/ap...
You can use it to create your own device profile, with considerably more stringent rules than the default options in the on-device menu. It's may not offer as much granularity as you prefer; but it's a good step up from the defaults. I think you can lower the number of failed login attempts down to 2. You can make complex passcodes mandatory and force aging and rotation. Theres a long laundry list of features you can disable. Hell, you could even force all internet traffic to go through a designated VPN, should you so desire.
I do have to say the interface is obtuse and unintuitive though. It's definitely not one of the software jewels in Apple's crown. But it gets the job done.
So very much this.
My default is to turn on logging on everything that has it; see about adding it to things that don't; dump it all into Splunk or ELK; and keep it forever.
Storage is cheaper than downtime.
Simple: We have security obligations to Japan. When we took over and occupied their country following WW2; we took it upon ourselves to write their new constitution for them. Said constitution placed severe restrictions on the size and composition of any future military they'd rebuild. And the missions they're allowed to undertake are similarly restricted. In return, we took upon ourselves the obligation to assure their security. North Korea is just across the sea from Japan, of course. And they've launched missiles into Japanese airspace of late. So I think it's safe to say that NK is a belligerent toward Japan. China has maintained belligerency towards Japan for about as long as I can remember, as well. Just a couple of years ago, they started intercepting and threatening Japanese airliners in International airspace... until the Air Force sent a few B-52s through those same air lanes to show what's up. And China has been trying to muscle in on the Senkaku islands, like they are the Spratlys, for many years as well. Russia, for that matter, is actually still *occupying* some of Japan's northern islands. So yeah, there's a quite legitimate obligation and need for a US presence at least in and around Japan.
A few decades later, President Carter signed into law the Taiwan Relations Act; which requires less comprehensive, but still binding, commitment to the defense of that nation as well. And I don't think rapacity and ambitions towards Taiwan need a reminder.
Well... I can't think of any reason to dislike T-Mobile. In fact, I have them as my carrier now. I've been nothing but happy since switching. And I'm very much dismayed at the prospect now of going back to AT&T. Sprint, on the other hand; if you don't yet hate them with a burning passion... their network, their choice of available phone hardware, their billing system, their customer service people, their CEO, the whole shebang (Hell, even their HQ campus in Overland Park is rage-inducing.)... it's all but certainly only because you've really just not gotten the chance to know them.
I'm really, Really, REALLY hoping for this one to be blocked.
No, I don't mean complain to Amazon about the price increase. I mean just go ahead and 1) Subscribe to Prime. Then, 2) Whenever a package is late or the contents are damaged, call in and complain. The email route will sometimes work too; but you'll have better results calling in and talking to a human. A few words to the rep, especially about how "this has become a pattern lately" or in November and December "this is very troubling during holiday shopping time", will net you a free month of Prime, and sometimes even a $5 or $10 credit to your account.
About three years ago, the reliability of Prime shipping dropped dramatically. I don't know exactly what happened. My guess would be that they're saving money by routing more shipping away from FedEx and UPS towards OnTrac and USPS. But I've had more late packages in the last three years than I think I had in the previous ten. So, taking my free months and account credits for late or damaged packaged into account; I think I've been paying more like $30-$40 per year for Prime. And even with the issues it's suffered as late; it's totally worth it at this price.
It's actually fairly unlikely that Apple cares about Shazam as a user-facing app at all. It's really much more likely that they want the dataset, the backend software, and maybe the development team, as a hedge against their current reliance on Gracenote.
Oh? If Steve Jobs is somehow managing to still "manipulate his followers and remoras", for his personal gain or any other reason... from beyond the grave... then perhaps it's entirely justified to treat him as a revered figure and for Apple to be tax-exempt. After all, we've extended that courtesy to the last guy documented to have pulled off that feat for about two millennia now.
He should also be required to call... by hand, on an old-school rotary-dial phone... every single person he robocalled, personally apologize, accept any verbal abuse received, and express his total agreement with said abuse, before moving on to the next offended party. And just to add in a bit of extra poetic justice; he should be required to issue these apologies to those people in alphabetical order.
> It's not a flaw, it's a feature. It permits employees of
> legitimate businesses to show a different callback
> number (e.g. customer service) rather than their
> personal extensions.
Well, I'd say that's a "feature" that's outlived its usefulness.
I get multiple number-spoofed scam calls every DAY at this point. Sure, every new number goes into my block list. But that doesn't stop the scammers setting their robocaller to just use the next number in the exchange. Meanwhile, I'm pretty sure I've only received two real business calls, with a legitimately-spoofed callback number, in the entire last *year*. Both of these were appointment reminders from my ophthalmologist's practice. And while that's a nice courtesy... I guess in theory... it's really superfluous, since those appointments went right into Fantastical when I made them, and I'd already gotten notified that they were forthcoming. So yeah... it'd totally be well worth giving up those appointment reminders, to get CallerID fixed to be non-fakable and drop the hammer on the telephone spammers.
Hell... thats half the reason I'm still resentful that the nerd-hating hipster brigade managed to so effectively torpedo Google Glass. Sure, it was half-baked and over priced as released. But it was the obvious first step towards Terminator & Predator vision, dammit. Realistically, IR & UV cameras plus ultrasound and maybe LIDAR, all feeding into a A/R HUD overlay, is a bit more realistic than contacts that do magic things with the EM spectrum, I would think.
(Unless, perhaps, those contacts are a miniature LDC display themselves. And maybe they can double as the eye-tracking component. But I'm not sure how you realistically generate the data to be displayed without a camera in the mix somewhere.)
Nope. It's remained in the news, as the story has developed. The police released the body camera footage from their earlier encounter with her a few days ago... that made the Friday news. And just this morning, there was a segment on KCBS about possible possible security changes at company campuses as as result of the shooting. But hey... carry on... and don't let a little thing like facts get in the way of your narrative.