Because sometimes I don't go out because I don't 'feel' like driving. Sure I could go to the grocery store to get this ingredient I am out of or I could just substitute this bag of rice I have for the called for pasta and still have a reasonable dinner. People make marginal decisions like that all the time. If going to the grocery does not mean having to drive and pay attention but instead means I can take my tablet with me and finish the TV show I am watching, just in the car instead of on the sofa, I might go when I otherwise would not have.
I have family about 2 hours away. Now there is no way I am driving 2 hours there and 2 hours back after work on a Tuesday night. 4 hours of driving isn't just a time investment its an mental and physical investment. On the other hand if I leave the office at 5:30 and can be at Mom's by 7:30 while I watch the news, read a book, and have a cocktail.... Well new I could go have dinner with my parents, get back in that car an hour later at 8:30 and still be home to bed by 11 or so. Does not sound so bad.
I have to disagree. The real value in space exploration has been the technology that came out of the effort. Its debatable if that is even really the origin of much of that tech. Certainly rocket and delivery technology came out of WWII and that isn't terribly useful for doing anything but hurling weapons at each other or tossing stuff into space.
We did get a lot of valuable computer technology, and some spiffy things like Velcro out of space exploration effort. We also made a number of materials science advances that have paid real dividends. I can't help but suspect the military applications and desires for most of those technologies would have birthed them too, if NASA had not provided a slightly more open incubator. All and all it was probably worth the investment.
Here we are at the 80/20 point though. We have 80% of the tech we really need to explore the solar system. What is left is cooking up the other 20% which might easily end up requiring 80% of the total investment in space form the late 50's on when its finally tallied, at least by the time we have a mars colony. Its also quite likely the tech to come out of that will be highly specialized and not nearly so applicable to life back here on earth. So might offer us 20% of the pay back value.
Personally I think continued investment in space exploration is a loosing proposition, at least over the time horizon of a lifetime. I think it makes perfect sense to wait and let China or India prove there is some pay back out there. Its always cheaper to imitate than to innovate. Provided we take some steps to preserve our manufacturing industry ( like re-erect some trade barriers with China and India ) playing catchup should be fast and cheap if it turns out we need to do that.
Kasich is more likely staying in the game for the same reason that Trump entered it
I don't buy that argument. Kasich is a sitting governor, that is a pretty significant political post, and he has been in the US House. He isn't a young man. I can understand wanting to be president but I really doubt he cares all that greatly about a cabinet position; maybe he would want to be VP. If he wants a career on Fox he can have that too just based off his brand as a governor. I don't think he needs this for brand building. A few on air commercial spots and spouting off on some hot button issue like abortion or immigration from Columbus would get him just as much national attention for the GOP rank and file.
Kasich is a popular governor too. He has broad appeal, and he is smart. You point out the people beyond Ohio don't know him that well. That is going to hurt in in a hypothetical poll against HRC if you take it today. After 6 months of a national presidential campaign that hurt largely goes away. I suspect he could do rather well against her. At least as well as Mit did against Obama in terms of popular vote. Being able to carry Midwestern and rust belt states might let him win the electoral college math against HRC. I would have more faith in him winning a national election than Rubio, honestly.
No the GOP's big problem is finding a way to damage Clinton. Trump will be beaten. Rubio failed to pick up the Bush voters in Nevada. They went to Trump, as far as we can tell from the exit polls. Cruz can beat Rubio if Carson leaves the race because those voters are not attracted to Trump. If Carson stays in though for the next couple rounds and Rubio grabs enough super Tuesday delegates Cruz is campaign is over. Rubio will pick up the Cruz voters in large enough numbers to stop Trump in the winner take all contests.
Everyone is worried about Trump winning but he basically can't. There is more head wind there than first meets the eye.
What the GOP need to be focused on honestly is doing everything they possible can to ensure HRC is indicted over the e-mail scandal. It goes against the conventional wisdom b/c they have already fumbled that and gotten burned but its really the only thing that can save them. Mitch and Ryan need to stick their necks out and start a new investigation, they need to find evidence that the FBI and a complicit Loretta Lynch can't sweep under the rug.
So dear AC what is the problem with that exactly? In that case Apple would have a clear personal interest in unlocking that phone. It would also be Apple and nobody else trying to FORCE Apple to unlock that phone.
Freedom means people ( or organizations ) should not be required by government to act against their own self interest. This is all about the right to use your own time and property as YOU see fit.
What is amazing to me is this isn't even a fourth amendment/privacy/fifth amendment/rights of the accused/exclusionary evidence/ type question. Its a question of very very basic freedom.
Apple sells a phone, they are not necessarily in any on going business relationship with the owner of said phone after that happens. The DOJ argues though that they should be able to phone them up and demand they create something which does not today exist (an unlock tool or firmware without protections). So Apple who was not a participant in any crime, an accessory, or in material possession of evidence etc now must act.
This quite literally sets the precedent the DOJ can conscript and individual or organization who has ever sold or manufactured something to assist in an investigation! We are supposedly not slaves! This very concept should be offensive to all freedom loving Americans and frankly anyone who isn't siding with Apple on this "Hates Freedom."
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves. --William Pitt
Still leaks information. Even if the time stamp is always in UTC, it remains possible to confirm the server is not traveling at a high enough relative relative to the requester to cause a difference in observed time.
This is serious folks, it likely means you can in fact determine the server to be on the same planetary body or even in the same orbit!
When you consider the size of the investment and the total revenues, I but that is shitty ROI as compared to what else could have been done with that money.
Why do third-world shitholes even bid for the Olympics then?
because they *think* its a good way to boost international prestige if they can mostly pull it off and with it international investment.
and while the host city is usually screwed the host country seems to benifit when its successful.
All they are doing is highlighting what an embarassment their country is
No quite the contrary. Usually there is enough wealth concentration and concentration of political power in third world shit holes, that the PTBs can make it happen and make a small corner of their yard look nice while the population suffers, and is displaced.
Any why would a healthy, fit, above average jock want to risk his or her health or even life, by going to this shithole
Because if you do win or do well you get a career as a celebrity spokes person, sports commentator, highly paid athletic trainer or consultant. You can probably live like a king after that. Even if you do run out of money or do something epically stupid down the road you can always get your genitals hacked off and put on a dress and start raking it in all over again.
On the other hand if you spend all that time training and don't make it you lost out on a lot of time and made a poor investment. Nobody and I mean nobody will give a damn about the athletic career you had leaving to get a 9-to-5 like all us other slobs who now have a head start.
I don't think USA Olympic athletes are covered by health insurance, because 'Murica
I don't know why you would think that. Most of our athletes come from reasonably privileged middle class backgrounds or better. If you are trying to have a successful athletic career one of things you make sure to buy is medical insurance. Maybe some are not covered well, but I'd be surprised. Its an extraordinary claim you'll need some evidence.
Frankly the Olympics are an embarrassing and socially destructive side show. The SJW crowd really should be outraged, but accepts it because they think its helping them accomplish their One World Government agenda I guess.
Wow okay like only 20,000 people did that last year alone. Its amazing he has put together such a group of rare a leet individuals. To think I have been leaving that off my CV all these years. Having attended let alone spoken at DefCon 20 years ago might be impressive, but now its pretty much meh. To be honest even getting to be a presenter in many cases is as much who you know as having something really cool to show off.
That said I have no problem with McAfee doing this. I object to the idea that the government can compel a vendor to weaken the security of their product before or after the fact let alone back door it. I think Apple has a clear business interest in not doing so and its a basic question of freedom that we should not force a manufacturer to assist in the investigation of a crime they were not involved in. It would be like if someone had something locked in a safe, and the government could demand the safe manufacturer drop whatever they were doing and take whatever steps are required to crack it. That precedent would essentially turn anyone who manufactures or sells anything into a potential conscript at any time.
I also think an individual or company ought to have the right not sell to or provide the government with services and equipment if they don't want to. I for one would make the same choice Tim Cook has in this case. The Three Letters and even local law enforcement have proven they can't follow the rules, give them something like a stingray and they will abuse it. God only knows what they might do with a zero day if you provided something like that to them. IMHO they have treated us citizens like the enemy and therefore can no longer expect cooperation. I wish we lived in a nation where LEO's followed our laws and if they came to me or Apple, or anyone else and asked for help catching a crook or investigating a crime we could do so freely and comfortably knowing any tools and techniques would not be abused or used to violate peoples rights but we don't live in that nation. Its sad.
Still I expect the FBI to do its job and try to get into that phone. If they can fine, but they have no right to make demands on Apple. If McAfee wants to help fine, that is his choice. If he can charge them a few 100,000K good for him.
What horribly things has COX done exactly? They have been my provider in a number of cases and as far as I can tell all they ever did was offer reasonable quality service (industry leading by some measures) at competitive prices.
In my personal experience their customer service was never nearly as painful as the other cable companies I have had the misfortune of dealing with. Cox never forced upgrades the way COMCRAP does, and let me continue using my old modem rather than renting one from them, etc.
As much as its possible to 'like' a cable company, I like COX.
The two products you pointed out are essentially plugins, they won't be installed on your friends computer and they wont be on the computer in the Hotel business center. Try again. People like web mail because they don't have to carry their own laptop everywhere they go.
For this to be even partially true, you would have to assume that all received email is encrypted (rather than just signed).
No, if you are not in a position to verify the signatures, and sign your replies we are back to essentially have no identity or integrity assurance at all. Only now the non technical person has to remember different rules are in effect when using the web interface than when using their client at home. That isn't a win, its a recipe for tears.
As to mobile devices you have a point, but who wants to compose a long form message on their cell phone, table maybe but not phone.
I still see it as either portable or secure, not both.
Consider all the vulnerabilities that have been found in MTAs, MDAs, and clients over the years. Then consider all the trojans and spam with tracking stuffs, etc. Google filters almost all of the later quite successfully, as to the former for many people and organizations it replaces all those things and so far the infrastructure has been well maintained and resistant to breaches (that we know of). Its also pretty carefully monitored. I suspect the ancient Sendmail install on that old SGI box at your ISP, could have sat compromised for weeks or months before anyone would have noticed in the years before GMAIL.
When you look at it from all sides its not so clear cut.
Well the thing you have to remember about Notes is mail was a bit of an after thought. Notes was really about the 'databases'. You could rather easily develop very complex multi-user applications, with offline replication. That mattered a lot in the early 90's when you did not 'VPN' but dialed into home office. Notes replication was amazing.
From a technical perspective Notes is probably one of the more interesting software systems ever developed. It was born of a time when clients were pretty limited and it had to be somewhat backward compatible. Which always limits you options going forward.
How are you going to implement that for web mail exactly? Will you let the sever do it? That means Google gets to assert your identity, and if they ever get compromised we have a whole mess of people sending signed mail with signatures that may or may not be valid and we are back to a more or less unauthenticated situation.
You could have the client do with JavaScript but that still leaves the door open, if the server is compromised and sends an altered script how can you know?
You go the traditional install plugin route, but then web mail is no more portable than a fat client.
There just isn't actually a good answer for this. You can have secure E-mail or portable E-mail but not both.
I would think the thing to do would not be to introduce randomized delays but rather to adopt a fairly pessimistic minimum latency to your client end points. If packets from a given client arrives closer together than the pessimistic latency the trailing packet should be held until that minimum time is reached. You probably want do this on sending to the client as well as that might still enable timing attacks otherwise. That wont effect performance much streaming media where the MTU will full most of the time and jitter matters as much as anything. It will probably be okay for things like VOIP too if the value is help to something like 250ms and the VPN provider is well connected / peered on the output side.
This should have the effect of making all your VPN clients appear equally well connected to third parties. Yes there will be some throughput limitation introduced but the reason to use these services is for anonymity not performance.
I am not so sure. Humans are by our very nature tool makers. Sure if someone hands you a device that seems to always misinterpret your queries you are going to get frustrated and give up pretty fast, no doubt. If you make it easy to 'train' that devices to do the right thing or just let users add their own commands etc, I expect most users would quite satisfied.
I am not sure where their no buttons to push no dials to turn, no adjustments to make mindset came from when it comes to electronics. I think its stupid actually and a bit short sited. Look at this way in every other product class the more adjust ability something has the more discoverable it usually is. Nobody wants to by a car without adjustable seats and mirrors. Would you choose office furniture that can't be easily configured to store letter or legal size documents? I am not saying sane defaults that don't *need* to be changed should not be a goal but yes I do want to be able to name the inputs on my TV or Receiver, "HMDI-3" is fine, but I'd rather it be able to say "Bluray Player", etc.
So I actually think local speech recognition might be advantageous. If there is a relatively straightforward way to program commands. On a TV that should be simple macro recording of remote control button pushes, or letting the user pick from a list of CEC commands. "Play disk" needs to set the audio settings on the receiver to movie, turn the TV to bluray input and send a play command to the bluray player. Its not hard.
Well yes, but in the past voice command processing has been implemented locally. When I used to say "Open Word" to my IPAQ back in 2003, nobody at Microsoft got sent an audio clip. I grant you voice commands were highly limited, and you had to know some syntax to get anything more advanced done than launching an application. OOTH you did not need to worry your device was spying on you.
I think this is kinda of an insane position for Samsung to take. They need to find away to address the privacy concerns or make it possible for people to 'securely' disable the feature, like maybe be able to unplug the pickup mike!
Consider TVs are things people put in their living rooms and in their bed rooms. These are our most private places. I want to be able to have a conversation in my own homes without outsiders listening or even potentially listening in, I bet if you ask most customers they'd say the same thing! I even suspect if you made it a conditional like, you can either have voice activation on your TV or know we are not listening to you, suddenly voice activation would not be considered a feature.
(2) AOL didn't offer Internet access until 1993, a couple of months after it started to offer Usenet access It spent a decade as a captive portal.
AOL was just like Prodigy, CompuServe, GEnie, and other services of it's day: You connected to a service through the public telephone network, and it was a subset of the information available, compared to what you'd get from an ISP, and advertisers had to pay for keywords.
I don't think you can blame AOL for the fact the internet was not opened up for commercial use until 1992. The fact that AOL provided a way for John Q. Public to get access to the Internet only months after it was really even an option is pretty impressive actually. Before 1992 if you were on the Internet you either were at a research University, or working for a defense contractor.
You act as if AOL was a walled garden, they started that way but that was because that was all there was and all anyone knew up that point, my recollection is they were actually pretty good about opening up to the wider Internet when it came along. Sure they built on top of what they had, who would do anything else? but I don't recall once the Internet was available AOL ever actively seeking to keep customers inside the walls, they were not blocking ports, or anything like that.
Actually it was, at least for DOS 6.0 on you could easily have multiple configurations specified in config.sys and autoexec, which could be setup to provide a menu based selection of which configuration you wanted to boot on start up.
And why exactly would Kim who fancies himself a god want to provide Daesh whose cause is to create an Islamic state with assistance in the form of a nuclear weapon?
I don't see many upsides for Kim or the DPRK in doing so. Everyone likes to paint Kim as a mad man. It might be true he does not always display what we consider to be sound judgement. Still he is self interested enough to hand a group that would turn on him as fast as he can blink a real actual WMD ( as opposed to the nasty but hardly massively destructive things we tend to use to justify drone strikes ). He isn't a lunatic.
If operational security was taken seriously or important these organizations would be much much smaller. The more people who know a secret the harder it is to control. If the three letters want to be effective they need to go back to their original mandates and downsize to the minimal number of people required to execute on them.
The FBI tries to be the everything of law enforcement, they should not. In fact they should probably not even have arrest powers. I would argue make them investigators of federal but domestic crimes only. Let them investigate, turn the arrest warrants over to the marshal service to pick folks up.
You are correct of course but suspect familiarity is what causes people to become less cautious and imprudent. "Hey I have driven this road a 1000 times and its always been just fine" they stop paying attention they drive faster. You go and make it different and suddenly they start paying attention again and yes slow down until its again familiar.
I hope some serious LONG term studies about center lines with good comparable areas with similar traffic and conditions are identified for test and control groups is done before a broad policy change like this is effected.
We have a lot of unlined roads, center and edge here in rural Virgina and people including me drive plenty fast around areas we know well. While it might not be worth the invest for the county or the state, all things being equal I certainly wish more roads were lined.
In places were there isn't much artificial light besides your head lights it can be hard to see a dark road surface at night. When someone elses headlights are in your face it can be especially hard to figure out how to safely share the road with the coming traffic in the dark. You can't see the edges well, due to the light pointed at you, you don't have the center line to judge by and the road is just wide enough for two vehicles to pass by each other while having no shoulders. You don't want to suddenly put one drive wheel in the soft dirt even at 35MPH that can result in a loss of control. TL:DR - people started painting reflective center lines on roads for a reason.
Are you sure? There as long been a question on where the dividing line is between food aide and 'dumping'. If you have a bunch of starving people around they will pay there last penny for something to eat. That is a strong intensive for local producers to find a way. You take that away when some third party comes a long to relieve the starvation. The result is you end up with large pockets of the world that never create a sustainable economy.
The problem with facebook's "free basics" is that its not really Internet access. Its limited social media and fact lookup. Which might be useful, but is it just useful enough that it prevents anyone from being able to deliver real access to the open internet by undermining the market?
So sure by blocking something like this you deny people something that might be a useful resource for them, but you also hopefully prevent them from being locked out of something much better, that will probably come along eventually if you keep Mark's grubby little mitts off the Monopoly button.
SJW, tern used by ignorant primitive assholes to describe educated caring intelligent people.
Sometimes, certainly. There are also times when its correctly applied, like at Oberlin where the cafeteria was protested because the "Chinese" food was inauthentic. "Cultural appropriation" is one of those examples that simply should not be thing. Imitation is the highest form of flattery. There is no sensible reason a minority should be upset that the majority wants to act like them, even if they do it badly, unless its being done in a mocking away. Its not "theft" or abuse its an indication your culture actually has power and influence.
Certainly the school cafeteria was not trying to insult Chinese students bad serving bad Chinese food, that is a ridiculous premise. The only interpretation is Americans respect and desire Chinese cooking and dishes, but might not know how to actually make them.
I think the Oberlin example proves there are SJWs. These are people who are actively seeking something to be offended by. They are pulling attention away legitimate injustices and grievances and wasting everyone time on their pet problems that don't actually harm anyone. So they hurt real social causes. They also cause real harm to innocent people doing harmless things.
Slashdot Mirror
Because sometimes I don't go out because I don't 'feel' like driving. Sure I could go to the grocery store to get this ingredient I am out of or I could just substitute this bag of rice I have for the called for pasta and still have a reasonable dinner. People make marginal decisions like that all the time. If going to the grocery does not mean having to drive and pay attention but instead means I can take my tablet with me and finish the TV show I am watching, just in the car instead of on the sofa, I might go when I otherwise would not have.
I have family about 2 hours away. Now there is no way I am driving 2 hours there and 2 hours back after work on a Tuesday night. 4 hours of driving isn't just a time investment its an mental and physical investment. On the other hand if I leave the office at 5:30 and can be at Mom's by 7:30 while I watch the news, read a book, and have a cocktail.... Well new I could go have dinner with my parents, get back in that car an hour later at 8:30 and still be home to bed by 11 or so. Does not sound so bad.
I have to disagree. The real value in space exploration has been the technology that came out of the effort. Its debatable if that is even really the origin of much of that tech. Certainly rocket and delivery technology came out of WWII and that isn't terribly useful for doing anything but hurling weapons at each other or tossing stuff into space.
We did get a lot of valuable computer technology, and some spiffy things like Velcro out of space exploration effort. We also made a number of materials science advances that have paid real dividends. I can't help but suspect the military applications and desires for most of those technologies would have birthed them too, if NASA had not provided a slightly more open incubator. All and all it was probably worth the investment.
Here we are at the 80/20 point though. We have 80% of the tech we really need to explore the solar system. What is left is cooking up the other 20% which might easily end up requiring 80% of the total investment in space form the late 50's on when its finally tallied, at least by the time we have a mars colony. Its also quite likely the tech to come out of that will be highly specialized and not nearly so applicable to life back here on earth. So might offer us 20% of the pay back value.
Personally I think continued investment in space exploration is a loosing proposition, at least over the time horizon of a lifetime. I think it makes perfect sense to wait and let China or India prove there is some pay back out there. Its always cheaper to imitate than to innovate. Provided we take some steps to preserve our manufacturing industry ( like re-erect some trade barriers with China and India ) playing catchup should be fast and cheap if it turns out we need to do that.
Kasich is more likely staying in the game for the same reason that Trump entered it
I don't buy that argument. Kasich is a sitting governor, that is a pretty significant political post, and he has been in the US House. He isn't a young man. I can understand wanting to be president but I really doubt he cares all that greatly about a cabinet position; maybe he would want to be VP. If he wants a career on Fox he can have that too just based off his brand as a governor. I don't think he needs this for brand building. A few on air commercial spots and spouting off on some hot button issue like abortion or immigration from Columbus would get him just as much national attention for the GOP rank and file.
Kasich is a popular governor too. He has broad appeal, and he is smart. You point out the people beyond Ohio don't know him that well. That is going to hurt in in a hypothetical poll against HRC if you take it today. After 6 months of a national presidential campaign that hurt largely goes away. I suspect he could do rather well against her. At least as well as Mit did against Obama in terms of popular vote. Being able to carry Midwestern and rust belt states might let him win the electoral college math against HRC. I would have more faith in him winning a national election than Rubio, honestly.
No the GOP's big problem is finding a way to damage Clinton. Trump will be beaten. Rubio failed to pick up the Bush voters in Nevada. They went to Trump, as far as we can tell from the exit polls. Cruz can beat Rubio if Carson leaves the race because those voters are not attracted to Trump. If Carson stays in though for the next couple rounds and Rubio grabs enough super Tuesday delegates Cruz is campaign is over. Rubio will pick up the Cruz voters in large enough numbers to stop Trump in the winner take all contests.
Everyone is worried about Trump winning but he basically can't. There is more head wind there than first meets the eye.
What the GOP need to be focused on honestly is doing everything they possible can to ensure HRC is indicted over the e-mail scandal. It goes against the conventional wisdom b/c they have already fumbled that and gotten burned but its really the only thing that can save them. Mitch and Ryan need to stick their necks out and start a new investigation, they need to find evidence that the FBI and a complicit Loretta Lynch can't sweep under the rug.
So dear AC what is the problem with that exactly? In that case Apple would have a clear personal interest in unlocking that phone. It would also be Apple and nobody else trying to FORCE Apple to unlock that phone.
Freedom means people ( or organizations ) should not be required by government to act against their own self interest. This is all about the right to use your own time and property as YOU see fit.
What is amazing to me is this isn't even a fourth amendment/privacy/fifth amendment/rights of the accused/exclusionary evidence/ type question. Its a question of very very basic freedom.
Apple sells a phone, they are not necessarily in any on going business relationship with the owner of said phone after that happens. The DOJ argues though that they should be able to phone them up and demand they create something which does not today exist (an unlock tool or firmware without protections). So Apple who was not a participant in any crime, an accessory, or in material possession of evidence etc now must act.
This quite literally sets the precedent the DOJ can conscript and individual or organization who has ever sold or manufactured something to assist in an investigation! We are supposedly not slaves! This very concept should be offensive to all freedom loving Americans and frankly anyone who isn't siding with Apple on this "Hates Freedom."
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves. --William Pitt
Well then you are doing it wrong. A ISP does not have the option but a organization like a school certainly can MTIM SSL.
There is no reason you should allow any SSL out you are not in the middle of.
Still leaks information. Even if the time stamp is always in UTC, it remains possible to confirm the server is not traveling at a high enough relative relative to the requester to cause a difference in observed time.
This is serious folks, it likely means you can in fact determine the server to be on the same planetary body or even in the same orbit!
When you consider the size of the investment and the total revenues, I but that is shitty ROI as compared to what else could have been done with that money.
Why do third-world shitholes even bid for the Olympics then?
because they *think* its a good way to boost international prestige if they can mostly pull it off and with it international investment.
and while the host city is usually screwed the host country seems to benifit when its successful.
All they are doing is highlighting what an embarassment their country is
No quite the contrary. Usually there is enough wealth concentration and concentration of political power in third world shit holes, that the PTBs can make it happen and make a small corner of their yard look nice while the population suffers, and is displaced.
Any why would a healthy, fit, above average jock want to risk his or her health or even life, by going to this shithole
Because if you do win or do well you get a career as a celebrity spokes person, sports commentator, highly paid athletic trainer or consultant. You can probably live like a king after that. Even if you do run out of money or do something epically stupid down the road you can always get your genitals hacked off and put on a dress and start raking it in all over again.
On the other hand if you spend all that time training and don't make it you lost out on a lot of time and made a poor investment. Nobody and I mean nobody will give a damn about the athletic career you had leaving to get a 9-to-5 like all us other slobs who now have a head start.
I don't think USA Olympic athletes are covered by health insurance, because 'Murica
I don't know why you would think that. Most of our athletes come from reasonably privileged middle class backgrounds or better. If you are trying to have a successful athletic career one of things you make sure to buy is medical insurance. Maybe some are not covered well, but I'd be surprised. Its an extraordinary claim you'll need some evidence.
Frankly the Olympics are an embarrassing and socially destructive side show. The SJW crowd really should be outraged, but accepts it because they think its helping them accomplish their One World Government agenda I guess.
These hackers attend Defcon in Las Vegas
Wow okay like only 20,000 people did that last year alone. Its amazing he has put together such a group of rare a leet individuals. To think I have been leaving that off my CV all these years. Having attended let alone spoken at DefCon 20 years ago might be impressive, but now its pretty much meh. To be honest even getting to be a presenter in many cases is as much who you know as having something really cool to show off.
That said I have no problem with McAfee doing this. I object to the idea that the government can compel a vendor to weaken the security of their product before or after the fact let alone back door it. I think Apple has a clear business interest in not doing so and its a basic question of freedom that we should not force a manufacturer to assist in the investigation of a crime they were not involved in. It would be like if someone had something locked in a safe, and the government could demand the safe manufacturer drop whatever they were doing and take whatever steps are required to crack it. That precedent would essentially turn anyone who manufactures or sells anything into a potential conscript at any time.
I also think an individual or company ought to have the right not sell to or provide the government with services and equipment if they don't want to. I for one would make the same choice Tim Cook has in this case. The Three Letters and even local law enforcement have proven they can't follow the rules, give them something like a stingray and they will abuse it. God only knows what they might do with a zero day if you provided something like that to them. IMHO they have treated us citizens like the enemy and therefore can no longer expect cooperation. I wish we lived in a nation where LEO's followed our laws and if they came to me or Apple, or anyone else and asked for help catching a crook or investigating a crime we could do so freely and comfortably knowing any tools and techniques would not be abused or used to violate peoples rights but we don't live in that nation. Its sad.
Still I expect the FBI to do its job and try to get into that phone. If they can fine, but they have no right to make demands on Apple. If McAfee wants to help fine, that is his choice. If he can charge them a few 100,000K good for him.
What horribly things has COX done exactly? They have been my provider in a number of cases and as far as I can tell all they ever did was offer reasonable quality service (industry leading by some measures) at competitive prices.
In my personal experience their customer service was never nearly as painful as the other cable companies I have had the misfortune of dealing with. Cox never forced upgrades the way COMCRAP does, and let me continue using my old modem rather than renting one from them, etc.
As much as its possible to 'like' a cable company, I like COX.
The two products you pointed out are essentially plugins, they won't be installed on your friends computer and they wont be on the computer in the Hotel business center. Try again. People like web mail because they don't have to carry their own laptop everywhere they go.
For this to be even partially true, you would have to assume that all received email is encrypted (rather than just signed).
No, if you are not in a position to verify the signatures, and sign your replies we are back to essentially have no identity or integrity assurance at all. Only now the non technical person has to remember different rules are in effect when using the web interface than when using their client at home. That isn't a win, its a recipe for tears.
As to mobile devices you have a point, but who wants to compose a long form message on their cell phone, table maybe but not phone.
I still see it as either portable or secure, not both.
Well you have to look at the whole story though.
Consider all the vulnerabilities that have been found in MTAs, MDAs, and clients over the years. Then consider all the trojans and spam with tracking stuffs, etc. Google filters almost all of the later quite successfully, as to the former for many people and organizations it replaces all those things and so far the infrastructure has been well maintained and resistant to breaches (that we know of). Its also pretty carefully monitored. I suspect the ancient Sendmail install on that old SGI box at your ISP, could have sat compromised for weeks or months before anyone would have noticed in the years before GMAIL.
When you look at it from all sides its not so clear cut.
Well the thing you have to remember about Notes is mail was a bit of an after thought. Notes was really about the 'databases'. You could rather easily develop very complex multi-user applications, with offline replication. That mattered a lot in the early 90's when you did not 'VPN' but dialed into home office. Notes replication was amazing.
From a technical perspective Notes is probably one of the more interesting software systems ever developed. It was born of a time when clients were pretty limited and it had to be somewhat backward compatible. Which always limits you options going forward.
How are you going to implement that for web mail exactly? Will you let the sever do it? That means Google gets to assert your identity, and if they ever get compromised we have a whole mess of people sending signed mail with signatures that may or may not be valid and we are back to a more or less unauthenticated situation.
You could have the client do with JavaScript but that still leaves the door open, if the server is compromised and sends an altered script how can you know?
You go the traditional install plugin route, but then web mail is no more portable than a fat client.
There just isn't actually a good answer for this. You can have secure E-mail or portable E-mail but not both.
I would think the thing to do would not be to introduce randomized delays but rather to adopt a fairly pessimistic minimum latency to your client end points. If packets from a given client arrives closer together than the pessimistic latency the trailing packet should be held until that minimum time is reached. You probably want do this on sending to the client as well as that might still enable timing attacks otherwise. That wont effect performance much streaming media where the MTU will full most of the time and jitter matters as much as anything. It will probably be okay for things like VOIP too if the value is help to something like 250ms and the VPN provider is well connected / peered on the output side.
This should have the effect of making all your VPN clients appear equally well connected to third parties. Yes there will be some throughput limitation introduced but the reason to use these services is for anonymity not performance.
I am not so sure. Humans are by our very nature tool makers. Sure if someone hands you a device that seems to always misinterpret your queries you are going to get frustrated and give up pretty fast, no doubt. If you make it easy to 'train' that devices to do the right thing or just let users add their own commands etc, I expect most users would quite satisfied.
I am not sure where their no buttons to push no dials to turn, no adjustments to make mindset came from when it comes to electronics. I think its stupid actually and a bit short sited. Look at this way in every other product class the more adjust ability something has the more discoverable it usually is. Nobody wants to by a car without adjustable seats and mirrors. Would you choose office furniture that can't be easily configured to store letter or legal size documents? I am not saying sane defaults that don't *need* to be changed should not be a goal but yes I do want to be able to name the inputs on my TV or Receiver, "HMDI-3" is fine, but I'd rather it be able to say "Bluray Player", etc.
So I actually think local speech recognition might be advantageous. If there is a relatively straightforward way to program commands. On a TV that should be simple macro recording of remote control button pushes, or letting the user pick from a list of CEC commands. "Play disk" needs to set the audio settings on the receiver to movie, turn the TV to bluray input and send a play command to the bluray player. Its not hard.
Well yes, but in the past voice command processing has been implemented locally. When I used to say "Open Word" to my IPAQ back in 2003, nobody at Microsoft got sent an audio clip. I grant you voice commands were highly limited, and you had to know some syntax to get anything more advanced done than launching an application. OOTH you did not need to worry your device was spying on you.
I think this is kinda of an insane position for Samsung to take. They need to find away to address the privacy concerns or make it possible for people to 'securely' disable the feature, like maybe be able to unplug the pickup mike!
Consider TVs are things people put in their living rooms and in their bed rooms. These are our most private places. I want to be able to have a conversation in my own homes without outsiders listening or even potentially listening in, I bet if you ask most customers they'd say the same thing! I even suspect if you made it a conditional like, you can either have voice activation on your TV or know we are not listening to you, suddenly voice activation would not be considered a feature.
(2) AOL didn't offer Internet access until 1993, a couple of months after it started to offer Usenet access It spent a decade as a captive portal.
AOL was just like Prodigy, CompuServe, GEnie, and other services of it's day: You connected to a service through the public telephone network, and it was a subset of the information available, compared to what you'd get from an ISP, and advertisers had to pay for keywords.
I don't think you can blame AOL for the fact the internet was not opened up for commercial use until 1992. The fact that AOL provided a way for John Q. Public to get access to the Internet only months after it was really even an option is pretty impressive actually. Before 1992 if you were on the Internet you either were at a research University, or working for a defense contractor.
You act as if AOL was a walled garden, they started that way but that was because that was all there was and all anyone knew up that point, my recollection is they were actually pretty good about opening up to the wider Internet when it came along. Sure they built on top of what they had, who would do anything else? but I don't recall once the Internet was available AOL ever actively seeking to keep customers inside the walls, they were not blocking ports, or anything like that.
Actually it was, at least for DOS 6.0 on you could easily have multiple configurations specified in config.sys and autoexec, which could be setup to provide a menu based selection of which configuration you wanted to boot on start up.
And why exactly would Kim who fancies himself a god want to provide Daesh whose cause is to create an Islamic state with assistance in the form of a nuclear weapon?
I don't see many upsides for Kim or the DPRK in doing so. Everyone likes to paint Kim as a mad man. It might be true he does not always display what we consider to be sound judgement. Still he is self interested enough to hand a group that would turn on him as fast as he can blink a real actual WMD ( as opposed to the nasty but hardly massively destructive things we tend to use to justify drone strikes ). He isn't a lunatic.
If operational security was taken seriously or important these organizations would be much much smaller. The more people who know a secret the harder it is to control. If the three letters want to be effective they need to go back to their original mandates and downsize to the minimal number of people required to execute on them.
The FBI tries to be the everything of law enforcement, they should not. In fact they should probably not even have arrest powers. I would argue make them investigators of federal but domestic crimes only. Let them investigate, turn the arrest warrants over to the marshal service to pick folks up.
You are correct of course but suspect familiarity is what causes people to become less cautious and imprudent. "Hey I have driven this road a 1000 times and its always been just fine" they stop paying attention they drive faster. You go and make it different and suddenly they start paying attention again and yes slow down until its again familiar.
I hope some serious LONG term studies about center lines with good comparable areas with similar traffic and conditions are identified for test and control groups is done before a broad policy change like this is effected.
We have a lot of unlined roads, center and edge here in rural Virgina and people including me drive plenty fast around areas we know well. While it might not be worth the invest for the county or the state, all things being equal I certainly wish more roads were lined.
In places were there isn't much artificial light besides your head lights it can be hard to see a dark road surface at night. When someone elses headlights are in your face it can be especially hard to figure out how to safely share the road with the coming traffic in the dark. You can't see the edges well, due to the light pointed at you, you don't have the center line to judge by and the road is just wide enough for two vehicles to pass by each other while having no shoulders. You don't want to suddenly put one drive wheel in the soft dirt even at 35MPH that can result in a loss of control. TL:DR - people started painting reflective center lines on roads for a reason.
livelihoods of local food sellers.
Are you sure? There as long been a question on where the dividing line is between food aide and 'dumping'. If you have a bunch of starving people around they will pay there last penny for something to eat. That is a strong intensive for local producers to find a way. You take that away when some third party comes a long to relieve the starvation. The result is you end up with large pockets of the world that never create a sustainable economy.
The problem with facebook's "free basics" is that its not really Internet access. Its limited social media and fact lookup. Which might be useful, but is it just useful enough that it prevents anyone from being able to deliver real access to the open internet by undermining the market?
So sure by blocking something like this you deny people something that might be a useful resource for them, but you also hopefully prevent them from being locked out of something much better, that will probably come along eventually if you keep Mark's grubby little mitts off the Monopoly button.
SJW, tern used by ignorant primitive assholes to describe educated caring intelligent people.
Sometimes, certainly. There are also times when its correctly applied, like at Oberlin where the cafeteria was protested because the "Chinese" food was inauthentic. "Cultural appropriation" is one of those examples that simply should not be thing. Imitation is the highest form of flattery. There is no sensible reason a minority should be upset that the majority wants to act like them, even if they do it badly, unless its being done in a mocking away. Its not "theft" or abuse its an indication your culture actually has power and influence.
Certainly the school cafeteria was not trying to insult Chinese students bad serving bad Chinese food, that is a ridiculous premise. The only interpretation is Americans respect and desire Chinese cooking and dishes, but might not know how to actually make them.
I think the Oberlin example proves there are SJWs. These are people who are actively seeking something to be offended by. They are pulling attention away legitimate injustices and grievances and wasting everyone time on their pet problems that don't actually harm anyone. So they hurt real social causes. They also cause real harm to innocent people doing harmless things.