Nice.... So someone with a cell phone sniffs the network, hacks the device, and then uses it to load malware onto the card's photo partition, that then will likely get ran on the next computer the owner plugs the card into.
Not to mention the card itself is a WiFi seeking botnet drone.
I really don't see why they can't get sued for negligence. Car manufactures do, and so does EVERYONE else. Perhaps Dyn should take the largest manufactures of the infected devices to court for just that. Sue for damages due to their negligently unsecured devices.
You'll never find a perfect solution. But that doesn't mean you don't implement at least the most modest of controls. If the manufacture is held liable for security, then devices won't ship with default passwords and goatse sized vulnerabilities.
After two years of updates, the majority of vulnerabilities that do ship will mostly be identified and patched (or should be at least). After that, a general herd immunity will develop. The devices left insecure after two years will have so much variety between them with different models and versions that it becomes impractical to target them.
IoT devices are less complex then PCs. They serve typically a single purpose with minor user interaction. A secure kernel, running a well written web interface makes for a VERY SMALL attack surface. These devices are only targetable right now because of the blatant disregard for any measurable sign of security.
No we don't. We don't need any reasons for those greedy incompetent asshats to filter our traffic. Instead, manufacturers should be held liable for insecure products, forcing their hand to secure the devices they ship, and to also provide updates. A minimum two year requirement before they can end of life the device, at which point they should have to provide source code for the community to assume updates on or continue to support the device themselves.
The value of the code is then weighed by the cost of continuing support, and they can decide what's the best option for themselves.
Sadly the VPNisnt just for privacy. By tunneling past the ISP, shit just works better. They cant prioritize the traffic, or worse, pass it through a crappy overloaded transparent caching proxy.
Maybe if Apple didn't sell their cables for such obscene prices, there would be less market demand for Chinese knockoffs. If I can buy 10 cables on eBay at $0.50 each, I don't care if 5 go out in less than a month. Also, I've NEVER seen or heard first hand if one of the knock offs catching fire.
Being paranoid, I'd venture that AT&T and/or Verizon pulled some weight to have them nag T-Mobile. Now that LTE is prolific/mature on all four networks, their real advantage over T-Mobile and Sprint is dying away.
And there is your answer... Because you have the pressure of ebooks to weigh against your manga, Amazon can get away with selling a small capacity system, and make you the fringe user who needs to buy the more expensive models.
In japan, the market force for high capacity storage is large enough that a low capacity model won't do well, and they then have to offer something in between.
The problem with permitting this if the tubes are full, is that the ISPs will create a ton a virtual circuits, all running at 80% or whatever the cut-off is, and then implement whatever filtering profits them. So their true capacity may be at 10%, but in technical legalise they comply.
Even if it's as generic as real-time protocols getting priority... how long will it take bittorrent clients to just wrap their packets as RTP traffic so they move faster.
It's really an all or nothing problem, or it will get gamed.
The nation of World of Warcraft The nation of Second-Life The nation of Darkweb (just an FYI, this one has some CRAZY protective privacy laws)
Though to be fair... Many people all over the world have dual citizenships and reside their whole lives as expatriates. How is this concept any different. All member citizens are simply expatriates, but still carry voting rights for representation of their member virtual nation. This doesn't excuse them from their locally resided countries laws, but it does afford a unified voice to a largely geographically dispersed group of people that may carry similar ideals. Its membership could grow to the point that it does in fact have sway at the UN.
Software that functions as an information system (database interface) or other business intelligence system (reports) is simply a worker performing a document procedure. I don't see asking the source as anything different than asking for the SOP on how an agency handles their records scheduling, or develops reports they make decisions off of. Some time ago, humans did the same work, just slower and more prone to "error" (political fudging to serve a goal).
The backend databases are a little grey. Returning the structure so the public knows what fields are being stored should be a quick and easy one. The data populating the database... that's another story. It would obviously need a LOT of PII cleaning before it could be released.
I doubt it.... You sue fake person, they fail to appear, you win a default judgment. As the article points out, what financial motive is there to gain from suing fake people, you can't recoup the court fees. However, by gaming the system, you now have enough paperwork to scare the third party admins into removing undesirable content.
It's really more of a problem with the 3rd party not verifying that the order applies to the originator of the content.... But what do they care? That would cost money, while just pulling the content is basically free.
Seriously not trying to troll. With the granular privacy settings in stock, what does Cyanogenmod really offer over AOSP now?
Seems the best option would be a new team that focuses on making a stable AOSP that's updatable and supports a variety of hardware other then the Nexus line, may it RIP.
I go to the theatre all the time. You just need to go to the right one. AMC Cinesuite is 18+ only, recliners with foot rest and push button for food service. The industry has innovated.
Why would you even bother waisting your time checking on them. With the data caps it became perfectly clear that they don't give a rat's ass about the customer.
I have a Xiaomi Mi Band, not for a fitness tracker, but for a wearable notification device. I never hear/notice my alerts when my phone is in my pocket. My fat ass could give a fuck that it monitors my steps and heart rate.
Right? Thicken the phone back up with some more battery and leave my headphones alone. I don't give a flying fuck about water proof/resistance. Shit, doesn't a phone going in a pool help their sales?
Maybe 30 years ago. Today you can publish a single in seconds. As for your example, it's great at proving my point.
When first released, "What I Like About You" was already a popular song on the Romantics' concert playlist. In terms of record sales and radio airplay, however, the song was only a moderate success at the time of its release, reaching only #49 on the Billboard Hot 100. The song did quite well in Australia however, reaching #2 on the Australian Singles Chart (Kent Music Report) on its initial release. It was only towards the end of the 1980s, after the song had been licensed for use in television commercials for Budweiser beer, that "What I Like About You" grew to become one of the most popular rock anthems of all time.
With the options listed above, in 5 years if it has made at least $10 messily dollars, you could extend it out another 5 years to 10. At that point you're at 1989, where it has made PLENTY of money. The little $317 gets it 5 more years to milk the success. After 15 years and making a fortune I don't see $10k being unreasonable to extend.
After two decades of monopolistic control, it should be public domain. If it's still THAT successful, you still have options for more time. But, what do you consider fair for the small amount of work put into the original creation? Even if the creator spent a year, maybe even two to create that work, why should they be paid the rest of their lives for such a small investment.
One thing Messenger Lite won't be able to do is make voice calls, in this first version at least. As a huge growth area for Facebook -- 300 million people use Messenger for voice calling -- it is a feature Chudnovsky is "definitely" looking at adding eventually. "People want to use the same kind of services they use everywhere else, but it definitely requires different types of tech."
If you could do voice calls over your data network, wouldn't you just use the full version of the app instead of the lite?
I also love that it's only available to
people in Kenya, Tunisia, Malaysia, Sri Lanka and Venezuela, and is set to come to other countries later.
So if you hate the full version sucking your battery dry too bad, you can't use the better one.
I like your logic there. I'd even say they should be able to extend the protection by paying the difference and even include the first 5 years a freely implied protection on anything. 0-5 years is free and implied on any work. Before the 5 years expire, you need to pay $10.24 and it's registration is extended to 10 years (very minor investment if you foresee your work becoming profitable) Before the 10 years expire, you need to pay $317.44 and it's registration is extended to 15 years Before the 15 years expire, you need to pay $10,158.08 and it's registration is extended to 20 years Before the 20 years expire, you need to pay $325,058.56 and it's registration is extended to 25 years Before the 25 years expire, you need to pay $10,401,873.92 and it's registration is extended to 30 years
I can't think of many works that would still be worth 10 million after 25 years. Perhaps a book to movie deal like LOTR, but I have to imagine with 150 million copies of the book being sold, it's fair to say Tolkien was already more than fairly rewarded for his work and it should have long since been put into the public domain by that point.
How is even 50 ok? The whole point behind copyright isn't to establish ownership of a "product". It exists to incentivize creators by providing a protected window of opportunity for them to profit from their works before the general public can do with it as they please. Just 5 to MAYBE 10 years is PLENTY of time to recoup costs and turn a hefty profit from a work. I don't see any reason why it should last longer. Sure, 100 years ago thing moved slower, and the profitability of a work may have had reason to warrant more time, but instead of slowly increasing that window of time the last century, the government should have been slowly shrinking it.
Why would be have a Roku and cable? I bought them because I left. Once everyone drops cable, the networks will realize they need apps or deals with Hulu/Netflix. As everyone here knows, it's the ISP side that needs FCC attention.
Slashdot Mirror
Nice.... So someone with a cell phone sniffs the network, hacks the device, and then uses it to load malware onto the card's photo partition, that then will likely get ran on the next computer the owner plugs the card into.
Not to mention the card itself is a WiFi seeking botnet drone.
I really don't see why they can't get sued for negligence. Car manufactures do, and so does EVERYONE else. Perhaps Dyn should take the largest manufactures of the infected devices to court for just that. Sue for damages due to their negligently unsecured devices.
You'll never find a perfect solution. But that doesn't mean you don't implement at least the most modest of controls. If the manufacture is held liable for security, then devices won't ship with default passwords and goatse sized vulnerabilities.
After two years of updates, the majority of vulnerabilities that do ship will mostly be identified and patched (or should be at least). After that, a general herd immunity will develop. The devices left insecure after two years will have so much variety between them with different models and versions that it becomes impractical to target them.
IoT devices are less complex then PCs. They serve typically a single purpose with minor user interaction. A secure kernel, running a well written web interface makes for a VERY SMALL attack surface. These devices are only targetable right now because of the blatant disregard for any measurable sign of security.
No we don't. We don't need any reasons for those greedy incompetent asshats to filter our traffic. Instead, manufacturers should be held liable for insecure products, forcing their hand to secure the devices they ship, and to also provide updates. A minimum two year requirement before they can end of life the device, at which point they should have to provide source code for the community to assume updates on or continue to support the device themselves.
The value of the code is then weighed by the cost of continuing support, and they can decide what's the best option for themselves.
Sadly the VPNisnt just for privacy. By tunneling past the ISP, shit just works better. They cant prioritize the traffic, or worse, pass it through a crappy overloaded transparent caching proxy.
Why flee.... It sounds like he's a good candidate to be our next President. Did he at least store the data on a sever that has Internet access?
Oh oh... His defense could be that he didn't want it to get accidentally deleted by the next administration. He was creating a backup!!!
Maybe if Apple didn't sell their cables for such obscene prices, there would be less market demand for Chinese knockoffs. If I can buy 10 cables on eBay at $0.50 each, I don't care if 5 go out in less than a month. Also, I've NEVER seen or heard first hand if one of the knock offs catching fire.
Being paranoid, I'd venture that AT&T and/or Verizon pulled some weight to have them nag T-Mobile. Now that LTE is prolific/mature on all four networks, their real advantage over T-Mobile and Sprint is dying away.
And there is your answer... Because you have the pressure of ebooks to weigh against your manga, Amazon can get away with selling a small capacity system, and make you the fringe user who needs to buy the more expensive models.
In japan, the market force for high capacity storage is large enough that a low capacity model won't do well, and they then have to offer something in between.
While I appreciate the reply, the dead has already been done. :)
a screenshot (or picture) showing Linux operating on your Fat PS3;
Shouldn't take much effort to find a pic to doctor on Google images.
The problem with permitting this if the tubes are full, is that the ISPs will create a ton a virtual circuits, all running at 80% or whatever the cut-off is, and then implement whatever filtering profits them. So their true capacity may be at 10%, but in technical legalise they comply.
Even if it's as generic as real-time protocols getting priority... how long will it take bittorrent clients to just wrap their packets as RTP traffic so they move faster.
It's really an all or nothing problem, or it will get gamed.
The nation of World of Warcraft
The nation of Second-Life
The nation of Darkweb (just an FYI, this one has some CRAZY protective privacy laws)
Though to be fair... Many people all over the world have dual citizenships and reside their whole lives as expatriates. How is this concept any different. All member citizens are simply expatriates, but still carry voting rights for representation of their member virtual nation. This doesn't excuse them from their locally resided countries laws, but it does afford a unified voice to a largely geographically dispersed group of people that may carry similar ideals. Its membership could grow to the point that it does in fact have sway at the UN.
Software that functions as an information system (database interface) or other business intelligence system (reports) is simply a worker performing a document procedure. I don't see asking the source as anything different than asking for the SOP on how an agency handles their records scheduling, or develops reports they make decisions off of. Some time ago, humans did the same work, just slower and more prone to "error" (political fudging to serve a goal).
The backend databases are a little grey. Returning the structure so the public knows what fields are being stored should be a quick and easy one. The data populating the database... that's another story. It would obviously need a LOT of PII cleaning before it could be released.
I doubt it.... You sue fake person, they fail to appear, you win a default judgment. As the article points out, what financial motive is there to gain from suing fake people, you can't recoup the court fees. However, by gaming the system, you now have enough paperwork to scare the third party admins into removing undesirable content.
It's really more of a problem with the 3rd party not verifying that the order applies to the originator of the content.... But what do they care? That would cost money, while just pulling the content is basically free.
Seriously not trying to troll. With the granular privacy settings in stock, what does Cyanogenmod really offer over AOSP now?
Seems the best option would be a new team that focuses on making a stable AOSP that's updatable and supports a variety of hardware other then the Nexus line, may it RIP.
I go to the theatre all the time. You just need to go to the right one. AMC Cinesuite is 18+ only, recliners with foot rest and push button for food service. The industry has innovated.
Why would you even bother waisting your time checking on them. With the data caps it became perfectly clear that they don't give a rat's ass about the customer.
I have a Xiaomi Mi Band, not for a fitness tracker, but for a wearable notification device. I never hear/notice my alerts when my phone is in my pocket. My fat ass could give a fuck that it monitors my steps and heart rate.
Right? Thicken the phone back up with some more battery and leave my headphones alone. I don't give a flying fuck about water proof/resistance. Shit, doesn't a phone going in a pool help their sales?
Maybe 30 years ago. Today you can publish a single in seconds. As for your example, it's great at proving my point.
When first released, "What I Like About You" was already a popular song on the Romantics' concert playlist. In terms of record sales and radio airplay, however, the song was only a moderate success at the time of its release, reaching only #49 on the Billboard Hot 100. The song did quite well in Australia however, reaching #2 on the Australian Singles Chart (Kent Music Report) on its initial release. It was only towards the end of the 1980s, after the song had been licensed for use in television commercials for Budweiser beer, that "What I Like About You" grew to become one of the most popular rock anthems of all time.
With the options listed above, in 5 years if it has made at least $10 messily dollars, you could extend it out another 5 years to 10. At that point you're at 1989, where it has made PLENTY of money. The little $317 gets it 5 more years to milk the success. After 15 years and making a fortune I don't see $10k being unreasonable to extend.
After two decades of monopolistic control, it should be public domain. If it's still THAT successful, you still have options for more time. But, what do you consider fair for the small amount of work put into the original creation? Even if the creator spent a year, maybe even two to create that work, why should they be paid the rest of their lives for such a small investment.
One thing Messenger Lite won't be able to do is make voice calls, in this first version at least. As a huge growth area for Facebook -- 300 million people use Messenger for voice calling -- it is a feature Chudnovsky is "definitely" looking at adding eventually. "People want to use the same kind of services they use everywhere else, but it definitely requires different types of tech."
If you could do voice calls over your data network, wouldn't you just use the full version of the app instead of the lite?
I also love that it's only available to
people in Kenya, Tunisia, Malaysia, Sri Lanka and Venezuela, and is set to come to other countries later.
So if you hate the full version sucking your battery dry too bad, you can't use the better one.
I like your logic there. I'd even say they should be able to extend the protection by paying the difference and even include the first 5 years a freely implied protection on anything.
0-5 years is free and implied on any work.
Before the 5 years expire, you need to pay $10.24 and it's registration is extended to 10 years (very minor investment if you foresee your work becoming profitable)
Before the 10 years expire, you need to pay $317.44 and it's registration is extended to 15 years
Before the 15 years expire, you need to pay $10,158.08 and it's registration is extended to 20 years
Before the 20 years expire, you need to pay $325,058.56 and it's registration is extended to 25 years
Before the 25 years expire, you need to pay $10,401,873.92 and it's registration is extended to 30 years
I can't think of many works that would still be worth 10 million after 25 years. Perhaps a book to movie deal like LOTR, but I have to imagine with 150 million copies of the book being sold, it's fair to say Tolkien was already more than fairly rewarded for his work and it should have long since been put into the public domain by that point.
How is even 50 ok? The whole point behind copyright isn't to establish ownership of a "product". It exists to incentivize creators by providing a protected window of opportunity for them to profit from their works before the general public can do with it as they please. Just 5 to MAYBE 10 years is PLENTY of time to recoup costs and turn a hefty profit from a work. I don't see any reason why it should last longer. Sure, 100 years ago thing moved slower, and the profitability of a work may have had reason to warrant more time, but instead of slowly increasing that window of time the last century, the government should have been slowly shrinking it.
Why would be have a Roku and cable? I bought them because I left. Once everyone drops cable, the networks will realize they need apps or deals with Hulu/Netflix. As everyone here knows, it's the ISP side that needs FCC attention.
Hopefully when Google's network becomes sentient, it will follow their "don't be evil" motto a little more closely then the humans running things.