They do have that for mobile data. It's under each app's settings. Unfortunately it doesn't have similar controls when using Wi-Fi. This get around that, I disable Wi-Fi unless it is needed.
I turn off Uber data while I'm not using it, and have done so ever since they removed the "Only while in use" option for location services. My trust in them dropped when they did this./p-
A hate crime is for when you hate a category of people, not one particular person. And there definitely are times when people don't hate the ones they kill. For example, the people who shoot random strangers on an equal opportunity basis do it because they simply love murder. I guess that would make it a love crime!
Intel's is much smaller than the one you linked (slightly less than one third the volume).
Intel's one is only smaller if you ignore the dock that it must plug into. That was the point of the original post; it never even claimed that the Vensmile PC was smaller than Intel's Computer Card. If you ignore the dock then you might as well say that your desktop PC is smaller as well, because you can pull out the CPU and carry it around in your pocket too.
That said, the two products don't really compete with each other, despite what the/. headline says. Intel's solution is made to slot in to become the brain of third party devices. It has a different target audience than people looking for a pocket PC.
And we should trust them for birth control advice?
China had the one-child policy between 1979 and 2015. This was changed to become a two-child policy. Either there hasn't been much sex going on since 1979 or they have had to be creative.
Microsoft only have themselves to blame for people disabling Windows Updates because they made it untrustworthy:
The Windows 10 upgrade fiasco
The backporting of the telemetry to previous versions of Windows
The updates that crash or cause problems
The update mechanism that in older Windows peg the CPU usage at 99%
The forced reboots at highly inconvenient times
The massive Windows 10 updates that mean that I have to reinstall some of our legacy software because Windows keeps resetting some crucial registry entries
The bundling of updates into a single entity so that we don't have control over what gets installed on our systems
And the hiding of what is in those updates so that we don't ask questions.
The embedded version of Windows XP is a separate product and still does get support (including updates) until April 2019, a fact XP users can use to their advantage to continue getting updates.
I did a really quick search when I posted my first message, but the only thing I could find was a torrent on the pirate bay. I can't access that from here to tell if it is legitimate.
We should be able to see how this occurred by looking at the leaked Windows 2000 source code back from 2004. I seem to recall that it included the networking code. Given that Microsoft backported the patch for this vulnerability to Windows XP then it seems reasonable to assume that it is still the same legacy code that came with Windows 2000 (and earlier).
Compiler warnings were a lot less sophisticated back in those days. I wonder how many warnings they have to turn off today just to be able to compile the ancient code that lives in the guts of Windows.
Colbert is saying the worst thing you can do with your mouth is to suck another man's cock and it would be particularly bad if said man is Vladamir Putin.
Colbert said nothing of the sort; just that Trump's mouth isn't good enough for anything more.
What?? They aren't deliberately offensive? Of course they are deliberately offensive. There is a reason why there is the term shock jock; they deliberately say things to shock people. There is a reason why Alex Jones recently said in court that his on-air persona is a character and doesn't represent him in reality. There is a big audience for people who are loud, offensive, and who get overly-angry about even the most trivial things. They have no problems with arguing against things that they previously were for.
This is a case of that. Wasn't the accusation that Colbert made a homophobic joke? Now you tell us that homophobia isn't a problem at all, and it was just swearing on TV that is the problem. If that is the case, then my original comment stands: this was never a case of homophobia.
The joke is literally using homosexuality as a club. While drooling morons are going, "OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO WOT NOW TRUMP?", they're not fucking doing it because "zomg Putin!", they're fucking doing it because, "LOL COLBERT CALLED TRUMP TEH GAY".
Good grief, you sound like a 12 year old.
You know it, I know it, and disingenuous pieces of shit everywhere know it.
Well obviously I don't know it because otherwise I would not have said that the joke doesn't say that homosexuality is bad. I stand by that claim. In no way did the joke say that gays are cock holsters; it just said that Trump is one. It didn't even say that Trump was performing a sexual act; just that all he is good for is acting in a subservient way to Putin. The joke is crude, but it makes no mention of homosexuals in general.
He was saying that Trump is so vile and disgusting that he must suck dicks like a degenerate.
He said nothing of the sort. He didn't even say that he does suck dicks, only that "the only thing [his] mouth is good for is being Vladimir Putin's cock holster".
Now did he say that this is all that gays' mouths are good for? No, just Trump. He didn't say that he was so bad that he must suck cock, but that it was all his mouth was good for - and the cock of the Russian president specifically. This is no way makes any statement about homosexuality in general.
And is it gay people who are attacking Colbert, or just conservatives out for blood? And do these same people also attack Trump for signing an order protecting freedom for opponents of gay marriage, or do their concern for lesbians and gays disappear when it comes to actual homophobic actions? No, they don't... which leads me to this:
There is a saying that it is very hard to be a liberal, because of all the stuff that you have to pretend that you don't know. It has, however, been a hilarious few days watching people like you pretend that you are having a hard time understanding why a group of people would be upset that their very identity itself is as a slur.
No, what is really funny is all the people who suddenly think that being homophobic is wrong, when the rest of the time that is their default position. The side of politics that rants against political correctness can twist themselves in knots to be politically correct about things that they don't believe at all simply because they can smell the blood in the water (or do you think that is offensive to sharks?). It is funny to see people like this random twit who complain about how Colbert is both homophobic and politically correct. Colbert must be so worried to lose a viewer who didn't like his show anyway!
So, it depends on who is talking? If it's a liberal saying it, it's OK, while if it's a liberal's enemy saying it, it's wrong. Gotcha. That's really the issue here.
Either homophobic jokes are wrong, or they're not
You have ignored the main point about my post, so once again I have to ask how is this a homophobic joke. Just because you keep saying that it is one doesn't mean that it is true. Just because it mentions an act that gays do, doesn't mean that it is denigrating them. All it says that the relationship between Don and Vlad is closer than they admit, with Trump being subservient to the one who helped win him the election. That's the joke.
And this is also the fundamental difference between when Colbert says it and when those attacking him now say it. When conservatives talk about homosexuals they aren't joking. They mean all the bad things they say about them; that being gay is a sickness that needs to be cured; that gays should not be able to marry; that they are pedophiles who prey on our children; that they will all burn in hell. So which one is homophobic? The one who tells a joke, or the one who viciously hate gays and acts to limit gay rights?
But surely it is hypocrisy for conservative pundits to complain when they actually say these sort of outrageous things all the time. The big difference is that they aren't joking.
The hosts of the radio show "Sons of Liberty" once stated that homosexuals committed half of all murders in large cities. That wasn't a joke. And did you know that victims of "legitimate rape" can't get pregnant? I can only wish that this was a joke. State senetor Michele Bachman once said that "If you're involved in the gay and lesbian lifestyle, it's bondage. It is personal bondage, personal despair and personal enslavement."
So I don't think that it is hypocritical to say something in jest that you would deplore if someone else said it seriously. This isn't really about hypocrisy, it is about seeing an opening to feel like they are taking the high moral ground and trash someone they don't like. It's the same as someone who happily calls people latte-sipping leftie warmist alarmists, and yet who also gets offended if you call them a denier.
When this story broke out, I searched for the clip to see what the fuss was about. When I did find it I realised that I had seen it before, and while I did think at the time that it was an unusual type of joke for one of those monologues, I didn't see how it could be labelled homophobic. The joke doesn't say that homosexuality is bad, nor did it say anything about anyone who is gay. It merely suggested a closer relationship than has been admitted and a power dynamic that Trump is Putin's bitch. It's strong stuff, but nothing different that calling Hillary Clinton a witch ("jail the witch").
The funny thing is, a lot of the people who are complaining about this would also say that gay marriage should not be allowed. I think that if gays and lesbians had a choice they would rather be able to live their lives as they want to and put up with the odd joke or two than not be allowed to marry the person they love and be told that they are going to hell.
LMS does allow local applications to talk to AMT, but the vulnerability exists over the network whether you have LMS or not.
According to Intel's disclosure (upon which your linked page was based), the correct way to fix this vulnerability is to update the firmware. If you can't do that then you are directed to unprovision the Intel manageability SKU to prevent network attacks and then disable LMS to mitigate against local attacks. From the INTEL-SA-00075 Mitigation Guide:
These mitigations are intended to prevent unauthorized activation and use of Intel manageability SKUs, Intel® Active Management Technology (Intel® AMT), Intel® Standard Manageability (ISM), and Intel® Small Business Technology (SBT) that have not applied the firmware update addressing the vulnerability. ... Intel highly recommends that the first step in all mitigation paths is to unprovision the Intel manageability SKU to address the network privilege escalation vulnerability. For provisioned systems, unprovisioning must be performed prior to disabling or removing the LMS.
So the original advice that disabling LMS is all you need to do (or not run Windows) was incorrect as it may lead people to believe that they are safe when they can still be affected by network intrusions.
What a disappointingly predictable response. A reply that provides no evidence, and fails to address anything that I said. All we get is name calling and vulgarities. You don't even have the wit to make your insults amusing.
Go on, give me your best shot! Perhaps if you remove your tinfoil hat the CIA might helpfully beam to you some choice phrases.
Why is this user's Thinkpad listening on AMT ports, meaning exposing an AMT attack surface, even with AMT turned off?
My guess would be that AMT isn't actually turned off, but that remote access is disabled because a strong password has yet to be set. I would also say that a work-supplied laptop that is called the Lenovo ThinkPad T430s Business Laptop may not necessarily qualify as being a "consumer-grade PC" (although I guess some models did come with Windows Home edition).
I may be a shill, but you are a plain nut-job! I provided a list of non-server Skylake CPUs and motherboard chipsets along with a list of the chipset model numbers that have vPro facility. All you provided was a strongly worded and unsupported assertion. If you had wanted to prove me wrong and actually believed your own rantings then you would have gone through the entire list and counted how many do and don't support vPro. Then you could have gloated about how wrong I was. But you didn't, so I will. Of the desktop CPUs, 6 support vPro while 22 do not. And as I said before only 1 in 6 of their chipsets would actually allow the CPUs to use that feature. You are wrong.
I do wonder why would you say we shouldn't trust Intel's word on their deliberate backdoors when they have been completely upfront (and even boasted) about the remote access facility of AMT! Nothing about this latest revelation shows that Intel have lied about anything.
If you have no evidence to support your notion that every Intel chip is secretly spying on you then don't swear at people who don't share your paranoid ravings. Some of us would rather have proof before we dusted off our pitchforks. That said, I would never buy a CPU that had remote access built in simply to avoid a potential attack vector. But there is a big difference between prudence and paranoia.
Apparently you just have to make sure the LMS service in Windows is not installed or is disabled. Or not run Windows? That's the software that passes the requests to the firmware.
When AMT is enabled, any packets sent to the machine's wired network port on port 16992 or 16993 will be redirected to the ME and passed on to AMT - the OS never sees these packets. AMT provides a web UI that allows you to do things like reboot a machine, provide remote install media or even (if the OS is configured appropriately) get a remote console.
So the firmware is intercepting the traffic before the OS gets it. Turning off the LMS service would stop the remote console, but not the ability to reboot the machine into a remote ISO. At that point, your files would be visible unless you encrypted your drive.
As for not running Windows, that won't help. Further down the page linked above, it has instructions for Linux on how to see whether you are vulnerable. It also says:
However, an attacker who enables emulated serial support may be able to use that to configure grub to enable serial console. Remote graphical console seems to be problematic under Linux but some people claim to have it working, so an attacker would be able to interact with your graphical console as if you were physically present. Yes, this is terrifying.
Every single Intel CPU has this hardware. The business SKUs just have it enabled. It's still there with the same blob, likely with the same vulnerability.
I would same that it is unlikely that the lowest of Celerons has all the features of the highest Xeon CPU with just some flags to turn off things like vPro. And I think that it is unlikely that they all have the same vulnerability when the security advisory explicitly states that:
This vulnerability does not exist on Intel-based consumer PCs.
The affected LMS service is enabled and run at startup by default in Windows 10.
Only if you have a CPU and motherboard chipset with vPro, which very few of them do. I had a look at some of the entries on Intel's list of Skylake desktop products for the consumer-level products, but got bored trying to find which of the CPUs had vPro support. I ended up looking at the motherboard chipsets, and only the Q170 supports it. The Z170, H170, Q150, B150, and H110 chipsets do not.
The original poster's point stands, that this does not affect consumer-grade PCs. Most people can happily ignore this vulnerability.
You can't bully a robot. If you call it bullying to pushing over a robot then you would have to call it the same when you push over a trash can. It is vandalism when you are dealing with objects. I think the company is trying to anthropomorphise their products.
You are completely wrong. Despite what the naysayers claim, the climate models are doing just fine. What you suggest is just a rehashing of the old denier argument that the climate is too complicated for anyone to understand and therefore global warming is false. And yet, as we keep spewing greenhouse gases into the environment the temperature keeps increasing just as was postulated it would way back in the 1890s. So even with their rudimentary understanding, the scientists back in the 19th century had more of an understanding of the mechanics of the climate than you want to credit those from today.
Yes, there is still more to learn about the climate, and so models will get more accurate. But there is nothing to suggest that anything we find anything that will alter the outcome to any significant degree such that we can just ignore the problem.
Slashdot Mirror
They do have that for mobile data. It's under each app's settings. Unfortunately it doesn't have similar controls when using Wi-Fi. This get around that, I disable Wi-Fi unless it is needed.
I turn off Uber data while I'm not using it, and have done so ever since they removed the "Only while in use" option for location services. My trust in them dropped when they did this./p-
A hate crime is for when you hate a category of people, not one particular person. And there definitely are times when people don't hate the ones they kill. For example, the people who shoot random strangers on an equal opportunity basis do it because they simply love murder. I guess that would make it a love crime!
Intel's is much smaller than the one you linked (slightly less than one third the volume).
Intel's one is only smaller if you ignore the dock that it must plug into. That was the point of the original post; it never even claimed that the Vensmile PC was smaller than Intel's Computer Card. If you ignore the dock then you might as well say that your desktop PC is smaller as well, because you can pull out the CPU and carry it around in your pocket too.
That said, the two products don't really compete with each other, despite what the /. headline says. Intel's solution is made to slot in to become the brain of third party devices. It has a different target audience than people looking for a pocket PC.
And we should trust them for birth control advice?
China had the one-child policy between 1979 and 2015. This was changed to become a two-child policy. Either there hasn't been much sex going on since 1979 or they have had to be creative.
Microsoft only have themselves to blame for people disabling Windows Updates because they made it untrustworthy:
The embedded version of Windows XP is a separate product and still does get support (including updates) until April 2019, a fact XP users can use to their advantage to continue getting updates.
I did a really quick search when I posted my first message, but the only thing I could find was a torrent on the pirate bay. I can't access that from here to tell if it is legitimate.
We should be able to see how this occurred by looking at the leaked Windows 2000 source code back from 2004. I seem to recall that it included the networking code. Given that Microsoft backported the patch for this vulnerability to Windows XP then it seems reasonable to assume that it is still the same legacy code that came with Windows 2000 (and earlier).
Compiler warnings were a lot less sophisticated back in those days. I wonder how many warnings they have to turn off today just to be able to compile the ancient code that lives in the guts of Windows.
Colbert is saying the worst thing you can do with your mouth is to suck another man's cock and it would be particularly bad if said man is Vladamir Putin.
Colbert said nothing of the sort; just that Trump's mouth isn't good enough for anything more.
What?? They aren't deliberately offensive? Of course they are deliberately offensive. There is a reason why there is the term shock jock; they deliberately say things to shock people. There is a reason why Alex Jones recently said in court that his on-air persona is a character and doesn't represent him in reality. There is a big audience for people who are loud, offensive, and who get overly-angry about even the most trivial things. They have no problems with arguing against things that they previously were for.
This is a case of that. Wasn't the accusation that Colbert made a homophobic joke? Now you tell us that homophobia isn't a problem at all, and it was just swearing on TV that is the problem. If that is the case, then my original comment stands: this was never a case of homophobia.
The joke is literally using homosexuality as a club. While drooling morons are going, "OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO WOT NOW TRUMP?", they're not fucking doing it because "zomg Putin!", they're fucking doing it because, "LOL COLBERT CALLED TRUMP TEH GAY".
Good grief, you sound like a 12 year old.
You know it, I know it, and disingenuous pieces of shit everywhere know it.
Well obviously I don't know it because otherwise I would not have said that the joke doesn't say that homosexuality is bad. I stand by that claim. In no way did the joke say that gays are cock holsters; it just said that Trump is one. It didn't even say that Trump was performing a sexual act; just that all he is good for is acting in a subservient way to Putin. The joke is crude, but it makes no mention of homosexuals in general.
He was saying that Trump is so vile and disgusting that he must suck dicks like a degenerate.
He said nothing of the sort. He didn't even say that he does suck dicks, only that "the only thing [his] mouth is good for is being Vladimir Putin's cock holster".
Now did he say that this is all that gays' mouths are good for? No, just Trump. He didn't say that he was so bad that he must suck cock, but that it was all his mouth was good for - and the cock of the Russian president specifically. This is no way makes any statement about homosexuality in general.
And is it gay people who are attacking Colbert, or just conservatives out for blood? And do these same people also attack Trump for signing an order protecting freedom for opponents of gay marriage, or do their concern for lesbians and gays disappear when it comes to actual homophobic actions? No, they don't... which leads me to this:
There is a saying that it is very hard to be a liberal, because of all the stuff that you have to pretend that you don't know. It has, however, been a hilarious few days watching people like you pretend that you are having a hard time understanding why a group of people would be upset that their very identity itself is as a slur.
No, what is really funny is all the people who suddenly think that being homophobic is wrong, when the rest of the time that is their default position. The side of politics that rants against political correctness can twist themselves in knots to be politically correct about things that they don't believe at all simply because they can smell the blood in the water (or do you think that is offensive to sharks?). It is funny to see people like this random twit who complain about how Colbert is both homophobic and politically correct. Colbert must be so worried to lose a viewer who didn't like his show anyway!
So, it depends on who is talking? If it's a liberal saying it, it's OK, while if it's a liberal's enemy saying it, it's wrong. Gotcha. That's really the issue here.
Either homophobic jokes are wrong, or they're not
You have ignored the main point about my post, so once again I have to ask how is this a homophobic joke. Just because you keep saying that it is one doesn't mean that it is true. Just because it mentions an act that gays do, doesn't mean that it is denigrating them. All it says that the relationship between Don and Vlad is closer than they admit, with Trump being subservient to the one who helped win him the election. That's the joke.
And this is also the fundamental difference between when Colbert says it and when those attacking him now say it. When conservatives talk about homosexuals they aren't joking. They mean all the bad things they say about them; that being gay is a sickness that needs to be cured; that gays should not be able to marry; that they are pedophiles who prey on our children; that they will all burn in hell. So which one is homophobic? The one who tells a joke, or the one who viciously hate gays and acts to limit gay rights?
But surely it is hypocrisy for conservative pundits to complain when they actually say these sort of outrageous things all the time. The big difference is that they aren't joking.
The hosts of the radio show "Sons of Liberty" once stated that homosexuals committed half of all murders in large cities. That wasn't a joke. And did you know that victims of "legitimate rape" can't get pregnant? I can only wish that this was a joke. State senetor Michele Bachman once said that "If you're involved in the gay and lesbian lifestyle, it's bondage. It is personal bondage, personal despair and personal enslavement."
So I don't think that it is hypocritical to say something in jest that you would deplore if someone else said it seriously. This isn't really about hypocrisy, it is about seeing an opening to feel like they are taking the high moral ground and trash someone they don't like. It's the same as someone who happily calls people latte-sipping leftie warmist alarmists, and yet who also gets offended if you call them a denier.
When this story broke out, I searched for the clip to see what the fuss was about. When I did find it I realised that I had seen it before, and while I did think at the time that it was an unusual type of joke for one of those monologues, I didn't see how it could be labelled homophobic. The joke doesn't say that homosexuality is bad, nor did it say anything about anyone who is gay. It merely suggested a closer relationship than has been admitted and a power dynamic that Trump is Putin's bitch. It's strong stuff, but nothing different that calling Hillary Clinton a witch ("jail the witch").
The funny thing is, a lot of the people who are complaining about this would also say that gay marriage should not be allowed. I think that if gays and lesbians had a choice they would rather be able to live their lives as they want to and put up with the odd joke or two than not be allowed to marry the person they love and be told that they are going to hell.
LMS does allow local applications to talk to AMT, but the vulnerability exists over the network whether you have LMS or not.
According to Intel's disclosure (upon which your linked page was based), the correct way to fix this vulnerability is to update the firmware. If you can't do that then you are directed to unprovision the Intel manageability SKU to prevent network attacks and then disable LMS to mitigate against local attacks. From the INTEL-SA-00075 Mitigation Guide :
So the original advice that disabling LMS is all you need to do (or not run Windows) was incorrect as it may lead people to believe that they are safe when they can still be affected by network intrusions.
Have you got a link for that?
What a disappointingly predictable response. A reply that provides no evidence, and fails to address anything that I said. All we get is name calling and vulgarities. You don't even have the wit to make your insults amusing.
Go on, give me your best shot! Perhaps if you remove your tinfoil hat the CIA might helpfully beam to you some choice phrases.
Why is this user's Thinkpad listening on AMT ports, meaning exposing an AMT attack surface, even with AMT turned off?
My guess would be that AMT isn't actually turned off, but that remote access is disabled because a strong password has yet to be set. I would also say that a work-supplied laptop that is called the Lenovo ThinkPad T430s Business Laptop may not necessarily qualify as being a "consumer-grade PC" (although I guess some models did come with Windows Home edition).
I may be a shill, but you are a plain nut-job! I provided a list of non-server Skylake CPUs and motherboard chipsets along with a list of the chipset model numbers that have vPro facility. All you provided was a strongly worded and unsupported assertion. If you had wanted to prove me wrong and actually believed your own rantings then you would have gone through the entire list and counted how many do and don't support vPro. Then you could have gloated about how wrong I was. But you didn't, so I will. Of the desktop CPUs, 6 support vPro while 22 do not. And as I said before only 1 in 6 of their chipsets would actually allow the CPUs to use that feature. You are wrong.
I do wonder why would you say we shouldn't trust Intel's word on their deliberate backdoors when they have been completely upfront (and even boasted) about the remote access facility of AMT! Nothing about this latest revelation shows that Intel have lied about anything.
If you have no evidence to support your notion that every Intel chip is secretly spying on you then don't swear at people who don't share your paranoid ravings. Some of us would rather have proof before we dusted off our pitchforks. That said, I would never buy a CPU that had remote access built in simply to avoid a potential attack vector. But there is a big difference between prudence and paranoia.
Apparently you just have to make sure the LMS service in Windows is not installed or is disabled. Or not run Windows? That's the software that passes the requests to the firmware.
Not according to this analysis:
So the firmware is intercepting the traffic before the OS gets it. Turning off the LMS service would stop the remote console, but not the ability to reboot the machine into a remote ISO. At that point, your files would be visible unless you encrypted your drive.
As for not running Windows, that won't help. Further down the page linked above, it has instructions for Linux on how to see whether you are vulnerable. It also says:
Every single Intel CPU has this hardware. The business SKUs just have it enabled. It's still there with the same blob, likely with the same vulnerability.
I would same that it is unlikely that the lowest of Celerons has all the features of the highest Xeon CPU with just some flags to turn off things like vPro. And I think that it is unlikely that they all have the same vulnerability when the security advisory explicitly states that:
The affected LMS service is enabled and run at startup by default in Windows 10.
Only if you have a CPU and motherboard chipset with vPro, which very few of them do. I had a look at some of the entries on Intel's list of Skylake desktop products for the consumer-level products, but got bored trying to find which of the CPUs had vPro support. I ended up looking at the motherboard chipsets, and only the Q170 supports it. The Z170, H170, Q150, B150, and H110 chipsets do not.
The original poster's point stands, that this does not affect consumer-grade PCs. Most people can happily ignore this vulnerability.
You can't bully a robot. If you call it bullying to pushing over a robot then you would have to call it the same when you push over a trash can. It is vandalism when you are dealing with objects. I think the company is trying to anthropomorphise their products.
You are completely wrong. Despite what the naysayers claim, the climate models are doing just fine. What you suggest is just a rehashing of the old denier argument that the climate is too complicated for anyone to understand and therefore global warming is false. And yet, as we keep spewing greenhouse gases into the environment the temperature keeps increasing just as was postulated it would way back in the 1890s. So even with their rudimentary understanding, the scientists back in the 19th century had more of an understanding of the mechanics of the climate than you want to credit those from today.
Yes, there is still more to learn about the climate, and so models will get more accurate. But there is nothing to suggest that anything we find anything that will alter the outcome to any significant degree such that we can just ignore the problem.