If I remember correctly, Reagan supported giving NASA a few billion dollars for a space station, and NASA burned through all that money without putting a single part of it in space?
Then Clinton pushed ISS as a way of making friends with the Russians, and it survived various attempts to cull it on that basis.
The Republicans are remembering a time when they could field a candidate that someone would want to elect, because they don't make lizard-man conspiracy theories seem plausible.
The Republican establishment don't want their candidate to become President, because then people might expect them to do something. Having Trump in the White House is their nightmare scenario; they'd rather see Hillary there, so they can keep telling Republican voters 'you must vote for us in Congress so we can stop Clinton!' Why else do you think they keep pushing for another Bush?
They hated Reagan for the same reason they hate Trump: they're both outsiders who could actually win.
And also, this is the first known breach affecting more than one application since the iOS App Store opened in 2008. Who KNOWS if this has been going on in Android?
Would Android malware even need it, when every dubious app demands all possible permissions before it will install?
Hint: the only way to prevent an app from doing BAD STUFF is for the operating system to prevent it from doing BAD STUFF. Even a human reading the source code has a hard time telling whether that socket it's opening to www.evilserver.com is being used legitimately, or sending your banking passwords to Elbonian hackers. And if the bad code is inserted by the compiler, reading the source is pointless.
If you want security, you need to sandbox the apps, and ensure that Fluffy Kitty Screensaver can't read your banking passwords. At best, any app scanning approach can only find the most obvious malware, as this has proven.
Oh, and don't outsource development to dubious nations.
Plus you seem to be arguing that humans don't enjoy killing each other? It's what we do best.
Uh, no, it's not. I don't believe there's any other predator that can live with so little violence with the kind of population densities humans manage in our cities. That's why we took over the planet.
Happily Android has also recently moved to this same "permission on demand" model which makes way more sense than "agree to laundry list of demands to run" ever did.
If, by 'recently', you mean 'in a still unreleased version of the OS that most current Android users will never get.'
It will be years before the majority of Android users have that capability, which should have been in the OS from the start.
So, as far as I can make out, you seem to be claiming that VW released a car designed to be unreliable and break down, so they can make money on repairs?
people were sold automobiles that were claimed to be street legal, but they are not.
Which law makes them not street legal?
That was my original question, which you side-stepped by claiming CRIMINAL FRAUD. Now you're claiming it's CRIMINAL FRAUD because the cars aren't legal... but you don't know what law makes them illegal.
"normal mode" is a lie, it's a fiction invented by a software developer, probably with the cooperation of higher-ups in order to sell a car that is not what it appears to be.
That's not an answer to my question.
You claim 'CRIMINAL FRAUD', so you must believe the 'test mode' is not the way the engine is designed to run. Yet you also claim that 'normal mode' is not the way the engine is designed to run. So why do you think VW would release a car that doesn't run the way it's designed to run?
Higher performance means higher internal engine stresses.
You have two choices here:
1. The engine is designed to run in 'test mode' all the time, and the code that allows it to run outside 'test mode' is a bug, or something some EVIL PROGRAMMER inserted because he wanted his car to go faster. 2. The engine is designed to run in normal mode all the time, and 'test mode' is a deliberate attempt to detune it for testing.
ripped off by having engines that are running outside of their design envelope, with premature part failures and lower reliability
In what sense are they 'running outside of their design envelope'? Are you saying that this isn't an intentional piece of code, it's just a bug that they don't run in 'test mode' all the time, and VW didn't design them that way?
The $18B doesn't cover the cost of 500,000 customers who not only got ripped off, but also were exposed to dangerous levels of harmful fumes. This is a torts lawyer wet dream.
Ripped off by getting better performance than they would have if the emissions controls were in 'test mode' all the time?
And, if you're worried about 'harmful fumes', you wouldn't have bought a stinky, polluting, smoke-spewing diesel in the first place.
I've seen several of our customers using iPads when they visit us. I've seen others using Apple or (increasingly uncommon) Windows laptops. I've never seen one using a Microsoft tablet.
So, on that anecdotal evidence, clearly Microsoft have little chance in the enterprise.
Oh, and the tire didn't 'explode', it was cut open by a piece of debris on the runway. That can happen to any aircraft, but it was more dangerous to Concorde because of the large fuel tanks and the location of the wheels relative to them.
And the time zone difference will mean that you'll arrive smack in the middle of the opposite part of the day you left. You're gonna have to sleep that off somehow, so who cares???
Me. I'd rather sleep in a hotel bed than on a plane. Even the planes with seats that fold down into beds still aren't very comfortable.
And the prices quoted here are about the same as my last transatlantic first class flight. Though I'm sure the real numbers would be several times as high.
And then the fleet was instantly and irrevocably grounded.
Uh, no, it wasn't.
Concorde was operationally profitable, at least for BA, until 9/11 took the bottom out of the airline market and killed many of the people who used to fly on Concorde (e.g. bankers flying between NYC and London), and the cost of the required upgrades to keep them flying couldn't be justified.
The crash did scare off some passengers, but they flew on for several years afterwards.
What I expect to see is more DRM extensions for browsers, similar to Microsoft's Trusted Audio Path, to ensure nothing can block content between the site and user's screen. It already is happening as sites go completely all Flash.
Then no-one will go to their sites. Like no iPad user goes to those 'all Flash' sites.
Slashdot Mirror
If I remember correctly, Reagan supported giving NASA a few billion dollars for a space station, and NASA burned through all that money without putting a single part of it in space?
Then Clinton pushed ISS as a way of making friends with the Russians, and it survived various attempts to cull it on that basis.
The Republicans are remembering a time when they could field a candidate that someone would want to elect, because they don't make lizard-man conspiracy theories seem plausible.
The Republican establishment don't want their candidate to become President, because then people might expect them to do something. Having Trump in the White House is their nightmare scenario; they'd rather see Hillary there, so they can keep telling Republican voters 'you must vote for us in Congress so we can stop Clinton!' Why else do you think they keep pushing for another Bush?
They hated Reagan for the same reason they hate Trump: they're both outsiders who could actually win.
Gnome now appears to be a haven for SJWs. Disagreeing with anything they say is 'hate', by definition.
It seems that the only acceptable change to Gnome for slashdotters is going back to the version 2 interface.
I think you'll find that most of us never left. MATE runs fine on my Linux machines.
Me? I bought a device that gets its updates direct from the OS vendor, just like you did.
So did I. They've now abandoned it for anything other than security updates, even though it was still on sale less than a year ago.
That's why I dumped the Nexus and bought an iPad.
And also, this is the first known breach affecting more than one application since the iOS App Store opened in 2008. Who KNOWS if this has been going on in Android?
Would Android malware even need it, when every dubious app demands all possible permissions before it will install?
Hint: the only way to prevent an app from doing BAD STUFF is for the operating system to prevent it from doing BAD STUFF. Even a human reading the source code has a hard time telling whether that socket it's opening to www.evilserver.com is being used legitimately, or sending your banking passwords to Elbonian hackers. And if the bad code is inserted by the compiler, reading the source is pointless.
If you want security, you need to sandbox the apps, and ensure that Fluffy Kitty Screensaver can't read your banking passwords. At best, any app scanning approach can only find the most obvious malware, as this has proven.
Oh, and don't outsource development to dubious nations.
Plus you seem to be arguing that humans don't enjoy killing each other? It's what we do best.
Uh, no, it's not. I don't believe there's any other predator that can live with so little violence with the kind of population densities humans manage in our cities. That's why we took over the planet.
I wasn't aware that the UK is a "south-American state of dubious friendship to the US."
Don't install .0 versions of operating systems on production systems. At least, not until they've been tested and shown to work.
Happily Android has also recently moved to this same "permission on demand" model which makes way more sense than "agree to laundry list of demands to run" ever did.
If, by 'recently', you mean 'in a still unreleased version of the OS that most current Android users will never get.'
It will be years before the majority of Android users have that capability, which should have been in the OS from the start.
To answer your question, yes the do actually have to meet the specs to be sold in the US.
But they meet the specs in the test. That's the whole point of the 'test mode' operation.
Is there a law which actually requires them to meet those specs outside of the test?
Hyundai was hit last year for fudging mileage numbers.
Which is something most car buyers actually care about.
So, as far as I can make out, you seem to be claiming that VW released a car designed to be unreliable and break down, so they can make money on repairs?
people were sold automobiles that were claimed to be street legal, but they are not.
Which law makes them not street legal?
That was my original question, which you side-stepped by claiming CRIMINAL FRAUD. Now you're claiming it's CRIMINAL FRAUD because the cars aren't legal... but you don't know what law makes them illegal.
"normal mode" is a lie, it's a fiction invented by a software developer, probably with the cooperation of higher-ups in order to sell a car that is not what it appears to be.
That's not an answer to my question.
You claim 'CRIMINAL FRAUD', so you must believe the 'test mode' is not the way the engine is designed to run. Yet you also claim that 'normal mode' is not the way the engine is designed to run. So why do you think VW would release a car that doesn't run the way it's designed to run?
With the really massive case of CRIMINAL FRAUD we are talking about here, that seems almost irrelevant.
What CRIMINAL FRAUD?
Aside from a few butthurt Greenies, the only people who care about emission tests are the governments who created them.
Higher performance means higher internal engine stresses.
You have two choices here:
1. The engine is designed to run in 'test mode' all the time, and the code that allows it to run outside 'test mode' is a bug, or something some EVIL PROGRAMMER inserted because he wanted his car to go faster.
2. The engine is designed to run in normal mode all the time, and 'test mode' is a deliberate attempt to detune it for testing.
Which are you claiming to be true?
ripped off by having engines that are running outside of their design envelope, with premature part failures and lower reliability
In what sense are they 'running outside of their design envelope'? Are you saying that this isn't an intentional piece of code, it's just a bug that they don't run in 'test mode' all the time, and VW didn't design them that way?
Is there actually any law saying they can't run the car in a special 'test mode' when being tested? Or is this just Greenie butthurt feelbads?
The $18B doesn't cover the cost of 500,000 customers who not only got ripped off, but also were exposed to dangerous levels of harmful fumes. This is a torts lawyer wet dream.
Ripped off by getting better performance than they would have if the emissions controls were in 'test mode' all the time?
And, if you're worried about 'harmful fumes', you wouldn't have bought a stinky, polluting, smoke-spewing diesel in the first place.
I've seen several of our customers using iPads when they visit us. I've seen others using Apple or (increasingly uncommon) Windows laptops. I've never seen one using a Microsoft tablet.
So, on that anecdotal evidence, clearly Microsoft have little chance in the enterprise.
Oh, and the tire didn't 'explode', it was cut open by a piece of debris on the runway. That can happen to any aircraft, but it was more dangerous to Concorde because of the large fuel tanks and the location of the wheels relative to them.
And the time zone difference will mean that you'll arrive smack in the middle of the opposite part of the day you left. You're gonna have to sleep that off somehow, so who cares???
Me. I'd rather sleep in a hotel bed than on a plane. Even the planes with seats that fold down into beds still aren't very comfortable.
And the prices quoted here are about the same as my last transatlantic first class flight. Though I'm sure the real numbers would be several times as high.
And then the fleet was instantly and irrevocably grounded.
Uh, no, it wasn't.
Concorde was operationally profitable, at least for BA, until 9/11 took the bottom out of the airline market and killed many of the people who used to fly on Concorde (e.g. bankers flying between NYC and London), and the cost of the required upgrades to keep them flying couldn't be justified.
The crash did scare off some passengers, but they flew on for several years afterwards.
What I expect to see is more DRM extensions for browsers, similar to Microsoft's Trusted Audio Path, to ensure nothing can block content between the site and user's screen. It already is happening as sites go completely all Flash.
Then no-one will go to their sites. Like no iPad user goes to those 'all Flash' sites.