Guess what?! Freedom comes with risks! I don't make any decision until I weigh the pros and cons and do a bit of research, and yes, this includes any and all apps I may want to use.
That's a pretty high cost. A bit like living in a ghetto, and having to consider your personal safety every time you go out, versus living in a nice, safe, pleasant community.
Uploading your contact data for the purposes of expected social connections within the app is not malware. It's not the way it should be done, and poses a security risk if the server is compromised. But there is no mal-intent there. Nevertheless such practice is now explicitly banned without asking the users permission via a dialog at the time.
Uploading your contact details to a server for the purposes of mailing lists, tracking outside of the intended application domain would be malware.
The former is what was flagged up for iOS.
Android meanwhile suffers from both, and much, much worse, such as malware sending premium rate SMSs, thus potentially causing users severe financial losses.
Since when is the iOS more secure?...an OS that can be rooted by a fucking website.
If that is your measure, the answer to the question you pose is July 15th 2011. That was when the last version of iOS that could be rooted via a website was replaced.
4.3.3 could be jailbroken via website, 4.3.4 would not.
5.x has been out since Oct 2011.
Personally I'd say a better measure is the amount of malware. And on that measure, Android has always been many times worse than iOS.
Hint: read the scale in future. It works with all charts, not just global warming ones. If you get the wrong impression from the correct data correctly plotted on a chart, it's your fault, not the chart.
I should have been more specific - the hockey stick graphs the public is usually shown are overly simplified, sometimes to the point of being ridiculous.
The problem isn't that you weren't specific enough. The problem is that you came out with some denier bullshit and I called you out with evidence you couldn't deny.
There's also the problem that some rabid GW proponents address any criticism, of any kind, with accusations of ignorance, industry conflict or worse.
Calling out crooks, liars and idiots isn't a problem. It's exactly what should be done. They don't need to be treated with kid gloves, humoured or given respect they don't deserve.
in design, form must follow function, not dictate it.
Microsoft certainly didn't do it as well as they could, but at least they tried. Apple didn't even try.
You are misinterpreting the one thing about design you've heard. "Form follows function" does not mean that everything including the kitchen sink should be included. Designers following form follows function simplify.
I can see you're offended, given that you're also from Alabama.
"If this scientist disagrees with us, there must be a reason, so let's dig... aha, he once took money from an oil company! Or, he is a Christian! Or, he's in the Bible Belt
Actually what I found, given the nudge by him being from Alabama, was that he believes in ID. That's an anti-science position. A belief in the bible before before science. And that's a very legitimate reason to call a scientist a Charlatan.
You're right. Whenever someone claims to be a scientist and is arguing against AGW, my very first step is to find out whether they are a charlatan. It would be stupid waste of time not to.
In the vast majority of cases, they are charlatans. Their position is nearly always because of politics, religion or oil company money. Not science.
Yes the old testament is part of the bible. But it's the Jews that take that seriously. Christians tend to put it away in a dark corner from the embarrassment of the go being very different from the new testament god. They just cling onto a few of the better stories, mostly told afresh rather than directly translated from the Old Testament writing.
I didn't say Jesus was squeaky clean. I said he wouldn't be one to carry a firearm or support a strong military.
But hell, believe what you like. That's the whole point of religion, no? Belief without regard for the facts.
Ah, how quickly you forget. Perhaps because you want to. It was less that a year ago that the Berkley Earth Surface Temperature study reported. Led by critic of the Hockey Stick, Richard Muller, funded by The Koch Brothers, who are desperate for AGW to be proved wrong.
The result? Actually the consensus is right, and that hockey stick is true.
Exactly the opposite of your claim, the Hockey Stick is more secure than ever having been confirmed over and over again.
Of course if your entire knowledge of AGW comes from the propagandist denier blogs, you wouldn't be aware of that. And that is what this story is about.
Hey Cartooney. Yes, it's there forever. How long do you want to keep this game up for? Do you want to fill the Google search for Daniel Phillips with it?
I'm responding to your morally and ethically corrupt campaign to astroturf off topic links, without ever being prepared to discuss them; to further the lies of Mike Daisey, even after you know they are lies. And not because you care about workers rights, but because you are a platform advocate for Linux and want to do competitors down.
Where do I start? OK, let's narrow it down. Which particular line on the chart did you think shows that "the promised "hockey stick" increase in temperatures not been seen in the last 15 years..."? The blue line, the red, or the black?
"We've seen quite a few Android malware discoveries in the recent past, mostly on unofficial Android markets. There was a premium-rate SMS Trojan that not only sent costly SMS messages automatically, but also prevented users' carriers from notifying them of the new charges, a massive Android malware campaign that may be responsible for duping as many as 5 million users, and an malware controlled via SMS." It's in the fucking summary.
On the one hand you've got iPhone Apps sending contact details - previously without user permission - now with user permission. Although in either case not with malicious intent.
On the other hand you've got Android apps sending premium rate phone numbers without the users permission.
And you\re having trouble differentiating?
Or were you just trying to ignore the type of malicious app mentioned in the summary, because it's bad news for Android?
Slashdot Mirror
There's no such thing as a forced iTunes upgrade.
Guess what?! Freedom comes with risks! I don't make any decision until I weigh the pros and cons and do a bit of research, and yes, this includes any and all apps I may want to use.
That's a pretty high cost. A bit like living in a ghetto, and having to consider your personal safety every time you go out, versus living in a nice, safe, pleasant community.
As a tul of thumb:
Uploading your contact data for the purposes of expected social connections within the app is not malware. It's not the way it should be done, and poses a security risk if the server is compromised. But there is no mal-intent there. Nevertheless such practice is now explicitly banned without asking the users permission via a dialog at the time.
Uploading your contact details to a server for the purposes of mailing lists, tracking outside of the intended application domain would be malware.
The former is what was flagged up for iOS.
Android meanwhile suffers from both, and much, much worse, such as malware sending premium rate SMSs, thus potentially causing users severe financial losses.
Since when is the iOS more secure? ...an OS that can be rooted by a fucking website.
If that is your measure, the answer to the question you pose is July 15th 2011. That was when the last version of iOS that could be rooted via a website was replaced.
4.3.3 could be jailbroken via website, 4.3.4 would not.
5.x has been out since Oct 2011.
Personally I'd say a better measure is the amount of malware. And on that measure, Android has always been many times worse than iOS.
What's deceptive about that?
You said that the hockey stick had been soundly discredited. That it was an example of not so solid science.
That makes you a liar and an idiot. And thus your opinion of whether liars and idiots should be called out is worthless.
Hint: read the scale in future. It works with all charts, not just global warming ones. If you get the wrong impression from the correct data correctly plotted on a chart, it's your fault, not the chart.
I should have been more specific - the hockey stick graphs the public is usually shown are overly simplified, sometimes to the point of being ridiculous.
The problem isn't that you weren't specific enough. The problem is that you came out with some denier bullshit and I called you out with evidence you couldn't deny.
There's also the problem that some rabid GW proponents address any criticism, of any kind, with accusations of ignorance, industry conflict or worse.
Calling out crooks, liars and idiots isn't a problem. It's exactly what should be done. They don't need to be treated with kid gloves, humoured or given respect they don't deserve.
in design, form must follow function, not dictate it.
Microsoft certainly didn't do it as well as they could, but at least they tried. Apple didn't even try.
You are misinterpreting the one thing about design you've heard. "Form follows function" does not mean that everything including the kitchen sink should be included. Designers following form follows function simplify.
Lazy and full of bullshit.
I can see you're offended, given that you're also from Alabama.
"If this scientist disagrees with us, there must be a reason, so let's dig ... aha, he once took money from an oil company! Or, he is a Christian! Or, he's in the Bible Belt
Actually what I found, given the nudge by him being from Alabama, was that he believes in ID. That's an anti-science position. A belief in the bible before before science. And that's a very legitimate reason to call a scientist a Charlatan.
You're right. Whenever someone claims to be a scientist and is arguing against AGW, my very first step is to find out whether they are a charlatan. It would be stupid waste of time not to.
In the vast majority of cases, they are charlatans. Their position is nearly always because of politics, religion or oil company money. Not science.
If you can't be bothered to make your own point, I'm not going to make it for you.
None of the three lines shows cooling over 15 years.
Yes the old testament is part of the bible. But it's the Jews that take that seriously. Christians tend to put it away in a dark corner from the embarrassment of the go being very different from the new testament god. They just cling onto a few of the better stories, mostly told afresh rather than directly translated from the Old Testament writing.
I didn't say Jesus was squeaky clean. I said he wouldn't be one to carry a firearm or support a strong military.
But hell, believe what you like. That's the whole point of religion, no? Belief without regard for the facts.
Clearly you never read to the end of the comment. There were no plagues of arks in the New Testament.
Ah, how quickly you forget. Perhaps because you want to. It was less that a year ago that the Berkley Earth Surface Temperature study reported. Led by critic of the Hockey Stick, Richard Muller, funded by The Koch Brothers, who are desperate for AGW to be proved wrong.
The result? Actually the consensus is right, and that hockey stick is true.
Exactly the opposite of your claim, the Hockey Stick is more secure than ever having been confirmed over and over again.
Of course if your entire knowledge of AGW comes from the propagandist denier blogs, you wouldn't be aware of that. And that is what this story is about.
Oh, I know where the black line comes from. It's the 3rd order derivative.
So not the black line. OK, which of the blue or red lines do you think shows it?
That is not what the article is about.
It's in the summary. More importantly it's in Android phones. But you want to ignore it because it's not convenient for your favoured platform.
There has been no iPhone malware that sends maliciously premium-rate SMSs. There has been Android malware that does that.
Hey Cartooney. Yes, it's there forever. How long do you want to keep this game up for? Do you want to fill the Google search for Daniel Phillips with it?
I'm responding to your morally and ethically corrupt campaign to astroturf off topic links, without ever being prepared to discuss them; to further the lies of Mike Daisey, even after you know they are lies. And not because you care about workers rights, but because you are a platform advocate for Linux and want to do competitors down.
I'll stop when you stop.
Where do I start? OK, let's narrow it down. Which particular line on the chart did you think shows that "the promised "hockey stick" increase in temperatures not been seen in the last 15 years..."? The blue line, the red, or the black?
No they're letting malware into their store because "it's open!"
I've seen a recent study (too lazy to search for it) that says that the Queen of England is a Lizard.
"We've seen quite a few Android malware discoveries in the recent past, mostly on unofficial Android markets. There was a premium-rate SMS Trojan that not only sent costly SMS messages automatically, but also prevented users' carriers from notifying them of the new charges, a massive Android malware campaign that may be responsible for duping as many as 5 million users, and an malware controlled via SMS."
It's in the fucking summary.
It doesn't happen to iPhones.
And how is that solution different from Android?
On the one hand you've got iPhone Apps sending contact details - previously without user permission - now with user permission. Although in either case not with malicious intent.
On the other hand you've got Android apps sending premium rate phone numbers without the users permission.
And you\re having trouble differentiating?
Or were you just trying to ignore the type of malicious app mentioned in the summary, because it's bad news for Android?
So the ones that raid your contacts and send the information to persons unknown are fine?
Clearly not. But they are many times less bad than the Android one described that is costing you serious money by sending premium-rate SMSs.