and even proved their identity by submitting selfies
And what are selfies supposed to prove? That whoever claims to be the user at one point had received a selfie of the person who was using the account until now?
Cool... Take a selfie posted from facebook and send it to instagram claiming that should give me access to that instagram account...
Sorry but unless your drivers license has your instagramm account printed on there is no way to use it (or a selfie or passport or whatever) to proof that you are the person who created the account. Yes, those documents proof that you are who you are claiming to be, but NOT that you have created the account. (unless there was an ID check during account creation, but who does that? Half of the companies can't even be arsed to confirm the email address)
If the kid gets sick for a few weeks, he'll lose those customers and that's okay. The kid's parents are providing food, housing, clothing, medical care and all the other necessities.
Most adults would quickly find themselves homeless with mounting medical debits in the same situation.
As far as my understanding of the US system goes, this would happen to the employed adult, too.
So facebook "understand[s] the password verification option isn't the best way to go about this"? Yes?
Sorry, but anyone in a company that does not understand that this is a horrible idea before anyone can stop the intern to waste more than 10 minutes coding what should be printed in the dictionary next to "bad idea" deserves to be hit by lighning when taking a dump!
I will say from the outside looking in the argument that any of these awards shows are "trade organizations" seems quite weak, and I would love to see how the court case goes here..
This is anything but a weak argument and it is not weakend in any way that the general public (including me and obviously you and probably anyone else) never realized that this award show is run by a trade organisation. Different rules would apply for award shows run by e.g. charities or even award shows not limited to members of the organizing trade organization or even awards without commercial and marketable potential as the Oscar.
So this is not a thing about "any award show" that would require special ruling or exemption but a bunch of criteria that makes this award (and probably a bunch of others) relevant in anti-trust laws.
On the other hand, any other reward not handed to industry members by industry members based on industry defined rules is not effected in the slightest way. e.g. Nobel Awards
I always laughed at Babylon 5's data crystals: What good is something you can't label? Even an SD card is tough, MicroSD out of the question (you generally just install and forget about them anyway, until it's time to upgrade). But is that my engineering reports to give to Captain Sheridan, or my collection of Centauri porn with full attributes?
IMHO one of the main reasons why CD-RW failed. (of course besides the battle vs. CD+RW, and plain CD-R becoming dirt cheap, solving also the labeling problem.)
While automation has contributed to the airline industry's stellar safety record in recent years, it has also been a factor in many of the crashes that have still occurred around the world.
And here we are were the humain brain is noteably bad at: Estimating rare risks. Is there a "sweet spot" on how much pilots should lidten to technology and how much to their seat?
There already is a killer app: "play [insert name of TV show]", and it pulls it up on Netflix, Prime, Hulu, or what ever other service is available that has the TV show.
Now if only it would stream it to my Chromecast.....
But then... IF Germany really doesn't care who they hand over possible access to their secure networks to, then the USA is well within it's purview to impose security requirements. You want the data? Then you secure your networks to our standards.
Absolutely.
But that's not what happening here or can you name which security standard is violated how by Huawei? Setting up a body of security standards is exactly what Germany is doing at the moment and probably would be glad to get a "best practice" example of reproducible security standards. But as much as I try, "Do as we tell you and it is us who is asking the questions" is not a security standard.
Now, on the existence of back doors.... My point here is that you have no way of knowing if some piece of equipment has one or not or if some firmware upgrade doesn't throw one in. You cannot just look at a router sitting in on the table and tell. You likely cannot hook up to the various network ports, do a port scan and watch network traffic for a few hours and know there are no backdoors. The ONLY way to really know is to build the software from source code you have reviewed and understand and then only if you've also reviewed the hardware.
Exactly. And such a requirement could and should be part of the security standards used to select the most secure vendor. After all, it is all about security. So, if Huawei won't undergo such a source audit, there would be no need for this discussion in the first place as I'm quite sure that this is part of the process any US vendor has to go through to be considered trustworthy enough to be used in sensitive communication networks. Isn't it?
A hostile government like China, or your friendly government like the USA?
Hostile or not, neither the US nor Germany can outright piss of their largest buisness partner. And that's what happening here. I hate to bring up the Trump subject and to admit that he did the right thing several times, it is HOW he is doing it. He acts like a schoolyard bully not only pissing of his major buisness partners, but the top 193 to 211* of them! And can you blame Germany for rethinking the "friendlyness" after this outright attempt of coercion?
Yes, there are good reasons to keep China out of the German mobile network. And it would have been easy for the US to guarantee that! Just be like "Hey guys: Make sure your phone network is safe from anyone spying! We do that by [long list of security specs, including source code review] and here, we will even allow you to use the results of the security audits we already did for Cisco & Co"
I don't want China in my phone network either, but by not giving anything but unproven accussations this "you are not to question your lieges orders" stance, that has been actually made harder. The only thing that shows is there is notthe slightest indice of Huawei doing anything wrong. Great job. This is called politics and diplomacy for a reason.
*Number of countries counted either by UN or FIFA membership.
So, why do you think it's a good idea to pay China for equipment that likely has back doors,
Again, that's a false premise. As of now, your question should be phrased: Why do you think it's a good idea to pay China for equipment that has no indication of backdoors or security issues except unfounded claims from someone backing a competing vendor?
Huawai would be in position to put a back door into any of their equipment with a firmware update, even if they don't exist now. Why take that chance? And how would you be able to know if they did? I seriously doubt they'd let you build the code from source...
They will if they want to sell it to Germany and if it is necessary to pass the security audit. And with no reliable information performing such an audit for ANY possible vendor is the only way to go.
Clearly Huawai would do as the government requires, and if that was to hide backdoors in their firmware updates, you can bet they'd do it. Cisco? Not so much.
Well, any american company also is no further than a NSL away from having to give the three letter agencies full access, too. So, again, Germany can't rely on anyone here and has to run their own strict security audit and include any possible vendor here.
Of course we should consider that Huawai may be forced to include backdoors.
On the other hand, with Cisco, we know it.
And if the US wants to start the blackmailing game, I'm sure they can call Cisco and make sure that their prices are.... compareable. Or if you have anything that may hint that Huawai indeed build in backdoors: Come up with some proof. Or at least an effing hint. Or clue. Or inkling... anything that is better than mere claim.
I'd even go as far and say that we'd be willing to believe any actual evidence (better to be spied on by the US than China) but as long there isn't anything like that the only sensible way to go is to put any possible vendor through a strict security check.
According to the link the photos will still stay online and only deprecated links will break and second, it is not like it happend without ample warning and time to migrate your data.
While agree with you that you should always have a local data backup (AND a remote one, e.g. in a cloud service!) this story is an example of how closing of a cloud service should work to give everyone enough time to migrate to another service, so that you don't need a local copy.
I guess that's always the risk of using other peoples computers (I mean cloud services)
That's the risk of using ANY data storage besides paper or microfiche: You have to migrate periodically.
No matter if you store your (whatever sort of) data in the cloud or locally in your desk drawer: You have to copy your 3.5'' floppy discs to CDs before you throw out your floppy drive, you have to copy your files from flickr to google photos and from Google+ to instagram (or whatever) when those services close and you have to copy your DVDs to some other medium before you get rid of your optical drive.
Archiving digital data is an ongoing process and nothing that you do once and can forget about. So instead of complaining of an online service going down, you should select the next one based on the exit strategies they offer. (Google Takeout comming to mind)
Saying that: I still miss Google reader and original picasa that was killed by their online-only strategy.
I used Lvl80 as an example for some high level but I don't think there is an actual level cap. So I guess you get promoted through the levels as long as you learn new stuff and improve.
But that's why I'd assume they added Levels so that they can still promote those - just call them "Rock Star" developers within the Software developer track up to level 80 and keep them at what they are good at and don't force them onto a management position to advance their career.
If you live in a time when TV was always second behind TV.
Actors would take roles in TV series only if they were desperate or already gave up the chance of an actual celebrity acting career.
Enter HBO and Netflix showing that TV does not have to be cheap and low quality. Their series are clever, funny, fresh and deep while old-school cinema is presenting us with nothing than the 15th superhero remake. Or 80s remake. (star Trek, Ghostbusters anyone?)
Slashdot Mirror
So the quote is incorrect about both honey AND milk....
Now I really wonder where toothpaste is really coming from!
I'm not a big soda drinker, but I will stop completely if they start pulling things out of their ass.
Leela: How can you trick people into drinking something that comes out of your behind? It's disgusting.
Slurm Queen: Is it? Honey comes from a bee's behind. Milk comes from a cow's behind. And have you ever used toothpaste?
Fry: Whose behind does that come from?
Slurm Queen: You don't wanna know.
While he will correctly claim that his show is an entertainment program, not a news program, the stories he presents have been factually accurate.
Which is even more frightening.
(Which, I just realize, sounds exactly like John Oliver would say after presenting a factually accurate newsitem...)
Anyway, the world came to a point where we laugh at the news and the actual investigative journalism is done by comedians.
I bet those Billboards have a watchdog, too.
Implemented as application to Autostart along with win. What could possibly go wrong using a pure desktop OS for every other scenario...
and even proved their identity by submitting selfies
And what are selfies supposed to prove? That whoever claims to be the user at one point had received a selfie of the person who was using the account until now?
Cool... Take a selfie posted from facebook and send it to instagram claiming that should give me access to that instagram account...
Sorry but unless your drivers license has your instagramm account printed on there is no way to use it (or a selfie or passport or whatever) to proof that you are the person who created the account. Yes, those documents proof that you are who you are claiming to be, but NOT that you have created the account. (unless there was an ID check during account creation, but who does that? Half of the companies can't even be arsed to confirm the email address)
Another question here: Why wasn't her first account using 2FA?
Too complicated and who needs security anyway?
Well, you do...
If the kid gets sick for a few weeks, he'll lose those customers and that's okay. The kid's parents are providing food, housing, clothing, medical care and all the other necessities.
Most adults would quickly find themselves homeless with mounting medical debits in the same situation.
As far as my understanding of the US system goes, this would happen to the employed adult, too.
What about setting up a website?
Why is no one able anymore to do anything on the web if it is not in one of those walled gardens?
So facebook "understand[s] the password verification option isn't the best way to go about this"? Yes?
Sorry, but anyone in a company that does not understand that this is a horrible idea before anyone can stop the intern to waste more than 10 minutes coding what should be printed in the dictionary next to "bad idea" deserves to be hit by lighning when taking a dump!
I will say from the outside looking in the argument that any of these awards shows are "trade organizations" seems quite weak, and I would love to see how the court case goes here..
This is anything but a weak argument and it is not weakend in any way that the general public (including me and obviously you and probably anyone else) never realized that this award show is run by a trade organisation. Different rules would apply for award shows run by e.g. charities or even award shows not limited to members of the organizing trade organization or even awards without commercial and marketable potential as the Oscar.
So this is not a thing about "any award show" that would require special ruling or exemption but a bunch of criteria that makes this award (and probably a bunch of others) relevant in anti-trust laws.
On the other hand, any other reward not handed to industry members by industry members based on industry defined rules is not effected in the slightest way. e.g. Nobel Awards
I always laughed at Babylon 5's data crystals: What good is something you can't label? Even an SD card is tough, MicroSD out of the question (you generally just install and forget about them anyway, until it's time to upgrade). But is that my engineering reports to give to Captain Sheridan, or my collection of Centauri porn with full attributes?
IMHO one of the main reasons why CD-RW failed. (of course besides the battle vs. CD+RW, and plain CD-R becoming dirt cheap, solving also the labeling problem.)
While automation has contributed to the airline industry's stellar safety record in recent years, it has also been a factor in many of the crashes that have still occurred around the world.
And here we are were the humain brain is noteably bad at: Estimating rare risks. Is there a "sweet spot" on how much pilots should lidten to technology and how much to their seat?
Shouldn't a cloud storage just support any type of binary blob?
Hello Alexa,
Did I get any plane tickets in my email?
No, but you have an email from the office, about a business trip to Hibiya Kokusai, three weeks from now.
Did you just go through my Inbox?
Yes, but that's what you friggin asked her to: Go through your email and search for plane tickets!
There already is a killer app: "play [insert name of TV show]", and it pulls it up on Netflix, Prime, Hulu, or what ever other service is available that has the TV show.
Now if only it would stream it to my Chromecast.....
The article doesn't even mention Google Home. Kinda lopsided if you ask me.
How many skills does that one have? 30?
But then... IF Germany really doesn't care who they hand over possible access to their secure networks to, then the USA is well within it's purview to impose security requirements. You want the data? Then you secure your networks to our standards.
Absolutely.
But that's not what happening here or can you name which security standard is violated how by Huawei? Setting up a body of security standards is exactly what Germany is doing at the moment and probably would be glad to get a "best practice" example of reproducible security standards. But as much as I try, "Do as we tell you and it is us who is asking the questions" is not a security standard.
Now, on the existence of back doors.... My point here is that you have no way of knowing if some piece of equipment has one or not or if some firmware upgrade doesn't throw one in. You cannot just look at a router sitting in on the table and tell. You likely cannot hook up to the various network ports, do a port scan and watch network traffic for a few hours and know there are no backdoors. The ONLY way to really know is to build the software from source code you have reviewed and understand and then only if you've also reviewed the hardware.
Exactly. And such a requirement could and should be part of the security standards used to select the most secure vendor. After all, it is all about security. So, if Huawei won't undergo such a source audit, there would be no need for this discussion in the first place as I'm quite sure that this is part of the process any US vendor has to go through to be considered trustworthy enough to be used in sensitive communication networks. Isn't it?
A hostile government like China, or your friendly government like the USA?
Hostile or not, neither the US nor Germany can outright piss of their largest buisness partner. And that's what happening here. I hate to bring up the Trump subject and to admit that he did the right thing several times, it is HOW he is doing it. He acts like a schoolyard bully not only pissing of his major buisness partners, but the top 193 to 211* of them! And can you blame Germany for rethinking the "friendlyness" after this outright attempt of coercion?
Yes, there are good reasons to keep China out of the German mobile network. And it would have been easy for the US to guarantee that! Just be like "Hey guys: Make sure your phone network is safe from anyone spying! We do that by [long list of security specs, including source code review] and here, we will even allow you to use the results of the security audits we already did for Cisco & Co"
I don't want China in my phone network either, but by not giving anything but unproven accussations this "you are not to question your lieges orders" stance, that has been actually made harder. The only thing that shows is there is notthe slightest indice of Huawei doing anything wrong. Great job. This is called politics and diplomacy for a reason.
*Number of countries counted either by UN or FIFA membership.
So, why do you think it's a good idea to pay China for equipment that likely has back doors,
Again, that's a false premise. As of now, your question should be phrased: Why do you think it's a good idea to pay China for equipment that has no indication of backdoors or security issues except unfounded claims from someone backing a competing vendor?
Huawai would be in position to put a back door into any of their equipment with a firmware update, even if they don't exist now. Why take that chance? And how would you be able to know if they did? I seriously doubt they'd let you build the code from source...
They will if they want to sell it to Germany and if it is necessary to pass the security audit. And with no reliable information performing such an audit for ANY possible vendor is the only way to go.
Clearly Huawai would do as the government requires, and if that was to hide backdoors in their firmware updates, you can bet they'd do it. Cisco? Not so much.
Well, any american company also is no further than a NSL away from having to give the three letter agencies full access, too. So, again, Germany can't rely on anyone here and has to run their own strict security audit and include any possible vendor here.
Of course we should consider that Huawai may be forced to include backdoors.
On the other hand, with Cisco, we know it.
And if the US wants to start the blackmailing game, I'm sure they can call Cisco and make sure that their prices are.... compareable. Or if you have anything that may hint that Huawai indeed build in backdoors: Come up with some proof. Or at least an effing hint. Or clue. Or inkling... anything that is better than mere claim.
I'd even go as far and say that we'd be willing to believe any actual evidence (better to be spied on by the US than China) but as long there isn't anything like that the only sensible way to go is to put any possible vendor through a strict security check.
Aehmm.. Why?
According to the link the photos will still stay online and only deprecated links will break and second, it is not like it happend without ample warning and time to migrate your data.
While agree with you that you should always have a local data backup (AND a remote one, e.g. in a cloud service!) this story is an example of how closing of a cloud service should work to give everyone enough time to migrate to another service, so that you don't need a local copy.
I guess that's always the risk of using other peoples computers (I mean cloud services)
That's the risk of using ANY data storage besides paper or microfiche: You have to migrate periodically.
No matter if you store your (whatever sort of) data in the cloud or locally in your desk drawer: You have to copy your 3.5'' floppy discs to CDs before you throw out your floppy drive, you have to copy your files from flickr to google photos and from Google+ to instagram (or whatever) when those services close and you have to copy your DVDs to some other medium before you get rid of your optical drive.
Archiving digital data is an ongoing process and nothing that you do once and can forget about. So instead of complaining of an online service going down, you should select the next one based on the exit strategies they offer. (Google Takeout comming to mind)
Saying that: I still miss Google reader and original picasa that was killed by their online-only strategy.
I used Lvl80 as an example for some high level but I don't think there is an actual level cap. So I guess you get promoted through the levels as long as you learn new stuff and improve.
But that's why I'd assume they added Levels so that they can still promote those - just call them "Rock Star" developers within the Software developer track up to level 80 and keep them at what they are good at and don't force them onto a management position to advance their career.
Wouldn't he be Level 5 then?
If you live in a time when TV was always second behind TV.
Actors would take roles in TV series only if they were desperate or already gave up the chance of an actual celebrity acting career.
Enter HBO and Netflix showing that TV does not have to be cheap and low quality. Their series are clever, funny, fresh and deep while old-school cinema is presenting us with nothing than the 15th superhero remake. Or 80s remake. (star Trek, Ghostbusters anyone?)