But too his credit, he did say a "simple analysis" although when reading TFA he omitted the word "minded" from the middle of that phrase.
Virtually all of his findings are traced to differences in date and time and chosen compiler settings and compiler vintage. Unless he can find large blocks of inserted code (not merely data segment differences) he is complaining about nothing.
He his certainly free to compile all of his system from source, and that way he could be assured he is running exactly what the source said. But unless and until he reads AND UNDERSTANDS every line of the source he is always going to have to be trusting somebody somewhere.
Its pretty easy to hide obfuscated functionality in a mountain of code (in fact it seems far too many programmers pride themselves their obfuscation skills). I would worry more about the mountain he missed while staring at the mole-hill his compile environment induced.
I suspect author is also bothered by wifi signals emanating from his router.
If my eyes are watering after a long session its because my screen is too bright, which is exactly the opposite of what he postulates as the problem (on off cycles of LEDs). Brighter requires longer "on" cycles, which in turn are less perceptible. Yet for most people overly bright screens are the source of complaints.
There is no reason to decrypt the data before caching. It's a flawed design.
Clearly you know nothing about how decryption works.
Once you close the session, the decryption key is lost. You won't be able to decrypt it later unless you also save the session key.
Using your line of reasoning, The person reading the screen is just another node along the chain. Perhaps their knowledge should be scrambled as soon as they step away from the screen?
Also, somebody teach this idiot how incredibly difficult it is to adjust data retrieval algorithms is*, especially on Google's scale.
Actually, the algorithms adjust themselves, in real time, all the time, based on trending searches.
That is why they are so successful. They are crowd sourced.
Everyone thinks they are so unique and individual and different from everybody else. They are totally shocked to find out they have exactly the same thought patterns as a large percentage of other people. I often see something on TV, reach for my tablet and google a couple words, only to have auto complete suggest almost exactly the next few words I was going to enter. 60 million other viewers saw the same thing, and decided to do the same search, and at least half are faster than I am. Its worked this way forever, and without it I'd still be clueless about who Amanda Witherspoon is.
Welcome to the world of crowd sourced search trends, and self fulfilling prophesies.
The truth is autocomplete isn't manipulated, its crowd sourced in real time. No conspiracy, no secret room full of minions trained to push an agenda. Just statistical weighting of what hundreds of thousands of people are searching for. If you don't like the results blame the users, because, in fact, that is exactly the source.
Why is this so hard for politicians (and anyone else with an ax to grind) to understand. You read about people suing google all over the world for the same thing, (and mostly losing except in France). .
That has never been the standard. And it would have violated several standards if you arbitrarily decided to not cache any ssl delivered data. Ssl was for protection of data in transit, not before or after the transmission is complete. The protection was not intended to outlive the actual connection.
You are confusing the recommendations for caching proxies with the recommendation for the intended endpoint.
The methodology followed by the 9th is different from any other court, which can have it issuing opinions that the majority of the justices in the 9th disagree with.
How? The 9th does not hear all cases en banc. In fact they hear only a very small number of cases en banc, and the bulk are heard by much smaller "limited en banc" panel of judges, which can and apparently frequently do issue rulings that much of rest of the 9th actually disagree with.
So few games actually require or are enhanced by a video connection that most people will just close the slider or tape it closed. The mic is still a problem.
It violates the letter of the 4th because it is a SEARCH.
If you have something sitting in your front yard you are clearly not concerned with it being public. But if you grow your pot well inside your property shielded by trees, or you like to entertain the ladies out by your shielded pool, or in your second story bedroom, you have the right to expect a search warrant to be delivered to access these areas.
If you value your privacy so little that none of this concerns you, I respectfully suggest you butt out of the discussion because your willingness to subject yourself to such intrusion becomes a real and present danger to the rest of us.
Actually, the US is only concerned with two things: 1) large sums of income in bitcoin not declared on your income tax, and 2) large sums transferred to or from criminal activities, drugs, terrorism, etc.
Addressing concern numbe 1: (income tax)... Bitcoin income is taxable just as barter "income" is taxable. To date this has been a small problem, because when you sell your bitcoin to buy a loaf of bread that transaction comes under scrutiny, and at this point in time, that transaction is the only bit the US government really cares to regulate (as mentioned in the story).
However, when you can buy many things with bitcoin, and it becomes very liquid, you can expect more forms of reporting required by the IRS, because bitcoin income, sans reporting, becomes totally off-the-books income. But for that to be a problem, bitcoin has to become just about as liquid as dollars or euros.
If large bitcoin receipts were reported as miscellaneous income, or barter income on your tax forms, valued at the then-current exchange rate, you will have removed any reason for the US government to be concerned about this as far as your personal tax return. It would be just like Tips reported by waitresses. No way to prove it, but mighty suspicious if you say you wait table for a living and don't report tips.
The US government has no interest in making transactions more expensive, or adding any friction to the system. They do have a vested interest in knowing about income in the form of bitcoin just as they have an interest in knowing about Paypal income.
Afterall, if the Senate is appointed Republicans would have control (more red states than blue) and being appointees they would be much easier for large commercial interests to control.
Its a lot more difficult and expensive to control 50 state legislatures so that you can control appointments to the Senate than it is to just dump money into a campaign war chest to re-elect the same bozos over and over again. People elect their own state legislates, and big national corporations don't have a lot of local sway. The corruptions of the past have been traded tor the corruptions of the present, which are a lot more pernicious and deep seated. A senator in the past was always "beholdin" to his legislature in his own state. Now there is no guarantee they will even do the bidding of their constituents. But its a virtual certainty they will do the bidding of big corporations from whom they get their campaign funds. If you can't see this your naivete knows no bounds.
It has nothing to do with Murdoch. The scholarly objections to the 17th have been around since before WWII.
True, the 4th Amendment to the Constitution only protects us from against unreasonable searches and seizures, and requires a warrant for most searches. The word "unreasonable" has been slowly leveraged by the courts over the decades to allow all sorts of impromptu searches by Police.
But there was no aircraft when the 4th was penned, and had their been, I seems that the practice of using an aircraft for police observation would certainly have been curtailed.
The use of a manned aircraft to search your property brings with it immediate and obvious notification. Its big and noisy and expensive, the pilot has to pee once in a while meaning it could never be continuous, with or without a warrant.
But with small, reasonably quiet battery operated drones, you can park it outside someones apartment window, and watch what is going on inside, useing thermal imaging, remote sound recording, and full motion video, and you can do this 24/7 using a couple of devices that cost less than $5000 each. And you can do it without a warrant, because you are not actually entering the premises.
If your conscious allows you to sneak that sort of activity in as being "not unreasonable" you probably have a career opportunity at a three letter agency.
or anyone who's lost -- the United Kingdom has this strange political system where you need to be a member of the legislative branch in order to serve on the national executive: only members of parliament can be ministers of Her Majesty's government. This would appear to imply that it is impossible to appoint a specialist as minister, since only professional politicians have a chance to be elected to parliament; in practice, appointment to the Lords is used as a workaround.
Ah, that explains a lot. Being the product of a public school education in the US it was always mystifying why there was this house of lords composed of appointed members. We were induced to believe it was the Monarchy's last hold on government power, but I guess our teachers were reluctant to suggest it existed only to prop up the good old boy appointments.
Of course, in the US, Senators were appointed by State Legislatures in the original configuration of the Constitution. This was in deference to the fact that the country was a Union of previously independent States, and the Senate was to represent the interests of these States.
Such was undone by the 17th Amendment which instituted direct election of senators.
There is a large and growing school of thought which suggests this was a huge mistake, and the beginning of the end of the States having any power or significance to any aspect of government beyond road maintenance.
Seems to be a bit of that nonsense going around lately. Obama did the same sort of thing nominating a telcom lobbyist as FCC chairman. .
Once might be construed as a good old boy political debt payback, but twice seems to suggest that the Telcom industry is making a concerted effort to get their minions into key regulatory positions.
Put another way: To someone who thinks "GNOME rocks => KDE sucks", nothing you can do to KDE will change their mind--it's still not GNOME, therefore it still sucks, and they'll create another justification as to why that is, forever and ever.
Actually it can be read exactly the opposite:
The fanboy, (often the developer, or the developer's hangers on) won't hear any criticism, because such people are trolls, and instead make up any excuse and call anyone names who dares complain about any change, or point out the the emperors new clothes lack certain key features. There then ensues a great shout down from the developers inflicted on their own user-base. The perfect storm of bad user relations.
Instead of saying,
ok, yeah we can see how that might be counter productive for your use case, so lets put in a switch that you can continue to use the rest of the new package but fall back to the old method till we get this new stuff up to your liking
the developer community ends up saying
hey, its free software, download it and fix it any way you want, otherwise STFU or go run Gnome or Windows
Even when they happen to take the latter approach with a coder capable of digging through the mountain of code and making the change, they will not accept and merge the outside coder's changes, and they will apply patches to their branch that render the coder's changes impossible in the future.
Case in point: The Dolphin file manager in KDE4 couldn't begin to match all of the powerful feature of Konqueror of KDE3.5. Early KDE4 adopters were opting to still use Konqueror file manager (as well as bitching vocally). So the developers, instead of spending their time bringing Dolphin up to Kong's capabilities, went in and gutted Kong, and piped it over Dolphin wearing Kong's clothing. Rather than admit Dolphin wasn't ready for prime time, they maliciously removed any ability to make a comparison, any bridge that would keep the users happy. Sabotage! Utterly childish, utterly unnecessary.
Google asked the secretive Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court on Tuesday to ease long-standing gag orders
So its not even out of the FISA court yet, and when it does leave the FISA court, its not going to district court. It goes to the court of appeals.
And its not likely going to the 9th Circuit either, and you can thank your lucky stars for that. The 9th circuit gets bitchslapped more than any other circuit for just being wrong. The 9th approved warrant-less GPS tracking. Bitchslapped by SCOTUS.
Way too many of 9th Circuit rulings have failed constitutional muster, and bolstered big government over reaching.
Agreed, it was obviously the first time this kid (he acts like a kid) got his feelings hurt by the very free speech he has been championing all along.
Welcome to the internet kid, grow a skin or log off.
KDE 4 deserved all the badmouthing it got in the early days. Its fine now, stable and works great very well. But back then it needed a bashing, and it generally got it. And the arrogant spew that was returned in the face of any criticism pretty much set the tone for the long fight that followed.
Disclaimer: I like KDE, I've used every version, I still use it today. I was very vocal against the near death of KDE caused by the developer's arrogance.
But it hardly matters, because sooner or later it reaches the Supreme Court, and there is this little matter of the Constitution involved.
True, but the supreme court can be wrong, and they have been in the past.
Funny thing about the Supreme Court being wrong... Its sort of like Paple Infallibility.
They are right when they make a decision (because our constitution pretty much pronounces that to be the case) and they are just as right when they overturn their prior decisions, as they frequently do.
In the fullness of time FISA courts are going to be found unconstitutional. Precise predictions as to WHEN are not possible, but either that happens or the United States of America ceases to exist. Some say it already has.
Slashdot Mirror
Ok, build a bunch of drum heads into a wall and notice they act just like, well, drum heads.
Brilliant. An acoustic diaphragm.
Can't think of a single use for this other than eves dropping where no electronics were allowed.
But too his credit, he did say a "simple analysis" although when reading TFA he omitted the word "minded" from the middle of that phrase.
Virtually all of his findings are traced to differences in date and time and chosen compiler settings and compiler vintage.
Unless he can find large blocks of inserted code (not merely data segment differences) he is complaining about nothing.
He his certainly free to compile all of his system from source, and that way he could be assured he is running
exactly what the source said. But unless and until he reads AND UNDERSTANDS every line of the source he is
always going to have to be trusting somebody somewhere.
Its pretty easy to hide obfuscated functionality in a mountain of code (in fact it seems far too many programmers pride
themselves their obfuscation skills). I would worry more about the mountain he missed while staring at the
mole-hill his compile environment induced.
I suspect author is also bothered by wifi signals emanating from his router.
If my eyes are watering after a long session its because my screen is too bright, which is exactly the opposite of what he postulates as the problem (on off cycles of LEDs). Brighter requires longer "on" cycles, which in turn are less perceptible. Yet for most people overly bright screens are the source of complaints.
There is no reason to decrypt the data before caching. It's a flawed design.
Clearly you know nothing about how decryption works.
Once you close the session, the decryption key is lost. You won't be able to decrypt it later unless you also save the session key.
Using your line of reasoning, The person reading the screen is just another node along the chain. Perhaps their knowledge should be
scrambled as soon as they step away from the screen?
Also, somebody teach this idiot how incredibly difficult it is to adjust data retrieval algorithms is*, especially on Google's scale.
Actually, the algorithms adjust themselves, in real time, all the time, based on trending searches.
That is why they are so successful. They are crowd sourced.
Everyone thinks they are so unique and individual and different from everybody else. They are totally shocked to find out they have exactly the same thought patterns as a large percentage of other people. I often see something on TV, reach for my tablet and google a couple words, only to have auto complete suggest almost exactly the next few words I was going to enter. 60 million other viewers saw the same thing, and decided to do the same search, and at least half are faster than I am. Its worked this way forever, and without it I'd still be clueless about who Amanda Witherspoon is.
Attorneys are ... :)
Welcome to the world of crowd sourced search trends, and self fulfilling prophesies.
The truth is autocomplete isn't manipulated, its crowd sourced in real time. No conspiracy, no secret room full of minions trained to push an agenda. Just statistical weighting of what hundreds of thousands of people are searching for. If you don't like the results blame the users, because, in fact, that is exactly the source.
Why is this so hard for politicians (and anyone else with an ax to grind) to understand. You read about people suing google all over the world for the same thing, (and mostly losing except in France).
.
That has never been the standard. And it would have violated several standards if you arbitrarily decided to not cache any ssl delivered data. Ssl was for protection of data in transit, not before or after the transmission is complete. The protection was not intended to outlive the actual connection.
You are confusing the recommendations for caching proxies with the recommendation for the intended endpoint.
Which is why I spoke in terms of percentages.
It goes further than just percentages or numbers.
The methodology followed by the 9th is different from any other court, which can have it issuing opinions that the majority of the justices in the 9th disagree with.
How? The 9th does not hear all cases en banc. In fact they hear only a very small number of cases en banc, and the bulk are heard by much smaller "limited en banc" panel of judges, which can and apparently frequently do issue rulings that much of rest of the 9th actually disagree with.
Not one that the mic can be remotely turned on.
Oh, I assure you I have no intention of buying it.
I'm pretty sure that can be worked around.
Electrician's tape.
So few games actually require or are enhanced by a video connection that most people will just close the slider
or tape it closed. The mic is still a problem.
It violates the letter of the 4th because it is a SEARCH.
If you have something sitting in your front yard you are clearly not concerned with it being public.
But if you grow your pot well inside your property shielded by trees, or you like to entertain the ladies
out by your shielded pool, or in your second story bedroom, you have the right to expect a search
warrant to be delivered to access these areas.
If you value your privacy so little that none of this concerns you, I respectfully suggest you butt out
of the discussion because your willingness to subject yourself to such intrusion becomes a real
and present danger to the rest of us.
Actually, the US is only concerned with two things: 1) large sums of income in bitcoin not declared on your income tax, and 2) large sums transferred to or from criminal activities, drugs, terrorism, etc.
Addressing concern numbe 1: (income tax)...
Bitcoin income is taxable just as barter "income" is taxable. To date this has been a small problem, because when you sell your bitcoin to buy a loaf of bread that transaction comes under scrutiny, and at this point in time, that transaction is the only bit the US government really cares to regulate (as mentioned in the story).
However, when you can buy many things with bitcoin, and it becomes very liquid, you can expect more forms of reporting required by the IRS, because bitcoin income, sans reporting, becomes totally off-the-books income. But for that to be a problem, bitcoin has to become just about as liquid as dollars or euros.
If large bitcoin receipts were reported as miscellaneous income, or barter income on your tax forms, valued at the then-current exchange rate, you will have removed any reason for the US government to be concerned about this as far as your personal tax return. It would be just like Tips reported by waitresses. No way to prove it, but mighty suspicious if you say you wait table for a living and don't report tips.
The US government has no interest in making transactions more expensive, or adding any friction to the system.
They do have a vested interest in knowing about income in the form of bitcoin just as they have an interest in knowing about Paypal income.
Afterall, if the Senate is appointed Republicans would have control (more red states than blue) and being appointees they would be much easier for large commercial interests to control.
Its a lot more difficult and expensive to control 50 state legislatures so that you can control appointments to the Senate than it is to just dump money into a campaign war chest to re-elect the same bozos over and over again. People elect their own state legislates, and big national corporations don't have a lot of local sway. The corruptions of the past have been traded tor the corruptions of the present, which are a lot more pernicious and deep seated. A senator in the past was always "beholdin" to his legislature in his own state. Now there is no guarantee they will even do the bidding of their constituents. But its a virtual certainty they will do the bidding of big corporations from whom they get their campaign funds. If you can't see this your naivete knows no bounds.
It has nothing to do with Murdoch. The scholarly objections to the 17th have been around since before WWII.
True, the 4th Amendment to the Constitution only protects us from against unreasonable searches and seizures, and requires a warrant for most searches. The word "unreasonable" has been slowly leveraged by the courts over the decades to allow all sorts of impromptu searches by Police.
But there was no aircraft when the 4th was penned, and had their been, I seems that the practice of using an aircraft for police observation would certainly have been curtailed.
The use of a manned aircraft to search your property brings with it immediate and obvious notification. Its big and noisy and expensive, the pilot has to pee once in a while meaning it could never be continuous, with or without a warrant.
But with small, reasonably quiet battery operated drones, you can park it outside someones apartment window, and watch what is going on inside, useing thermal imaging, remote sound recording, and full motion video, and you can do this 24/7 using a couple of devices that cost less than $5000 each. And you can do it without a warrant, because you are not actually entering the premises.
If your conscious allows you to sneak that sort of activity in as being "not unreasonable" you probably have a career opportunity at a three letter agency.
or anyone who's lost -- the United Kingdom has this strange political system where you need to be a member of the legislative branch in order to serve on the national executive: only members of parliament can be ministers of Her Majesty's government. This would appear to imply that it is impossible to appoint a specialist as minister, since only professional politicians have a chance to be elected to parliament; in practice, appointment to the Lords is used as a workaround.
Ah, that explains a lot. Being the product of a public school education in the US it was always mystifying why there was this house of lords composed of appointed members. We were induced to believe it was the Monarchy's last hold on government power, but I guess our teachers were reluctant to suggest it existed only to prop up the good old boy appointments.
Of course, in the US, Senators were appointed by State Legislatures in the original configuration of the Constitution. This was in deference to the fact that the country was a Union of previously independent States, and the Senate was to represent the interests of these States.
Such was undone by the 17th Amendment which instituted direct election of senators.
There is a large and growing school of thought which suggests this was a huge mistake, and the beginning of the end of the States having any power or significance to any aspect of government beyond road maintenance.
Seems to be a bit of that nonsense going around lately. Obama did the same sort of thing nominating a telcom lobbyist as FCC chairman. .
Once might be construed as a good old boy political debt payback, but twice seems to suggest that the Telcom industry is making a concerted effort to get their minions into key regulatory positions.
This does not bode well for the consumer.
Why should being a large circuit make them wrong more often?
To be fair, the rate at which the 9th is reversed has fallen in the last couple years to around 76 percent, down from 94 percent in 2009.
Haven't most distros moved already to MariaDB?
Put another way: To someone who thinks "GNOME rocks => KDE sucks", nothing you can do to KDE will change their mind--it's still not GNOME, therefore it still sucks, and they'll create another justification as to why that is, forever and ever.
Actually it can be read exactly the opposite:
The fanboy, (often the developer, or the developer's hangers on) won't hear any criticism, because such people are trolls, and instead make up any excuse and call anyone names who dares complain about any change, or point out the the emperors new clothes lack certain key features. There then ensues a great shout down from the developers inflicted on their own user-base. The perfect storm of bad user relations.
Instead of saying,
ok, yeah we can see how that might be counter productive for your use case, so lets put in a switch that you can continue to use the rest of the new package but fall back to the old method till we get this new stuff up to your liking
the developer community ends up saying
hey, its free software, download it and fix it any way you want, otherwise STFU or go run Gnome or Windows
Even when they happen to take the latter approach with a coder capable of digging through the mountain of code and making the change, they will not accept and merge the outside coder's changes, and they will apply patches to their branch that render the coder's changes impossible in the future.
Case in point: The Dolphin file manager in KDE4 couldn't begin to match all of the powerful feature of Konqueror of KDE3.5. Early KDE4 adopters were opting to still use Konqueror file manager (as well as bitching vocally). So the developers, instead of spending their time bringing Dolphin up to Kong's capabilities, went in and gutted Kong, and piped it over Dolphin wearing Kong's clothing. Rather than admit Dolphin wasn't ready for prime time, they maliciously removed any ability to make a comparison, any bridge that would keep the users happy. Sabotage! Utterly childish, utterly unnecessary.
Look, I get it. You're 14, you live in your parents' basement,
Way to improve the level of discourse.
On the other hand, you've pretty well proved your own point about trolls and moochers causing drama.
Well played sir.
From TFA:
Google asked the secretive Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court on Tuesday to ease long-standing gag orders
So its not even out of the FISA court yet, and when it does leave the FISA court, its not going to district court. It goes to the court of appeals.
And its not likely going to the 9th Circuit either, and you can thank your lucky stars for that.
The 9th circuit gets bitchslapped more than any other circuit for just being wrong.
The 9th approved warrant-less GPS tracking. Bitchslapped by SCOTUS.
Way too many of 9th Circuit rulings have failed constitutional muster, and bolstered big government over reaching.
Agreed, it was obviously the first time this kid (he acts like a kid) got his feelings hurt by the very
free speech he has been championing all along.
Welcome to the internet kid, grow a skin or log off.
KDE 4 deserved all the badmouthing it got in the early days. Its fine now, stable and works great very well.
But back then it needed a bashing, and it generally got it. And the arrogant spew that was returned
in the face of any criticism pretty much set the tone for the long fight that followed.
Disclaimer: I like KDE, I've used every version, I still use it today.
I was very vocal against the near death of KDE caused by the developer's arrogance.
But it hardly matters, because sooner or later it reaches the Supreme Court, and there is this little matter of the Constitution involved.
True, but the supreme court can be wrong, and they have been in the past.
Funny thing about the Supreme Court being wrong... Its sort of like Paple Infallibility.
They are right when they make a decision (because our constitution pretty much pronounces that to be the case) and
they are just as right when they overturn their prior decisions, as they frequently do.
In the fullness of time FISA courts are going to be found unconstitutional. Precise predictions as to WHEN are not possible, but
either that happens or the United States of America ceases to exist. Some say it already has.