Um, that's hardly surprising, since they make use of webkit-specific extensions to the adopted standards. There are separate IE9 extensions for implementing many of the same draft features, but as with the webkit extensions, you have to specifically target them for them to work. Your complaint boils down to IE is Not Webkit.
You're just wrong. Candidates can't accept huge unlimited donations, and haven't been able to do so for a very long time. Most of the campaign money raised is not by the candidate but by third parties to advocate for the candidate - so-called "soft" money. Unless you are willing to abandon free speech principles to the point that you are willing to make political advocacy a crime, the interested money will find a means to effect advocacy.
To add, from your own link, 2008 *could* be. The clause asked about in your first link applied to the IDE itself, not binaries created using the IDE. It's a basic anti-reselling clause.
Actually, I believe the *compiler* is identical, it's just the IDE that has been feature-limited. But, given that most of those limitations are irrelevant to the hobbyist, it's a pretty good deal at $0.
Okay, so it is more accurate to say that Apple doesn't *accomodate* open-source licenses (particularly GPL it would seem.) But Microsoft does. That's still noteworthy.
Even a tiny bit of Hypertalk knowledge would let you blow Powerpoint out of the water. It may have looked like a stack of slides, but Hypercard was a full on development environment.
Liquid crystals respond to *electric* charge. An optical transistor should not require electrical charges at all. In other words, something like a liquid crystal that was activated or deactivated by light. Theoretically you could do this by slapping a small PV cell on to an existing crystal panel, but the goal here is to be able to fab everything out of silicon like we do with electronic integrated circuits.
What I can't wait for is the electricity-emitting light diode.
The target is Windows 8's SecureBoot technology. This hack allows one to boot from an unsecured boot chain, while telling SecureBoot "everything is ok, we're happilly booting from UEFI with a secure boot chain" - and SecureBoot believes it.
Windows 8 *can* boot from an unsecured boot chain by design. Windows 8 does not require secure booting.
From the point of view of the OS there's no way to tell if the "a Secure Boot process did successfully happen" is coming from a real secure boot process, and the checksum it's getting is a legitimate one, which is successfully signed with legitimate keys that the OS possess, or if the message one is a bogus one, produced by a root-kit mascarading as a secure bootloader, and that the message is successfully recognised, because it is checked against bogus keys which where injected into the OS by the root-kit (or the whole signing-check process being NOP-ed out by the root-kit).
But it doesn't really matter. Having booted securely does not enable or disable any particular functionality in Windows. The ONLY point of it is to prevent rootkits from replacing the boot sector and thereby compromising all the other system security. Once the signed boot sector is loaded, its job is done.
This headline is incorrect, secure boot was not compromised. From the ARS story:
The exploit allegedly defeats the security features of Windows 8's new Boot Loader. However, Kleissner said in a message exchange with Ars Technica that the exploit did not currently target the Unified Extensible Firmware Interface (UEFI), but instead went after legacy BIOS. Kleissner said he has shared his research and paper and the paper he plans to present, "The Art of Bootkit Development," with Microsoft.
Windows 8 will also enter the market in a time when the industry is shifting to the Unified Extensible Firmware Interface (UEFI) for BIOS on all new client systems. We will continue to support the legacy BIOS interface, but machines using the UEFI interface will have significantly richer capabilities. For instance, UEFI systems can render rich graphical experiences in native resolution via the Graphic Output Protocol (GOP) driver. With UEFI, the OS can finally communicate with boot firmware in a standard way; this work is strongly supported by standards work in UEFI and the TCG (Trusted Computing Group). This enables such features as secure boot, where the OS and firmware cooperate in creating a secure handoff mechanism. It also enables a seamless visual experience from the time you hit the power button – one experience owned by two distinct components.
Sigh. First of all, I'm not the same person. Second of all, there was indeed a ruling that jailbreaking was not illegal and did not violate DMCA, to which Apple strongly objected. Call it a "tiff" or not, that's really beside the point.
Slashdot Mirror
User registries are also located in the user's profile path.
Um, that's hardly surprising, since they make use of webkit-specific extensions to the adopted standards. There are separate IE9 extensions for implementing many of the same draft features, but as with the webkit extensions, you have to specifically target them for them to work. Your complaint boils down to IE is Not Webkit.
Are you talking about adopted standards or draft standards?
You're just wrong. Candidates can't accept huge unlimited donations, and haven't been able to do so for a very long time. Most of the campaign money raised is not by the candidate but by third parties to advocate for the candidate - so-called "soft" money. Unless you are willing to abandon free speech principles to the point that you are willing to make political advocacy a crime, the interested money will find a means to effect advocacy.
Yeah, well the wrinkle is that you can't get rid of campaigning without also getting rid of free speech.
To add, from your own link, 2008 *could* be. The clause asked about in your first link applied to the IDE itself, not binaries created using the IDE. It's a basic anti-reselling clause.
Actually, I believe the *compiler* is identical, it's just the IDE that has been feature-limited. But, given that most of those limitations are irrelevant to the hobbyist, it's a pretty good deal at $0.
Where in that link does it say the binaries cannot be sold?
Okay, so it is more accurate to say that Apple doesn't *accomodate* open-source licenses (particularly GPL it would seem.) But Microsoft does. That's still noteworthy.
Those rovers are hoarding all the Martian Jabra Water for themselves!
No, there isn't actually; the reactor must first act upon the DU to convert it into more radioactive isotopes.
Numerology is deceptively powerful to the simple-minded.
Even a tiny bit of Hypertalk knowledge would let you blow Powerpoint out of the water. It may have looked like a stack of slides, but Hypercard was a full on development environment.
Open PowerPoint.
Press Alt+F11.
You were saying?
Liquid crystals respond to *electric* charge. An optical transistor should not require electrical charges at all. In other words, something like a liquid crystal that was activated or deactivated by light. Theoretically you could do this by slapping a small PV cell on to an existing crystal panel, but the goal here is to be able to fab everything out of silicon like we do with electronic integrated circuits.
What I can't wait for is the electricity-emitting light diode.
The target is Windows 8's SecureBoot technology. This hack allows one to boot from an unsecured boot chain, while telling SecureBoot "everything is ok, we're happilly booting from UEFI with a secure boot chain" - and SecureBoot believes it.
Windows 8 *can* boot from an unsecured boot chain by design. Windows 8 does not require secure booting.
From the point of view of the OS there's no way to tell if the "a Secure Boot process did successfully happen" is coming from a real secure boot process, and the checksum it's getting is a legitimate one, which is successfully signed with legitimate keys that the OS possess, or if the message one is a bogus one, produced by a root-kit mascarading as a secure bootloader, and that the message is successfully recognised, because it is checked against bogus keys which where injected into the OS by the root-kit (or the whole signing-check process being NOP-ed out by the root-kit).
But it doesn't really matter. Having booted securely does not enable or disable any particular functionality in Windows. The ONLY point of it is to prevent rootkits from replacing the boot sector and thereby compromising all the other system security. Once the signed boot sector is loaded, its job is done.
Seriously, hello, editors? Is anybody home? This post is 100% false. The very subject of this story has tweeted:
No it's not attacking UEFI or secure boot, right now working with the legacy BIOS only (details will be in the paper)
Do the words "reckless disregard for the truth" have any meaning to you?
Yup. FFS editors, your headline is straight up libel. FIX IT.
This headline is incorrect, secure boot was not compromised. From the ARS story:
The exploit allegedly defeats the security features of Windows 8's new Boot Loader. However, Kleissner said in a message exchange with Ars Technica that the exploit did not currently target the Unified Extensible Firmware Interface (UEFI), but instead went after legacy BIOS. Kleissner said he has shared his research and paper and the paper he plans to present, "The Art of Bootkit Development," with Microsoft.
Secure boot does nothing if you have legacy BIOS.
InterContinental Mallistic Bissiles?
On the other hand, intelligent people are betting lots of their own money that you are wrong:
Why the U.S. Can Beat China: The Facts About SpaceX Costs, Elon Musk
You could wire a physical keyswitch on the case to a motherboard jumper and include a literal key for unlocking the boot process.
Sinfosky said:
Windows 8 will also enter the market in a time when the industry is shifting to the Unified Extensible Firmware Interface (UEFI) for BIOS on all new client systems. We will continue to support the legacy BIOS interface, but machines using the UEFI interface will have significantly richer capabilities. For instance, UEFI systems can render rich graphical experiences in native resolution via the Graphic Output Protocol (GOP) driver. With UEFI, the OS can finally communicate with boot firmware in a standard way; this work is strongly supported by standards work in UEFI and the TCG (Trusted Computing Group). This enables such features as secure boot, where the OS and firmware cooperate in creating a secure handoff mechanism. It also enables a seamless visual experience from the time you hit the power button – one experience owned by two distinct components.
So make of that what you will.
It's only required for the OEM sticker. Windows 8 will continue to support legacy BIOS.
Sigh. First of all, I'm not the same person.
Second of all, there was indeed a ruling that jailbreaking was not illegal and did not violate DMCA, to which Apple strongly objected. Call it a "tiff" or not, that's really beside the point.