I think those jobs would most likely be offshored despite what tfa says. I ha ve yet to speak to anyone in a call center who's primary language is English.
But Id like a clarification-- if there were 13,000 bugs 15 months ago, and now there are 6000, doesnt that speak to massive improvement? Why not leave back in spring 2010?
Well, IIRC, unconfirmed bug reports (UNCO) are where every bug submission goes before it gets triaged. These bug reports run the gamut of "My internets not working with Firefox" to "Firefox dumps core with gtk+-2.0.3-foobar". It sounds like a lot of bugs, but UNCO is the large gaping pit where every bug report goes before it becomes confirmed. It takes no technical knowlege to issue an UNCO so many of these could just be PEBCAK bugs.
Don't know for sure anymore, but it used to be that each partition on the disk had 512 bytes of meta-data associated with it. On boot slices, that 512 was the MBR. On non-boot slices that 512 held info about extended partitions and such. You could save that 512 bytes to some disk medium and write it back later. Cheaper than paying mcaffe/symantec/extorsion.
save MBR from first scsi (sata) disk
dd if=/dev/sda of=/media/usb/mbr.bin bs=512 count=1
when you need to restore:
dd if=/media/usb/mbr.bin of=/dev/sda bs=512 count=1
(FTFA) "In a patent-infringement case that started today at the International Trade Commission, Microsoft
accused Motorola Mobility of infringing seven of its patents and requested a halt to imports of certain
Motorola phones. The trial is the first smartphone dispute to be heard since Google announced it would
buy Motorola Mobility."
This is why we're headed towards managed computing and app stores.
We have Managed Computing now (or don't you have an IT department?). I don't understand how that would be done differently. Also, if you think Apple is the end-all-be-all model of perfect software distribution then you've overconsumed your quota of kool-aid.
The real issue here is people are expecting to get something for nothing by giving up control of what gets installed (the payment model). This is the exact problem which FOSS software addresses, however it's too "geeky" for most people. Just like the internet used to be.
Seems like there has been a lot of activity lately trying to put android/google in a bad light. Oracle vs. google, Apple vs. Samsung, Apple vs. HTC, to NYTimes pimping out negative views on Motorola acquisition. I don't agree with everything google does but it's not they are doing anything new from a monopoly standpoint. One of the aforementioned companies is even suing based on alleged evidence tampering which, IMO, should be getting much more attention than what it is.
The Apple ecosystem creeps me out. How can you think outside the box when the environment you are in is designed to put you in the box? No thanks. At least with the PC i still get a hardware platform designed for alternative systems.
It would be great to have SSL fixed but it won't happen. The reasons are (same as Flash, HTML5 and Java, IPV6):
1) has a monetary interest in the technology
2) The public/private sectors have adopted this as defacto standard
3) Haters hate change in the name of "secure"
The only way to change this is to implement a work-around which excludes the current 'key masters' and makes the previous technology obsolete (like HTML5.. ok, mostly obsolete).
wow that's a lot of heavy gear. You are probably not aware of the combined weight you will be hauling by putting everything in one bag. Perhaps ditch the macbook and pick up a tablet first. This would cut some bulk as well as weight.
They'll just get a slap on the wrist for lying. Worst case, the CEO will "resign" (aka: early retirement w/benefits) for good PR and the whole thing forgotten in a month.
finally someone is putting a stop to Google's monopolistic business strategies.
I think you fail to realize that "monopolistic business strategies" are the norm for business in the US.
Anti-competitive laws are exactly this - you should not use your monopoly in another area to gain unfair advantage in other market.
That's great, but if you are going to hang one company for doing this, then hang the others who are doing the same thing. Apple, Oracle, AT&T, Microsoft; they all have their little vendor lock-in schemes which don't allow any room for competition.
And doesn't necessarily increase revenue. Besides that, in my history anyway, managers do not want to spend another $5k because a product is "More Secure". They would much rather put the $5k into a product with a dead-simple API than put it into some hypothetical circumstance which they have no direct experience with.
Security is one of those things you can only truly understand by getting burned by it.
It's Open Source. Unimportant to the apathetic, however it is a factor which will become more important as corporations increase their role in governments.
It starts out with an exploit called Aurora, which compromises AD.
Whoops.
Actually, on page 6 (and 20) of the pdf, the exploit starts by tricking the user into clicking a malicious link in Safari; but yeah, the Windows Domain Controller gets the second bullet.
...while Apple, for all its theoretical security, has very little experience dealing with actual security issues. Or maybe it's just a random bug, IDK.
Exactly. The bigger picture is concerning because Apple really *is* poised to become the Next Big Thing on the Desktop (Sorry Linux. Your awesome, but slaying the n00bs will never get you on the Desktop). Hopefully Apple will do a better job at fixing vulnerabilities than Microsoft did. The user's are (As usual) going to be key howerver because (FTFA - pdf link):
* Apple users feel safe because they have no history of exploitation
* Apple users tend to be just as ignorant as anyone else
- Go ahead and run this unsigned binary
- Who needs AV ?
* 14% of all publicly disclosed OS exploits in 2008 affected OSX
* 1,151 CVEs in past 3 years affected Apple (Windows was 1,325)
* Mac users not paranoid like Win users so may be easier to socially engineer
Slashdot Mirror
for the lulz
I think those jobs would most likely be offshored despite what tfa says. I ha
ve yet to speak to anyone in a call center who's primary language is English.
But Id like a clarification-- if there were 13,000 bugs 15 months ago, and now there are 6000, doesnt that speak to massive improvement? Why not leave back in spring 2010?
Well, IIRC, unconfirmed bug reports (UNCO) are where every bug submission goes before it gets triaged. These bug reports run the gamut of "My internets not working with Firefox" to "Firefox dumps core with gtk+-2.0.3-foobar". It sounds like a lot of bugs, but UNCO is the large gaping pit where every bug report goes before it becomes confirmed. It takes no technical knowlege to issue an UNCO so many of these could just be PEBCAK bugs.
Don't know for sure anymore, but it used to be that each partition on the disk had 512 bytes of meta-data associated with it. On boot slices, that 512 was the MBR. On non-boot slices that 512 held info about extended partitions and such. You could save that 512 bytes to some disk medium and write it back later. Cheaper than paying mcaffe/symantec/extorsion.
save MBR from first scsi (sata) disk
dd if=/dev/sda of=/media/usb/mbr.bin bs=512 count=1
when you need to restore:
dd if=/media/usb/mbr.bin of=/dev/sda bs=512 count=1
Sprint - they still have unlimited data.
Unlimited data may not be around for long if Sprint is anything like Verizon
http://mobile.wsj.com/article/SB100014240531119033279045765266906
Sorry to these religiously opposed to the iPhone but it doesn't come with any crapware.
Giving up all your alternatives by conceding to vendor lock-in is far worse than crapware. By participating you become an advocate.
Second that, but what's to say Sprint won't sell out to Apple too? If Apple were to give sprint a big kick-back to drop Google they could do it.
Buys up all the spectrum, drops unlimited data plans.
Because you can't keeping people fat, stupid and glued to Fox news without stripping of the educational system first.
(FTFA)
"In a patent-infringement case that started today at the International Trade Commission, Microsoft
accused Motorola Mobility of infringing seven of its patents and requested a halt to imports of certain
Motorola phones. The trial is the first smartphone dispute to be heard since Google announced it would
buy Motorola Mobility."
This is why we're headed towards managed computing and app stores.
We have Managed Computing now (or don't you have an IT department?). I don't understand how that would be done differently. Also, if you think Apple is the end-all-be-all model of perfect software distribution then you've overconsumed your quota of kool-aid.
The real issue here is people are expecting to get something for nothing by giving up control of what gets installed (the payment model). This is the exact problem which FOSS software addresses, however it's too "geeky" for most people. Just like the internet used to be.
Seems like there has been a lot of activity lately trying to put android/google in a bad light. Oracle vs. google, Apple vs. Samsung, Apple vs. HTC, to NYTimes pimping out negative views on Motorola acquisition. I don't agree with everything google does but it's not they are doing anything new from a monopoly standpoint. One of the aforementioned companies is even suing based on alleged evidence tampering which, IMO, should be getting much more attention than what it is.
Are iphones really worth all this strife? Just sayin.. if it sucks, put your money into the competition. It's really the only way to change it.
The Apple ecosystem creeps me out. How can you think outside the box when the environment you are in is designed to put you in the box? No thanks. At least with the PC i still get a hardware platform designed for alternative systems.
Quit your bitching. Anonymous is standing up against oppression. Doesn't matter whether it's a Bus or a Bank the idea is the same.
It would be great to have SSL fixed but it won't happen. The reasons are (same as Flash, HTML5 and Java, IPV6):
1) has a monetary interest in the technology
2) The public/private sectors have adopted this as defacto standard
3) Haters hate change in the name of "secure"
The only way to change this is to implement a work-around which excludes the current 'key masters' and makes the previous technology obsolete (like HTML5.. ok, mostly obsolete).
Probably follow one of these formats:
a) We had an elderly worker collecting images for the court. She had them on her laptop and mistakenly transmogrified them.
b) Our twitter account was hacked and the faulty images placed instead
c) We mistakenly used pictures from the apple website which are scaled to enhance browsing on mobile devices
d) It was a typo
wow that's a lot of heavy gear. You are probably not aware of the combined weight you will be hauling by putting everything in one bag. Perhaps ditch the macbook and pick up a tablet first. This would cut some bulk as well as weight.
They'll just get a slap on the wrist for lying. Worst case, the CEO will "resign" (aka: early retirement w/benefits) for good PR and the whole thing forgotten in a month.
finally someone is putting a stop to Google's monopolistic business strategies.
I think you fail to realize that "monopolistic business strategies" are the norm for business in the US.
Anti-competitive laws are exactly this - you should not use your monopoly in another area to gain unfair advantage in other market.
That's great, but if you are going to hang one company for doing this, then hang the others who are doing the same thing. Apple, Oracle, AT&T, Microsoft; they all have their little vendor lock-in schemes which don't allow any room for competition.
And doesn't necessarily increase revenue. Besides that, in my history anyway, managers do not want to spend another $5k because a product is "More Secure". They would much rather put the $5k into a product with a dead-simple API than put it into some hypothetical circumstance which they have no direct experience with.
Security is one of those things you can only truly understand by getting burned by it.
It's Open Source. Unimportant to the apathetic, however it is a factor which will become more important as corporations increase their role in governments.
It starts out with an exploit called Aurora, which compromises AD.
Whoops.
Actually, on page 6 (and 20) of the pdf, the exploit starts by tricking the user into clicking a malicious link in Safari; but yeah, the Windows Domain Controller gets the second bullet.
...while Apple, for all its theoretical security, has very little experience dealing with actual security issues. Or maybe it's just a random bug, IDK.
Exactly. The bigger picture is concerning because Apple really *is* poised to become the Next Big Thing on the Desktop (Sorry Linux. Your awesome, but slaying the n00bs will never get you on the Desktop). Hopefully Apple will do a better job at fixing vulnerabilities than Microsoft did. The user's are (As usual) going to be key howerver because (FTFA - pdf link):
* Apple users feel safe because they have no history of exploitation
* Apple users tend to be just as ignorant as anyone else
- Go ahead and run this unsigned binary
- Who needs AV ?
* 14% of all publicly disclosed OS exploits in 2008 affected OSX
* 1,151 CVEs in past 3 years affected Apple (Windows was 1,325)
* Mac users not paranoid like Win users so may be easier to socially engineer