His way is perhaps more ethical than just putting the patches into a nice torrent, and making sure they get noticed. If the GRSecurity patches are what they SAY they are, then a hardened kernel would therefore not be able to identified.
It's Google's handy design flaw of Android. Oops, little leak there.
Indeed, should you check with AppThority and others, you'll find that the misbehavior is mindboggling.
But here's the part that makes me crazy: no one gives a shit. They believe it's the price they pay. The technologists have been shown time and time again that people are sheep. They follow the herd. The herd hasn't the capacity fathom what data mining in China means, and so because it goes over their heads, it's a whoooosh situation. So the fuckers keep doing it, and each day, a few heads rise up and yell, WTF? Those heads make easy targets.
Please don't mistake Uncle Sam for US citizenry; you insult most people living in the US should you do this. US corporations have no shames and will push all edges until their hands (but preferably wallets) are slapped.
While the EU attempts to reign in corporate misbehavior, it also fails miserably.
And no, I didn't say I was anti-capitalist, only that corporations are charged to have no morals, and no conscience, only shareholder return. The corporate shield permits them to live not unlike warriors in the 1500s.
The post has a lot of problems. First, you don't "accidentally" sign your pgp key with "Dutch Police". These guys were amateurs that lucked into hijacking an existing site, then doing all they could to turn up information about the users of the site.
While the site and its users are arguably "bad people", I agree with you that the evidence obtained may be very difficult to obtain successful prosecutions from. Has all the earmarks of an amateur investigation, if the info in the post is correct.
My point is similar. Blackmail, extortion, intimidation, all of these seem what CNN is doing. I'M NOT A FAN of trolls and trollish behavior. However, they should take him/her to court and settle it there.
While this is the responsible person's ostensible attitude that you cite, at what point are non-governmental consequences proper?
An anecdotal example: I have an uncle who, even though he's an educated professional, was a member of the KKK and has stunningly racist, misogynist, anti-Semetic, xenophobic attitudes, and is happy to babble all sort of stuff to his family and others in earshot. Do I act as a proxy and sue-him-on-behalf or just walk away from his nonsense as I normally do?
I don't like any of his stuff at all. But like others, I'll defend his right to say it, much as it's like crapping in the kitchen full of guests.
We agree that disinformation is hideous, and an issue that is completely masked. Ok, who gets outed, and who stays masked? Is a mask a sign of evil-- like the Anonymous mask? Or does anonymity have value within the constraints stated if it's not a troll, and just an AC on slashdot? At what point is the outing of the troll intimidation or extortion or even blackmail?
As he probably should be ashamed. However, it's still an act of unnecessary intimidation on CNN's part. It's like having a juicy still-secret WikiLeaks tidbit and using it as extortion.
There is a right to privacy, although not explicit in the US Constitution. Their speech rights don't trump (pardon the use of this word) each other.
From what I can tell, there is no incitement or inducement to violence, as well as other forbidden acts, like sedition.
CNN did not come to the name without a disclosure by reddit to them.
There might be a case for hate speech, but otherwise, corporate media has no more value than individual speech. Again, I'm not abetting trolling in any way, rather I abhor intimidation.
Why should CNN have this power? I'm loathe to defend either in this case, but it seems that free speech (in lieu of libel/slander) gives a troll a right to his/her boorish behavior.
Although they have a reputation to protect, they could have done this in a much better way. Will Slashdot protect me if I blast CNN for bing milquetoast ninnies? Corporate media lapdogs?
I don't know. The threats, however, are very very onerous.
And I'm talking about private and commercial, but not Duke OWNED installations.
My comments still stand. Lots of money has been poised towards state legislatures to cripple solar money. The propaganda piece cited is just more disinformation and scare tactics, as opposed to cogent research, IMHO.
And in the absence of peer review, let's look to the poor monopolistic electric utility companies, who are the ostensible direct beneficiaries of the study, just like Kellogg and Post sponsored studies on sugar and carbohydrates.
Not many solar panels have been taken out of service, to start with, and more installed each and every day. They have a pretty long life, and so the pool of "spent" solar panels seems mysterious to me. Comparing them to nuclear waste, volume for volume, is designed to evoke horrors in those that believe that somehow, solar panels will kill for thousands of years, and they won't.
YES, e-waste needs great attention, but this is far more a hatchet job designed to slow down the implementation rate of solar panels. Do you smell the Koch Bros, AES, or Duke Energy in this one? I'm just not sure, only to follow the money.
You make the mistake of believing that I espouse Linux as a secure operating system. It's better than the mutt called Windows in security, and has been for quite sometime. It's not invulnerable. Almost nothing is.
Do you understand concepts like SE Linux? If not, then there is no rational discussion from here; you're a Windows fanboi and will not be swayed.
Windows is prevalent in a large part of the business world. But as they're systematically held hostage by ransomware, cracks that leak billions of dollars (stated in regulatory fines, not to mention personal data protection damage), and consistently over time, one cannot help believe that other choices might be made, and lessons learned, other platforms chosen.
The charlatans that once cursed Linux as an abomination now freely promote it, embrace it, and love it within the top offices of Microsoft. Moreover, *BSD version are doing surprisingly well, too. Just how many ransomware victims (as an example) do you need until you recognize the rot within?
Not hating on Microsoft. They're their own worst enemy. And I have quite a bit of difficulty with your determination that this makes Windows more secure than Linux. Remember: Microsoft only recently even considered the concept of user space. Everything was root. Everything before XP SP2 was admin. Only now are they trying to protect user space in rational ways. And they're failing.
Why are they failing? Lack of rigorous testing made impossible by legacy APIs, horrific driver control, proprietary transports, and management that is more interested share price than product integrity.
When you say that Linux has no protection from this kind of malware, I'd ask you to obtain further education to fill in the gaps in your knowledge. Linux isn't inviolate, no doubt. But it's not swiss cheese, correctly implemented, either.
Slashdot Mirror
His way is perhaps more ethical than just putting the patches into a nice torrent, and making sure they get noticed. If the GRSecurity patches are what they SAY they are, then a hardened kernel would therefore not be able to identified.
Oh, wait.....
It's Google's handy design flaw of Android. Oops, little leak there.
Indeed, should you check with AppThority and others, you'll find that the misbehavior is mindboggling.
But here's the part that makes me crazy: no one gives a shit. They believe it's the price they pay. The technologists have been shown time and time again that people are sheep. They follow the herd. The herd hasn't the capacity fathom what data mining in China means, and so because it goes over their heads, it's a whoooosh situation. So the fuckers keep doing it, and each day, a few heads rise up and yell, WTF? Those heads make easy targets.
And it's a data exfiltration nightmare. Oh, can't attach the customer file in Outlook because it's too big. Ok, let's use THIS!!
OTOH, it does at least for now, permit those behind censorship firewalls to obtain big wads of news.... but...as you cite: Terrorists!!!
Please don't mistake Uncle Sam for US citizenry; you insult most people living in the US should you do this. US corporations have no shames and will push all edges until their hands (but preferably wallets) are slapped.
While the EU attempts to reign in corporate misbehavior, it also fails miserably.
And no, I didn't say I was anti-capitalist, only that corporations are charged to have no morals, and no conscience, only shareholder return. The corporate shield permits them to live not unlike warriors in the 1500s.
Except that the admission of evidence might be disallowed.
Worse, imagine putting a big red flag on all the email you send that screams: We're totally inept.
The post has a lot of problems. First, you don't "accidentally" sign your pgp key with "Dutch Police". These guys were amateurs that lucked into hijacking an existing site, then doing all they could to turn up information about the users of the site.
While the site and its users are arguably "bad people", I agree with you that the evidence obtained may be very difficult to obtain successful prosecutions from. Has all the earmarks of an amateur investigation, if the info in the post is correct.
Peas too close to your potatoes, or just having a bad morning?
Status symbols appeal to vanity and the tribal instinct.
I drive a 18 year old hybrid that gets 64mpg. Seats two. I watch another car pull up aside me at an intersection; a 2017 Maserati.
I paid $4k used for my car, and maybe $800 in insurance.
He leased it for $700/mo or bought it for $48K, and pays $2200/yr in in insurance.
Yes, he may get a few sex partners out of the deal, or impress clients.
And he, like the ostensible iPhone 8 customer above, is just piling $100 bills into a pile to be lit by the match of his ego.
Except that this constitutes blackmail and/or extortion, IMHO.
That might be profound, but here and within this context, it's a non sequitur.
You mean extortion, blackmail, and intimidation aren't enough?
Suppression is one thing, but absence is another. How much goes uncovered both by fiat and by sloth, not to mention a corporate "editorial direction"?
Yep, they look like monsters. It's well deserved, IMHO, not that the troll looks any better.... but at least not like extortionists.
My point is similar. Blackmail, extortion, intimidation, all of these seem what CNN is doing. I'M NOT A FAN of trolls and trollish behavior. However, they should take him/her to court and settle it there.
While this is the responsible person's ostensible attitude that you cite, at what point are non-governmental consequences proper?
An anecdotal example: I have an uncle who, even though he's an educated professional, was a member of the KKK and has stunningly racist, misogynist, anti-Semetic, xenophobic attitudes, and is happy to babble all sort of stuff to his family and others in earshot. Do I act as a proxy and sue-him-on-behalf or just walk away from his nonsense as I normally do?
I don't like any of his stuff at all. But like others, I'll defend his right to say it, much as it's like crapping in the kitchen full of guests.
We agree that disinformation is hideous, and an issue that is completely masked. Ok, who gets outed, and who stays masked? Is a mask a sign of evil-- like the Anonymous mask? Or does anonymity have value within the constraints stated if it's not a troll, and just an AC on slashdot? At what point is the outing of the troll intimidation or extortion or even blackmail?
As he probably should be ashamed. However, it's still an act of unnecessary intimidation on CNN's part. It's like having a juicy still-secret WikiLeaks tidbit and using it as extortion.
There is a right to privacy, although not explicit in the US Constitution. Their speech rights don't trump (pardon the use of this word) each other.
From what I can tell, there is no incitement or inducement to violence, as well as other forbidden acts, like sedition.
CNN did not come to the name without a disclosure by reddit to them.
There might be a case for hate speech, but otherwise, corporate media has no more value than individual speech. Again, I'm not abetting trolling in any way, rather I abhor intimidation.
Not under the law, just your opinion. It wasn't litigated. Reddit coughed the user name and the identity became known.
CNN has no high ground here. Nor does the troll.
Why should CNN have this power? I'm loathe to defend either in this case, but it seems that free speech (in lieu of libel/slander) gives a troll a right to his/her boorish behavior.
Although they have a reputation to protect, they could have done this in a much better way. Will Slashdot protect me if I blast CNN for bing milquetoast ninnies? Corporate media lapdogs?
I don't know. The threats, however, are very very onerous.
I note your duke.edu address.
And I'm talking about private and commercial, but not Duke OWNED installations.
My comments still stand. Lots of money has been poised towards state legislatures to cripple solar money. The propaganda piece cited is just more disinformation and scare tactics, as opposed to cogent research, IMHO.
And in the absence of peer review, let's look to the poor monopolistic electric utility companies, who are the ostensible direct beneficiaries of the study, just like Kellogg and Post sponsored studies on sugar and carbohydrates.
Not many solar panels have been taken out of service, to start with, and more installed each and every day. They have a pretty long life, and so the pool of "spent" solar panels seems mysterious to me. Comparing them to nuclear waste, volume for volume, is designed to evoke horrors in those that believe that somehow, solar panels will kill for thousands of years, and they won't.
YES, e-waste needs great attention, but this is far more a hatchet job designed to slow down the implementation rate of solar panels. Do you smell the Koch Bros, AES, or Duke Energy in this one? I'm just not sure, only to follow the money.
Not like Windows is...
You can push the public only so far....
You make the mistake of believing that I espouse Linux as a secure operating system. It's better than the mutt called Windows in security, and has been for quite sometime. It's not invulnerable. Almost nothing is.
Do you understand concepts like SE Linux? If not, then there is no rational discussion from here; you're a Windows fanboi and will not be swayed.
Windows is prevalent in a large part of the business world. But as they're systematically held hostage by ransomware, cracks that leak billions of dollars (stated in regulatory fines, not to mention personal data protection damage), and consistently over time, one cannot help believe that other choices might be made, and lessons learned, other platforms chosen.
The charlatans that once cursed Linux as an abomination now freely promote it, embrace it, and love it within the top offices of Microsoft. Moreover, *BSD version are doing surprisingly well, too. Just how many ransomware victims (as an example) do you need until you recognize the rot within?
Not hating on Microsoft. They're their own worst enemy. And I have quite a bit of difficulty with your determination that this makes Windows more secure than Linux. Remember: Microsoft only recently even considered the concept of user space. Everything was root. Everything before XP SP2 was admin. Only now are they trying to protect user space in rational ways. And they're failing.
Why are they failing? Lack of rigorous testing made impossible by legacy APIs, horrific driver control, proprietary transports, and management that is more interested share price than product integrity.
When you say that Linux has no protection from this kind of malware, I'd ask you to obtain further education to fill in the gaps in your knowledge. Linux isn't inviolate, no doubt. But it's not swiss cheese, correctly implemented, either.