I'd say they were guilty of false representation of damages, costs and lost Intellectual Property towards their shareholders and possibly even leaking secret information about weapon systems and other military intelligence in some cases. They don't have to tell, but they'd sure would be liable for any damages occurred to their share holders and customers by not doing so. No need to change laws, just make sure they get sued hard for keeping their mouth shut and they will do it voluntarily the next time something happens.
People take so much time complaining about "modern technology" that they have none left to learn how to deal with it. I work on cars as a hobby and I'm doing fine even repairing modern cars that dealers can't get fixed. Yes, I use my brain combined with old school skills to fix all sorts of cars, modern and classic. Modern cars aren't that more difficult to fix or diagnose, it just takes a decent understanding of basic electronics and mechanics. Modern diagnostic computer systems should be standardized, so independent mechanics and hobby workers can still afford to work on them. It has always required mechanical skills, knowledge and good diagnostic skills to work on cars and that should remain the same, even if you need some computerized equipment to do some of the diagnostics. If a dealer can't fix it, it's usually because they have bad diagnostics technicians working for them, not because the computers are making it difficult. They had the same problem 50 years ago, when cars didn't have computers or electronics and the same applies to hobby workers.
You honestly expect politicians to come up with taxes that tax their campaign fund sponsors? That wouldn't be in the interest of those that put them in place now, would it?
It's not about quality, it's about how many you can sell. Nobody wants a TV they can only watch in a dark room, except for a very small group of men. That makes the product rather... unmarketable.
Catching burglars would put them and their families out of income, yet, burglars are being caught and put in jail sometimes. Why would other criminals not get punished? If I was a judge, a company that openly defies the law repeatedly, would get all their assets confiscated and the management would be put in jail for leading a criminal organization. Apple is taking a big risk here and they are responsible for the consequences to their workers, not the judge.
4 out of 8 CA servers were proven to be tampered with and the hacker got Admin and/or SYSTEM privileges. The only thing he didn't get away with were the actual private keys, since those were stored in hardware that did the actual signing. If Diginotar would have scheduled the signing to a specific time of day and removed the smartcards from the readers for those CAs, he wouldn't even have been able to get his rogue certificates signed. The other 4 servers weren't interesting for the hacker and my interpretation is that he mainly used the CA server that could sign "web site certificates" for MITM purposes. I'd say that qualifies as "fully hacked" as opposed to for instance a single web server where a single web service was not completely secure, so he could manipulate it into signing requests. He got through 3 layers of (obviously lacking) security before he got to the CA servers themselves. Layer 1 was web servers, layer 2 was the office network and layer 3 were the CA servers themselves. He used stacked tunnels to get through firewalls between network segments and used public webservers he already owned as file drop. Out of over 250 investigated machines, he got access on all significant ones in the certificate, web hosting and logging processes, but the actual hardware containing the private keys. In summary, I'd say fully hacked is an accurate description.
So what you are saying is that you are willing to accept censorship about what apps you can run, in turn for a working operating system, even if alternatives are available? That must be some operating system then, that you are willing to trade.
The Bell curve is exactly what it is. It's a distribution curve of IQ test scores for adults. By definition, half of the people are below IQ 100 and the other half are above it. They make up test scores based on a proper bell curve distribution, not on how good people do the test. This makes for interesting differences in scores for the same test, if you look at different areas/countries. Even though the USA scores a 100 average IQ for a test, they have to give higher marks to the same number of questions right than certain other areas of the planet to achieve this.
In the Netherlands, any contract that makes explicit claims about rights, especially terms of service, make them default against the party drawing up the explicit terms. That means, as soon as they define something, anything not in that definition, is automatically excluded. This works great for consumer rights, but tends to make terms of service incredibly TL;DR. I'm fairly certain that this the case in most western countries. Not putting something like this in your law, makes terms of service and contracts worse, so it's a catch 22.
What would help, is legislation that would make any contract or legal document not drawn up to be comprehensible by the "target audience" null and void. Any legalese or obfuscation should automatically make that part of the contract not applicable. That should teach lawyers and companies to keep things clear, simple and understandable. Also, a lot less court cases should appear, since people would know what they were dealing with and would be able to settle their differences without a court.
I can think of a few very common occasions where you will in fact be wrong.
Increasing the transmit power on the base station will increase the amount of packets that reach the guests without corruption, even if the ACK (assuming you are using TCP and not UDP or some other non IP network protocol) might fail some time. This may increase actual bandwidth and very possible the rate at which the two devices "sync". Very often, transmission to guests will be rather asynchronous, so if your transmission type is adaptive to buffer bloat, a few retransmits might actually get your data in quicker than a lower data ratio.
Several streaming protocols use UDP and as long as the client sends regular signals it's still connected data will remain coming in. Some even have an automatic bandwidth throttling mechanism built in and will allow higher quality streams this way. Granted, not very common for laptops, but smart phones and tablets that use 3G and wireless tend to use the same protocols for both networks and will profit from this.
Also, who's saying you are only increasing the base station transmit power? My laptop has increased transmit power in the AC profile. Once it goes to battery mode, it's on a more conservative setting. Works just fine, I get double the data rate on the ground floor and upstairs I still get usable signal, compared to intermittent losing connectivity altogether.
The people that should have made money from writing those subtitles and that probably have done so for Finnish Television or Cinema companies, have not been paid, nor has their product been used. That means that these people are deprived of royalties in favour of illegally obtained translations that have violated the copyright of the show in question.
Either that, or the whole model doesn't make sense, take your pick.
Sure, mod me down as a flame bait if you can't bother to look at the arguments. This is nothing more than propaganda and not news.
Without serious information on what they would in fact do as a retaliation, I think we should regard this as cultural bluff and not an actual threat to western society. The only one that benefits from hyping things like this, are press agencies and people that work in the black ops part of government and defence contractors.
Terrorism has killed less people than traffic accidents, common flu and if you take a long time average over the last 100 years, I think even lightning strikes may come close to causing the same amount of deaths. However, the amount of draconian measurements taken and money spent on "fighting terrorism" is way bigger than for any of these. Given the fact that no objective measurable proof exists or is published, the best way to deal with terrorists is to not give in to them and keep on living your life the way you want to. That means not paying attention to them, or changing your habits. If you do that, they get what they want and they will have won.
HP had a nice tablet, but they didn't sell because there was no market share and no apps for it. Once they started dumping them to get rid of stock, they sold out in three days. You can set a price based on estimated sales numbers, price per unit at that production level and development costs that need to be earned back. If your predictions fail, it doesn't matter what the unit price is, you will lose money. By calculating in a loss on the units for the first 2 years and making that back later when you have market share and get an income from your app market, you can "aggressively" buy market share to maybe get a future for your product and platform. It's not just a "if I build it, they will come" thing here. They have no unique selling point that anyone has discovered yet and they are at least the fourth party to try this market, with Apple and Android currently holding the main share, HP's WebOS failing and probably more attempts that I don't know about. The only way to get in that market is to either sell something people just "have to have" or to out-price your competitors by being the cheapest capable device. You have to build sustainability before you can start talking about profit margins.
Moat alligators have shown averse skin reactions in a small number of participants in a controlled study, in which participants were exposed to moat alligators for a prolonged period of time. Based on this result, caution should be taken when possible exposure to moat alligators might be unavoidable. If you experience adverse skin reactions as a result of exposure to moat alligators, stop exposure immediately and consult a qualified dermatologist.
Apart from wages, you have to provide decent and safe working environments for your workers, within the limits of local law. You have to provide 401K or other benefits, depending on what country/state you are in. You have to pay taxes on your profits. You need to pay for local and state permits. Those extra costs add up. In Western Europe, putting someone to work will easily cost you twice the amount of what you pay them. What they actually get after taxes, can be as little as half of that. So every 10 euro you get to spend, will cost your employer 40 euro. In the USA it may not be that much, you may get 20 out of 40, but you have to pay for your own health care from that money, there is very little workers comp if you lose your job and there are many other things left to free market that you have to pay for out of your own pocket. Most of these don't exist in China, making manual labor manufacturing a lot cheaper and easier to do there.
Yes, the first generations of traction control systems were rather crude and didn't work well on ice. However, some manufacturers actually evolve their product and modern TC systems are doing a whole lot better than the ones that caused all the urban myths. That doesn't mean that every car you buy now has a capable TCS on it, but if you steer away from "We sold this model for the last 100 years, why change?" or "Our car is cheaper because we copy old Euro tech" style manufacturers, you will probably find capable electronics that actually help prevent accidents. However, there is no recipe against a driver that chooses to drive way too fast under circumstances that will most likely cause ice on the roads. Once you go 50 mph in a certain direction and hit ice, there is no amount of electronics or steering that will stop you sliding straight ahead in the direction you were going. It often takes a tree, house, rock, car or other large object to stop you, or you'll roll over once you gain grip again or hit a ditch. Physics can be a bitch sometimes and there will always be people that fail to realize that in time.
This new technology isn't about traction control, it's about not hitting that pothole or lost cargo on the road. This will mean that your car will suddenly swerve hard, slamming the steering wheel out of your hands, breaking your thumb or fingers and making you spill your hot coffee on your lap. People will blame that on their car, but they fail to realize that you shouldn't be holding the wheel with just one hand, or with your thumbs hooked, or drinking hot coffee while driving. It's the same as with driving under icy conditions; these mechanisms are put on cars to help good drivers deal with situations the human brain can't cope with, not to substitute the driver. If you want that, go talk to Google.
Put in the contract for development that either they will have to pay you a maintenance fee, or pay for maintenance on an hourly rate when required. The third option we that If they choose to open source the code you write for them and it gets accepted in the project you wrote the extension for, they will have the option to use that maintained code. Let them make the choice, at least this will give you an option to work on it as an addition to an existing FOSS project, or some custom thing from the very beginning. By starting out already knowing which direction you're going, the difference in development time will be less than if you have to re-write everything to get it merged with the FOSS project.
Various automounters can be made to only mount read-only. Without root or sudo, such a thing would be easy to implement. Also, (auto)mounting could be made something only root would be allowed to do. Device permissions could be defaulted to root only, the list goes on and on.
When you order systems with a bunch of drives in them and a RAID controller, some "quality" manufacturers take it upon themselves to actually mix and match drives for you, so they don't come off the assembly line right after each other. This is probably why you don't see "mass failure" happening on those systems.
Either, all the answers you find are your own, or all the answers you find are things you've already tried. And the enormous amount of advertisements by companies that will sell you your problem, or the solution for it, most often both at the same time.
Now Osama Bin Laden is Dead and the cold war with Russia is over, they need a new enemy. Without an enemy, people might actually look at the state of the economy, freedom and other inconvenient things. So what if the Iranians have spawned a bunch of script kiddies? Pearl Harbor was an unprovoked massive attack at the whole of the only part of the USA's army that could threaten a country at once. These are pin pricks compared to that. I call cry wolf for the sake of distraction and black ops budget justification.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd say they were guilty of false representation of damages, costs and lost Intellectual Property towards their shareholders and possibly even leaking secret information about weapon systems and other military intelligence in some cases. They don't have to tell, but they'd sure would be liable for any damages occurred to their share holders and customers by not doing so. No need to change laws, just make sure they get sued hard for keeping their mouth shut and they will do it voluntarily the next time something happens.
Even better, once it fails altogether, they will give it to the community in an Open Source Project!
People take so much time complaining about "modern technology" that they have none left to learn how to deal with it. I work on cars as a hobby and I'm doing fine even repairing modern cars that dealers can't get fixed. Yes, I use my brain combined with old school skills to fix all sorts of cars, modern and classic. Modern cars aren't that more difficult to fix or diagnose, it just takes a decent understanding of basic electronics and mechanics. Modern diagnostic computer systems should be standardized, so independent mechanics and hobby workers can still afford to work on them. It has always required mechanical skills, knowledge and good diagnostic skills to work on cars and that should remain the same, even if you need some computerized equipment to do some of the diagnostics. If a dealer can't fix it, it's usually because they have bad diagnostics technicians working for them, not because the computers are making it difficult. They had the same problem 50 years ago, when cars didn't have computers or electronics and the same applies to hobby workers.
You honestly expect politicians to come up with taxes that tax their campaign fund sponsors? That wouldn't be in the interest of those that put them in place now, would it?
It's not about quality, it's about how many you can sell. Nobody wants a TV they can only watch in a dark room, except for a very small group of men. That makes the product rather... unmarketable.
The USA courts never bothered about such a minute technicality. Why would the UK be any different?
Catching burglars would put them and their families out of income, yet, burglars are being caught and put in jail sometimes. Why would other criminals not get punished? If I was a judge, a company that openly defies the law repeatedly, would get all their assets confiscated and the management would be put in jail for leading a criminal organization. Apple is taking a big risk here and they are responsible for the consequences to their workers, not the judge.
4 out of 8 CA servers were proven to be tampered with and the hacker got Admin and/or SYSTEM privileges. The only thing he didn't get away with were the actual private keys, since those were stored in hardware that did the actual signing. If Diginotar would have scheduled the signing to a specific time of day and removed the smartcards from the readers for those CAs, he wouldn't even have been able to get his rogue certificates signed. The other 4 servers weren't interesting for the hacker and my interpretation is that he mainly used the CA server that could sign "web site certificates" for MITM purposes. I'd say that qualifies as "fully hacked" as opposed to for instance a single web server where a single web service was not completely secure, so he could manipulate it into signing requests. He got through 3 layers of (obviously lacking) security before he got to the CA servers themselves. Layer 1 was web servers, layer 2 was the office network and layer 3 were the CA servers themselves. He used stacked tunnels to get through firewalls between network segments and used public webservers he already owned as file drop. Out of over 250 investigated machines, he got access on all significant ones in the certificate, web hosting and logging processes, but the actual hardware containing the private keys. In summary, I'd say fully hacked is an accurate description.
So what you are saying is that you are willing to accept censorship about what apps you can run, in turn for a working operating system, even if alternatives are available? That must be some operating system then, that you are willing to trade.
The Bell curve is exactly what it is. It's a distribution curve of IQ test scores for adults. By definition, half of the people are below IQ 100 and the other half are above it. They make up test scores based on a proper bell curve distribution, not on how good people do the test. This makes for interesting differences in scores for the same test, if you look at different areas/countries. Even though the USA scores a 100 average IQ for a test, they have to give higher marks to the same number of questions right than certain other areas of the planet to achieve this.
In the Netherlands, any contract that makes explicit claims about rights, especially terms of service, make them default against the party drawing up the explicit terms. That means, as soon as they define something, anything not in that definition, is automatically excluded. This works great for consumer rights, but tends to make terms of service incredibly TL;DR. I'm fairly certain that this the case in most western countries. Not putting something like this in your law, makes terms of service and contracts worse, so it's a catch 22.
What would help, is legislation that would make any contract or legal document not drawn up to be comprehensible by the "target audience" null and void. Any legalese or obfuscation should automatically make that part of the contract not applicable. That should teach lawyers and companies to keep things clear, simple and understandable. Also, a lot less court cases should appear, since people would know what they were dealing with and would be able to settle their differences without a court.
Your proposal is ridiculous! Next, you'll be saying politicians should know how to run a country!
I can think of a few very common occasions where you will in fact be wrong.
Increasing the transmit power on the base station will increase the amount of packets that reach the guests without corruption, even if the ACK (assuming you are using TCP and not UDP or some other non IP network protocol) might fail some time. This may increase actual bandwidth and very possible the rate at which the two devices "sync". Very often, transmission to guests will be rather asynchronous, so if your transmission type is adaptive to buffer bloat, a few retransmits might actually get your data in quicker than a lower data ratio.
Several streaming protocols use UDP and as long as the client sends regular signals it's still connected data will remain coming in. Some even have an automatic bandwidth throttling mechanism built in and will allow higher quality streams this way. Granted, not very common for laptops, but smart phones and tablets that use 3G and wireless tend to use the same protocols for both networks and will profit from this.
Also, who's saying you are only increasing the base station transmit power? My laptop has increased transmit power in the AC profile. Once it goes to battery mode, it's on a more conservative setting. Works just fine, I get double the data rate on the ground floor and upstairs I still get usable signal, compared to intermittent losing connectivity altogether.
The people that should have made money from writing those subtitles and that probably have done so for Finnish Television or Cinema companies, have not been paid, nor has their product been used. That means that these people are deprived of royalties in favour of illegally obtained translations that have violated the copyright of the show in question.
Either that, or the whole model doesn't make sense, take your pick.
Sure, mod me down as a flame bait if you can't bother to look at the arguments. This is nothing more than propaganda and not news.
Without serious information on what they would in fact do as a retaliation, I think we should regard this as cultural bluff and not an actual threat to western society. The only one that benefits from hyping things like this, are press agencies and people that work in the black ops part of government and defence contractors.
Terrorism has killed less people than traffic accidents, common flu and if you take a long time average over the last 100 years, I think even lightning strikes may come close to causing the same amount of deaths. However, the amount of draconian measurements taken and money spent on "fighting terrorism" is way bigger than for any of these. Given the fact that no objective measurable proof exists or is published, the best way to deal with terrorists is to not give in to them and keep on living your life the way you want to. That means not paying attention to them, or changing your habits. If you do that, they get what they want and they will have won.
HP had a nice tablet, but they didn't sell because there was no market share and no apps for it. Once they started dumping them to get rid of stock, they sold out in three days. You can set a price based on estimated sales numbers, price per unit at that production level and development costs that need to be earned back. If your predictions fail, it doesn't matter what the unit price is, you will lose money. By calculating in a loss on the units for the first 2 years and making that back later when you have market share and get an income from your app market, you can "aggressively" buy market share to maybe get a future for your product and platform. It's not just a "if I build it, they will come" thing here. They have no unique selling point that anyone has discovered yet and they are at least the fourth party to try this market, with Apple and Android currently holding the main share, HP's WebOS failing and probably more attempts that I don't know about. The only way to get in that market is to either sell something people just "have to have" or to out-price your competitors by being the cheapest capable device. You have to build sustainability before you can start talking about profit margins.
Moat alligators have shown averse skin reactions in a small number of participants in a controlled study, in which participants were exposed to moat alligators for a prolonged period of time. Based on this result, caution should be taken when possible exposure to moat alligators might be unavoidable. If you experience adverse skin reactions as a result of exposure to moat alligators, stop exposure immediately and consult a qualified dermatologist.
Apart from wages, you have to provide decent and safe working environments for your workers, within the limits of local law. You have to provide 401K or other benefits, depending on what country/state you are in. You have to pay taxes on your profits. You need to pay for local and state permits. Those extra costs add up. In Western Europe, putting someone to work will easily cost you twice the amount of what you pay them. What they actually get after taxes, can be as little as half of that. So every 10 euro you get to spend, will cost your employer 40 euro. In the USA it may not be that much, you may get 20 out of 40, but you have to pay for your own health care from that money, there is very little workers comp if you lose your job and there are many other things left to free market that you have to pay for out of your own pocket. Most of these don't exist in China, making manual labor manufacturing a lot cheaper and easier to do there.
Yes, the first generations of traction control systems were rather crude and didn't work well on ice. However, some manufacturers actually evolve their product and modern TC systems are doing a whole lot better than the ones that caused all the urban myths. That doesn't mean that every car you buy now has a capable TCS on it, but if you steer away from "We sold this model for the last 100 years, why change?" or "Our car is cheaper because we copy old Euro tech" style manufacturers, you will probably find capable electronics that actually help prevent accidents. However, there is no recipe against a driver that chooses to drive way too fast under circumstances that will most likely cause ice on the roads. Once you go 50 mph in a certain direction and hit ice, there is no amount of electronics or steering that will stop you sliding straight ahead in the direction you were going. It often takes a tree, house, rock, car or other large object to stop you, or you'll roll over once you gain grip again or hit a ditch. Physics can be a bitch sometimes and there will always be people that fail to realize that in time.
This new technology isn't about traction control, it's about not hitting that pothole or lost cargo on the road. This will mean that your car will suddenly swerve hard, slamming the steering wheel out of your hands, breaking your thumb or fingers and making you spill your hot coffee on your lap. People will blame that on their car, but they fail to realize that you shouldn't be holding the wheel with just one hand, or with your thumbs hooked, or drinking hot coffee while driving. It's the same as with driving under icy conditions; these mechanisms are put on cars to help good drivers deal with situations the human brain can't cope with, not to substitute the driver. If you want that, go talk to Google.
Or otherwise we'll never get it....
Put in the contract for development that either they will have to pay you a maintenance fee, or pay for maintenance on an hourly rate when required. The third option we that If they choose to open source the code you write for them and it gets accepted in the project you wrote the extension for, they will have the option to use that maintained code. Let them make the choice, at least this will give you an option to work on it as an addition to an existing FOSS project, or some custom thing from the very beginning. By starting out already knowing which direction you're going, the difference in development time will be less than if you have to re-write everything to get it merged with the FOSS project.
Various automounters can be made to only mount read-only. Without root or sudo, such a thing would be easy to implement. Also, (auto)mounting could be made something only root would be allowed to do. Device permissions could be defaulted to root only, the list goes on and on.
When you order systems with a bunch of drives in them and a RAID controller, some "quality" manufacturers take it upon themselves to actually mix and match drives for you, so they don't come off the assembly line right after each other. This is probably why you don't see "mass failure" happening on those systems.
Either, all the answers you find are your own, or all the answers you find are things you've already tried. And the enormous amount of advertisements by companies that will sell you your problem, or the solution for it, most often both at the same time.
Now Osama Bin Laden is Dead and the cold war with Russia is over, they need a new enemy. Without an enemy, people might actually look at the state of the economy, freedom and other inconvenient things. So what if the Iranians have spawned a bunch of script kiddies? Pearl Harbor was an unprovoked massive attack at the whole of the only part of the USA's army that could threaten a country at once. These are pin pricks compared to that. I call cry wolf for the sake of distraction and black ops budget justification.