Wouldn't be so sure, Time Warner Inc. has various holdings (eg. Hulu) together with Comcast. Time Warner Inc. and Comcast have also been investing in various ventures together since. Comcast also owns AT&T Broadband.
Don't go to the closest grocery store then. The closest to me is my local butcher and fishmonger and I can get quality at very low prices. I think I have a Whole Foods near me but nobody I know has ever gone out of their way to go there, I don't even know anyone that's ever been there. It's kind of like Costco for hippies.
We do have the worlds highest rated grocery chain in our area though, even Trader Joe can't get a hold in our market.
AT&T is trying to merge with TW which is also part of Comcast. As if you didn't have choices before, now they'll have virtually all of the DSL, Cable and Wireless market as well as all the media companies that come along under one big corporation. I thought Ma Bell was split up to prevent these kinds of things.
Who says they want to vet it out? If the show gets higher ratings, people will pay more for advertising during the show. This helps both the TV networks and Nielsen.
There is no technical reason except that OneDrive is intended for small spaces on computer's primary hard drives however they do sell OneDrive "unlimited" to their Enterprise customers and some people have been grandfathered into an unlimited plan as well.
When you use external drives (typically formatted as FAT or exFAT for compatibility with eg. Mac) or ReFS (basically distributed file systems) you can basically get 'unlimited' "cloud storage" far beyond the few hundreds to a terabyte a primary boot disk gives you.
There is no reason your syncing solution doesn't work on modern file systems, it doesn't need low-level access to the drive.
The EU has gone after Microsoft over a complaint by Novell from 1995, they were indeed fined to the tune of $500M later reduced to ~300M by the courts in 2007 and I believe it may still be in appeal at this point. The EU has in the mean time threatened Microsoft over other practices but never followed up.
I was about to comment the same thing, this is about the attack surface against primarily IoT devices that run minimal versions of older (think pre-XP era) kernels.
It doesn't say anything about the overall success rate of these attacks. Given 90+% of devices is not Windows these days (the myth that Windows is more commonly used so it had more people trying to attack it is now thoroughly debunked) I would imagine the attempts to hack old Linux machines would increase. And even so, the most common hacks on these IoT devices is NOT Linux, the kernel, it's some shitty web app they put on top of it.
Well, an actively evil hypervisor is indeed more problematic (where someone has full access to it), I was more thinking of an automated exploit, automated exploits will be much more difficult to execute, you will require someone with deeper understanding of the kernel to manually intervene on every exploitable machine.
And Intel SGX has been broken and will probably be further broken in the future, it is also a double-sided sword. You can hide attack code in an enclave and nobody will ever be able to find it and from there on you can load side channel attacks.
The idea is that when you have hundreds of machines, even though their uptime is high, they'll still all be running 'different' kernels.
To be able to find a memory location, you have to pretty much already run as root. This is to prevent exploits before they get to that point. Eg. if you have a weak TCP/IP stack and you send an 'evil bit' that overflows the buffer, you're no longer guaranteed that by filling the next n buffers you will be able to execute shell code.
Once you can search through the memory, you've gotten to a much farther point.
Secure Boot is not about security, it's about control. It only verifies the signature of the kernel loader against a list of 'approved vendors', once the kernel is loaded, you can do pretty much anything you want with the computer.
Apparently Google is willing to foot the bill or less able to pull out of the market. Apple and Microsoft has enough clout, if they just threaten to pull out of Europe or pass on the cost to their educational and government customers, the fines are quickly forgotten. These things are just a political game, it's pure protectionism.
Google's market is much more fractured and less important to continuity of businesses. There are plenty of other search engines and Android and their ads are not just sold by Google, but by hundreds if not thousands of smaller parties. Even if Google threatened to pull out of the market, they would be doing enough residual business to still qualify for the fine.
They also need the European market much more than Apple or Microsoft combined and have little to no leverage over their customers.
Lots of people here asking about the advantages - here is the laymans explanation.
So typically with ASLR you load a kernel blob into a randomized space and then it just sits there. An attacker (e.g. an evil hypervisor) could search the entire address space for the kernel or in some other way hook into the kernel binary and then simply count up or down address spaces or more likely pass an evil payload to load exploits against specific parts of the kernel from there. Since you always know which parts come first, you can craft payloads so that it gets passed or overflows until it reaches the vulnerable piece of code.
What this is doing, it randomized the kernel and subsequently the entire kernel even though it sits in the same spot and you could still find or hook into it, you can't simply count up and down anymore to find the bad piece of code nor can you be guaranteed that weak boundary checks will pass your payload, because even though the system has hooked your vulnerable piece of code somewhere, it's not going to be in the same spot.
It's basically more fine grained ASLR where you break the program (the kernel) down further in smaller pieces to be randomized.
Yeah, but that doesn't work well with a REST interface, something like a CRM with REST ends up very kludgey simply because you want to run complex, dependent, stateful queries.
The problem as I attempted to point out is with the initial 'requirements'. The OP managed to cram in a bunch of technology-du-jour as to their "requirements" without even checking with or assembling a team of programmers. I don't understand why everyone needs to specify a REST interface just because Twitter has one.
I understand that you can have agencies enforcing laws like the FCC and FAA and they can publish guidelines on how to best follow the existing rules. But it seems the EPA has been given enough leeway to be able to make guidelines that become laws without any oversight. They are using guidelines/rules within their purview to criminalize entire industries which seems a far overreach.
That seems very unconstitutional to me. So all Trump would have to do is create the Agency for Laws and Order and whatever rules that agency makes would become law indefinitely without congressional approval?
What are you blabbering on about? Election boards can suspend elections in cases of extreme interference because that's their job - making sure the elections run well.
The courts can only interpret the law, although lately courts have been more making the laws, constitutionally they can only say yes or no to the interpretation of a law.
Trumps travel ban is completely legal from a constitutional viewpoint and if the Trump administration steps outside the law, they are indeed liable for that. The courts merely confirmed that Trump was right and the lower courts weren't, the language you're referring to is just to appease left wing nut jobs that make out the SCOTUS majority but is legally a big "duh".
The EPA has the right to implement and interpret their own rules unless another order is brought down from Congress. The EPA and similar agencies are there simply to circumvent the "duly authorized by Congress" part of a law and thus courts are free to strike them down as they see fit, but they cannot uphold a rule unless it's properly voted on by Congress to be implemented.
The true option is to go to court anyway, most small claims courts will not allow those clauses to stand, you can't sign away your state's right to control commerce, you don't have that sort of authority.
How about a TCP stack and Caldera DR-Webspider to get online and look at pr0n. STS and the many other clones of Norton Commander Customized config.sys and autoexec.bat menu's for various games and software you wanted to run Being able to exit Windows Replacing the MS-DOS in Windows 95-ME with DR-DOS just to get it stable. debug.exe
I understand maintaining the old schedulers but schedulers to most newer hardware are actually detrimental. SSD and even some modern hard drives do best with the noop scheduler simply because the overhead of a scheduler is noticeable. Even on embedded devices, schedulers take up cycles. And if you really need one, there are literally dozens of them to choose from and even though you may want to have some variations in yours, why take them all up in the mainline kernel? Just keep them separate.
Slashdot Mirror
Probably NetBSD/OpenBSD?
Wouldn't be so sure, Time Warner Inc. has various holdings (eg. Hulu) together with Comcast. Time Warner Inc. and Comcast have also been investing in various ventures together since. Comcast also owns AT&T Broadband.
Don't go to the closest grocery store then. The closest to me is my local butcher and fishmonger and I can get quality at very low prices. I think I have a Whole Foods near me but nobody I know has ever gone out of their way to go there, I don't even know anyone that's ever been there. It's kind of like Costco for hippies.
We do have the worlds highest rated grocery chain in our area though, even Trader Joe can't get a hold in our market.
AT&T is trying to merge with TW which is also part of Comcast. As if you didn't have choices before, now they'll have virtually all of the DSL, Cable and Wireless market as well as all the media companies that come along under one big corporation. I thought Ma Bell was split up to prevent these kinds of things.
Who says they want to vet it out? If the show gets higher ratings, people will pay more for advertising during the show. This helps both the TV networks and Nielsen.
There is no technical reason except that OneDrive is intended for small spaces on computer's primary hard drives however they do sell OneDrive "unlimited" to their Enterprise customers and some people have been grandfathered into an unlimited plan as well.
When you use external drives (typically formatted as FAT or exFAT for compatibility with eg. Mac) or ReFS (basically distributed file systems) you can basically get 'unlimited' "cloud storage" far beyond the few hundreds to a terabyte a primary boot disk gives you.
There is no reason your syncing solution doesn't work on modern file systems, it doesn't need low-level access to the drive.
The EU has gone after Microsoft over a complaint by Novell from 1995, they were indeed fined to the tune of $500M later reduced to ~300M by the courts in 2007 and I believe it may still be in appeal at this point. The EU has in the mean time threatened Microsoft over other practices but never followed up.
I thought it was Russia hacking the US, Now you're telling me Russia is hacking Russia?
I was about to comment the same thing, this is about the attack surface against primarily IoT devices that run minimal versions of older (think pre-XP era) kernels.
It doesn't say anything about the overall success rate of these attacks. Given 90+% of devices is not Windows these days (the myth that Windows is more commonly used so it had more people trying to attack it is now thoroughly debunked) I would imagine the attempts to hack old Linux machines would increase. And even so, the most common hacks on these IoT devices is NOT Linux, the kernel, it's some shitty web app they put on top of it.
Yeah, but Grub or Linux using or verifying signed code has nothing to do with Secure Boot. Secure Boot ends when Grub loads.
Well, an actively evil hypervisor is indeed more problematic (where someone has full access to it), I was more thinking of an automated exploit, automated exploits will be much more difficult to execute, you will require someone with deeper understanding of the kernel to manually intervene on every exploitable machine.
And Intel SGX has been broken and will probably be further broken in the future, it is also a double-sided sword. You can hide attack code in an enclave and nobody will ever be able to find it and from there on you can load side channel attacks.
The idea is that when you have hundreds of machines, even though their uptime is high, they'll still all be running 'different' kernels.
To be able to find a memory location, you have to pretty much already run as root. This is to prevent exploits before they get to that point. Eg. if you have a weak TCP/IP stack and you send an 'evil bit' that overflows the buffer, you're no longer guaranteed that by filling the next n buffers you will be able to execute shell code.
Once you can search through the memory, you've gotten to a much farther point.
Secure Boot is not about security, it's about control. It only verifies the signature of the kernel loader against a list of 'approved vendors', once the kernel is loaded, you can do pretty much anything you want with the computer.
Apparently Google is willing to foot the bill or less able to pull out of the market. Apple and Microsoft has enough clout, if they just threaten to pull out of Europe or pass on the cost to their educational and government customers, the fines are quickly forgotten. These things are just a political game, it's pure protectionism.
Google's market is much more fractured and less important to continuity of businesses. There are plenty of other search engines and Android and their ads are not just sold by Google, but by hundreds if not thousands of smaller parties. Even if Google threatened to pull out of the market, they would be doing enough residual business to still qualify for the fine.
They also need the European market much more than Apple or Microsoft combined and have little to no leverage over their customers.
Lots of people here asking about the advantages - here is the laymans explanation.
So typically with ASLR you load a kernel blob into a randomized space and then it just sits there. An attacker (e.g. an evil hypervisor) could search the entire address space for the kernel or in some other way hook into the kernel binary and then simply count up or down address spaces or more likely pass an evil payload to load exploits against specific parts of the kernel from there. Since you always know which parts come first, you can craft payloads so that it gets passed or overflows until it reaches the vulnerable piece of code.
What this is doing, it randomized the kernel and subsequently the entire kernel even though it sits in the same spot and you could still find or hook into it, you can't simply count up and down anymore to find the bad piece of code nor can you be guaranteed that weak boundary checks will pass your payload, because even though the system has hooked your vulnerable piece of code somewhere, it's not going to be in the same spot.
It's basically more fine grained ASLR where you break the program (the kernel) down further in smaller pieces to be randomized.
Yeah, but that doesn't work well with a REST interface, something like a CRM with REST ends up very kludgey simply because you want to run complex, dependent, stateful queries.
The problem as I attempted to point out is with the initial 'requirements'. The OP managed to cram in a bunch of technology-du-jour as to their "requirements" without even checking with or assembling a team of programmers. I don't understand why everyone needs to specify a REST interface just because Twitter has one.
Constitutionally the Federal government can only regulate inter-state commerce, not local commerce.
I understand that you can have agencies enforcing laws like the FCC and FAA and they can publish guidelines on how to best follow the existing rules. But it seems the EPA has been given enough leeway to be able to make guidelines that become laws without any oversight. They are using guidelines/rules within their purview to criminalize entire industries which seems a far overreach.
That seems very unconstitutional to me. So all Trump would have to do is create the Agency for Laws and Order and whatever rules that agency makes would become law indefinitely without congressional approval?
What are you blabbering on about? Election boards can suspend elections in cases of extreme interference because that's their job - making sure the elections run well.
The courts can only interpret the law, although lately courts have been more making the laws, constitutionally they can only say yes or no to the interpretation of a law.
Trumps travel ban is completely legal from a constitutional viewpoint and if the Trump administration steps outside the law, they are indeed liable for that. The courts merely confirmed that Trump was right and the lower courts weren't, the language you're referring to is just to appease left wing nut jobs that make out the SCOTUS majority but is legally a big "duh".
The EPA has the right to implement and interpret their own rules unless another order is brought down from Congress. The EPA and similar agencies are there simply to circumvent the "duly authorized by Congress" part of a law and thus courts are free to strike them down as they see fit, but they cannot uphold a rule unless it's properly voted on by Congress to be implemented.
The true option is to go to court anyway, most small claims courts will not allow those clauses to stand, you can't sign away your state's right to control commerce, you don't have that sort of authority.
How about a TCP stack and Caldera DR-Webspider to get online and look at pr0n.
STS and the many other clones of Norton Commander
Customized config.sys and autoexec.bat menu's for various games and software you wanted to run
Being able to exit Windows
Replacing the MS-DOS in Windows 95-ME with DR-DOS just to get it stable.
debug.exe
BTRFS is broken by design. It should not be used, it should be tossed and any efforts going to ZFS.
I understand maintaining the old schedulers but schedulers to most newer hardware are actually detrimental. SSD and even some modern hard drives do best with the noop scheduler simply because the overhead of a scheduler is noticeable. Even on embedded devices, schedulers take up cycles. And if you really need one, there are literally dozens of them to choose from and even though you may want to have some variations in yours, why take them all up in the mainline kernel? Just keep them separate.
In systemd, if a unit fails, the ENTIRE init system fails and your system boots in emergency mode.