Switching to 64 bit builds means that they will have to drop OSX 10.6, right? It's about time this one is left behind!
No, 64 bit builds run on 10.6 just fine. You may be confused here: 10.7 requires a 64 bit processor. So if you don't support 10.6, then supporting 32 bit is pointless - anything running 10.7 upwards supports 64 bit.
What isn't supported anymore is machines with 32 bit processor.
Believing that there isn't a god is a belief: the acceptance of an assertion without sufficient evidence.
Not at all. It's the same as believing that there is no tooth fairy, that there are no monsters under your bed at night, and so on. It's not "I believe there is no god", it's more like "what's this god thing that you keep going on about". I know there are people who like to go on about this god thing, but it's really not worth it to an atheist. It's not important enough to be put into a category "belief" or "not belief", like I don't bother not believing in the tooth fairy.
After a few accidents caused by drunk cops driving (that actually injuredor killed people) in my country, the new law is that if a cop is caught drunk behind the wheel, he can start looking for a new job (in addition to whatever punishment a non-cop would get in the same situation).
Well, in my country, cops who were caught shoplifting, but doing so while carrying their gun, were convicted for armed robbery.
And that's the problem; it's impossible to justify a value system purely from an atheist perspective;
And there you go wrong from the very start. There is no "atheist perspective". Being an atheist just means that you don't fall for that nonsense about gods above us that Christians, Muslims and many others claim to believe. That's it. There is no "atheist perspective", just like there is no "people who had their appendix removed" perspective.
However, I found some benchmarks about USB 3 flash drives, where lots of drives had impressive throughput, but most of them broke down spectacularly once you tried to read or write many small files. The exception being Sandisk Extreme drives, costing about twice as much as the cheapest drives.
And how is that different from sharing the road with any other tired driver? How do I know you don't drive tired because you are overextended on your mortgage and are rushing from one job to another? Or running a delivery business on the side?
Uber relies on a pool of casual workers who get paid piss poor wages. These piss poor workers will work lots of hours in order to make enough money. So that's a system that is _designed_ to create unsafe driving.
There are of course other situations where unsafe driving will happen. But first we should get rid of situations where it happens by design, and a lot.
There is absolutely no reason to expect a 64 bit architecture to be faster than a 32 bit architecture unless you are doing a lot of 64 bit operations, or need more than 4G of RAM.
Except if you know a few details of the Objective-C implementation in MacOS X and iOS. For example, in 64 bit many NSNumber and NSDate objects don't actually allocate any memory, but the 64 bit in the pointer contain all the data. In 64 bit, C++ std::string up to 22 chars in size don't allocate any memory. Retain/release are faster in 64 bits. memcpy or memset or memcmp or strlen run twice as fast.
If OSX comes "free" with their hardware, but is also sold separately - or even just has a defined value separately - they will likely fall afoul of the law. Unless, of course, the judge is an Apple user in which case it will be swept under the rug.
The difference is that it is an _Apple_ computer with an _Apple_ operating system. I bet it would be completely legal for Microsoft to sell you a _Microsoft_ computer with a _Microsoft_ operating system and not sell it without it and not give you a refund. But we are talking about HP computers with Microsoft OS, and Dell computers with Microsoft OS, and Acer computers with Microsoft Os and so on.
Since computing is moving to tablets and phones, can we get OS refunds for iDevices and Android tablets and phones also ?
The difference with Mac and iDevices is that the hardware is made by the same company that creates the software. You will have no problem whatsoever buying a computer without MacOS X or a phone or tablet without iOS. For Android tablets or phones I'm not sure how much money goes to Google,
More likely outcome is that they change the auto-reply text of the mail to "thank you for your valuable feedback", and then still continue to ignore it. The customer will be none-the-wiser, and unable to prove that feedback gets ignored.
The court, not being stupid, will probably send a few "canary" emails. Like an email with the text: "Dear Google. I'm really happy with your search engine. But in order to prove that you are really reading all these emails, please send an email to "JudgeJudy@German.court", telling us the name, address and phone number of the human responding to the mail so we can check it. Not replying to this email will result in a doubling of your fine. "
If Google decides to discontinue all Google services in Germany as a result, would that really be a "win" for the German consumer?
It would be a huge for Microsoft and Bing.
But that's only for search. "All services" would be quite fatal for Android phone users, so Apple would be really, really happy. Microsoft as well, I suppose.
Google can argue that they've met the requirements of the law by providing a means for customers to communicate. No where in the law does it require Google to respond.
1. You better read the law or a good translation. 2. There's a law in Germany that's not actually written down, but that any sane people obey: "Never tell a judge or a policeman or the inland revenue that you think they are stupid". It's the worst crime you can commit.
On the surface this sounds like a great decision for the google users in Germany. But do you really think Google is going to change their ways? Or spend one dime to appeal this ruling? Nope! They'll just change their automated reply to "Thank you for your issue/concern. We'll look into it and get back to you if necessary."
If they don't act, they will be fined. However, in Germany being fined doesn't mean you paid for what you are doing wrong, it means the court did something to get your attention. So if after being fined they don't act, the fine will be increased until they act. There isn't really a limit, because not changing their ways tells the court "this fine was so small that we can afford to ignore it, fine us more!".
from what i understand of the definition of "customer", a "customer" means "someone who is paying for a service". here, there's no payment involved, therefore there is no contract of sale. i would imagine that it's fairly safe to say that we're most definitely *not* quotes customers of google quotes.
You pay for Google's services with your personal information. And obviously your definition of "customer" doesn't matter. The German court's definition of "Kunde" might.
And I'm quite sure it doesn't refer to customers only but to everyone affected by a business. If I have a business that gets rid of my customers' rubbish by putting it in front of the doors of non-customers, surely these non-customers should be able to contact me?
How do you prove that someone started creating accounts in your name or signing up your e-mail address to all kinds of nasty groups? Most sites won't disclose the IP address of the person who signed you up without some sort of legal order and I don't think "A guy left our forum in a huff and the next day I started getting signed up for stuff" is sufficient grounds to obtain one.
Wouldn't something like "freedom of information act" allow you to access _all_ information that is stored about you? For example the IP addresses of all accounts _in your name_?
There is some evidence that the data was collected over a long time. It is quite possible that data was stolen long before it was deleted.
And yes, it is entirely possible to think you deleted photos and they are in a backup. Or not actually a backup, but just stored in iCloud. If you take tons of photos with multiple devices, you can store them all in iCloud. But you will for example remove lots of photos from your 16GB phone but keep them on your 128GB tablet. So if you delete photos from your phone, they are intentionally kept so you can restore them again. And of course the intent of a backup system is among other things to keep data that was deleted by mistake - how can iCloud know if you deleted something by mistake or not?
Yes, but you do still have the same fingertip. Unless you're worried about the common case of losing your phone and your fingertip at the same time.
Now you are being stupid. The iPhone doesn't know that it's _my_ fingerprint. It only knows that it's the fingerprint of the person who programmed their fingerprint into the iPhone. So if _I_ can buy a brand new iPhone, program it with my finger print, enter my AppleID and password and perform a restore, then any scammer who knows my AppleID and password can buy a brand new iPhone, program it with his or her finger print, enter my AppleID and password and perform a restore. In other words, this isn't giving any security.
Maybe to you but that's not the way the real world works. People absolutely do call all tablets "iPads" regardless of actual make. They refer to any MP3 player as an "iPod" whether it actually is or isn't. People don't search, they "Google".
It makes a difference whether the word is used as a generic term, or whether it is used by mistake. Let's say you see me holding a tablet from 10 meters distance. You might say "he is holding an iPad". As I come closer, you can see it is made by Samsung. Will you say "he is holding a Samsung iPad" or "he is holding a Samsung tablet" or "he is holding a "?
You would think that with all the noise they made about their fingerprint reader that they would have an optional two-factor authentication method that uses in in addition to a password. Sure, someone could still get around that too more likely than not, but it makes it hell of a lot more difficult than just attacking a password or being able to guess it.
Think about it. I buy an iPhone with fingerprint reader. I store top secret information and back it up on iCloud. The I drop the iPhone into the toilet and it dies, unrecoverable. I go to the store and hand over the cash for a new iPhone. At that point the backup functionality must work. It can't use the fingerprint of my old iPhone, because the new iPhone doesn't have it. All I have is the Apple ID and password.
What could work is that you enter say your name and passport number (I mean physical passport number), you go to an Apple Store with your passport, iCloud sends a passcode to the store, and they hand it over to you only if they see the passport and it matches.
Take the Elcomsoft tool mentioned. It requires for example "The targetâ(TM)s iCloud passwordâ"by them volunteering it, through a phishing attack, or by gaining access through other social engineering.".
These tools don't do anything cryptographically clever. If you have a victim's iCloud password, they are cracked. All this tool does is to make it easy to download all the data and to examine the data, once the account is cracked. It doesn't do anything about the cracking.
The discusses also details a method for spoofing device identification to convince iCloud to restore data to a device mimicking the target's phone.
I checked the link, and it does no such thing. The article is about fake Wifi hotspots. Such a fake Wifi hotspot could of course cause all kinds of trouble (basically it can read WiFi traffic that you thought was encrypted), but it doesn't allow anyone to convince iCloud of anything.
You should re-read TFS, then. This entire topic centers on exactly that - "iPad" has become a generic term for any tablet, just as iPod has become a generic for any portable music player.
No, the situation is different. The reporters didn't see that someone was using a Microsoft tablet and called it by a generic name "iPad". They saw someone using a Microsoft tablet aka Surface and mistakenly believed it was an Apple tablet aka iPad. If reporters start saying "NFL is using iPads made by Microsoft" or "NFL is using an iPad Surface" assuming there is a classic iPad, iPad Retina, iPad Air, and now an iPad Surface, you may have a point.
Slashdot Mirror
Switching to 64 bit builds means that they will have to drop OSX 10.6, right? It's about time this one is left behind!
No, 64 bit builds run on 10.6 just fine. You may be confused here: 10.7 requires a 64 bit processor. So if you don't support 10.6, then supporting 32 bit is pointless - anything running 10.7 upwards supports 64 bit.
What isn't supported anymore is machines with 32 bit processor.
Believing that there isn't a god is a belief: the acceptance of an assertion without sufficient evidence.
Not at all. It's the same as believing that there is no tooth fairy, that there are no monsters under your bed at night, and so on. It's not "I believe there is no god", it's more like "what's this god thing that you keep going on about". I know there are people who like to go on about this god thing, but it's really not worth it to an atheist. It's not important enough to be put into a category "belief" or "not belief", like I don't bother not believing in the tooth fairy.
After a few accidents caused by drunk cops driving (that actually injuredor killed people) in my country, the new law is that if a cop is caught drunk behind the wheel, he can start looking for a new job (in addition to whatever punishment a non-cop would get in the same situation).
Well, in my country, cops who were caught shoplifting, but doing so while carrying their gun, were convicted for armed robbery.
And that's the problem; it's impossible to justify a value system purely from an atheist perspective;
And there you go wrong from the very start. There is no "atheist perspective". Being an atheist just means that you don't fall for that nonsense about gods above us that Christians, Muslims and many others claim to believe. That's it. There is no "atheist perspective", just like there is no "people who had their appendix removed" perspective.
However, I found some benchmarks about USB 3 flash drives, where lots of drives had impressive throughput, but most of them broke down spectacularly once you tried to read or write many small files. The exception being Sandisk Extreme drives, costing about twice as much as the cheapest drives.
And how is that different from sharing the road with any other tired driver? How do I know you don't drive tired because you are overextended on your mortgage and are rushing from one job to another? Or running a delivery business on the side?
Uber relies on a pool of casual workers who get paid piss poor wages. These piss poor workers will work lots of hours in order to make enough money. So that's a system that is _designed_ to create unsafe driving.
There are of course other situations where unsafe driving will happen. But first we should get rid of situations where it happens by design, and a lot.
There is absolutely no reason to expect a 64 bit architecture to be faster than a 32 bit architecture unless you are doing a lot of 64 bit operations, or need more than 4G of RAM.
Except if you know a few details of the Objective-C implementation in MacOS X and iOS. For example, in 64 bit many NSNumber and NSDate objects don't actually allocate any memory, but the 64 bit in the pointer contain all the data. In 64 bit, C++ std::string up to 22 chars in size don't allocate any memory. Retain/release are faster in 64 bits. memcpy or memset or memcmp or strlen run twice as fast.
If OSX comes "free" with their hardware, but is also sold separately - or even just has a defined value separately - they will likely fall afoul of the law. Unless, of course, the judge is an Apple user in which case it will be swept under the rug.
The difference is that it is an _Apple_ computer with an _Apple_ operating system. I bet it would be completely legal for Microsoft to sell you a _Microsoft_ computer with a _Microsoft_ operating system and not sell it without it and not give you a refund. But we are talking about HP computers with Microsoft OS, and Dell computers with Microsoft OS, and Acer computers with Microsoft Os and so on.
Since computing is moving to tablets and phones, can we get OS refunds for iDevices and Android tablets and phones also ?
The difference with Mac and iDevices is that the hardware is made by the same company that creates the software. You will have no problem whatsoever buying a computer without MacOS X or a phone or tablet without iOS. For Android tablets or phones I'm not sure how much money goes to Google,
Instead of spending a rumored $100 MILLION giving everyone a U2 album few want, ...
I think it's $100 million for an advertising campaign. Giving everyone a U2 album is just one small part of it.
More likely outcome is that they change the auto-reply text of the mail to "thank you for your valuable feedback", and then still continue to ignore it. The customer will be none-the-wiser, and unable to prove that feedback gets ignored.
The court, not being stupid, will probably send a few "canary" emails. Like an email with the text: "Dear Google. I'm really happy with your search engine. But in order to prove that you are really reading all these emails, please send an email to "JudgeJudy@German.court", telling us the name, address and phone number of the human responding to the mail so we can check it. Not replying to this email will result in a doubling of your fine. "
If Google decides to discontinue all Google services in Germany as a result, would that really be a "win" for the German consumer?
It would be a huge for Microsoft and Bing.
But that's only for search. "All services" would be quite fatal for Android phone users, so Apple would be really, really happy. Microsoft as well, I suppose.
I will love reading about anyone who managed to destroy a call centre of these scammers and get them out of business.
Myself, I would fear bad legal consequences if I did it, because hacking into their computers isn't going to be legal just because they are scammers.
Now telling them that you just hacked into their computers and asking them to open log files to show evidence, that would be fun.
Google can argue that they've met the requirements of the law by providing a means for customers to communicate. No where in the law does it require Google to respond.
1. You better read the law or a good translation. 2. There's a law in Germany that's not actually written down, but that any sane people obey: "Never tell a judge or a policeman or the inland revenue that you think they are stupid". It's the worst crime you can commit.
On the surface this sounds like a great decision for the google users in Germany. But do you really think Google is going to change their ways? Or spend one dime to appeal this ruling? Nope! They'll just change their automated reply to "Thank you for your issue/concern. We'll look into it and get back to you if necessary."
If they don't act, they will be fined. However, in Germany being fined doesn't mean you paid for what you are doing wrong, it means the court did something to get your attention. So if after being fined they don't act, the fine will be increased until they act. There isn't really a limit, because not changing their ways tells the court "this fine was so small that we can afford to ignore it, fine us more!".
You should ask for your money back.
You should ask for all your data back.
However, Google has quite a strong monopoly. That will make their case a lot weaker.
from what i understand of the definition of "customer", a "customer" means "someone who is paying for a service". here, there's no payment involved, therefore there is no contract of sale. i would imagine that it's fairly safe to say that we're most definitely *not* quotes customers of google quotes.
You pay for Google's services with your personal information. And obviously your definition of "customer" doesn't matter. The German court's definition of "Kunde" might.
And I'm quite sure it doesn't refer to customers only but to everyone affected by a business. If I have a business that gets rid of my customers' rubbish by putting it in front of the doors of non-customers, surely these non-customers should be able to contact me?
How do you prove that someone started creating accounts in your name or signing up your e-mail address to all kinds of nasty groups? Most sites won't disclose the IP address of the person who signed you up without some sort of legal order and I don't think "A guy left our forum in a huff and the next day I started getting signed up for stuff" is sufficient grounds to obtain one.
Wouldn't something like "freedom of information act" allow you to access _all_ information that is stored about you? For example the IP addresses of all accounts _in your name_?
There is some evidence that the data was collected over a long time. It is quite possible that data was stolen long before it was deleted.
And yes, it is entirely possible to think you deleted photos and they are in a backup. Or not actually a backup, but just stored in iCloud. If you take tons of photos with multiple devices, you can store them all in iCloud. But you will for example remove lots of photos from your 16GB phone but keep them on your 128GB tablet. So if you delete photos from your phone, they are intentionally kept so you can restore them again. And of course the intent of a backup system is among other things to keep data that was deleted by mistake - how can iCloud know if you deleted something by mistake or not?
Yes, but you do still have the same fingertip. Unless you're worried about the common case of losing your phone and your fingertip at the same time.
Now you are being stupid. The iPhone doesn't know that it's _my_ fingerprint. It only knows that it's the fingerprint of the person who programmed their fingerprint into the iPhone. So if _I_ can buy a brand new iPhone, program it with my finger print, enter my AppleID and password and perform a restore, then any scammer who knows my AppleID and password can buy a brand new iPhone, program it with his or her finger print, enter my AppleID and password and perform a restore. In other words, this isn't giving any security.
Maybe to you but that's not the way the real world works. People absolutely do call all tablets "iPads" regardless of actual make. They refer to any MP3 player as an "iPod" whether it actually is or isn't. People don't search, they "Google".
It makes a difference whether the word is used as a generic term, or whether it is used by mistake. Let's say you see me holding a tablet from 10 meters distance. You might say "he is holding an iPad". As I come closer, you can see it is made by Samsung. Will you say "he is holding a Samsung iPad" or "he is holding a Samsung tablet" or "he is holding a "?
You would think that with all the noise they made about their fingerprint reader that they would have an optional two-factor authentication method that uses in in addition to a password. Sure, someone could still get around that too more likely than not, but it makes it hell of a lot more difficult than just attacking a password or being able to guess it.
Think about it. I buy an iPhone with fingerprint reader. I store top secret information and back it up on iCloud. The I drop the iPhone into the toilet and it dies, unrecoverable. I go to the store and hand over the cash for a new iPhone. At that point the backup functionality must work. It can't use the fingerprint of my old iPhone, because the new iPhone doesn't have it. All I have is the Apple ID and password.
What could work is that you enter say your name and passport number (I mean physical passport number), you go to an Apple Store with your passport, iCloud sends a passcode to the store, and they hand it over to you only if they see the passport and it matches.
Take the Elcomsoft tool mentioned. It requires for example "The targetâ(TM)s iCloud passwordâ"by them volunteering it, through a phishing attack, or by gaining access through other social engineering.".
These tools don't do anything cryptographically clever. If you have a victim's iCloud password, they are cracked. All this tool does is to make it easy to download all the data and to examine the data, once the account is cracked. It doesn't do anything about the cracking.
The discusses also details a method for spoofing device identification to convince iCloud to restore data to a device mimicking the target's phone.
I checked the link, and it does no such thing. The article is about fake Wifi hotspots. Such a fake Wifi hotspot could of course cause all kinds of trouble (basically it can read WiFi traffic that you thought was encrypted), but it doesn't allow anyone to convince iCloud of anything.
You should re-read TFS, then. This entire topic centers on exactly that - "iPad" has become a generic term for any tablet, just as iPod has become a generic for any portable music player.
No, the situation is different. The reporters didn't see that someone was using a Microsoft tablet and called it by a generic name "iPad". They saw someone using a Microsoft tablet aka Surface and mistakenly believed it was an Apple tablet aka iPad. If reporters start saying "NFL is using iPads made by Microsoft" or "NFL is using an iPad Surface" assuming there is a classic iPad, iPad Retina, iPad Air, and now an iPad Surface, you may have a point.