From what I understand,the leak makes revocation useless:
"The master key allows you to recover every other key in the system and lets you decrypt [HDCP video content], impersonate a device, or create new displays and start selling HDCP compatible devices."
While [Intel and content providers] are spending millions on HDCP, he says, they will be denied the benefits of research that can help fix the technology. Ferguson predicts that a year from now, someone will post a HDCP master key on the Internet, and the money spent on the system will be wasted.
Upgrading the firmware of players to disable HDMI altogether isn't possible at this point. I'm not sure of the exact process, but since you can make new displays, you can create a device that just makes up a random one if it doesn't handshake in five seconds. Also, you can impersonate any existing device- and blocking every existing monitor on the market isn't feasible either.
I could buy an iPad with the money I have but I'll take a regular textbook any day, namely because they can't take the book away from you.
Additionally, the hardware is more of a novelty than anything else at this point- too expensive, too fragile (especially for middle schoolers), too much of a target for theft, and not advanced enough.
The textbook companies love this concept, since it kills secondhand ownership. You can sell licenses to eBooks just like software!
Also, math input without a stylus or keyboard (and I doubt they're teaching LaTeX for any sort of efficient math input) can't be fun.
Re:What will they do with the money?
on
Skype Files For IPO
·
· Score: 5, Informative
The SEC filing (part of the summary) states that the money from the offering will be used for "general corporate purposes", but this becomes more interesting when put in perspective of their prospectus, where they want to grow in four areas:
First, we believe that there is a significant opportunity to grow our user base.
Yawn. Most companies are going to claim this. Next!
Second, we believe that we can generate more communications revenue from our users by improving awareness and adoption of our paid products and introducing premium products such as group video calling.
They want to charge for video calling, even though Oovoo and others offer it for free? Good luck, unless you're going to split it into free group calling or do a freemium model (certain group calling features are limited to paid users).
Third, we will continue to develop new monetization models for our large connected user base. We currently generate a small portion of our net revenues through marketing services (such as advertising) and licensing, which we expect will grow as a percentage of our net revenues over time.
They want to make more money off of the people who aren't paying for Skype. I predict more ads and third party ads within the Skype application.
Fourth, we will broaden our user base to include more business users. For example, we have recently released and will continue to develop and market Skype for Business products that aim to capitalize on demand for Skype from small, medium and large businesses.
This is where the money could be useful: scaling up development and investing in new technologies and getting businesses aware. This requires people and time, which takes money. Right now, Skype isn't big in the corporate world from what I've seen, with big warnings from my company not to install it (and heavy filtering on anything Skype related). If they compromise and possibly allow a business client that keeps within the network for anything that isn't a call to an outgoing line (and maybe integrates with the desktop app), I could see Skype getting a major foothold.
Just some observations. I'm not wowed by this IPO either, and the lack of specificity of how they're going to spend the money makes me wonder if they've even gotten that far yet.
I've seen "reality view" (at least, that's what Navigon called it, IIRC) on several US PNDs.
I've seen this on US devices too.
I've also seen plenty of GPS units, including TomToms, that will take lists with custom icons and provide warnings for red light/speed cameras/speed traps.
My first GPS in dash from 2001 does this.
I've seen my GPS acknowledge a change in street name/status (highway X turns into road Y) plenty of times.
The last one interests me and would be a great feature.
This happened to me because my street was correct under NAVTEQ data but incorrect under Teleatlas (previous street on the left is a service road without a name, but it stole our street's name under Teleatlas data).
Teleatlas got the hint when I submitted it 10 times in a row on their Map Insight and corrected the data the next day (in contrast, I had submitted it several times over the previous two years).
The laughs will come if consumers decide that they don't care and buy the phone anyway despite headlines saying how Motorola has put a self destruct chip in the phone. The carriers will probably play hardball with every device manufacturer and get this technology in every Android phone so they can brag about an open platform but lock down the updates and stop providing Android updates a year after the phone is released.
If consumers ignore the Droid and other phones that implement such anti-consumer chips, then it'll be a victory for Android users, resiting attempts to take away from the openness of the platform.
eFUSE can be used to change chip logic on the fly based on the operation,, or, as Motorola is using, can be used to modify the programming of the chip itself to render the device nonfunctional without a reflash.
If you could figure out the necessary code to flash to the chip - which wouldn't be easy - yeah, you could reflash the chip via the JTAG port.
Given that HTC and others aren't locking the phones down in a method where the phone deliberately tries to use a device to brick if the phone's firmware/kernel/bootloader is not official, crackers are more likely to ignore the phone. And given the publicity ("Motorola phones have chip that self destructs"), ordinary consumers could be scared off too.
I've heard that Cyanogen and other groups that do this sort of technical work on Android phones have sworn off the Droid X because options that are equally good as phones and won't make getting a custom ROM on a process that will destroy several phones and be risky every time someone flashes it themselves exist.
We understand there is a community of developers interested in going beyond Android application development and experimenting with Android system development and re-flashing phones. For these developers, we highly recommend obtaining either a Google ADP1 developer phone or a Nexus One, both of which are intended for these purposes. At this time, Motorola Android-based handsets are intended for use by consumers and Android application developers, and we have currently chosen not to go into the business of providing fully unlocked developer phones.
The use of open source software, such as the Linux kernel or the Android platform, in a consumer device does not require the handset running such software to be open for re-flashing. We comply with the licenses, including GPLv2, for each of the open source packages in our handsets. We post appropriate notices as part of the legal information on the handset and post source code, where required, at http://opensource.motorola.com./Securing the software on our handsets, thereby preventing a non-Motorola ROM image from being loaded, has been our common practice for many years. This practice is driven by a number of different business factors. When we do deviate from our normal practice, such as we did with the DROID, there is a specific business reason for doing so. We understand this can result in some confusion, and apologize for any frustration.
Even the official builds from Motorola allow you to install APKs not blessed by Google, correct? So what reason would Verizon have to block a small but vocal minority from getting super geeky with their phones? What reason would Verizon have to say "don't allow non-official firmware"?
If you're going along with the theory that they'll stop Android upgrades as a reason to upgrade, I doubt it'll work. The headlines I'm reading now are "Motorola puts self destruct chips in phones", not "Droid X does not permit reflashing." These are the headlines that scare regular buyers away.
Even if the nerds are a minority of your buyers they're still the group that people come to when they want to get a new phone. Given the lockdown, would you recommend a Droid X to anyone, even if they weren't planning on unlocking it? No, out of principle, and the fact that there are numerous other great options for Android, I would recommend someone against buying a Motorola phone at the time being.
eFUSE is a chip technology developed by IBM is a special type of chip where the code isn't completely static- based on the operation of the device, an eFUSE can blow itself. This can reroute the logic in a variety of ways, or be used as a self destruct mechanism.
It's reversible, but only by Motorola directly via JTAG. They have the custom code needed to flash the chip back to its original state.
Seriously, I can understand your warranty being voided if you do unapproved modifications to a device, but designing the device so it blows up if you try to modify it is just wrong.
Why do hardware companies think they should have the right to own the device forever? Why should I buy a device that has a time bomb built in that may trip if the official software gets corrupted due to a bug?
The whole thing reeks. I'm done with Motorola. What is the point of this exactly? What does Motorola lose by you running a custom ROM? New phone sales when they decide after a year not to provide any Android updates?
It was a modified version of Tamper Data that the author alleged "many problems have been solved in this version".
In addition to modifying several existing files, the author added a file called tamperPost.js that very deliberately sends every form submission to a remote server. You can see some of the code of this on the Netcraft article in the summary (or or a direct link to the image)
When you see the image, you can see that it was obviously a deliberate attempt to steal credentials.
The addon was experimental, and whenever you try to install an experimental addon you have to check a box acknowledging it's experimental before the install button works, and it's tagged with a scary warning that it could blow up your computer or compromise the security of Firefox due to the lack of code review.
Not only that, but the author couldn't even use proper English in the addon description:
View and modify HTTP/HTTPS headers it's base on tamper data but many problems have been solved in this version u can check it out.
Given that, I hate to say that "people had it coming", but I figure people had ample warning that they were trying something that could be malicious.
When making a comparison, how can you ignore the ONLY benefits of the e-reader (e-ink, battery life, and the free data on some models)? Tablets win for the same thing that all superior products win: for anyone looking for MORE than a decent platform for reading text, e-readers suck. If that's all you want to do, that's great, enjoy your e-reader. The price cuts certainly help. The problem is that there are *so many* disadvantages to an e-reader that you're neglecting, along with a complementary list of advantages for tablets.
A tablet does many things well. The eReader is cheaper and does one thing well. As I said, the iPad will have its fans, but there will be people who want a single purpose device.
Of your four "advantages", two are restatements of each other (battery life is a function of power draw) and one is highly subjective at best ("easier on the eyes").
Not the same point. When you are sitting reading a page on the iPad, you are using just as much battery life as when you flip the page. Whereas you can leave an e-Ink page up for several minutes and the draw will be very minimal. e-ink uses big amounts of power to change the state, but keeping the text on screen takes virtually no battery power.
Then there are the disadvantages: page flips are slow and clumsy, artwork is terrible unless it's line art, there's no color (and the color e-ink prototypes aren't going to cut it, either), there's essentially no interaction other than scrolling, it has limited/no multimedia capabilities, and it is, in the words of Alton Brown, a unitasker of the first degree.
As I said. Some will want everything and the kitchen sink, and others will want a good book reading device.
Compare a tablet, with a full range of information, Internet, multimedia, gaming, productivity, communication, and reading applications. Tablets done right have screens with good color, viewing angles, and contrast, and highly responsive multitouch interfaces. Battery life north of 10 hours is enough so as to make no difference to most people--they can use it all day, drop it into a charger at night, and use it all day again. The reading applications aren't limited to text, but fully-featured magazines, comic books, illustrated texts, and interactive content, all of which can be used without an external light source with a simple adjustment of background brightness.
Which appeals to some people and not others. A lot of people would enjoy the benefits. If I had infinite resources, I'd get some very nice (and expensive) technology, and my computer would have top of the line components.
People who complain about "headaches" when using an LCD are just doing so in an environment with insufficient ambient light, which e-readers only avoid because they're illegible without sufficient ambient light. Whining about staring into a "lightbulb" is only based on poor ergonomic choices that they've made themselves. There is no physical difference to the eye whether light is backlit or reflected; turn on a lamp and/or adjust your brightness in low-light conditions and your problems are magically solved.
True, to some degree. I would still prefer to read E-ink for hours over a regular display, even with a large amount of ambient light (either from bulbs or natural).
That said, personal preference is personal preference. If e-ink is the fairy dust cure-all, then it counts against tablets. Does it count enough to give up all the other functionality? That depends on what you're buying it for. But there's little question that
LendMe has to be explicitly allowed by the book's publisher, you can only lend it to once for up to 14 days (obviously, you can't read it until your friend "returns" the book or the 14 days elapses).
The razor/blade model is somewhat applicable and somewhat not.
It's applicable in the sense that the eReaders aren't a major cash cow (like the iPod is), but it's not applicable in the sense that the blades (books) don't dull. There's a cost to switching that builds up over time as you invest into a library.
Text is small, bandwidth has become cheaper, and at this point the eBooks are barely cheaper than the regular books. The nook can only use 3G for the B&N store on device, and the Kindle has only a very basic web browser (it's barely usable, good for a quick wikipedia lookup but not any extended browsing).
So the purchases more than make up for the 3G downloading.
I have an 8GB iPod Touch that's under a year old and I get maybe two hours of continuous use browsing the web indoors (where the backlight doesn't have to be full blast to be somewhat readable) and I get a couple hours of usage tops.
I know, anecdotal, etc...but at the price of these devices, they're great for people that read more than a book every once in a while.
Everyone is learning from Apple (used to be the case with music, still the case with apps):
When you entice people to make a significant investment in your platform (via books with your proprietary DRM system - the nook uses ePUBs, but it's wrapped with their own DRM) so switching means throwing all of the books they bought away, you'll have them buying your device (and more importantly, the books) for years to come.
Some people would argue that you argue that you only read books once, but some people watch movies, read books, etc. multiple times.
When you neglect the benefits of dedicated eReader devices with e-ink, such as...
The fact that they get battery life in weeks instead of hours
The fact that they use minimal power between page flips (vs. a relatively steady draw)
The fact that they are easier on the eyes
The fact that they are more easily read in sunlight...
It's a lot easier to say that it's over and the iPad/tablet rush will kill the eReader revolution.
Not to mention the fact that the nook/Kindle are much, much cheaper. That makes taking it to places like the beach (large zipper plastic bag keeps it safe and readable) or just on the go in general is something you don't have to worry about.
Yes, the iPad will have its fans. But there are people who don't want a "do everything" device, they want something that reads books really, really well. And the nook, Kindle, and other eReaders do that. Until there's a radical revolution in color screen technology that gains the benefits that e-ink has (which are great for a book reading device)
Not to mention that the 3G iPad is $130 extra, and doesn't include free 3G for the store so you can make an impulse book buy wherever you are. That's major in the convenience factor of the device.
Q: I don't like NoScript redirecting the browser on its release notes page every time I upgrade it. Is there any way to prevent this?
If you feel you don't need such heads up, you can disable this feature by clicking the NoScript icon, selecting Options and unchecking "Display the release notes on update" in the "Notifications" tab.
He's intentionally driving traffic to his page, but you can disable it easily (it used to require about:config, but it was a boolean that was fairly easy to find).
Slashdot Mirror
Upgrading the firmware of players to disable HDMI altogether isn't possible at this point. I'm not sure of the exact process, but since you can make new displays, you can create a device that just makes up a random one if it doesn't handshake in five seconds. Also, you can impersonate any existing device- and blocking every existing monitor on the market isn't feasible either.
I could buy an iPad with the money I have but I'll take a regular textbook any day, namely because they can't take the book away from you.
Additionally, the hardware is more of a novelty than anything else at this point- too expensive, too fragile (especially for middle schoolers), too much of a target for theft, and not advanced enough.
The textbook companies love this concept, since it kills secondhand ownership. You can sell licenses to eBooks just like software!
Also, math input without a stylus or keyboard (and I doubt they're teaching LaTeX for any sort of efficient math input) can't be fun.
Yawn. Most companies are going to claim this. Next!
They want to charge for video calling, even though Oovoo and others offer it for free? Good luck, unless you're going to split it into free group calling or do a freemium model (certain group calling features are limited to paid users).
They want to make more money off of the people who aren't paying for Skype. I predict more ads and third party ads within the Skype application.
This is where the money could be useful: scaling up development and investing in new technologies and getting businesses aware. This requires people and time, which takes money. Right now, Skype isn't big in the corporate world from what I've seen, with big warnings from my company not to install it (and heavy filtering on anything Skype related). If they compromise and possibly allow a business client that keeps within the network for anything that isn't a call to an outgoing line (and maybe integrates with the desktop app), I could see Skype getting a major foothold.
Just some observations. I'm not wowed by this IPO either, and the lack of specificity of how they're going to spend the money makes me wonder if they've even gotten that far yet.
Even if they're told exactly what the app will have access to, people will click through anything.
This happened to me because my street was correct under NAVTEQ data but incorrect under Teleatlas (previous street on the left is a service road without a name, but it stole our street's name under Teleatlas data).
Teleatlas got the hint when I submitted it 10 times in a row on their Map Insight and corrected the data the next day (in contrast, I had submitted it several times over the previous two years).
The laughs will come if consumers decide that they don't care and buy the phone anyway despite headlines saying how Motorola has put a self destruct chip in the phone. The carriers will probably play hardball with every device manufacturer and get this technology in every Android phone so they can brag about an open platform but lock down the updates and stop providing Android updates a year after the phone is released.
If consumers ignore the Droid and other phones that implement such anti-consumer chips, then it'll be a victory for Android users, resiting attempts to take away from the openness of the platform.
eFUSE can be used to change chip logic on the fly based on the operation,, or, as Motorola is using, can be used to modify the programming of the chip itself to render the device nonfunctional without a reflash.
If you could figure out the necessary code to flash to the chip - which wouldn't be easy - yeah, you could reflash the chip via the JTAG port.
Given that HTC and others aren't locking the phones down in a method where the phone deliberately tries to use a device to brick if the phone's firmware/kernel/bootloader is not official, crackers are more likely to ignore the phone. And given the publicity ("Motorola phones have chip that self destructs"), ordinary consumers could be scared off too.
His point is that if they don't sell a phone with the features (or restrictions) that a carrier wants, the carrier will buy from someone else instead.
I've heard that Cyanogen and other groups that do this sort of technical work on Android phones have sworn off the Droid X because options that are equally good as phones and won't make getting a custom ROM on a process that will destroy several phones and be risky every time someone flashes it themselves exist.
You'd have to figure out an exploit that would allow you to modify the firmware (ROM), bootloader, or kernel without root access on the device.
However, every piece of software has bugs and many OSes have had escalation exploits, so it certainly is within the realm of possibility.
Even the official builds from Motorola allow you to install APKs not blessed by Google, correct? So what reason would Verizon have to block a small but vocal minority from getting super geeky with their phones? What reason would Verizon have to say "don't allow non-official firmware"?
If you're going along with the theory that they'll stop Android upgrades as a reason to upgrade, I doubt it'll work. The headlines I'm reading now are "Motorola puts self destruct chips in phones", not "Droid X does not permit reflashing." These are the headlines that scare regular buyers away.
Even if the nerds are a minority of your buyers they're still the group that people come to when they want to get a new phone. Given the lockdown, would you recommend a Droid X to anyone, even if they weren't planning on unlocking it? No, out of principle, and the fact that there are numerous other great options for Android, I would recommend someone against buying a Motorola phone at the time being.
eFUSE is a chip technology developed by IBM is a special type of chip where the code isn't completely static- based on the operation of the device, an eFUSE can blow itself. This can reroute the logic in a variety of ways, or be used as a self destruct mechanism.
It's reversible, but only by Motorola directly via JTAG. They have the custom code needed to flash the chip back to its original state.
Seriously, I can understand your warranty being voided if you do unapproved modifications to a device, but designing the device so it blows up if you try to modify it is just wrong.
Why do hardware companies think they should have the right to own the device forever? Why should I buy a device that has a time bomb built in that may trip if the official software gets corrupted due to a bug?
The whole thing reeks. I'm done with Motorola. What is the point of this exactly? What does Motorola lose by you running a custom ROM? New phone sales when they decide after a year not to provide any Android updates?
It was a modified version of Tamper Data that the author alleged "many problems have been solved in this version".
In addition to modifying several existing files, the author added a file called tamperPost.js that very deliberately sends every form submission to a remote server. You can see some of the code of this on the Netcraft article in the summary (or or a direct link to the image)
When you see the image, you can see that it was obviously a deliberate attempt to steal credentials.
Not only that, but the author couldn't even use proper English in the addon description:
Given that, I hate to say that "people had it coming", but I figure people had ample warning that they were trying something that could be malicious.
A tablet does many things well. The eReader is cheaper and does one thing well. As I said, the iPad will have its fans, but there will be people who want a single purpose device.
Not the same point. When you are sitting reading a page on the iPad, you are using just as much battery life as when you flip the page. Whereas you can leave an e-Ink page up for several minutes and the draw will be very minimal. e-ink uses big amounts of power to change the state, but keeping the text on screen takes virtually no battery power.
As for the allegedly subjective claim..., you are right, there is debate. Based on personal experience, that is my opinion.
As I said. Some will want everything and the kitchen sink, and others will want a good book reading device.
Which appeals to some people and not others. A lot of people would enjoy the benefits. If I had infinite resources, I'd get some very nice (and expensive) technology, and my computer would have top of the line components.
LendMe has to be explicitly allowed by the book's publisher, you can only lend it to once for up to 14 days (obviously, you can't read it until your friend "returns" the book or the 14 days elapses).
The razor/blade model is somewhat applicable and somewhat not.
It's applicable in the sense that the eReaders aren't a major cash cow (like the iPod is), but it's not applicable in the sense that the blades (books) don't dull. There's a cost to switching that builds up over time as you invest into a library.
Text is small, bandwidth has become cheaper, and at this point the eBooks are barely cheaper than the regular books. The nook can only use 3G for the B&N store on device, and the Kindle has only a very basic web browser (it's barely usable, good for a quick wikipedia lookup but not any extended browsing).
So the purchases more than make up for the 3G downloading.
I have an 8GB iPod Touch that's under a year old and I get maybe two hours of continuous use browsing the web indoors (where the backlight doesn't have to be full blast to be somewhat readable) and I get a couple hours of usage tops.
I know, anecdotal, etc...but at the price of these devices, they're great for people that read more than a book every once in a while.
Everyone is learning from Apple (used to be the case with music, still the case with apps):
When you entice people to make a significant investment in your platform (via books with your proprietary DRM system - the nook uses ePUBs, but it's wrapped with their own DRM) so switching means throwing all of the books they bought away, you'll have them buying your device (and more importantly, the books) for years to come.
Some people would argue that you argue that you only read books once, but some people watch movies, read books, etc. multiple times.
It's a lot easier to say that it's over and the iPad/tablet rush will kill the eReader revolution.
Not to mention the fact that the nook/Kindle are much, much cheaper. That makes taking it to places like the beach (large zipper plastic bag keeps it safe and readable) or just on the go in general is something you don't have to worry about.
Yes, the iPad will have its fans. But there are people who don't want a "do everything" device, they want something that reads books really, really well. And the nook, Kindle, and other eReaders do that. Until there's a radical revolution in color screen technology that gains the benefits that e-ink has (which are great for a book reading device)
Not to mention that the 3G iPad is $130 extra, and doesn't include free 3G for the store so you can make an impulse book buy wherever you are. That's major in the convenience factor of the device.
He's intentionally driving traffic to his page, but you can disable it easily (it used to require about:config, but it was a boolean that was fairly easy to find).