Microsoft is guilty of being too successful. That's it. Any "law" they've broken is post facto. Some bureaucrat can look at some business arrangement and say it's "anti-competitive". What the fuck is the definition of "anti-competitive"? It's whatever your opponents can convince some government flunky it is.
They haven't been "convicted" of shit. They've been sued in civil court, consented to specific agreements to avoid bullshit lawsuits, or been told by heavy handed bureaucrats in Brussels to pay up or else. That's it.
Exactly. I even use it in the var x = foo() case, but that's because much like the honey badger I just don't give a shit. ctrl-space and hover over tells me everything I need to know.
Lol, yeah. Was going to write same (seemingly obvious to me and you) reply. What in the world is he talking about? They certainly can change time (the time it takes to download shit).
I have something better than iPhone - a Galaxy Nexus and I'm getting same plan. They throttle at 5 gigs, but I understand and have no issue with this.
I have a sense this is an entitlement issue. People feel entitled to unlimited _and_ unthrottled data, when it doesn't seem AT&T is promising that. Maybe AT&T just needs to make clear that you get X gigs of data at 4g speeds, and unlimited data beyond that at slower speeds. I have a feeling people would still cry about it.
Either AT&T is false advertising, or people are confused as to what "unlimited data" means.
You can get unlimited data and still be throttled. Those are not contradictory. In fact I'm on T-Mobile's prepaid plan, $30 and I get "unlimited" data. But guess what, they clearly state that it's unlimited and only up to 5 gigs of it is at 3g speeds. I understand this, and agree to it.
So someone with a clear head please explain, is this just bullshit whining of people who don't understand that there is no _speed_ component in the phrase "unlimited data" and it's perfectly legitimate to throttle at some point as long as it's disclosed, or is it truly AT&T advertising unlimited data at guaranteed 3g or 4g speeds?
Sure, things change. I don't know what that has to do with anything. Someone was saying "somebody oughta..." prosecute Bush/Cheney, and I demonstrated there is nothing an American court can do and certainly nothing a Kangaroo International court can do.
Like fucking _Russia_ or _China_ has the moral standing to make a stink about a US President not following international law? A joke.
By whom? What US law prevents a US President from using waterboarding on a non-US citizen on foreign soil? If you can point me to that very specific US law then maybe I'll agree.
Would be bad business for Intel in some ways. They are competing with those chips (ARM) and it seems silly to me that they would offer their _massive_ competitive advantage (top flight manufacturing with large capacity) to a competitor.
They could only manufacture using a previous generation process, I guess. Make their Atom chips on e.g. 14nm and only offer 22nm fabbing for third parties.
No such thing. Good luck with the US allowing foreign nations to prosecute a sitting or former US President for "war crimes".
War crimes is just something the most powerful nations define to use as a tool against the less powerful nations for not playing by their rules. If you think it's something used against the US's, Russias, Chinas of the world then you are sadly deluded.
I'm not real happy with MS on that, but FAT32 and filesystem implementation specifics are at least reasonable patents. Squarish, "thinner" tablets? Unlock screens? Yeah, not so much.
I really, really hope we see a replay of the 80's again and that when MS gets Win8 with a similar experience on PC's, tablets, and phones that Apple goes the way of the dinosaur.
Oh God, please spare me. I'm sure you'll be cool when someone "copies" your Social Security number, copies your voice as you talk to a 1-900 sex number, and copies all your credit card numbers and receipts. I mean information wants to be freeeeeeee! Right?
He stole data. The holes weren't obvious or trivial. They now have to hope he didn't actually sell the data, or that someone didn't hack it from _him_.
So other than every facet of the situation being totally different, I guess you're right it's similar other than that.
What a bunch of nonsense. You're not fooling anyone. How about _real_ ethical hackers find the vulnerability and report it to Facebook without breaking in and stealing their data? How's that for an idea there, Corky?
Why do people keep parroting this nonsense? It is security. It's just not total (or in some cases even nearly adequate) security.
Obscurity makes it more difficult to break into something, therefore it improves security. Do you know that you probably use security through obscurity every day? Namely your PIN numberis obscured. Someone looks over your shoulder and your security is shot.
The problem with security through obscurity is when you overestimate its effectiveness, which is often very low.
We have a whole generation of people, likely the same ones who parrot "never ever use GOTO, my teacher tought me that", who overuse that tired nonsense about security through obscurity in every circumstance.
OK, you go do $200k worth of damage to a casino or bank lobby and we'll see how well you fare in court. You do understand that when someone gets the security guys rolling after a break-in it costs a lot of manpower to respond, right?
Umm, what kind of blathering numbskull would pay $100 less for the iPad 3 over the iPad 2? Why wouldn't they just spring the extra $100 for an extra few years of relevance?
Slashdot Mirror
Uhh, he will. Along with the SATA3 ports that will. What in the world are you talking about?
Microsoft is guilty of being too successful. That's it. Any "law" they've broken is post facto. Some bureaucrat can look at some business arrangement and say it's "anti-competitive". What the fuck is the definition of "anti-competitive"? It's whatever your opponents can convince some government flunky it is.
They haven't been "convicted" of shit. They've been sued in civil court, consented to specific agreements to avoid bullshit lawsuits, or been told by heavy handed bureaucrats in Brussels to pay up or else. That's it.
So? Ford hurt many buggy whip makers and horse breeders with his mass production of the automobile, was he evil too?
Exactly. I even use it in the var x = foo() case, but that's because much like the honey badger I just don't give a shit. ctrl-space and hover over tells me everything I need to know.
Lol, yeah. Was going to write same (seemingly obvious to me and you) reply. What in the world is he talking about? They certainly can change time (the time it takes to download shit).
I have something better than iPhone - a Galaxy Nexus and I'm getting same plan. They throttle at 5 gigs, but I understand and have no issue with this.
I have a sense this is an entitlement issue. People feel entitled to unlimited _and_ unthrottled data, when it doesn't seem AT&T is promising that. Maybe AT&T just needs to make clear that you get X gigs of data at 4g speeds, and unlimited data beyond that at slower speeds. I have a feeling people would still cry about it.
Either AT&T is false advertising, or people are confused as to what "unlimited data" means.
You can get unlimited data and still be throttled. Those are not contradictory. In fact I'm on T-Mobile's prepaid plan, $30 and I get "unlimited" data. But guess what, they clearly state that it's unlimited and only up to 5 gigs of it is at 3g speeds. I understand this, and agree to it.
So someone with a clear head please explain, is this just bullshit whining of people who don't understand that there is no _speed_ component in the phrase "unlimited data" and it's perfectly legitimate to throttle at some point as long as it's disclosed, or is it truly AT&T advertising unlimited data at guaranteed 3g or 4g speeds?
Sure, things change. I don't know what that has to do with anything. Someone was saying "somebody oughta..." prosecute Bush/Cheney, and I demonstrated there is nothing an American court can do and certainly nothing a Kangaroo International court can do. Like fucking _Russia_ or _China_ has the moral standing to make a stink about a US President not following international law? A joke.
By whom? What US law prevents a US President from using waterboarding on a non-US citizen on foreign soil? If you can point me to that very specific US law then maybe I'll agree.
Intel is a manufacturing company. Spinning off their foundries would be like McDonald's spinning off their hamburger business.
Would be bad business for Intel in some ways. They are competing with those chips (ARM) and it seems silly to me that they would offer their _massive_ competitive advantage (top flight manufacturing with large capacity) to a competitor.
They could only manufacture using a previous generation process, I guess. Make their Atom chips on e.g. 14nm and only offer 22nm fabbing for third parties.
No such thing. Good luck with the US allowing foreign nations to prosecute a sitting or former US President for "war crimes".
War crimes is just something the most powerful nations define to use as a tool against the less powerful nations for not playing by their rules. If you think it's something used against the US's, Russias, Chinas of the world then you are sadly deluded.
Treason. Pfft. A word both wingnuts on the left and wingnuts on the right love to throw around.
Good luck with that, wingnut.
Lol, yes it's too much to ask. Charged with what, specifically? You're being ridiculous.
Very few people do real work with tablets. 97% of usage is to browse the web and play games.
I'm not real happy with MS on that, but FAT32 and filesystem implementation specifics are at least reasonable patents. Squarish, "thinner" tablets? Unlock screens? Yeah, not so much.
I really, really hope we see a replay of the 80's again and that when MS gets Win8 with a similar experience on PC's, tablets, and phones that Apple goes the way of the dinosaur.
Yeah, Slashdot is full of people with very little experience of the real world. It's kind of mesmerizing sometimes.
"Microsoft? Pfft, who's that? Like anyone in the world is using their stuff. They'll be dead in a few years!"
I'll take Microsoft over Apple anytime. Apple is proving to be evil incarnate, while Microsoft was just brutal in business occasionally.
Apple is going full retard with patents. You never go full retard.
Oh God, please spare me. I'm sure you'll be cool when someone "copies" your Social Security number, copies your voice as you talk to a 1-900 sex number, and copies all your credit card numbers and receipts. I mean information wants to be freeeeeeee! Right?
It's literally nothing like that situation.
He stole data. The holes weren't obvious or trivial. They now have to hope he didn't actually sell the data, or that someone didn't hack it from _him_.
So other than every facet of the situation being totally different, I guess you're right it's similar other than that.
Right. Which is...illegal.
What a bunch of nonsense. You're not fooling anyone. How about _real_ ethical hackers find the vulnerability and report it to Facebook without breaking in and stealing their data? How's that for an idea there, Corky?
Security through obscurity is not security.
Why do people keep parroting this nonsense? It is security. It's just not total (or in some cases even nearly adequate) security.
Obscurity makes it more difficult to break into something, therefore it improves security. Do you know that you probably use security through obscurity every day? Namely your PIN numberis obscured. Someone looks over your shoulder and your security is shot.
The problem with security through obscurity is when you overestimate its effectiveness, which is often very low.
We have a whole generation of people, likely the same ones who parrot "never ever use GOTO, my teacher tought me that", who overuse that tired nonsense about security through obscurity in every circumstance.
The risk was when he stole the data, not when he broke in.
OK, you go do $200k worth of damage to a casino or bank lobby and we'll see how well you fare in court. You do understand that when someone gets the security guys rolling after a break-in it costs a lot of manpower to respond, right?
Umm, what kind of blathering numbskull would pay $100 less for the iPad 3 over the iPad 2? Why wouldn't they just spring the extra $100 for an extra few years of relevance?