I don't know about the OP reasoning, but in my opinion, publishing full details including full card numbers and pin codes was a bad idea. Publish enough to demonstrate that you do in fact have the data, but not enough to make it trivial for someone to use the data. Partial card number, enough that the cardholder can be reasonably certain that's his card and the last 2-3 digits of the pin. It's one thing to go public and embarrass the banks, it's another to expose 3M customers to fraud and abuse by making it easy for the crooks.
Of course, for the public, an even more common unit of energy is the kilowatt-hour (kWh). Scientists, and some engineers use Joules, but it's not common outside certain fields.
It's not a bad idea, but it's a terrible implementation. It should be a textbook example of what not to do in the field of information presentation. It puts form over function, makes it difficult to read, hard to find info, and makes terrible use of screen space.
Or click on any one of dozens of apps that automatically enable it (e.g. most/all of the "social reader" apps from sites like the Washington Post, HuffPo, etc.)
Well, there are some types of creation you can do on an iPad or similar device, particularly basic photo and creation and minor editing. Some graphics arts, and some music. Text entry is tougher, but the new dictation features may change that. For the types of creation work most home users do, that might be sufficient.
However, writers, photographers, video editors, web designers, programmers, engineers, accountants, etc will find such devices too limiting for the types of tasks they regularly perform. So, you're going to see a continuation of two fairly distinct categories of products target at those different market segments. Any attempts to merge them will fail until someone addresses the differences in user interaction models (and I don't know that will ever happen, but I don't think it's likely). While the consumer focused market is going to be the larger volume, those other markets are still a very large market so I don't see it going away or prices increasing significantly. Prices may increase somewhat at volume shifts to the consumer devices, but since much of the electronics and manufacturing technology is shared, volume increases there will help keep down the costs for the other market.
P.S. your signature line highlights one of the problems with making TV more interactive. You either need a dedicated controller/keyboard/mouse, or a new interaction model, cause a touchscreen controller is most useful when you're looking at the touchscreen.
A smart TV is a monitor with a built-in computer that lets someone get on Facebook and watch Netflix. An iMac is a computer with a built-in monitor that lets someone get on Facebook and watch Netflix. If there are "completely different markets and expectations", as you put it, between "a monitor with a built-in computer" and "a computer with a built-in monitor", where do these "completely different markets and expectations" ultimately come from?
A TV, even a "smart" TV is primarily a media consumption device. The purpose is viewing media created elsewhere, usually by more than one person at a time. Changing channels, or selecting a different media source is about the extent of your interaction with a TV. Smart TV's don't change that model, nor will they until someone creates a whole new way of interacting with a TV (e.g. new input devices/methods that work while a group of people a sitting on the couch 10 ft from it).
A computer is a content creation device, thus is has a keyboard, mouse, and it designed for a single user at a time.
The reason the iPad is such a success is that Apple realized this difference and made a tablet that is primarily a consumption device. Sure, you CAN type on it, but it's used almost entirely for consumption. The touch screen works for interactivity because you're close to it and because you typically have only a single user at a time.
First, I'm glad he won. It shouldn't have gotten to that point, but he did what he had to do.
I am typing on one of the affected machines now. The 8600M GT in this one failed in January of this year, 4 yrs & 4 months after purchase. Apple refused to replace it under warranty because it was beyond 4 years. I was not happy about that.
Contrary to some previous posts, repair cost for these machines isn't $1000+. In store repair quote was around $450. However, Apple also offers "depot service", flat rate repair on this machine is $310. I couldn't afford that at the time, but in March, I had the money and took it in for repair. It came back less than a week later, repaired, NO CHARGE. No explanation of why it was free, but it was free.
So, Apple certainly could have handled it better up front, but in the end, they did take care of me. I was without the use of my machine for about 10 weeks because I didn't have money to authorize the repair. Granted, it still has a GPU that can fail at any time, and make the machine useless. But the reality is that I have a 4.5 yr old machine that is still working, still very usable, and is likely to continue for a few more years. I say I got my money's worth, even with the GPU defect.
Replace "TV" with "PC" and you have an argument for locking down computers too, and for locking down routers so that people can't install aftermarket firmware that allows a separate guest network. Or what am I still missing?
No, you don't. Two very different classes of devices with completely different markets and expectations.
I have heard of it in theory, but I have never had a chance to use a home router whose stock firmware can handle two SSIDs. So I guess most people would need to buy a second AP.
Then you're using the wrong routers. I have a couple that support guest networks out of the box, and those are a few years old. I've installed dozens that support guest networks.
Because it's acting as a NAS to which the authorized user can upload video to a connected USB hard drive.
Bad idea. Get a separate NAS. A TV is the viewing/consumption device, not a server.
With what certificate? All Android apps are cryptographically signed, but almost all devices allow use of applications signed with a self-signed certificate because much of Android security relies on key continuity management. And what's the key difference between a "firmware update" and an "app" anyway?
Pull your head out. Signed with a certificate from the manufacturer, and for which the trusted root is in the currently running firmware of course. If a vendor allows user loaded apps on the TV, both the user and the vendor deserve all the headaches of dealing with the malware. It's 100% predictable, and it's a bad idea.
In other words, do not allow use of a Nintendo DS on the same AP. It's a very popular device that supports only WEP. Even the DSi and 3DS, which support WPA, drop back to WEP when playing DS games.
Which would hurt the use of portable smart TVs such as Amazon's Kindle Fire, ASUS's Transformer, Apple's iPad, or any other tablet that can connect to complimentary open Wi-Fi in hotels and restaurants.
1. No unencrypted incoming connections. The only incoming connection possibly allowed is a limited function remote control (turn off, if it has DVR capabilities, allow changes to the recording schedule). Why does a device for viewing content need incoming connections or a web server?
2. No OTA updates. Firmware updates must be cryptographically signed, and the update must be initiated by the device itself, not "pushed". Signed updates can also be installed from a USB flash drive, no network required.
3. Built-in firewall. If it's based on Linux/BSD, set up IP tables, use Shorewall, etc.
4. If it supports Wi-Fi, Require WPA/WPA2 connections. Do not allow use of WEP or no encryption.
Obviously, that's not an exhaustive list, but if they follow those, the chances of a successful penetration decrease significantly.
He didn't just second guess his instruments, he also ignored his captain, and did so while impaired. I understand that impaired, groggy state when waking quite well, but he still should have known not to react.
But they need to monetize the Windows brand to extract maximal shareholder value by strategically extending it across all their product lines in a cohesive fashion thus creating synergistic increases in customer mindshare. Ultimately, this will amplify their revenue and deliver continued growth.
Well, here we are almost a week later, and they're not in the top 100 phones & accessories anymore.
The Black is down to #3 in phones with plans, and the Cyan has dropped to #8. The next best selling WP7.x is the HTC Titan II at #40.
In Unlocked phones, the Lumia 900 isn't in the top 100, and the highest ranked WP7.x is a Samsung Focus I917 at #89, the only WP in the top 100.
And that's with the $100 bill credit making them effectively free with 2yr contract, and no major new phone announcements or introductions pushing them down.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know about the OP reasoning, but in my opinion, publishing full details including full card numbers and pin codes was a bad idea. Publish enough to demonstrate that you do in fact have the data, but not enough to make it trivial for someone to use the data. Partial card number, enough that the cardholder can be reasonably certain that's his card and the last 2-3 digits of the pin. It's one thing to go public and embarrass the banks, it's another to expose 3M customers to fraud and abuse by making it easy for the crooks.
So, iiNet didn't just win, they smacked down just about all of plaintiff's claims, and made them pay all of the defendant's costs?
That's a big win.
"First time accepted submitter gstrickler" != "at least once rejected submitter gstrickler".
FTFY
Of course, for the public, an even more common unit of energy is the kilowatt-hour (kWh). Scientists, and some engineers use Joules, but it's not common outside certain fields.
At which point, you have a malicious prosecution claim, and reason to request censure of their Atty.
RTFA, he works for both MS & Oracle.
... and he is now analyzing FRAND issues for both Microsoft and Oracle.
Apps that tell you in fine print. Apps that if you don't install them, return you to your FB feed rather than let you read the content.
There is/was also a "Try Timeline Now" button, that enabled Timeline without telling the user that you couldn't turn it off after you "try it".
But the point is, users don't have to click "Get Timeline Now" to enable it as the GP stated.
So, while you are technically correct, you've completely missed the point.
it was brought here by a European Swallow?
Does it work for politicians too? Most of them need to get a grip, and need a brain implant or transplant.
It's not a bad idea, but it's a terrible implementation. It should be a textbook example of what not to do in the field of information presentation. It puts form over function, makes it difficult to read, hard to find info, and makes terrible use of screen space.
Aside from that, it's just fine.
Or click on any one of dozens of apps that automatically enable it (e.g. most/all of the "social reader" apps from sites like the Washington Post, HuffPo, etc.)
Well, there are some types of creation you can do on an iPad or similar device, particularly basic photo and creation and minor editing. Some graphics arts, and some music. Text entry is tougher, but the new dictation features may change that. For the types of creation work most home users do, that might be sufficient.
However, writers, photographers, video editors, web designers, programmers, engineers, accountants, etc will find such devices too limiting for the types of tasks they regularly perform. So, you're going to see a continuation of two fairly distinct categories of products target at those different market segments. Any attempts to merge them will fail until someone addresses the differences in user interaction models (and I don't know that will ever happen, but I don't think it's likely). While the consumer focused market is going to be the larger volume, those other markets are still a very large market so I don't see it going away or prices increasing significantly. Prices may increase somewhat at volume shifts to the consumer devices, but since much of the electronics and manufacturing technology is shared, volume increases there will help keep down the costs for the other market.
P.S. your signature line highlights one of the problems with making TV more interactive. You either need a dedicated controller/keyboard/mouse, or a new interaction model, cause a touchscreen controller is most useful when you're looking at the touchscreen.
A smart TV is a monitor with a built-in computer that lets someone get on Facebook and watch Netflix. An iMac is a computer with a built-in monitor that lets someone get on Facebook and watch Netflix. If there are "completely different markets and expectations", as you put it, between "a monitor with a built-in computer" and "a computer with a built-in monitor", where do these "completely different markets and expectations" ultimately come from?
A TV, even a "smart" TV is primarily a media consumption device. The purpose is viewing media created elsewhere, usually by more than one person at a time. Changing channels, or selecting a different media source is about the extent of your interaction with a TV. Smart TV's don't change that model, nor will they until someone creates a whole new way of interacting with a TV (e.g. new input devices/methods that work while a group of people a sitting on the couch 10 ft from it).
A computer is a content creation device, thus is has a keyboard, mouse, and it designed for a single user at a time.
The reason the iPad is such a success is that Apple realized this difference and made a tablet that is primarily a consumption device. Sure, you CAN type on it, but it's used almost entirely for consumption. The touch screen works for interactivity because you're close to it and because you typically have only a single user at a time.
First, I'm glad he won. It shouldn't have gotten to that point, but he did what he had to do.
I am typing on one of the affected machines now. The 8600M GT in this one failed in January of this year, 4 yrs & 4 months after purchase. Apple refused to replace it under warranty because it was beyond 4 years. I was not happy about that.
Contrary to some previous posts, repair cost for these machines isn't $1000+. In store repair quote was around $450. However, Apple also offers "depot service", flat rate repair on this machine is $310. I couldn't afford that at the time, but in March, I had the money and took it in for repair. It came back less than a week later, repaired, NO CHARGE. No explanation of why it was free, but it was free.
So, Apple certainly could have handled it better up front, but in the end, they did take care of me. I was without the use of my machine for about 10 weeks because I didn't have money to authorize the repair. Granted, it still has a GPU that can fail at any time, and make the machine useless. But the reality is that I have a 4.5 yr old machine that is still working, still very usable, and is likely to continue for a few more years. I say I got my money's worth, even with the GPU defect.
Replace "TV" with "PC" and you have an argument for locking down computers too, and for locking down routers so that people can't install aftermarket firmware that allows a separate guest network. Or what am I still missing?
No, you don't. Two very different classes of devices with completely different markets and expectations.
I have heard of it in theory, but I have never had a chance to use a home router whose stock firmware can handle two SSIDs. So I guess most people would need to buy a second AP.
Then you're using the wrong routers. I have a couple that support guest networks out of the box, and those are a few years old. I've installed dozens that support guest networks.
What's scary is that the author thinks 1% is scary. Let's talk again if they hit 10%.
Because it's acting as a NAS to which the authorized user can upload video to a connected USB hard drive.
Bad idea. Get a separate NAS. A TV is the viewing/consumption device, not a server.
With what certificate? All Android apps are cryptographically signed, but almost all devices allow use of applications signed with a self-signed certificate because much of Android security relies on key continuity management. And what's the key difference between a "firmware update" and an "app" anyway?
Pull your head out. Signed with a certificate from the manufacturer, and for which the trusted root is in the currently running firmware of course. If a vendor allows user loaded apps on the TV, both the user and the vendor deserve all the headaches of dealing with the malware. It's 100% predictable, and it's a bad idea.
In other words, do not allow use of a Nintendo DS on the same AP. It's a very popular device that supports only WEP. Even the DSi and 3DS, which support WPA, drop back to WEP when playing DS games.
Which would hurt the use of portable smart TVs such as Amazon's Kindle Fire, ASUS's Transformer, Apple's iPad, or any other tablet that can connect to complimentary open Wi-Fi in hotels and restaurants.
Ever heard of a guest network?
Does that mean I win this round of MBA BS?
P.S. Sorry about the eyes.
1. No unencrypted incoming connections. The only incoming connection possibly allowed is a limited function remote control (turn off, if it has DVR capabilities, allow changes to the recording schedule). Why does a device for viewing content need incoming connections or a web server?
2. No OTA updates. Firmware updates must be cryptographically signed, and the update must be initiated by the device itself, not "pushed". Signed updates can also be installed from a USB flash drive, no network required.
3. Built-in firewall. If it's based on Linux/BSD, set up IP tables, use Shorewall, etc.
4. If it supports Wi-Fi, Require WPA/WPA2 connections. Do not allow use of WEP or no encryption.
Obviously, that's not an exhaustive list, but if they follow those, the chances of a successful penetration decrease significantly.
He didn't just second guess his instruments, he also ignored his captain, and did so while impaired. I understand that impaired, groggy state when waking quite well, but he still should have known not to react.
But they need to monetize the Windows brand to extract maximal shareholder value by strategically extending it across all their product lines in a cohesive fashion thus creating synergistic increases in customer mindshare. Ultimately, this will amplify their revenue and deliver continued growth.
This runs sp1 (i.e. WP 7.5)
Well, here we are almost a week later, and they're not in the top 100 phones & accessories anymore.
The Black is down to #3 in phones with plans, and the Cyan has dropped to #8. The next best selling WP7.x is the HTC Titan II at #40.
In Unlocked phones, the Lumia 900 isn't in the top 100, and the highest ranked WP7.x is a Samsung Focus I917 at #89, the only WP in the top 100.
And that's with the $100 bill credit making them effectively free with 2yr contract, and no major new phone announcements or introductions pushing them down.
Shhh! You'll spoil my plans.
Outlaw them and put out a bounty (or a Bounty?)