I think you're right in that I do need to do some more reading into this. I'm not sure if we're talking about whether Apple can decode the device or if Apple can lift the gates on gov't brute forcing it.
It seems more that Apple cannot cooperate, which is what will keep the FBI from storming their facilities in the long run; their "unwillingness" to cooperate is simply cheap PR riding on the back of their inability to do so.
They cannot cooperate because they intentionally engineered their OS so they couldn't comply. It may be for PR purchases, after all in a post-Snowden world we do care about phones that the gov't can't sniff, but it certainly didn't come 'cheap'.
I'm suggesting it's not an issue for the same reason people sharing images, gifs, videos, etc isn't an issue for a bazillion other websites that have been in operation for a very long time.
I do not understand this fear towards the government. If the government wants your data, it will get your data. If you don't want the government to get your data, stop putting it on your phone.
Part of the concern about the government getting your data is that it needs to follow the established procedures to obtain it. There's nothing good about them being able to take it without a warrant. Even 'probable cause' is so vague, at least where I live, that a DUI traffic stop could end in one's phone getting searched. Why? What does the phone show related to that stop? You don't have to be up to anything illegal for this to be scary!
This is not at all about getting away with crime it's about reigning in the power of the gov't. Sometimes it's a matter of getting the laws changed, sometimes it's a matter of evolving the technology. What you're suggesting is akin to giving law enforcement the keys to your house and inviting them to come rooting around your closets on their whim. You don't actually have to have anything to hide to not want that.
I'll buy that. Although I don't know what you'd do to secure a printer that you wouldn't do with any other device on the network. It has to transmit and receive.
Perhaps you shouldn't be using your personal phone for criminal activities.
They are, by definition, looking into your phone to see if you've performed any criminal activities, meaning they're looking whether you're a criminal or not. Here's a practical example for you: Suppose you get pulled over for a traffic stop and they decide to rifle through your phone. You're then busted and jailed because furry-porn is illegal in your state. You'll change your tune then.
Also, given that this is public news, you think law enforcement would try replacing the hardware with one that they know will "shit its memory"?
This is EXACTLY the point I was making. They've been deterred from screwing with the hardware, and now it's an issue of the legality of man-handling people, which is something that Apple did not invent.
The gov't can legally break into your house, but the question of whether or not they can compel you to confess things like passwords is being challenged right now. Apple took a step in our favor. Sorry, I know that's hard to hear, but they did.
If you think relying solely on fingerprint will stop law enforcement from getting into your phone?
I think my phone shitting its memory when Law Enforcement tries to tamper with the hardware is a good thing, not the end-all-be-all solution to the world's problems.
They will force you to put your finger on the reader.
Perhaps. But they only have a 48 hour window. The "everything or nothing" philosophy isn't serving you.
Pftbtbt... this isn't real malware because it requires side-loading, and everyone knows that's super dangerous so you should only use the wall^H^H^H^H store. Let's meet over in the next thread so I can tell you about how awesome Android is because you can sideload apps!
I'm pretty sure the 'printer toner' reference was in spilling it, not that a toner cartridge was infecting the network. Toner is the office equivalent of glitter.
If you say stupid shit here, it gets culled or refuted and then buried pretty quickly...
Hahaha! Bull. When one says stupid shit here they, more often than not, fight to the end to save face. Either they come up with some weird rationale that backs them up or they try to change the topic so they can fight over there instead. At least on social media someone will back down if they're clearly in the wrong, not wanting the stink of that to tarnish their name. Here on Slashdot there's nothing to lose but pride, that's why this place is so hostile.
But you can also never reason with them. One of the reasons I don't use social media is I don't feel like engaging with random idiots who are either some tenuous friend of a friend coworker's cousin by marriage 14 places removed or complete strangers who just happened on a comment. Dealing with that crap can sometimes be draining even if you're only reading their comment and then completely ignoring it afterward. It takes up mental cycles no matter what, and when some of these people are trying to get a deliberate rise out of you, you occasionally feel a stab of wanting to respond to the provocation.
How is that any different than posting on Slashdot? Surely it's just as stressful dealing with all the contrarianism here.
I mentioned before that Slashdot has spent years breeding ignorance about how patents work. This +5, Informative is such a great example.
I know there's a LOT I've missed out, but you get the point. I've been building my own PCs since 1988. All using modular components.
This person replied believing that Microsoft had patented any and all modular configurations, as opposed to a very specific implementation that will only apply to its own standard. It's not his fault, either. Typically when Slashdot posts a patent story the headline reads something like this: "Apple Patents Page Turn Animation", leading to a discussion thread where people cry 'prior art!' and rattle off all the zillions of times they've seen any old page turn animation. It should read: "Apple Patents a Specific Page Turn Animation", which would have lead to a much more fruitful discussion. But, nah, waving pitchforks over patents spins the ad-counter. Anyway, this article did at least add the word 'a' to the title, but it's so similar to the sensationalist bullshit we've seen before that it's not very noticeable. I don't blame anyone for missing the distinction.
So, to answer his question: No, none of what he you described is prior art. But since the article didn't bother to link to the patent, and I'm too lazy to dig it up, the critical bit of information about what you WOULD need to find isn't going to turn up in this post. If the patent says that the modular PC requires a green Cabbage Patch Doll wearing suspenders, then you have to find previous PCs with green Cabbage Patch Dolls wearing suspenders. A PC with a red Cabbage Patch doll wouldn't count.
Heh. Anybody who has encountered someone like you, one who must save face at all costs and cry "troll!!!" when the debate doesn't go their way, will understand my amusement.
Anyway, be my guest. I look forward to you showing other people how you suddenly decided to find a shallow way to declare victory immediately after pointing out that you contradicted your own argument. That behaviour is so common here I'm impressed you actually think I'd feel threatened! "Oh no, he might show people what a bad sport he is!"
You have a good day as well, thank you for the amusement!
Jumping on a post, taking it offtopic and adding nothing but noise...
It's not off-topic, nor is it noise. It's just unpleasant to you because your pride is hurt. We could have had an interesting discussion by now, plenty of opportunities for it. "Why would radio waves be better than accelerometers?" "Why is sleeping with a smart phone in your pocket silly?" "What are the advantages of a dedicated device?" And so on. For some reason you didn't want that. Can't blame me for that one, either.
Please answer the question I have asked several times.
Oh, now that you've tripped over your own argument you want to change the topic just one sentence after bitching about allegedly going off topic. Okie doke, I'm game.
The answer is: It's entertaining. I've never seen someone fight so hard to save face after these humbling moments. I'm just wondering if you're going to pound your keyboard quietly into the night or do the sensible thing and just own up to the fact that your remark was in haste.
Slashdot Mirror
I think you're right in that I do need to do some more reading into this. I'm not sure if we're talking about whether Apple can decode the device or if Apple can lift the gates on gov't brute forcing it.
It seems more that Apple cannot cooperate, which is what will keep the FBI from storming their facilities in the long run; their "unwillingness" to cooperate is simply cheap PR riding on the back of their inability to do so.
They cannot cooperate because they intentionally engineered their OS so they couldn't comply. It may be for PR purchases, after all in a post-Snowden world we do care about phones that the gov't can't sniff, but it certainly didn't come 'cheap'.
Heh. Google's basically saying that the Walled Garden is a more secure approach. Let that sink in for a moment.
I'm suggesting it's not an issue for the same reason people sharing images, gifs, videos, etc isn't an issue for a bazillion other websites that have been in operation for a very long time.
Yeah because all those lawsuits against the GIF sharing community.
Thank you!
I do not understand this fear towards the government. If the government wants your data, it will get your data. If you don't want the government to get your data, stop putting it on your phone.
Part of the concern about the government getting your data is that it needs to follow the established procedures to obtain it. There's nothing good about them being able to take it without a warrant. Even 'probable cause' is so vague, at least where I live, that a DUI traffic stop could end in one's phone getting searched. Why? What does the phone show related to that stop? You don't have to be up to anything illegal for this to be scary!
This is not at all about getting away with crime it's about reigning in the power of the gov't. Sometimes it's a matter of getting the laws changed, sometimes it's a matter of evolving the technology. What you're suggesting is akin to giving law enforcement the keys to your house and inviting them to come rooting around your closets on their whim. You don't actually have to have anything to hide to not want that.
Camshaft hooked up to my Raspberry Pi.
Ooooo careful with that... the phrase "good driver" is rarely associated with Linux.
I'll buy that. Although I don't know what you'd do to secure a printer that you wouldn't do with any other device on the network. It has to transmit and receive.
I did not know that. I wonder why my AppleTV or any of my game consoles don't respect that either?
The cable box can't tell when your tv is on.
Perhaps you shouldn't be using your personal phone for criminal activities.
They are, by definition, looking into your phone to see if you've performed any criminal activities, meaning they're looking whether you're a criminal or not. Here's a practical example for you: Suppose you get pulled over for a traffic stop and they decide to rifle through your phone. You're then busted and jailed because furry-porn is illegal in your state. You'll change your tune then.
Again, I don't think the original post was about the printer being an infection point.
Also, given that this is public news, you think law enforcement would try replacing the hardware with one that they know will "shit its memory"?
This is EXACTLY the point I was making. They've been deterred from screwing with the hardware, and now it's an issue of the legality of man-handling people, which is something that Apple did not invent.
The gov't can legally break into your house, but the question of whether or not they can compel you to confess things like passwords is being challenged right now. Apple took a step in our favor. Sorry, I know that's hard to hear, but they did.
If you think relying solely on fingerprint will stop law enforcement from getting into your phone?
I think my phone shitting its memory when Law Enforcement tries to tamper with the hardware is a good thing, not the end-all-be-all solution to the world's problems.
They will force you to put your finger on the reader.
Perhaps. But they only have a 48 hour window. The "everything or nothing" philosophy isn't serving you.
Fine, it's vendor lock-in that makes it harder for law-enforcement to get into my phone. I'll take it.
Pftbtbt... this isn't real malware because it requires side-loading, and everyone knows that's super dangerous so you should only use the wall^H^H^H^H store. Let's meet over in the next thread so I can tell you about how awesome Android is because you can sideload apps!
I'm pretty sure the 'printer toner' reference was in spilling it, not that a toner cartridge was infecting the network. Toner is the office equivalent of glitter.
Oops. I wasn't intending to imply you were the AC. I apologize.
I love how an AC came out of the woodwork to illustrate my point.
If you say stupid shit here, it gets culled or refuted and then buried pretty quickly...
Hahaha! Bull. When one says stupid shit here they, more often than not, fight to the end to save face. Either they come up with some weird rationale that backs them up or they try to change the topic so they can fight over there instead. At least on social media someone will back down if they're clearly in the wrong, not wanting the stink of that to tarnish their name. Here on Slashdot there's nothing to lose but pride, that's why this place is so hostile.
But you can also never reason with them. One of the reasons I don't use social media is I don't feel like engaging with random idiots who are either some tenuous friend of a friend coworker's cousin by marriage 14 places removed or complete strangers who just happened on a comment. Dealing with that crap can sometimes be draining even if you're only reading their comment and then completely ignoring it afterward. It takes up mental cycles no matter what, and when some of these people are trying to get a deliberate rise out of you, you occasionally feel a stab of wanting to respond to the provocation.
How is that any different than posting on Slashdot? Surely it's just as stressful dealing with all the contrarianism here.
I mentioned before that Slashdot has spent years breeding ignorance about how patents work. This +5, Informative is such a great example.
I know there's a LOT I've missed out, but you get the point. I've been building my own PCs since 1988. All using modular components.
This person replied believing that Microsoft had patented any and all modular configurations, as opposed to a very specific implementation that will only apply to its own standard. It's not his fault, either. Typically when Slashdot posts a patent story the headline reads something like this: "Apple Patents Page Turn Animation", leading to a discussion thread where people cry 'prior art!' and rattle off all the zillions of times they've seen any old page turn animation. It should read: "Apple Patents a Specific Page Turn Animation", which would have lead to a much more fruitful discussion. But, nah, waving pitchforks over patents spins the ad-counter. Anyway, this article did at least add the word 'a' to the title, but it's so similar to the sensationalist bullshit we've seen before that it's not very noticeable. I don't blame anyone for missing the distinction.
So, to answer his question: No, none of what he you described is prior art. But since the article didn't bother to link to the patent, and I'm too lazy to dig it up, the critical bit of information about what you WOULD need to find isn't going to turn up in this post. If the patent says that the modular PC requires a green Cabbage Patch Doll wearing suspenders, then you have to find previous PCs with green Cabbage Patch Dolls wearing suspenders. A PC with a red Cabbage Patch doll wouldn't count.
Heh. Anybody who has encountered someone like you, one who must save face at all costs and cry "troll!!!" when the debate doesn't go their way, will understand my amusement.
Anyway, be my guest. I look forward to you showing other people how you suddenly decided to find a shallow way to declare victory immediately after pointing out that you contradicted your own argument. That behaviour is so common here I'm impressed you actually think I'd feel threatened! "Oh no, he might show people what a bad sport he is!"
You have a good day as well, thank you for the amusement!
Jumping on a post, taking it offtopic and adding nothing but noise...
It's not off-topic, nor is it noise. It's just unpleasant to you because your pride is hurt. We could have had an interesting discussion by now, plenty of opportunities for it. "Why would radio waves be better than accelerometers?" "Why is sleeping with a smart phone in your pocket silly?" "What are the advantages of a dedicated device?" And so on. For some reason you didn't want that. Can't blame me for that one, either.
Please answer the question I have asked several times.
Oh, now that you've tripped over your own argument you want to change the topic just one sentence after bitching about allegedly going off topic. Okie doke, I'm game.
The answer is: It's entertaining. I've never seen someone fight so hard to save face after these humbling moments. I'm just wondering if you're going to pound your keyboard quietly into the night or do the sensible thing and just own up to the fact that your remark was in haste.