But I compared them head to head and at the time with the Tivo Roamio OTA system, like only about $299 and included lifetime menu/guide service, it was a much better deal for me to hook to my antenna for all my OTA/DVR needs.
Program guide data is transmitted over the air for free. For $300 you could buy a four tuner home run and three separate 4k SBCs running Kodi.
Is there any public, free, satellite TV? It sound like it would be a fun hobby and hopefully PBS / NASA / public government feeds/research-feeds/etc is out there as content
If you are living in the US, English only speaker and not a Jesus freak there is absolutely nothing.
You DO realize that the entire concept of "the desktop" has drastically changed from 10-20 years ago, right?
Nope, mine looks and works remarkably similar which is kind of a let down. Years ago tech gods were spending at least some time making shit better... today they are spending all their time trying to fuck you.
Today "the desktop" means pretty much everything from a tablet to a workstation.
Sorry I don't recognize that definition of desktop and don't know of anyone else who does. Nobody thinks tablet when "desktop" is invoked.
but does most of its work over a network and can run any web-based application that comprises the majority of apps today. Wintel-only "desktop" is a dinosaur that is dead, just too stupid to lay down.
The only difference between now and 20 years ago is most of the time when normal people sat in front of their computer it was to click the 'AOL' or Internet dialer.
For a huge number of users email / communications / Internet was always the point of owning a computer. Nothing substantive has changed.
The biggest challenge for the family was going off Microsoft Office products (Outlook, Word, Excel and Powerpoint) and moving to the Google (and Apple) versions.
Google office suite is also malware. All you've done is rearrange deck chairs on sinking ship.
Really nice to see ongoing work on bringing windows compatibility, various graphics stacks and traditional X server replacements up to speed. Sooner Microsoft's Malware operating system dies the better off we'll all be.
"Cloud Industry Forum, for the first time, businesses are spending more on cloud than on internal infrastructure. The cloud is taking over the role that data centers used to play"
Translation to English:
Rent a server industry forum, for the first time, business are spending more money renting other peoples servers than owning and operating their own. Rented servers is taking over the role that owning your own servers used to play.
In its first Voice of the Enterprise survey, 451 Research predicted that 60 percent of nearly 1,000 IT leaders surveyed plan to run the majority of their IT off premises by 2019
Translation to English:
Server rental industry marketing hacks release survey showing favorable outlook. Be cool like everyone else and rent a server instead of buying your own.
Gartner states that 80 percent of internally developed software is now either cloud-enabled or cloud-native.
I tried to translate this to English but my translation software crashed.
I used to work in a technical support role. We used a chat service provider called comm100 which does show the agent what you type in real time. At first, I felt dirty like I was invading their privacy
Everyone that designs and installs shit like this knows damn well what they are doing is wrong. They persist only because they get away with it.
but it does help efficiency considerably.
Ends justify means?
but also consider that the support agent is usually multi-tasking between clients, so being able to know what you are typing as you are typing it is a real time saver.
If knowing is a timesaver and that's truly the justification then the solution is both obvious and trivial. Provide proper feedback in UI design such that end user knows what's happening. This is a trivial and obvious solution. The fact it's not being done speaks volumes to the true intent which is entirely to deceive the customer.
If Microsoft can be sued for intentionally deceptive interfaces... why should these chat vendors and the companies who deploy them get a pass?
If spy speakers like echo started recording everything all the time and uploading it to Amazon/Google mothership while intentionally disabling the activation indicators to hide that fact from the end user would that be ok? Do you think they could manage to do that and successfully repel resulting lawsuits? Personally I very much doubt it.
Is this a big deal? I worked on a CSR chat system for a major clothing retailer back in the early 00's that had that feature. If I remember right, there was an ActiveX version for IE and a javascript version for anyone else and you configure it to see as the user typed or wait until they hit "Send". The idea was that if you watched the person type, the CSR could start to compose their answer so that there was a small delay as possible.
Yes of course this behavior is unacceptable. You are being dishonest with the customer. If you want to do this legitimately all you need to do is configure the interface such that what customer types appears in sent area of message box as CSR sees it so there is no confusion or assumptions about what is happening.
When you design a UI like this it's not materially different than creating an interface where dismissing an upgrade prompt causes Windows 10 to be installed. You know damn well what a particular UX design almost always with an explicit 'Send' button conveys to a normal person. This sort of shady behavior sure as heck is not that.
Would love to see some nuisance lawsuits over this shit.
I don't get it. Is this some kind of compression artifact? Intentional redaction?
The camera is stationary WRT ISS so how does blurriness follow the same position on the globe when everything around it and before and after remains in focus?
Was always curious why rowhammer still works after scramblers built into current day memory controllers. They explain some of the reason it still works on page 10.
S|TME (total memory encryption) should be completely effective against these types of problems in future hardware.
3. More efficient air conditioners. The best ACs use a 3rd the power of the worst. Wider adoption of ACs in India, China, and SE Asia is the biggest reason for growing CO2 emissions. We should have an $10M X-Prize for a better and cheaper AC.
4. More efficient and cost effective insulation, and improved passive heating systems for buildings.
Efficiency angle already well into diminishing returns territory especially heating and cooling scene. While it is physically possible to do some crazy shit like heat a mansion in sub-zero weather with a candle the reality is quite different.
5. Better sensors to detect people moving around in buildings. Only heat/cool/light where the people are.
This is often a counterproductive strategy for the most energy efficient heating and cooling technologies as a practical matter they operate by leveraging temperature differentials on a continuous basis. When you heat or cool a space it's not just the air and moisture content you are also heating or cooling solid matter in the environment which is 1000 times the density of air.
6. Better batteries. Wider adoption of electric cars.
7. Wider adoption of wind and solar, along with better storage, and better long distance transmission.
By far the biggest bang for the buck in energy space is development of dirt cheap batteries that don't suck ass in any way (low weight, high density, safe, operating temperatures, long life). If you can pull it off everything in the energy scene changes overnight.
9. Aggregated self-driving-delivery-on-demand services, so no one needs to drive to the grocery store to buy a jug of milk, or go to the post office to drop off a package.
If you want do something meaningful on the conservation front increasing household size is the most effective option available.
Iron fertilization of the oceans to generate plankton blooms. This will remove CO2 from the ocean, and increase fish harvests. People can eat more fish and less beef. Of all the geo-engineering proposals, this is the easiest and the most likely to work.
There are productive things that can be done with carbon without polluting the air and seas with crap and seeing what happens.
STP/biochar for example can provide best soils for growing crops while sequestering excess carbon.
1. Better and more available contraceptives for 3rd world women.
2. Better education, healthcare, higher literacy rates, and better sex ed for 3rd world women
In the long run, these first two solutions will likely have the greatest effect. No one will use less CO2 than the people that aren't born.
The 1st world has already turned the corner on both population growth and energy consumption. We need to help the rest of the world do the same, and do it faster.
No science supporter thinks population is either the problem or a useful solution.
Not while a 1st world person consumes 30 times the resources of a 3rd world person. Sex ed, condoms and an education are never going to result in a 30x drop off in 3rd world population.
Helping the third world rise is a nice thing to do. It can certainly yield some benefit on the margins (assistance with renewable energy technology, land use...etc) as they will rise regardless of whether they are assisted or not yet realistically in aggregate expecting this to have a positive effect on the environment is pure madness.
The ONLY viable solution at this point is advancing technology. Improved efficiency, better cheaper energy generation, storage and transmission.
I feel like I've entered the twilight zone when I read an argument that storing my work on my machine is dangerous while storing it anywhere else is considered safe.
Most browsers support local storage for applications. Websites are able to store data on your local computer in a local file store that only the site can access. Websites are currently also able to prompt you to upload files from your computer and save files to your computer.
Security has been compromised the moment my data isn't stored on my machine.
More likely it was compromised before that when software was loaded / executed from someone else's machine.
Virtually every internet service today is a major security breach.
People who don't want to be owned run software from vendors they trust and don't let it screw around on the Internet.
And when someone tries to come up with something to reduce the near-requirement that all data be given up from inception, people call it a security threat? WTF? That's some pretty rich spin control.
The reason this is a security threat is external web sites can gain access to modify your files. Imagine a browser dialogue that asks the user to upload a data file. The chooser selects file for upload and then at some future time website retains the capability to access and modify local file without prompting to insert a virus that is executed the next time data file is accessed or to exfiltrated additional data the user didn't intend to share.
Given that websites can already:
1. Store and manipulate data locally 2. Prompt for user file to upload 3. Prompt for user file to save/overwrite
The question is whether this feature serves sufficiently useful purpose to warrant risk given current capabilities or will it on balance be leveraged primarily for malicious intent. Well over 90% of security breaches are achieved by way of social engineering / tricking end users who frankly don't understand what all of these security dialogues mean.
massively abused and used to take over every poor sap's PC the moment it was deployed. Yet here we are, it's been around for years now, and somehow, presumably by blind luck rather than skill, they managed to make it secure.
What does Web USB have to do with granting web sites write access to local filesystem? I fail to see the linkage. They are two separate features with separate security properties. Each must be evaluated on the merits not by some ridiculous unfalsifiable false equivalence.
It has a metal case that conducts static charges to ground instead of building up and resetting USB interface and eventually frying the keyboard. My last one (Logitech) died this way.
It's not obnoxious. No ridiculous backlights and over the top gamer shit. I almost got the version with no printed labels.
Went with cherry blue to break habit of striking thru. It has helped to apply just enough pressure and slightly improve typing speed.
Volume control wheel is nice but the damn wheel is reversed.
Sleep button on keyboard. Will usually suspend to ram when not using it and a single button on the keyboard is convenient but somewhat rare for some reason.
Two USB3 slots are nice to have.
There are some things I didn't like:
The metal looks cool and all but it's actually cold to the touch and sharp and annoying. It's not like sharp ginsu like metal but the edges wear on you. Had to get a palm rest to sit in front of it to make that problem disappear.
Piece of shit num,caps,scroll lock lights are obnoxious blue undiffused leds that send up bat signals on the ceiling at night. It's also annoying like looking into a flashlight even during the day if you simply look at the indicator light head on. Nothing some tape won't fix but fuck them for such a crappy design and using blue leds.
I disagree. The topic at hand is to somehow keep the natives lulled, not to let them participate in meaningful activity. In other words, yes, the goal is to give the Kardasians (or however these useless cunts are spelled) to the masses.
On what basis do you disagree? Keeping couch potatoes happy isn't mentioned in the CAF documents anywhere. The relevant legislation (47 USC 1302) makes the purpose and priorities quite clear.
My comment is not about denying couch potatoes access to Kardasians. It's simply stating that's not the point of enabling legislation and FCC initiatives to that end. It's about making sure people can use the Internet for the full range of purposes expressed in the legislation. 10mbit is more than enough to download Kardasians 3mbit is NOT more than enough to be a Kardasian and upload your performance given most end user systems lack the capability to leverage high efficiency complexity codecs in real time. A luxury easily afforded to streaming providers.
Except in the US almost all connections except for true business class (ie, comes with a SLA) are meant to consume data, not generate it. Well, beyond the initial request for the latest stream of the Kardashians or whatever and any TCP ACK traffic related to consuming.
The point of government involvement WRT CAF funding is ensuring equal opportunity in underserved markets. The question is whether you can work from home (voice, video conferences, remote data access, telemedicine..etc) and do your homework.
While streaming Kardashians may be important to you it's totally irrelevant to the topic at hand.
The definition specifically caters to cable broadband providers who have shitty upstream and infinite downstream.
The actual 706 definition of broadband makes no distinction of any kind between sending and receiving. It is about capabilities not directionality.
If it must take 25 mbit to "receive" high quality voice, data, graphics and video then it must also be true that 25 mbit is required to "originate" the same.
The fact people using administration messaging systems can receive messages from arbitrary Internet domains via comically insecure SMTP at will is what congress should be investigating.
think you're misunderstanding.... The most common hack isn't a technological one but rather social based. For example:
1) The person uses a weak password, either something like 'password' or their birthday.
2) The person is tricked into entering their credentials into a spoofed or compromised application which relays the password.
This is only possible because the Internet is addicted to insecure authentication protocols. Universally PLAINTEXT passwords transmitted via TLS. This is a ridiculous and insane practice that puts millions of users at unnecessary risk.
If you use secure authentication protocols (e.g. PAKE) it doesn't matter who is on the other end. Not only will the attacker not get anything when you try and login to their system you will get an immediate indication they are not who they claim to be.
3) People tend to reuse login credentials, so if a password on a weakly secure site is compromised, then the password on a properly secured website is also compromised
It doesn't have to be this way if secure authentication protocols and associated interfaces are adopted. Stored augmented verifiers can be made site specific even if the user themselves use same ones everywhere.
FIDO2 and hardware keys get around the issue by not using passwords but instead by using public key infrastructure. In a PKI setup, there are two halves to the security, the public key and the private key. The public key you give out freely and it can live in the website's database you want to login to as plain text. It doesn't matter if it gets compromised, anyone can see it and it doesn't matter.
This setup is a lot more secure because no passwords are stored on the server's database, meaning that a breach in the server side leaks considerably less. It also eliminates weak passwords as a potential breaching point.
So much of security is a shell game. People are constantly punting responsibility to this or that and come to believe the issue no longer exists. Most of the time the issue is still there it's just hidden, changed or the problem is defined away by scope or framing of competing system.
In this case the server is still guarding it's private key for server authentication and compromising it is game over same as compromising password database.
It is fundamentally misguided to treat public keys as just another field in a database that doesn't matter if it gets compromised. It's critically important for authenticating the user. If an attacker can replace it then the attacker gains access as that user.
In the end backend security isn't appreciably changed. Servers still guard secrets and the penalty for failure to keep them secure is mission failure.
The security of end users WRT "know" vs "have" should not be compared to worst possible current practices involving plaintext passwords transmitted via adhoc TLS protected web forms when new alternatives are discussed. It is context dependent.
Some people may benefit from a hardware key because they are forgetful and live with low risk of physical attack.
Others may have excellent memory, live with people they don't trust or in an environment with higher physical risks. There may be legal concerns WRT government ability to compel production of physical things.
As far as 2FA goes, FIDO has more universal support than Smart Cards---no kludgy 3rd-party middleware required for it to work.
No it doesn't. Smart cards have been widely used for approaching two decades.
The FIDO2 standard is managed by the FIDO Alliance, and it has a number of cheap and popular dongles (including Yubikey).
Which ones are cheaper than a smart card?
Hell I'll make it even easier. Which ones are cheaper than the cost of a smart card reader AND a smart card?
This is what everyone should support.
Can you support your position? Why should I support this system when I already support smart cards / client certs? What's the benefit?
And as an added bonuses, wider adoption will make it very difficult for Microsoft to hijack the standard. Not likely to happen at present anyway though.
There is already a standard. You have failed to offer a compelling reason why a new one is necessary or beneficial.
Slashdot Mirror
But I compared them head to head and at the time with the Tivo Roamio OTA system, like only about $299 and included lifetime menu/guide service, it was a much better deal for me to hook to my antenna for all my OTA/DVR needs.
Program guide data is transmitted over the air for free. For $300 you could buy a four tuner home run and three separate 4k SBCs running Kodi.
Is there any public, free, satellite TV? It sound like it would be a fun hobby and hopefully PBS / NASA / public government feeds/research-feeds/etc is out there as content
If you are living in the US, English only speaker and not a Jesus freak there is absolutely nothing.
Why is it wrong? The only thing I see that's wrong is trying to pretend it doesn't happen
You answered your own question. It's wrong because it is intentionally deceptive.
You DO realize that the entire concept of "the desktop" has drastically changed from 10-20 years ago, right?
Nope, mine looks and works remarkably similar which is kind of a let down. Years ago tech gods were spending at least some time making shit better... today they are spending all their time trying to fuck you.
Today "the desktop" means pretty much everything from a tablet to a workstation.
Sorry I don't recognize that definition of desktop and don't know of anyone else who does. Nobody thinks tablet when "desktop" is invoked.
but does most of its work over a network and can run any web-based application that comprises the majority of apps today. Wintel-only "desktop" is a dinosaur that is dead, just too stupid to lay down.
The only difference between now and 20 years ago is most of the time when normal people sat in front of their computer it was to click the 'AOL' or Internet dialer.
For a huge number of users email / communications / Internet was always the point of owning a computer. Nothing substantive has changed.
my wife and younger daughter to ChromeOS laptops
ChromeOS = Google malware.
The biggest challenge for the family was going off Microsoft Office products (Outlook, Word, Excel and Powerpoint) and moving to the Google (and Apple) versions.
Google office suite is also malware. All you've done is rearrange deck chairs on sinking ship.
Welcome my little friends, here is some fish.
Really nice to see ongoing work on bringing windows compatibility, various graphics stacks and traditional X server replacements up to speed. Sooner Microsoft's Malware operating system dies the better off we'll all be.
"Cloud Industry Forum, for the first time, businesses are spending more on cloud than on internal infrastructure. The cloud is taking over the role that data centers used to play"
Translation to English:
Rent a server industry forum, for the first time, business are spending more money renting other peoples servers than owning and operating their own. Rented servers is taking over the role that owning your own servers used to play.
In its first Voice of the Enterprise survey, 451 Research predicted that 60 percent of nearly 1,000 IT leaders surveyed plan to run the majority of their IT off premises by 2019
Translation to English:
Server rental industry marketing hacks release survey showing favorable outlook. Be cool like everyone else and rent a server instead of buying your own.
Gartner states that 80 percent of internally developed software is now either cloud-enabled or cloud-native.
I tried to translate this to English but my translation software crashed.
I used to work in a technical support role. We used a chat service provider called comm100 which does show the agent what you type in real time. At first, I felt dirty like I was invading their privacy
Everyone that designs and installs shit like this knows damn well what they are doing is wrong. They persist only because they get away with it.
but it does help efficiency considerably.
Ends justify means?
but also consider that the support agent is usually multi-tasking between clients, so being able to know what you are typing as you are typing it is a real time saver.
If knowing is a timesaver and that's truly the justification then the solution is both obvious and trivial. Provide proper feedback in UI design such that end user knows what's happening. This is a trivial and obvious solution. The fact it's not being done speaks volumes to the true intent which is entirely to deceive the customer.
If Microsoft can be sued for intentionally deceptive interfaces ... why should these chat vendors and the companies who deploy them get a pass?
If spy speakers like echo started recording everything all the time and uploading it to Amazon/Google mothership while intentionally disabling the activation indicators to hide that fact from the end user would that be ok? Do you think they could manage to do that and successfully repel resulting lawsuits? Personally I very much doubt it.
Bah! Old bulletin board systems (BBSes)'s had real-time chats too. Now, get off my lawn! :P
The issue isn't the capability it's going out of your way to hide it from the user.
Is this a big deal? I worked on a CSR chat system for a major clothing retailer back in the early 00's that had that feature. If I remember right, there was an ActiveX version for IE and a javascript version for anyone else and you configure it to see as the user typed or wait until they hit "Send". The idea was that if you watched the person type, the CSR could start to compose their answer so that there was a small delay as possible.
Yes of course this behavior is unacceptable. You are being dishonest with the customer. If you want to do this legitimately all you need to do is configure the interface such that what customer types appears in sent area of message box as CSR sees it so there is no confusion or assumptions about what is happening.
When you design a UI like this it's not materially different than creating an interface where dismissing an upgrade prompt causes Windows 10 to be installed. You know damn well what a particular UX design almost always with an explicit 'Send' button conveys to a normal person. This sort of shady behavior sure as heck is not that.
Would love to see some nuisance lawsuits over this shit.
I don't get it. Is this some kind of compression artifact? Intentional redaction?
The camera is stationary WRT ISS so how does blurriness follow the same position on the globe when everything around it and before and after remains in focus?
Do you really expect this disparity to continue for the next century?
It's irrelevant what I expect. Whether it takes 10 days 10 years or 100 years the problem is STILL resource utilization per person not population.
A generation ago, China was as poor as Africa. Today they are 8 times richer per capita.
Today China is the worlds largest polluter by country.
Nitpick: America emits ~10 times as much as Africa per capita, not 30.
Right because Americans don't trade with any other country and produce everything they consume entirely within their own borders.
Was always curious why rowhammer still works after scramblers built into current day memory controllers. They explain some of the reason it still works on page 10.
S|TME (total memory encryption) should be completely effective against these types of problems in future hardware.
3. More efficient air conditioners. The best ACs use a 3rd the power of the worst. Wider adoption of ACs in India, China, and SE Asia is the biggest reason for growing CO2 emissions. We should have an $10M X-Prize for a better and cheaper AC.
4. More efficient and cost effective insulation, and improved passive heating systems for buildings.
Efficiency angle already well into diminishing returns territory especially heating and cooling scene. While it is physically possible to do some crazy shit like heat a mansion in sub-zero weather with a candle the reality is quite different.
5. Better sensors to detect people moving around in buildings. Only heat/cool/light where the people are.
This is often a counterproductive strategy for the most energy efficient heating and cooling technologies as a practical matter they operate by leveraging temperature differentials on a continuous basis. When you heat or cool a space it's not just the air and moisture content you are also heating or cooling solid matter in the environment which is 1000 times the density of air.
6. Better batteries. Wider adoption of electric cars.
7. Wider adoption of wind and solar, along with better storage, and better long distance transmission.
By far the biggest bang for the buck in energy space is development of dirt cheap batteries that don't suck ass in any way (low weight, high density, safe, operating temperatures, long life). If you can pull it off everything in the energy scene changes overnight.
9. Aggregated self-driving-delivery-on-demand services, so no one needs to drive to the grocery store to buy a jug of milk, or go to the post office to drop off a package.
If you want do something meaningful on the conservation front increasing household size is the most effective option available.
Iron fertilization of the oceans to generate plankton blooms. This will remove CO2 from the ocean, and increase fish harvests. People can eat more fish and less beef. Of all the geo-engineering proposals, this is the easiest and the most likely to work.
There are productive things that can be done with carbon without polluting the air and seas with crap and seeing what happens.
STP/biochar for example can provide best soils for growing crops while sequestering excess carbon.
I am a science supporter. Here are my solutions:
1. Better and more available contraceptives for 3rd world women.
2. Better education, healthcare, higher literacy rates, and better sex ed for 3rd world women
In the long run, these first two solutions will likely have the greatest effect. No one will use less CO2 than the people that aren't born.
The 1st world has already turned the corner on both population growth and energy consumption. We need to help the rest of the world do the same, and do it faster.
No science supporter thinks population is either the problem or a useful solution.
Not while a 1st world person consumes 30 times the resources of a 3rd world person. Sex ed, condoms and an education are never going to result in a 30x drop off in 3rd world population.
Helping the third world rise is a nice thing to do. It can certainly yield some benefit on the margins (assistance with renewable energy technology, land use...etc) as they will rise regardless of whether they are assisted or not yet realistically in aggregate expecting this to have a positive effect on the environment is pure madness.
The ONLY viable solution at this point is advancing technology. Improved efficiency, better cheaper energy generation, storage and transmission.
I feel like I've entered the twilight zone when I read an argument that storing my work on my machine is dangerous while storing it anywhere else is considered safe.
Most browsers support local storage for applications. Websites are able to store data on your local computer in a local file store that only the site can access. Websites are currently also able to prompt you to upload files from your computer and save files to your computer.
Security has been compromised the moment my data isn't stored on my machine.
More likely it was compromised before that when software was loaded / executed from someone else's machine.
Virtually every internet service today is a major security breach.
People who don't want to be owned run software from vendors they trust and don't let it screw around on the Internet.
And when someone tries to come up with something to reduce the near-requirement that all data be given up from inception, people call it a security threat? WTF? That's some pretty rich spin control.
The reason this is a security threat is external web sites can gain access to modify your files. Imagine a browser dialogue that asks the user to upload a data file. The chooser selects file for upload and then at some future time website retains the capability to access and modify local file without prompting to insert a virus that is executed the next time data file is accessed or to exfiltrated additional data the user didn't intend to share.
Given that websites can already:
1. Store and manipulate data locally
2. Prompt for user file to upload
3. Prompt for user file to save/overwrite
The question is whether this feature serves sufficiently useful purpose to warrant risk given current capabilities or will it on balance be leveraged primarily for malicious intent. Well over 90% of security breaches are achieved by way of social engineering / tricking end users who frankly don't understand what all of these security dialogues mean.
What is this mound of security bugs you refer to?
Probably this one..
https://www.cvedetails.com/vul...
Modern Firefox and Chrome are both incredibly secure
You got the "Incredible" part right.
We have had this panic several times before. Remember the Web USB API?
That was going to be a security nightmare,
Um no Firefox does NOT support Web USB... Chrome is alone in this madness.
It very much has been a security nightmare.
https://pwnaccelerator.github....
massively abused and used to take over every poor sap's PC the moment it was deployed. Yet here we are, it's been around for years now, and somehow, presumably by blind luck rather than skill, they managed to make it secure.
What does Web USB have to do with granting web sites write access to local filesystem? I fail to see the linkage. They are two separate features with separate security properties. Each must be evaluated on the merits not by some ridiculous unfalsifiable false equivalence.
Don't do it, don't even think about it.
It has a metal case that conducts static charges to ground instead of building up and resetting USB interface and eventually frying the keyboard. My last one (Logitech) died this way.
It's not obnoxious. No ridiculous backlights and over the top gamer shit. I almost got the version with no printed labels.
Went with cherry blue to break habit of striking thru. It has helped to apply just enough pressure and slightly improve typing speed.
Volume control wheel is nice but the damn wheel is reversed.
Sleep button on keyboard. Will usually suspend to ram when not using it and a single button on the keyboard is convenient but somewhat rare for some reason.
Two USB3 slots are nice to have.
There are some things I didn't like:
The metal looks cool and all but it's actually cold to the touch and sharp and annoying. It's not like sharp ginsu like metal but the edges wear on you. Had to get a palm rest to sit in front of it to make that problem disappear.
Piece of shit num,caps,scroll lock lights are obnoxious blue undiffused leds that send up bat signals on the ceiling at night. It's also annoying like looking into a flashlight even during the day if you simply look at the indicator light head on. Nothing some tape won't fix but fuck them for such a crappy design and using blue leds.
C'mon, you don't put that into writing. Did they put "to keep the blacks where we think they belong" when they wrote the Jim Crow laws?
WTF!? Is there an objective basis for your claim?
I disagree. The topic at hand is to somehow keep the natives lulled, not to let them participate in meaningful activity. In other words, yes, the goal is to give the Kardasians (or however these useless cunts are spelled) to the masses.
On what basis do you disagree? Keeping couch potatoes happy isn't mentioned in the CAF documents anywhere. The relevant legislation (47 USC 1302) makes the purpose and priorities quite clear.
My comment is not about denying couch potatoes access to Kardasians. It's simply stating that's not the point of enabling legislation and FCC initiatives to that end. It's about making sure people can use the Internet for the full range of purposes expressed in the legislation. 10mbit is more than enough to download Kardasians 3mbit is NOT more than enough to be a Kardasian and upload your performance given most end user systems lack the capability to leverage high efficiency complexity codecs in real time. A luxury easily afforded to streaming providers.
Except in the US almost all connections except for true business class (ie, comes with a SLA) are meant to consume data, not generate it. Well, beyond the initial request for the latest stream of the Kardashians or whatever and any TCP ACK traffic related to consuming.
The point of government involvement WRT CAF funding is ensuring equal opportunity in underserved markets. The question is whether you can work from home (voice, video conferences, remote data access, telemedicine..etc) and do your homework.
While streaming Kardashians may be important to you it's totally irrelevant to the topic at hand.
The definition specifically caters to cable broadband providers who have shitty upstream and infinite downstream.
The actual 706 definition of broadband makes no distinction of any kind between sending and receiving. It is about capabilities not directionality.
If it must take 25 mbit to "receive" high quality voice, data, graphics and video then it must also be true that 25 mbit is required to "originate" the same.
The fact people using administration messaging systems can receive messages from arbitrary Internet domains via comically insecure SMTP at will is what congress should be investigating.
think you're misunderstanding.... The most common hack isn't a technological one but rather social based. For example:
1) The person uses a weak password, either something like 'password' or their birthday.
2) The person is tricked into entering their credentials into a spoofed or compromised application which relays the password.
This is only possible because the Internet is addicted to insecure authentication protocols. Universally PLAINTEXT passwords transmitted via TLS. This is a ridiculous and insane practice that puts millions of users at unnecessary risk.
If you use secure authentication protocols (e.g. PAKE) it doesn't matter who is on the other end. Not only will the attacker not get anything when you try and login to their system you will get an immediate indication they are not who they claim to be.
3) People tend to reuse login credentials, so if a password on a weakly secure site is compromised, then the password on a properly secured website is also compromised
It doesn't have to be this way if secure authentication protocols and associated interfaces are adopted. Stored augmented verifiers can be made site specific even if the user themselves use same ones everywhere.
FIDO2 and hardware keys get around the issue by not using passwords but instead by using public key infrastructure. In a PKI setup, there are two halves to the security, the public key and the private key. The public key you give out freely and it can live in the website's database you want to login to as plain text. It doesn't matter if it gets compromised, anyone can see it and it doesn't matter.
This setup is a lot more secure because no passwords are stored on the server's database, meaning that a breach in the server side leaks considerably less. It also eliminates weak passwords as a potential breaching point.
So much of security is a shell game. People are constantly punting responsibility to this or that and come to believe the issue no longer exists. Most of the time the issue is still there it's just hidden, changed or the problem is defined away by scope or framing of competing system.
In this case the server is still guarding it's private key for server authentication and compromising it is game over same as compromising password database.
It is fundamentally misguided to treat public keys as just another field in a database that doesn't matter if it gets compromised. It's critically important for authenticating the user. If an attacker can replace it then the attacker gains access as that user.
In the end backend security isn't appreciably changed. Servers still guard secrets and the penalty for failure to keep them secure is mission failure.
The security of end users WRT "know" vs "have" should not be compared to worst possible current practices involving plaintext passwords transmitted via adhoc TLS protected web forms when new alternatives are discussed. It is context dependent.
Some people may benefit from a hardware key because they are forgetful and live with low risk of physical attack.
Others may have excellent memory, live with people they don't trust or in an environment with higher physical risks. There may be legal concerns WRT government ability to compel production of physical things.
As far as 2FA goes, FIDO has more universal support than Smart Cards---no kludgy 3rd-party middleware required for it to work.
No it doesn't. Smart cards have been widely used for approaching two decades.
The FIDO2 standard is managed by the FIDO Alliance, and it has a number of cheap and popular dongles (including Yubikey).
Which ones are cheaper than a smart card?
Hell I'll make it even easier. Which ones are cheaper than the cost of a smart card reader AND a smart card?
This is what everyone should support.
Can you support your position? Why should I support this system when I already support smart cards / client certs? What's the benefit?
And as an added bonuses, wider adoption will make it very difficult for Microsoft to hijack the standard. Not likely to happen at present anyway though.
There is already a standard. You have failed to offer a compelling reason why a new one is necessary or beneficial.