And I'll say fuck you to the parasites and find my sources of entertainment, news, and community elsewhere. I'd be perfectly happy if all ad supported websites went out of business (I'm not counting those that have ads for their own products though, just those with ads from external sources).
Just out of curiosity, I'd like to point out that all search engines are ad supported. And, for that matter, Slashdot. You don't want to be able to use Google or Bing (and by extension, pretty much any other search like DuckDuckGo), or do you have some other business model to propose?
At some point you have to trust someone. You can't eliminate all third parties and yourself. If you don't trust Yahoo or Google or any other OpenID provider to be paranoid on your behalf, you're going to have to trust yourself. Or not logging into things could also work.
Let's say I want to buy a copy of Windows, because it doesn't come with my Mac. I'm not even going to splurge for Ultimate, and settle for Windows 7 Home Premium. Newegg has it for "$189.99 was: $199.99". Yes, you can get OEM versions for half that, but saying $200 for a Windows license is certainly not out of thin air.
DRM isn't implemented in Silverlight (for obvious reasons), so it can't play Netflix. About all I've ever seen in Moonlight is a notice to update my version of Silverlight.
If I ever become a billionaire, I'm going to hire a blimp with "PROPOSITION 65 WARNING: THE SUN IS KNOWN TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA TO CAUSE CANCER" to float up and down the state. Stupid proposition system.
No, the scammers convinced the victim's phone company to transfer the number to a different account. Meaning they then had control of the second factor.
Unless it has changed in the past couple years since I've last looked, deploying code to your own iOS device requires a $99/year developer subscription. Which very much is preventing me from installing my apps on my devices. The free tools don't provide you with a certificate to deploy to real hardware, only the emulator.
Not necessarily. For many classes of problems, the answer is much easier to verify than it is to determine in the first place. If a giant mess of software is used to create an easily verifiable answer, that answer is no more suspect than if the software was perfectly simple and readable.
For example, if there is a mathematical proof that the best possible routing through a graph is n units long, and a giant mess of spaghetti code finds a path that is n units long, I would be perfectly happy accepting it as a valid answer. Even though finding the path may be incredibly complicated, it is easy to check when an answer. I'd be equally as happy with a correct answer drawn by a toddler, but the spaghetti code hopefully has a better chance of finding one.
No it shouldn't. There's always a tradeoff between security and usability. Security is all about mitigating risk, and if the effort to better secure a document to only those "who should have access" is greater than the harm the document being released would cause, it isn't worth it. The whole point of security classifications is to deal with this in a sane manner: this document is of great importance, it has to stay on the network behind an air gap and locked doors. This other one is useful to a lot of people and not very damaging, so put it on the non-secure internet-bridged network. And to better secure material you have to make it accessable to fewer people, so would you rather governments stop sharing information between agencies?
Slashdot Mirror
Joining in the fun stories to support the claim, our local transit police used a cardboard officer to deter bike theft: http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/editorials/2013/08/14/cardboard-cop-prompts-real-drop-crime/twoZrFoyg1qrPQCVLtnF8K/story.html
And was released over a year before Office for Windows.
From the guy who chose to base Safari of KHTML: "But I chose the engine we used — with my team’s and my management chain’s support, of course —"
Sounds like an engineering-led decision to me.
And I'll say fuck you to the parasites and find my sources of entertainment, news, and community elsewhere. I'd be perfectly happy if all ad supported websites went out of business (I'm not counting those that have ads for their own products though, just those with ads from external sources).
Just out of curiosity, I'd like to point out that all search engines are ad supported. And, for that matter, Slashdot. You don't want to be able to use Google or Bing (and by extension, pretty much any other search like DuckDuckGo), or do you have some other business model to propose?
Guessing they haven't figured out what that configuration is.
At some point you have to trust someone. You can't eliminate all third parties and yourself. If you don't trust Yahoo or Google or any other OpenID provider to be paranoid on your behalf, you're going to have to trust yourself. Or not logging into things could also work.
Hmm, the first product of Applesoft could be a BASIC Interpreter!
Amusing that name has actually been used by the two companies.
Let's say I want to buy a copy of Windows, because it doesn't come with my Mac. I'm not even going to splurge for Ultimate, and settle for Windows 7 Home Premium. Newegg has it for "$189.99 was: $199.99". Yes, you can get OEM versions for half that, but saying $200 for a Windows license is certainly not out of thin air.
Where you went wrong: you assumed our drones use encryption ;)
DRM isn't implemented in Silverlight (for obvious reasons), so it can't play Netflix. About all I've ever seen in Moonlight is a notice to update my version of Silverlight.
Moonlight works (but only as a Firefox plugin?). However, DRM isn't / can't be implemented, so it's useless for Silverlight's main use (aka, Netflix).
If I ever become a billionaire, I'm going to hire a blimp with "PROPOSITION 65 WARNING: THE SUN IS KNOWN TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA TO CAUSE CANCER" to float up and down the state. Stupid proposition system.
You would be incorrect, and 0.02% of Gmail users are very glad. http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/02/28/google-goes-to-the-tape-to-get-lost-emails-back/
No, the scammers convinced the victim's phone company to transfer the number to a different account. Meaning they then had control of the second factor.
Funny, I can't remember when the ability to be able to drag and drop files in to web apps was added
It seems to be fairly common, being used by Gmail since April 2010, and is in the Mozilla docs.
And everything is just a certain arrangement of atoms. So why should anything be illegal? :)
Optical won't power headphones, which would pretty much defeat the main purpose of a headphone jack. The other option, sure.
Wait... that description *isn't* about some random chain mail spam, but something with two major companies behind it? Seriously?
As a former KDE user (and current Microsoft employee), that drives me batty. Luckilly, there's freeware to the rescue: http://antibody-software.com/web/software/software/wizmouse-makes-your-mouse-wheel-work-on-the-window-under-the-mouse/. Scrolling some windows without focus causes the taskbar icon to glow for a notification, but other than that, it works great.
If I'm trying to demo a WiFi connected cell phone, for example, how is ethernet going to help?
Well, Dillon Beresford apparently does, so yes :)
Curious: in what way is compiling the OpenJDK for ARM not full featured? Not supported by Oracle? Or are you referring to hardware support / Jazelle?
Unless it has changed in the past couple years since I've last looked, deploying code to your own iOS device requires a $99/year developer subscription. Which very much is preventing me from installing my apps on my devices. The free tools don't provide you with a certificate to deploy to real hardware, only the emulator.
Not necessarily. For many classes of problems, the answer is much easier to verify than it is to determine in the first place. If a giant mess of software is used to create an easily verifiable answer, that answer is no more suspect than if the software was perfectly simple and readable.
For example, if there is a mathematical proof that the best possible routing through a graph is n units long, and a giant mess of spaghetti code finds a path that is n units long, I would be perfectly happy accepting it as a valid answer. Even though finding the path may be incredibly complicated, it is easy to check when an answer. I'd be equally as happy with a correct answer drawn by a toddler, but the spaghetti code hopefully has a better chance of finding one.
No it shouldn't. There's always a tradeoff between security and usability. Security is all about mitigating risk, and if the effort to better secure a document to only those "who should have access" is greater than the harm the document being released would cause, it isn't worth it. The whole point of security classifications is to deal with this in a sane manner: this document is of great importance, it has to stay on the network behind an air gap and locked doors. This other one is useful to a lot of people and not very damaging, so put it on the non-secure internet-bridged network. And to better secure material you have to make it accessable to fewer people, so would you rather governments stop sharing information between agencies?