elmo2you

20 ms·

121.
by elmo2you 6y ago
A local database with a hash of every possible non-official Apple app in it? Sounds like something maybe only storage manufacturers will like. The thing is, this is not a new security problem/challenge. It essentially can not be proper
122.
by elmo2you 6y ago
That's all nice and well, but what if some country decides that your country will still have Internet access, but a "degraded experience" to Apple's central infrastructure? Still sounds to me like Apple rolled out a huge
123.
by elmo2you 6y ago
Sincerely and without any intention to troll or be sarcastic: I'm puzzled that people are willing buy a computer/OS where (apparently) software can/will fail to launch if some central company server goes down. Maybe I'm
124.
by elmo2you 6y ago
> It's likely not an anti-trust issue. No single manufacturer has anything close to a monopoly .. Funny .. It's exactly this kind of response that illustrates what I meant with the erosion of the meaning of anti-trust. You appe
125.
by elmo2you 6y ago
> How is this not something akin to an anti-trust issue? It probably (if not certainly) is .. but with authorities systematically failing their duties on that subject, and for a long time too, don't expect much (if anything) to come
126.
by elmo2you 6y ago
> I like Erlang/Elixir but I still see a lot of code with obvious race conditions. Race conditions? Are you sure? AFAIK, that's pretty much impossible in Erlang/Elixir. I do get with what you are saying with the second par
127.
by elmo2you 6y ago
I will have to agree with this. Until I started working with Erlang/Elixir, I would probably have agreed with the OP article instead. Or at least its title, for reading about concurrency problems has become rather obsolete (for me). Fo
128.
by elmo2you 6y ago
Interesting thought. It would definitely call bluff on these bully tactics by GitHub. GitHub's deplorable behavior might very well be illegal, but fat chance of anyone dragging the company to court over it, considering how much that wo
129.
by elmo2you 6y ago
As I have seen argued on several places thus far, including at the link below, this alleged DMCA complaint has been contrived at best and certainly falling outside of Safe Harbor doctrine. Meaning, the "immediate action" requireme
130.
by elmo2you 6y ago
Can they even pull the AGPL license? The re-licensing of current/new code is one thing, but removing the license on the old code? How is that possible? What about copies elsewhere, are those no longer validly licensed? That's not
131.
by elmo2you 6y ago
I fully agree with that. Even more, I'm not so sure that it is in accordance with Github's rules, and might (sometimes) even be in in direct violation of the license with which it is got published. Either way, it certainly feels a
132.
by elmo2you 6y ago
>The bottom line is that unfortunately Russia is perceived to be like a bully against its neighbouring countries in its West and North-West because of its words and actions. If it stopped doing the needless bullying, maybe those neighbou
133.
by elmo2you 6y ago
> presenting detailed proof could reveal something about Norway's capabilities which they'd rather keep hidden Then they can also keep this accusation out of the public eye and deal with this on a diplomatic, which is where the
134.
by elmo2you 6y ago
.. in addition to that, it's not like Norway is without controversy, when it comes to accusing Russia. I'm not making any claims here. Not about Russia being behind it, nor the opposite. If Norway publicly accuses Russia, then it
135.
by elmo2you 6y ago
> Trademark law says you can't mislead consumers into thinking your thing is the trademark owner's thing. So, where did you get that these infected machines became a "your thing" and no longer are just Windows (albeit
136.
by elmo2you 6y ago
> Security alliance worries encrypted messaging apps can be used by bad actors Same goes for kitchen knives. I don't hear them call for banning those, or have every sale of one tracked and monitored (which would only illustrate the
137.
by elmo2you 6y ago
> By telling Apple they can’t control others’ speech on their platform, you are in effect controlling Apple’s speech Since when is control, or censorship, of what someone else says speech in it's own right? If Apple wanted a disclai
138.
by elmo2you 6y ago
> .. don't they have a moral responsibility to try and do something about it? Is Apple a law enforcing agency with jurisdiction in that region? If the answer to that is no, then the answer to your (rhetorical) question is equally no
139.
by elmo2you 6y ago
Even more, Apple has assigned itself powers that in most (sane) countries are a strict monopoly of governments (and preferably only after going through a legal system/process and strictly regulated). Especially Apple's attempt&#x2
140.
by elmo2you 6y ago
For what it's worth .. I have a rather intimate/inside perspective on Serbia and its dealings .. and yes, I can confirm that all of the things you mentioned are indeed true. Plus a whole lot more, which I rather not get into. Long
141.
by elmo2you 6y ago
It might also be worth mentioning that this case is first and foremost a big money power play (arguably even with abuse of the legal system), between two immensely powerful businesses (each of which probably deserve to be called a criminal
142.
by elmo2you 6y ago
As I already mentioned, I do agree with your opinion in general, have mixed feelings about the whole subject, and I certainly do agree with the situation being pretty sad. For what it's worth, I did realize something while thinking abo
143.
by elmo2you 6y ago
I am also situated in (but not originally from) Eastern Europe. On a personal level I pretty much completely agree with your opinion. However, that might be in part because I like to take time to prepare food and actually know how to cook.
144.
by elmo2you 6y ago
I get your point and I personally do consider the dietary habits of many Americans outright insane (though it has to be said that many may have not as much "choice" to eat more healthy, since healthy food appears to have become a
145.
by elmo2you 6y ago
As a Dutch person (in Holland licorice is pretty popular too), I can tell from personal experience that there should be put a big emphasis on "licorice =>COULD<= be dangerous". I have had periods where I would easily eat a b
146.
by elmo2you 6y ago
Fair enough. Clearly not a greenhorn. From the context of your description, your earlier arguments certainly make more sense, more than they would in the situations I'm personally more familiar with. My main conclusion here is that we
147.
by elmo2you 6y ago
> Or the port ssh works on Calling that part of the auth policy (in the context if was responding to) is a bit of a stretch, but okay. > Surely you'd limit access to that on an IP level and bounce via a bastion (which you do cont
148.
by elmo2you 6y ago
> Not sure what you're arguing here. You either have control over sshd or you don't. Or are you really suggesting you can change the port of sshd but aren't allowed to disable password auth? First, you'll have to sepa
149.
by elmo2you 6y ago
> Or are you allowing password authentication like it's 1999? That is assuming you have such authority or technical means. If you're maintaining systems for a company, there's a good change that the product vendor simply w
150.
by elmo2you 6y ago
> Botnets and fast networking stacks like DPDK have made port scanning the entire Internet a much more viable proposition than 20 years ago True indeed, yet even today I have seen little evidence of scanning beyond standard ports (pretty

More ›