I was totally agreeing with your post, and then this. This makes no sense. Not sure how you can even compare these things.
That being said, unfortunately Steam has so many games because of its DRM. Not because the DRM actually benefits anyone, but because game publishers are convinced they need it. Steam has one of the least intrustive DRM setups out there; it certainly has it's problems but is fairly transparent in use.
I greatly prefer GOG but I like to play things that either were released after 2002 and/or aren't The Witcher. Steam gives that option. Right now GOG, for the most part, doesn't.
The odd part to me is they asked for an explanation of DLC, but not DRM, which is also used but not explained in the article. Both are extremely common terms.
How is the author supposed to know that DLC wouldn't be understood but DRM would be? What about EA? Or Q&A?
Sorry, but if you don't understand a common term relating to the article, you can look it up. But demanding the author explain one of the common terms because you didn't get makes you appear ignorant and lazy.
There's a difference between asking a question and demanding the author change their story to account for your ignorance. If the individual had said something like: "What's DLC? I've never seen that term before..." they may have gotten a different response, probably with an explanation (they still could have searched for it faster, but whatever).
Instead they opened with "How about resolving the acronym at least once?" Entirely different situation, and now worthy of scorn.
And where do you store this password? I'm willing to bet you don't have it memorized.
The nature of passwords is that the harder it is to crack, the harder it is for humans to remember. If the password becomes too difficult to remember, and must be stored, it's now worthless (because the password to store the complex password will need to be easy enough to remember...which defeats the purpose of the complex password).
Either way, the point is that it's much easier to crack a password than the encryption it protects. Computers have gotten powerful enough that even standard computers using a graphics card can test an insane amount of passwords per second. A specialized computer, such as EFF's Deep Crack, would break your hash in under a month.
Passwords are like a door lock. They'll stop someone from easily breaking in, but even the toughest door or most complex lock is only going to buy you time. A determined attacker is getting in.
Libertarianism is an inherently flawed concept. The assumption that a "free" market can exist without regulation is a fairy tale that those who abuse the system would love for you to believe.
Exhibit #1: Clinton deregulated Wall Street, and ten years later the whole thing practically collapses.
Corruption and back-dealing exist in real life, and you can't create an economic model based purely on competition without factoring in those who manipulate the market.
Exhibit #2: If you want to see an almost entirely "free" market, check out Eve Online, which has a fairly representative free market economy. It's also full of huge corporations that manipulate the market and completely steamroll smaller corporations economically. The economy works (especially since resources are essentially unlimited as they refresh themselves) but there is virtually no advantage to the "small business".
What we actually need is business regulation by people without an investment or other incentive to help certain businesses. Unfortunately this doesn't exist, hence we get the widespread corruption with regulation because those regulations are ineffective.
Nobody needs to break the encryption. They just need to break the password.
Which is easy. Any security system is only as strong as it's weakest link. And, in the case of computer security, most of the time you (the user) are the weakest link.
Read the first article with a grain of salt (it was later determined to be based on a flawed study). Even if the study was flawed, it still indicates a disconnect between professed sexual orientation and actual sexual orientation in many cases.
According to NHIS only 0.7% of Americans even identify as bisexual, let alone engage in bisexual activity. The highest estimates for men is 1.8% and 2.8% for women in 2002.
Studies have found that bisexuals do exist, as I stated before, but that it's very rare (I would classify anything under 3% of the population as "extremely rare"). The argument I was responding too said that "most" people are bisexual or can be "convinced" to be bisexual, and this is completely the opposite of reality, in which over 97% of the population is not that way.
Ok, but either way at the highest estimates the homosexual population accounts for maybe 6% of the overall population of a country. Compare this to the 5-10% estimated infertility rates in heterosexual couples (ignoring people who are single, or outside childbearing years) and homosexuality is almost completely statistically insignificant to declining birth rates, especially if you account for the miniscule percent that would have children in the imaginary world where same-sex relationships weren't possible.
You can have any view you want, but if you want people to agree with you, you might want some slightly plausible data to back it up.
Most people are not exclusive in their sexual preference...
[Citation needed]
If anything, scientific studies have shown the opposite, in that most people are only attracted to one sex or the other. By studying arousal in self-declared bisexuals scientists found that the vast majority of them were only physically stimulated by one sex or the other, regardless of their professed preferences.
It doesn't mean bisexuals don't exist, it just means that it's extremely rare...which is the opposite of "most people not being exclusive in their sexual preferences."
The more likely reason is because it's easy to rally ignorant people in hatred towards a minority and blame them for your problems rather than actually do something to fix the real issue.
Actually, the "Private Mode" on the new Samsung phones(My Note 4 has it) is a great start. I have no idea how good the encryption on it is but it would probably have prevented something like this. Basically, you enable "Private Mode" via a password or other security (different from your normal phone unlock" and, once enabled, most of your phone's files can be hidden from other users.
What's nice about this is that you can hide certain files, for example a list of passwords, banking information, nude pictures, personal notes, etc., but still allows access to everything else. The private stuff doesn't show up at all unless you enable the mode.
This would have allowed the individual to still let the police unlock her phone and call but not have access to personal pictures. It's handy for other things, too, like showing your girlfriend's mother a picture of your dog without worrying about whether or not she's also going to see the naked pictures you took of her daughter =).
There are third party apps that do this as well but I hope making this a default phone capability becomes standard, especially as people start using standard smartphones more and more for business.
The website was designed using software that was discontinued prior to 2003. Anyone who understands even the basics of computer security knows that the older software is the more exploits and flaws have been discovered in the interim. Sure, new software can (and does) have security issues, sometimes more than old software, but in general any older link in an update chain (like Microsoft Office) is going to be weaker than a new link.
So if you're releasing a product that has security implications, like one with a freaking keylogger built-in, it had better be up-to-date with the latest security protocols. The fact that the company either hasn't updated or is still using tools from before 2003 does not bode well for the actual software they're creating.
Web design is easy compared to software development, and they put zero effort into it. Let me ask you something...if you were to bring your valuables into a bank, and they didn't have an ATM, they told you they couldn't accept debit cards because they didn't have any readers, they were using typewriters behind the counter, and they locked the front door with a chain, would you keep your money there? Or would you argue that the bank's lack of modernization doesn't detract from their security, it's what they do with it that's important?
Technically iTunes sells DRM free music, so you can put on whatever device you want. It's the only part of Apple that I actually slightly agree with.
I won't use it, because a) it's Apple and b) Google Play All Access does everything I want (for now). But I do applaud the DRM free music; at least you're getting some actual value out of your $1.
I'm fairly sure I've met other people like this. It's always struck me as a form of pathological lying. What always shocks me is people who hear someone like this and don't have warning bells going off in their head screaming "bullshit!"
There is a Doctor that knows everything about the human body...he travels through time and space, and...oh, wait, you were talking about a human doctor.
They tried it. The problem is evidence. With a few exceptions, most of the time there isn't enough evidence to actually convict an infringer, and the judicial system (so far) isn't as friendly to copyright trolling as it is to patent trolling. The biggest issue is that they need to file a suit against each individual infringer, and they aren't going to get nearly as much in settlement from an individual as patent trolls get from companies. They've still sued over 20,000 people in the U.S.
On the post: CD Projekt Red Goes All DLC For The Witcher 3...But It's Completely Free And Doesn't Require Pre-Order
Re: Best Game Company
I was totally agreeing with your post, and then this. This makes no sense. Not sure how you can even compare these things.
That being said, unfortunately Steam has so many games because of its DRM. Not because the DRM actually benefits anyone, but because game publishers are convinced they need it. Steam has one of the least intrustive DRM setups out there; it certainly has it's problems but is fairly transparent in use.
I greatly prefer GOG but I like to play things that either were released after 2002 and/or aren't The Witcher. Steam gives that option. Right now GOG, for the most part, doesn't.
On the post: CD Projekt Red Goes All DLC For The Witcher 3...But It's Completely Free And Doesn't Require Pre-Order
Re:
On the post: CD Projekt Red Goes All DLC For The Witcher 3...But It's Completely Free And Doesn't Require Pre-Order
Re: Re:
How is the author supposed to know that DLC wouldn't be understood but DRM would be? What about EA? Or Q&A?
Sorry, but if you don't understand a common term relating to the article, you can look it up. But demanding the author explain one of the common terms because you didn't get makes you appear ignorant and lazy.
There's a difference between asking a question and demanding the author change their story to account for your ignorance. If the individual had said something like: "What's DLC? I've never seen that term before..." they may have gotten a different response, probably with an explanation (they still could have searched for it faster, but whatever).
Instead they opened with "How about resolving the acronym at least once?" Entirely different situation, and now worthy of scorn.
On the post: Former NSA Lawyer Says Reason Blackberry Failed Was 'Too Much Encryption' Warns Google/Apple Not To Make Same Mistake
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
And where do you store this password? I'm willing to bet you don't have it memorized.
The nature of passwords is that the harder it is to crack, the harder it is for humans to remember. If the password becomes too difficult to remember, and must be stored, it's now worthless (because the password to store the complex password will need to be easy enough to remember...which defeats the purpose of the complex password).
Either way, the point is that it's much easier to crack a password than the encryption it protects. Computers have gotten powerful enough that even standard computers using a graphics card can test an insane amount of passwords per second. A specialized computer, such as EFF's Deep Crack, would break your hash in under a month.
Passwords are like a door lock. They'll stop someone from easily breaking in, but even the toughest door or most complex lock is only going to buy you time. A determined attacker is getting in.
On the post: Now In Charge Of Congress, GOP Plans To Give Up Its Own Constitutional Powers To The Obama Administration
Re: Re: And this is why I don't vote
Exhibit #1: Clinton deregulated Wall Street, and ten years later the whole thing practically collapses.
Corruption and back-dealing exist in real life, and you can't create an economic model based purely on competition without factoring in those who manipulate the market.
Exhibit #2: If you want to see an almost entirely "free" market, check out Eve Online, which has a fairly representative free market economy. It's also full of huge corporations that manipulate the market and completely steamroll smaller corporations economically. The economy works (especially since resources are essentially unlimited as they refresh themselves) but there is virtually no advantage to the "small business".
What we actually need is business regulation by people without an investment or other incentive to help certain businesses. Unfortunately this doesn't exist, hence we get the widespread corruption with regulation because those regulations are ineffective.
On the post: Former NSA Lawyer Says Reason Blackberry Failed Was 'Too Much Encryption' Warns Google/Apple Not To Make Same Mistake
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Which is easy. Any security system is only as strong as it's weakest link. And, in the case of computer security, most of the time you (the user) are the weakest link.
On the post: Russia Dismantles Steve Jobs Memorial, Fearing That Tim Cook's Homosexuality Might Be Contagious
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bi sexuality
Read the first article with a grain of salt (it was later determined to be based on a flawed study). Even if the study was flawed, it still indicates a disconnect between professed sexual orientation and actual sexual orientation in many cases.
According to NHIS only 0.7% of Americans even identify as bisexual, let alone engage in bisexual activity. The highest estimates for men is 1.8% and 2.8% for women in 2002.
Studies have found that bisexuals do exist, as I stated before, but that it's very rare (I would classify anything under 3% of the population as "extremely rare"). The argument I was responding too said that "most" people are bisexual or can be "convinced" to be bisexual, and this is completely the opposite of reality, in which over 97% of the population is not that way.
On the post: Russia Dismantles Steve Jobs Memorial, Fearing That Tim Cook's Homosexuality Might Be Contagious
Re: Re: Re:
You can have any view you want, but if you want people to agree with you, you might want some slightly plausible data to back it up.
On the post: Russia Dismantles Steve Jobs Memorial, Fearing That Tim Cook's Homosexuality Might Be Contagious
Re: Re: Re:
[Citation needed]
If anything, scientific studies have shown the opposite, in that most people are only attracted to one sex or the other. By studying arousal in self-declared bisexuals scientists found that the vast majority of them were only physically stimulated by one sex or the other, regardless of their professed preferences.
It doesn't mean bisexuals don't exist, it just means that it's extremely rare...which is the opposite of "most people not being exclusive in their sexual preferences."
The more likely reason is because it's easy to rally ignorant people in hatred towards a minority and blame them for your problems rather than actually do something to fix the real issue.
On the post: MPAA And Movie Theaters Issue A Complete Ban On Google Glass, Because They 'Have A Long History Of Welcoming Tech Advances'
Re: Re: Re: I think they did the right thing
This statement should win the most funny award. It's so mind numbingly ignorant that it has to be a joke.
Right?
On the post: More Cops Investigate More Teens 'Sexting.' Now What?
Re:
We should just start executing teens for this kind of stuff. Clearly the best solution...you can't be too safe!
On the post: California Cops Passed Around Explicit Photos Harvested From Arrestees' Phones
Re: Encryption woudn't help here
What's nice about this is that you can hide certain files, for example a list of passwords, banking information, nude pictures, personal notes, etc., but still allows access to everything else. The private stuff doesn't show up at all unless you enable the mode.
This would have allowed the individual to still let the police unlock her phone and call but not have access to personal pictures. It's handy for other things, too, like showing your girlfriend's mother a picture of your dog without worrying about whether or not she's also going to see the naked pictures you took of her daughter =).
There are third party apps that do this as well but I hope making this a default phone capability becomes standard, especially as people start using standard smartphones more and more for business.
On the post: 5 Year Old Who Drew A Gun In Crayon Forced To Sign No-Suicide Contract With School
On the post: Sheriff Slams EFF As 'Not Credible,' Insists ComputerCOP Isn't Malware & Would Have Stopped Columbine
Re: Sorry, but...
So if you're releasing a product that has security implications, like one with a freaking keylogger built-in, it had better be up-to-date with the latest security protocols. The fact that the company either hasn't updated or is still using tools from before 2003 does not bode well for the actual software they're creating.
Web design is easy compared to software development, and they put zero effort into it. Let me ask you something...if you were to bring your valuables into a bank, and they didn't have an ATM, they told you they couldn't accept debit cards because they didn't have any readers, they were using typewriters behind the counter, and they locked the front door with a chain, would you keep your money there? Or would you argue that the bank's lack of modernization doesn't detract from their security, it's what they do with it that's important?
On the post: Sheriff Slams EFF As 'Not Credible,' Insists ComputerCOP Isn't Malware & Would Have Stopped Columbine
Re: Let's look at the source code...
IT Guys: Wait, you can do that!? I thought I compiled that website! You must have violated the CFAA for unauthorized access to a computer system!
Rest of Internet: /facepalm
On the post: Major Labels Easily Win Lawsuit Against Grooveshark
Re: Re: Re:
I won't use it, because a) it's Apple and b) Google Play All Access does everything I want (for now). But I do applaud the DRM free music; at least you're getting some actual value out of your $1.
On the post: Another Story Of A 'Fake' Brilliant Inventor? Is 'Scorpion Walter O'Brien' A Real Computer Security Genius?
Re: Thank you for this article
On the post: Another Story Of A 'Fake' Brilliant Inventor? Is 'Scorpion Walter O'Brien' A Real Computer Security Genius?
Re: No! No! No!
This actually makes sense. If Mr. O'Brien had access to the TARDIS, then presumably he had a sonic screwdriver...which can hack anything except wood.
Computer genius, or man with a sonic screwdriver? I guess we'll never know...
On the post: Another Story Of A 'Fake' Brilliant Inventor? Is 'Scorpion Walter O'Brien' A Real Computer Security Genius?
Re: Computer Security Genius
Nevermind.
On the post: Revealed: How To Get The IFPI To Issue Bogus DMCA Takedowns On Just About Anything, With No Questions Asked And No Review
Re: Re:
See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitol_Records,_Inc._v._Thomas-Rasset
http://en.wikipedia.org/w iki/Trade_group_efforts_against_file_sharing
Next >>