|
OriginalGriff wrote: "Before I can help, you'll need to go the Settings, and change your Speech language to one I can speak".
Well, you may have your OS locale set to en-WA (Welsh English), that would explain it...  
Anything that is unrelated to elephants is irrelephant
Anonymous
-
The problem with quotes on the internet is that you can never tell if they're genuine
Winston Churchill, 1944
-
I'd just like a chance to prove that money can't make me happy.
Me, all the time
|
|
|
|
|
I guess she's not into sheepslang?
Rules for the FOSW ![ ^]
if(this.signature != "")
{
MessageBox.Show("This is my signature: " + Environment.NewLine + signature);
}
else
{
MessageBox.Show("404-Signature not found");
}
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: Apparently, "English" isn't one of them...
Scroll down to W
...for a more local language!
Life is too shor
|
|
|
|
|
W∴ Balboos wrote: Heaven forbid the FBI or NSA gets information from some phones.
You've obviously missed the point. Most folks are not too worried about the FBI or NSA getting some information from phones. Its a little creepy but "so what?" - most people have nothing to interest the FBI or NSA.
Its the next logical step that worries intelligent people. The backdoor to our phones is stolen by or leaked to hackers & thieves who do have an interest in our data. Kapeesh?
There are two types of people in this world: those that pronounce GIF with a soft G, and those who do not deserve to speak words, ever.
|
|
|
|
|
It wasn't a back-door that was at issue (w/apple) - it's that the attempt to get in would have wiped the data. Good anti-theft for the device, perhaps. The FBI wanted a method to crack the (trivial 4-digit) key without destroying the data. Then they still have to decrypt it by finding the key.
Now - what has apple gotten for their PR-Driven protests? The FBI got their own crack - and that means that all phones are cracked from a logical point of view. Much worse than apple helping them out and trying to keep the thing under control.
But my point was all of these people belly-aching about privacy and they (cluelessly) give away everything because it's not so obviously in-their-face. Hence the double-wetting incident.
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
W∴ Balboos wrote: It wasn't a back-door that was at issue (w/apple)...
Defeating a mechanism that stops brute force password attempts is a form of a backdoor. 
W∴ Balboos wrote: Now - what has apple gotten for their PR-Driven protests?
PR driven, huh? Ask yourself - is there any protest Apple could have waged that you would not have considered "PR driven"? What about Microsoft? Google? Facebook? What about the company you work for?
W∴ Balboos wrote: Much worse than apple helping them out and trying to keep the thing under control.
No, I don't think so. Apple can now try to figure out the FBI crack and stop it.
W∴ Balboos wrote: But my point was all of these people belly-aching about privacy and they (cluelessly) give away everything...
There certainly are a bunch of people in this world who do not understand every single aspect of privacy. You and I among them. Certainly we're all entitled to our own opinions about the issues we are aware of?
There are two types of people in this world: those that pronounce GIF with a soft G, and those who do not deserve to speak words, ever.
|
|
|
|
|
W∴ Balboos wrote: Then they still have to decrypt it by finding the key.
 Once they have the PIN they simply log on as if they are the user. In what world does the user have to decrypt their own phone and find the key to do it? At no time was the dispute with Apple ever about finding the key or decrypting the data. It was entirely about the failsafe which meant that a brute force crack of the PIN would result in a self-destruct if it was unsuccessful in the first few attempts.
W∴ Balboos wrote: The FBI got their own crack
So they say. I've yet to see any unequivocal proof that this is the case.
W∴ Balboos wrote: that means that all phones are cracked from a logical point of view
Well, not all of them, obviously. But this would have been the case irrespective of who employed it first and for what reason. You don't seriously think that Apple's decisions affected the desire of hackers and crackers, white or black hatted, to claim victory over Apple's safeguards at the earliest possible moment? If this crack is real then it has always been possible and its discovery was always inevitable. If it was as easy as the manufacturer revealing that they had a way to bypass their own security to stop anyone other than the manufacturer attempting it we would have been free of the bad guys and the security consultants a long time ago!
I am not a number. I am a ... no, wait!
|
|
|
|
|
9082365 wrote: In what world does the user have to decrypt their own phone and find the key to do it?
You misinterpret that point. The encryption/decryption is done in the background (like https, for example). The data is stored encrypted.
9082365 wrote: So they say. I've yet to see any unequivocal proof that this is the case.
And I've yet to see unequivocal proof that Apple doesn't already have their 'back door' available for their own use. So - what does that do to your point?
< br>
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
All apple has to do is use robust internal encryption and it will take too long to be worthwhile for the hacker to hack a phone (or whatever). This might mean the user has their own password (heaven forbid!) - and if they really give a damn about their security, it won't be 'ABC123'.
The TV folk (those who inspired my original post) were all worked up about the government invading their privacy.
There needn't be a back-door: if the encryption is good, the immense computing power required to decrypt the info in anything close to a useful time-frame is enough. There time will be (and IS) better spent hacking into the data repositories (banks, credit cards, IRS). Why kill yourself for a few dimes when theirs millions to be made in a single hit?
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
Cortana in Swahili means "Who Cares".
New version: WinHeist Version 2.2.2 Beta tomorrow (noun): a mystical land where 99% of all human productivity, motivation and achievement is stored.
|
|
|
|
|
Cortana is one of the 73 things you need to kill, if you want to regain half the functionality of XP and Win 7 in Win 10.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
W∴ Balboos wrote: Micro$oft
Holy crap, it's the 90s again.
|
|
|
|
|
Movie Quote Of The Day
He: Me bum's gone to sleep again, all down the left cheek.
She: Really? That's fascinating.
Which movie?
|
|
|
|
|
Proctologist[^]
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
I can't remember the movie, but I seem to recall that it worked itself out in the end... 
Anything that is unrelated to elephants is irrelephant
Anonymous
-
The problem with quotes on the internet is that you can never tell if they're genuine
Winston Churchill, 1944
-
I'd just like a chance to prove that money can't make me happy.
Me, all the time
|
|
|
|
|
Paris on the ride
Rules for the FOSW ![ ^]
if(this.signature != "")
{
MessageBox.Show("This is my signature: " + Environment.NewLine + signature);
}
else
{
MessageBox.Show("404-Signature not found");
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
I do not usually spam the Lounge with links but, in a recent interview with Microsoft CEO Nadella, this came up. How often do we not remember this?
Rosoff: What has been the biggest change to your life and your lifestyle since you became the CEO of Microsoft? We have a lot of readers who struggle to manage work-life balance, they're always busy, everybody is working all the time. How do you do it? [...]
Nadella: Maybe I have to reframe it ... There's no such thing as balance. It's how do I harmonize my work and my life.
[...] We all spend far too much time at work for it not to be something more than work, for it not to have deeper meaning, whether it be Microsoft or any one of us in any role. [...]
Satya Nadella interview with Business Insider - Business Insider[^]
Life is too shor
|
|
|
|
|
"Harmonize" is what China does.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
"Evaporate" is the word you are looking for! 
Life is too shor
|
|
|
|
|
I read some text about that futurist works in Google.
I think google's success and microsoft's failure depence that.
For example after Google anounced Google glass , Microsft anounced holo.
Google make an investment for android , after Microsft make an investment for windows phone.
Now google works about unmanned vehicles, artificial intelligence(deep mind), ...
What do you think about that?
|
|
|
|
|
You really, really, really do some research before you start shooting your mouth off. Microsoft has a very active research lab[^] - it was set up in 1997. Hololens was a project that Alex Kipman (the head of the Hololens division) was working on off and on, for several years. Microsoft had a mobile phone platform (not a very good one mind) long before Android was around. You might want to check when Microsoft patented what looked like Kinect Glasses (it was 2012) - the year before Google invited people to sign up for Google Glass.
This space for rent
|
|
|
|
|
Not to mention that comparing HoloLens to Google Glass (which on hold for now) is a bit idiotic...
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
Absolutely, in many ways MS Research is the closest thing we have now to the Xerox Parc and MIT labs of old. Projects like Singularity (a clean slate O/S) and Phoenix (a compilation platform) really did break ground. And, just like Parc, they seem to be failing to capatilize on the potential.
HoloLens though looks awesome - potentially one of the most transformative technologies in my lifetime. Makes Google Glass look like just another advertising platform (which naturally it would be if it had taken off).
"If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough."
Alan Kay.
|
|
|
|
|
Microsoft's failure? I wish I could fail that good!!!!
I am not a number. I am a ... no, wait!
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
