Comment Where is the privacy policy of that site? (Score 4, Insightful) 164
It's like a sick joke! They have a site that shows how much data they can mine (with your permission) and then they can do whatever they want with it?
It's like a sick joke! They have a site that shows how much data they can mine (with your permission) and then they can do whatever they want with it?
What is this "second password verification screen"? Was it secondary identification questions (like mother's maiden name) or the same password again? I don't have an Xbox, so I have no idea what that means.
Good question. I can't imagine the code that would generate this bug.
If you encrypt, it's not very convenient to do what the person in the article did: link to a video. His IM buddy would have to download/decrypt before seeing the video. Your point is well-taken, of course. But leaving for another cloud provider is likely not going to make things any better. Cloud storage, by its broad definition, is sacrificing security for convenience (to some extent). You can certainly mitigate that via encryption, but at the loss of much of the convenience, especially when it comes to this particular use case, which is the sharing of a video.
Not to mention that there are apps like GrooVe IP which allow you to make free VOIP calls via your Google Voice number.
Not for long.
From your own link:
Due to changes in Google Voice, this app will be switching to a different provider to make and receive calls. You can find the most up to date information on our Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/snrb....
That's possible, but sounds implausible. Barcodes can't store that much information, and you'd need a really long barcode to store a long enough number for all the coffee pods they might expect to make. Maybe though.
QR codes could easily store enough. But I'd be more worried about:
It'd be funny if they did this, and someone hacked a Keurig machine to report back to Keurig that lots and lots of codes were used, when in fact they weren't, so that many random users would find many K-cups unusable.
Isn't that what I already said??
One other thing they could do would be a unique barcode or other machine-readable sequence on each pod, and then have the machine phone home to make sure that the code is valid and hasn't been used before. Any word on whether 2.0 requires an Internet connection?
The great thing about that idea is that slashdot'ers could systematically disable all of the real pods
True. One of the comments in TFA mentioned that this could be used for bank/credit card phishing. I thought that was an important insight to note. I think you'd get even more people blindly calling their bank based on a number on Google Local, and one could listen in and get all sorts of card numbers, social security numbers, secret passcodes, etc.
The cheapest Tesla can be had after credits for about 60 grand. It's just that most people don't want the small 40kWh (software limited 60kWh) battery.
It *could* be had for that amount. The 40kWh model was only really "available" for a few days. A few hundred people were grandfathered in.
3) absolutely no use of of malloc or free. it could lead to stack overflows.
Hate to be nit-picky here, but that's not true. It's a great idea to not use malloc() in a real-time application, for reasons of performance. But it can't overflow the stack.
Unless you call it recursively
2) absolutely no local variables. it could lead to stack overflows.
I think it would be pretty hard to overflow the stack by use of local variables. I mean it's easy to cause, but you'd pretty much always see it if you've even tested the program once. The best reason I can think of for not using local variables is that globals are easier to debug.
1) absolutely no recursion. it could lead to stack overflows.
This should be rule number one for this type of application.
the Dutch championships are a good enough place to tell whether it's positive or negative
And I'm sure if there was a problem there people would have been complaining that they were used when they were "untested". To some US competitors those *were* the Olympics.
Also, if you believe that people play harder in competition (creating a better test), then you probably believe that people play harder in the Olympics, so the Dutch championships still wouldn't have been a good enough test.
I am more inclined to believe that there were issues even during testing in practice, as some have said.
The U.S. team wore the suits in the past month for simulated race conditions, but the Games marked the first time in competition.
So there's a perfect example of an American racing in untested gear.
So where should they have tested them? In competition? I hope not without testing them in competition before that!
The bill doesn't specify the technology (according to TFA). I would assume this would be implemented using the "push" mechanism (which is actually "pull", in reality). At the same time it checks for alerts, the device would check for the kill "signal". This mechanism would be controlled by the carrier or OS provider, and shouldn't be vulnerable in this way.
Should mention that I'm against it, though!
Well, not to state the obvious, but you could actually not do the crime!
I guess there's no point in even having a trial?
Contrary to popular opinion, its not too hard to go about your life without attracting any police attention.
Happens every day. The odds of it happening to a particular individual may be pretty low, but when you beat those odds, you'll probably argue for the rules of justice to be followed.
If I can't sing along with my friends on a phone call the connection is too laggy and the delay is going to adversely affect my conversation. I fear that this news will lead to the end of my sing-alongs, which means awkward, interruption-filled conversations (as mentioned by others).
Suggest you just sit there and wait till life gets easier.
