Forgot your password?

Comment: Re: Why is Boeing responsible? (Score 1) 125

by AvitarX (#48041683) Attached to: Boeing Told To Replace Cockpit Screens Affected By Wi-Fi

You're correct , I'm assuming implied warrenty . I'd think that at least the airlines (as the end purchaser ) would be covered under the fair assumption that airplanes can operate unhindered by weather radar etc .

I would assume that's the equivelant of selling an airplane that doesn't fly .

Comment: Re:Why is Boeing responsible? (Score 1) 125

by AvitarX (#48041195) Attached to: Boeing Told To Replace Cockpit Screens Affected By Wi-Fi

I don't know that specs would be required.

I think a reasonable argument could be made that airplanes are resistant to air surveillance and weather radar (arguably WiFi too for a passenger jet, but I'd think those other two are un ambiguous, though it should be assumed that there's at the very least accidental WiFi on, permitted or not) to be fit for the purpose in which they are sold, making it an issue of implied warranty.

If Boeing purchased these with the stated purpose being the cockpit, I don't think speccing enters into the equation, these are things that a reasonable person assumes are fine for a display, especially if it's being sold for flight. Nobody requested in the spec it not randomly turn off for no reason, but if that was the problem I'd assume it would be unambiguous too, it's implied that they will operate, and operate in the environment for which they were sold.

It is Boeing's job to make the airlines whole (if it's determined that they are indeed unacceptable), and Honneywell's job to make Boeing whole.

Comment: Re:Update to Godwin's law? (Score 1) 453

by AvitarX (#48040841) Attached to: Obama Administration Argues For Backdoors In Personal Electronics

I understand the LEAs don't care, but it's the lawmakers that surprise me.

You'd think they would care if the US could remain secure or not. There's huge overlap for example with our private power companies and security (as every report seems to say), why would they want to purposefully weaken the security of anybody.

I just don't understand how the lawmakers don't see it that way, that limiting the ability to keep information secret is a huge security threat to the nation.

I don't expect the LEAs to care about security, only the ability to do their job.

Comment: Re:Update to Godwin's law? (Score 5, Insightful) 453

by AvitarX (#48040219) Attached to: Obama Administration Argues For Backdoors In Personal Electronics

What I don't understand is the lack of concern about security.

I'm far more afraid of a terrorist/criminal organization getting access to these back doors, and reading all of the encrypted documents that companies (including government contractors) want to secure, than hidden communication allowing them to get away.

How is the government not concerned about corporate espionage, terrorism, and other criminal activity, you'd think from a security standpoint, they would want encryption to be legit.

Comment: Re: I dunno about LEDs, but CFLs don't last (Score 2) 596

by AvitarX (#48002087) Attached to: The Great Lightbulb Conspiracy

Every led I've purchased (I only buy energy star , because they are actually testing them for light quality ,unlike with CFLs ,so that may make a difference ) , has said it was dimmable , to the point I thought it was intrinsic in the technology .

They're also the only bulbs that have any real life in my old house . My porch light lasts 2-3 weeks incandesant . I'm 4 months on the led I put in it , on convenience alone it's worth the price .

Comment: Re: Other hackable things (Score 1) 70

by AvitarX (#47978837) Attached to: Apple's TouchID Fingerprint Scanner: Still Hackable

The security feature I'd like to see is a way to with touch only turn off a phone that's locked ( for example the 5 quick clicks method on the power button most portable vaporizors tend to use) .

This with a long password and whole disk encryption on boot

I could then use sloppy security most of the time , ( 4 digit pin) ,but I could easily turn it off in my pocket before handing it over to a malicious actor ( law enforcement / theif) .

Comment: Re: Because... (Score 1) 252

by AvitarX (#47974977) Attached to: Do Specs Matter Anymore For the Average Smartphone User?

There's also people like me that can't seem to keep a phone working for more than a year or two .

At this point , I think I'll be sticking to phones like the Moto e or g , $200 for a workable phone , not customization to make it annoying (every non nexus android I've used had weird little issues with sharing objects between the built in apps and newer apps from the store)

Facts are stubborn, but statistics are more pliable.