Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Biased, much ? (Score 1) 23

I don't think that we shouldn't cover animal experimentation with flower words. I've no doubt animal experiments are OK, as you've said they mostly help the health of humans, but we should at least name what we do to the animals by what it is. How would you call it?

Of course, an internet census is not such an "ethical" goal as healing people, so my comparison might be a bit shaky from this perspective.

Comment: I wonder (Score 2) 23

Why is using idle machines of other people (he's used only machines whose load was under a certain threshold), more unethic than to torment and kill mice in the name of science? I don't think that, when used responsible, latter is unethic, but I wonder why do they put things above biological life?

Comment: Re:Not surprised (Score 2) 130

When I've had no android, I've thought that too. But as I've purchased an android phone, I was quite impressed about the efficient and tight rights separation system of android. Don't misunderstand me: I didn't "activate" the play store app, as I needed to couple it with a google account. If you could install the free apps without an account I'd have tried it, but that way google had lost a customer. The next thing I was annoyed of was the samsung bloat, and the possible lock-in the case I really started to like one of those apps. I solved these two problems when I've installed CM and F-Droid. Of course, I can't install the fanciest whatsapp and so on, but at least I know my phone is truly mine (except for the baseband part), and that lock-ins are very hard. I was fascinated when I found out that every installed app has its own UNIX user assigned.

The rights separation in android is far more better than anything on the linux desktop. In X, every application can keylog me. In android, that's not possible. On the linux desktop, every application has access to all my files, including my .ssh directory.. In android, fs access is far more developed and limited. In linux desktop, every app has access to the webcam. In android, you can see which app has access. Of course, android could do better, perhaps by adding a "revoke right" option and an "always ask" option (osmand for example has a nice recorder feature, but most time I use it I don't need it so why does it have the right *all time*, rather let android ask for that permission the few times I need it), but right now it does best.

The most annoying features of the android ecosystem radiate from GAPPS, but almost none from AOSP.

Comment: Re:Oe noes! A compiler bug! (Score 4, Insightful) 613

by NotInHere (#47544721) Attached to: Linus Torvalds: "GCC 4.9.0 Seems To Be Terminally Broken"

End result, the GCC people will fix this bug in short order (what are GCC point releases for anyway)

The bug was reported 4 point releases ago. It just now started effecting the kernel.

In fact, it has been fixed in trunk even before Linus' rant.

Comment: Re:At fucking last (Score 1) 194

by NotInHere (#47516781) Attached to: Firefox 33 Integrates Cisco's OpenH264

OpenH264 only ships with a video decoder, no AAC audio decoder. The hack Cisco made with OpenH264 won't work, as the AAC licensing pool company removed caps. For WebRTC, this is no problem, as opus will be used as audio encoding.
But MP4 won't work. Perhaps there is potential for a matroska-based h.264+opus format, as when IE and safari (which don't have opus for the audio element yet) implement WebRTC, they need opus encoders and decoders. Then its only a small step to support this mixed format.

+ - Firefox 33 gets Cisco's OpenH264->

Submitted by NotInHere
NotInHere (3654617) writes "As promised, version 33 of the Firefox browser will fetch the OpenH264 module from Cisco, which enables Firefox to decode and encode H.264 video, for both the <video> tag and WebRTC, which has a codec war on this matter. The module won't be a traditional NPAPI plugin, but a so-called Gecko Media Plugin (GMP), Mozilla's answer to the disliked Pepper API. Firefox had no cross-platform support for H.264 before."
Link to Original Source

Comment: OK you CAN take down onion addresses (Score 1) 122

but no one wants to do that. Doing it would mean to be responsible for subsequent takedowns, and what is seen as illegal in one country may be the opposite in another country, and you would need to establish a system for takedown, which can be misused for censorship.

Comment: Re:You conceded my point on rogue DNS @ least (Score 1) 122

To bring this back to the original topic: you know what a command and control is? I hope so. My posts only have covered the time the malware already was installed on the device. Not before. Of course you won't get the virus when you click a link "download here" which leads into nothingness. And yes, you are true, single ips are easier to fight than dns entries in remote countries, spread over the world. I just said that IPs cannot be blocked by a host file, and I say that it makes no sense to give a DNS server a DNS entry, which would have to be resolved first using a dns server, but the only one available needs a dns lookup before working, and so on and so on.

The only cause that justifies this /. story is that this malware was the first ransomware that used an onion address for C&C, not just only "tor alone". It would gain almost no advantage when it then exited the tor network again through an exit node. It would still have needed some DNS entry somewhere. onion addresses are almost impossible to take down.

Please explain: what are hardcodes?

TOR isn't slow anymore. try it. today. then come back and tell me your opinion about the speed of tor but don't yell tor *is* slow while not having tried it recently (you may yell tor *was* slow though).

Comment: Re:Block rogue DNS servers via hosts (Score 1) 122

Blocking ips using a hosts file... I'm sorry but I don't know of any way of doing this.
Even it it were possible, there tor uses no "rogue DNS" servers, and not using any DNS directly, the DNS is tunneled to the exit relay which then invokes the DNS request. Any block by any firewall or ISP DNS fails here -- not just DNS request blocks like the hosts files, but also IP level blocks. This is what TOR was invented for.

No amount of genius can overcome a preoccupation with detail.