Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:So everything is protected by a 4 digit passcod (Score 1) 366

by mark-t (#47938385) Attached to: Apple Will No Longer Unlock Most iPhones, iPads For Police
And how would you do step 1 or 2, exactly? Consider the possibility that the passcode protection could actually be enforced right down to the individual chip level, so trying to image the storage without the correct password would be futile, only giving you garbage at best.

Comment: Re:4 digits = impossible? (Score 1) 366

by mark-t (#47938191) Attached to: Apple Will No Longer Unlock Most iPhones, iPads For Police
If you didn't want it to completely erase everything after a number of failed attemps, but the device could still be set up to block more than, say, 10 attempts per hour, then you're looking at closer to a month and a half, assuming you make 10 attemps every hour, night and day until you crack it... or on average, still more than 20 days to crack. In that amount of time, it's not inconceivable that one could have reasonably earned enough money to buy a whole new iphone, so the data would have to be of extreme importance to even want to go through with that. If you restrict it to no more than 10 attempts per 24 hours, then you're looking at the average length of time to crack being well in excess of a year. And again, it would have to all be done manually.... Who the fuck has that kind of patience?

Comment: Re:So everything is protected by a 4 digit passcod (Score 1) 366

by mark-t (#47938073) Attached to: Apple Will No Longer Unlock Most iPhones, iPads For Police
If the passcode must be manually entered, then even a 4 digit password is not particulalry feasible to try and crack. Sure, it can be done by a determined enough person, but you're talking about sitting around doing nothing but pressing virtual keys on a screen for what on average would probably be at least half a dozen hours before they might luck out and get it right. Most people have something considerably better to do with their time... If that couples with a password count restriction, say, limited to 10 attempts to unlock per hour, then it's completely infeasible.

Comment: Re:Simple set of pipelined utilties! (Score 1) 345

by mark-t (#47937979) Attached to: Torvalds: No Opinion On Systemd

It would be more like saying that everyone should be calling your home an El-Gaz home because you got central heating from El-Gaz, even though your home is not owned in any way by El-Gaz... but calling it that would suggest it...

Really, if Stallman had ever suggested that Minix should be called GNU/Minix because of the full suite of GNU tools that it used to come with, Tannenbaum would have probably dropped their use almost immediately (he eventually did anyways, but if it wasn't using the GNU tools back when Linux was first being developed, there's every likelihood that Linux wouldn't have been dependent on GNU tools either, if it had ever been developed at all).

And besides, everything else that uses the GNU project name in its title is at least intended to be strongly affiliated with the GNU project, if not actually *part* of the GNU project itself. Linux uses the GPL, and most distros use GPL tools, but Linux is *NOT* a GPL project, nor it is really affiliated with it.

Comment: Re:GNU is about not being Unix. (Score 1) 345

by mark-t (#47934585) Attached to: Torvalds: No Opinion On Systemd
My point is that names are important, and they should do so in a way that isn't going to leave a person confused about what something is. Prefixing the name of a piece of software with the name of the GNU project carries the connotation that it is something that is actually *PART* of that project, or else it was at least explicitly the intent of its creators to be strongly affiliated with the GNU project. Linux uses the GPL, but is not actually affiliated with the GNU project in any way, so calling it GNU/Linux is misleading at best, an outright lie at worst. If one really feels a need to have to point out that Linux is being distributed with GNU software, then it would make sense to explicitly point out that fact... nobody is stopping anybody from being honest about the origins of the software most Linux distros come bundled with. But calling Linux GNU/Linux as some sort of a shorthand form carries the connotation that Linux is somehow actually part of the GNU project, which it isn't... or at least implies that they actively support or publish some specific distribution of Linux (in which case, the term would refer specifically to that distribution), but that's not the case either.

Comment: Re:they will defeat themselves (Score 1) 906

by mark-t (#47934277) Attached to: ISIS Bans Math and Social Studies For Children

I can't see any religious reason to ban math

I was puzzling over this for a while myself, but then I considered that it may be because it includes concepts like infinity... and even merely acknowledging the existence of such a thing, and even though it is purely an abstract concept, it may be considered tantamount to challenging the infinite nature of Allah, and thus not something that should be taught.

Comment: Re:Still too much (Score 1) 372

by mark-t (#47933973) Attached to: Is the Tesla Model 3 Actually Going To Cost $50,000?

I don't argue that they sell, but really... if they were just selling the vehicle, it would cost half of what it does.

Tesla, and Mercedes, can charge what they do because there are enough people out there that are willing to pay top dollar for a brand name.

In Tesla's case, it's also because it doesn't really have a competitor that offers anything resembling the same automobile features... all the other EV manufactures can't boast anything close to Tesla's range, and most look like crap (and the few that don't have abysmal range, not good for anything but commuting, and if I could afford to own a second car, I would be able to afford to own a Tesla in the first place).

Comment: Re:Simple set of pipelined utilties! (Score 1) 345

by mark-t (#47933193) Attached to: Torvalds: No Opinion On Systemd
Then just friggen call it Linux plus mostly gnu stuff. Calling it gnu/Linux is essentially rebranding it, suggesting that Linux is part of gnu. It is not. Linux may be GPL, but it is not part of the GNU project, where everything else that refers to the gnu project explicitly on its appellation is.

The number of arguments is unimportant unless some of them are correct. -- Ralph Hartley

Working...