BGAN is a high speed satellite internet network run by Inmarsat. If you have line-of-sight to geostationary orbit it'll work.
Core 1 Duo machines are perfectly usable if the software is just written sanely.
Bad choice of example. Core 1 machines are pretty much garbage thanks to one stupid choice by Intel, the return to 32 bit. 64 bit was already standard at that point. We could have had Windows 7 as a 64 bit exclusive if it weren't for the fucking Core 1 and similar timeframe Atoms meaning there were 32 bit only systems still under warranty.
Fuck Intel for releasing those things.
I mean you can get rather creative with DNS and NAT Rules www.domain.com and www.domain.org can point to the same outside IP Address then an advanced router knows based on the requested domain name wither to go internally to 10.0.0.2 and 10.0.0.3.
DNS has absolutely nothing to do with NAT. Certain protocols, such as HTTP and SIP, allow the *same* IP to host multiple domains which are differentiated by a field in the request. A reverse proxy can send traffic that hits this same IP to go to multiple servers, including different ones based on domain, but NAT's involvement is over with by the time anything cares about the hostname on the request.
I doubt that, it would be trivial to modify a list of local hashes to prevent being detected.
As opposed to it not being trivial to modify your DNS cache?
Anything that's checking standard local resources will be trivial to edit for someone who cares to. Sending a list of flagged hashes would be the more privacy-safe way to do this. Whether they do or not I have no idea, but nothing about the information I've seen posted so far including any of the decompiled code seems to indicate one way or another.
Correct. I'm no fan of Canonical when they try to impose their will (Unity of course being the biggest example), but for fuck's sake people this is making a big deal out of literally nothing.
Quoting directly from the Canonical Intellectual Property Rights Policy (emphasis mine):
Any redistribution of modified versions of Ubuntu must be approved, certified or provided by Canonical if you are going to associate it with the Trademarks. Otherwise you must remove and replace the Trademarks and will need to recompile the source code to create your own binaries. This does not affect your rights under any open source licence applicable to any of the components of Ubuntu.
Just like Mozilla, just like Red Hat, and just like many other major open source projects Ubuntu uses trademarks to protect their brand. Don't use their brand and you're just forking an open source project as normal. See also Iceweasel, CentOS, etc.
There are two things a Kindle does with its WiFi connection: Downloading content from Amazon and running a barely functional web browser. If you aren't going to use the Amazon store there's basically nothing worth using the WiFi for.
Funny how the real reason for the "privacy respecting" certification is that many of the most popular color printers will not print exactly what you sent, open source driver or not, but instead will add "microdot" coding that uniquely identifies the actual printer used. This is officially to track down counterfeiters, but given how obvious a printed counterfeit really is compared to a properly stamped bill I don't see that justification as legitimate.
I see this as something you'd use if you tend to work in a GUI that's just full of terminals. You can keep a gitsh terminal open and easily switch over to it to run git commands without having to drop out of something else.
There are relatively new systems, 2 to 5 years old, that only did 802.11b.
Then guess what? They were obsolete when released and/or were continued to be produced with obsolete technology long after they should have changed. Just because someone kept making it and someone else bought it doesn't change that. It's 2014, five years old would be from 2009 when 802.11n was officially ratified and draft-N hardware had been on the shelves for months. If anyone was buying hardware that only does 802.11b in 2009, that's their own fault for being fucking stupid.
To argue that a technology which is 15 years old and has gone through three further generations since which scaled performance exponentially isn't obsolete is just crazy talk.
A more realistic reason is that many people just don't have the option of running cabling through an existing property - people who rent.
As someone who's never owned a structure but has had wired ethernet in every room of every place he's lived, I have to call bullshit. Sure, wiring is harder when you rent, but it's not impossible.
Some landlords actually welcome the improvements, seeing the value in modern connectivity, and allow more traditional wiring to take place. My current rental house is like this and over the month I've lived here I've spent an hour or two per weekend with fiberglass rods, fish tape, and a cable bit getting Cat6 from a patch panel placed in the office to the TV, bedrooms, garage, and anywhere else a permanent network device sits.
Others may not be officially interested in such things, but that doesn't mean you can't do them anyways. Ethernet cables are tiny, the hole required to pass one through a wall is trivial to patch over. If you have attic or basement access as I did in my last apartment, you can often follow existing cable or telephone lines from there in to the wall, then just swap the faceplate from the single outlet to a dual combo or a keystone-style configuration. In that last place the laundry room had a vent pipe going straight to the attic. I used that to get wires upstairs for the bedrooms by just climbing up there and dropping some plenum-rated wire down the tube. The other ends followed a cable wire down in to one of the bedrooms and was just punched through the wall behind the box to reach the other room.
Tucking wires along baseboards, running them under carpet, through ducts, etc. All great ways to run low-voltage wire in a residence when you can't just do it the right way. I'd never recommend a business network be done this way nor anything carrying dangerous power levels, but for home ethernet it's perfectly safe and much better than any wireless ever will be.
LAN parties are still alive and well. Yeah, in the era of broadband it's a lot harder to justify the old two-man LAN when Hamachi and the like make VPNs accessible to the masses and most games support easy connection to your friends online, but the experience of getting together with a bunch of friends and competing or cooperating in the same room is hard to beat.
Just last weekend I hosted a small LAN. Just six people showed up due to the weather, but we still had a great time. Cooperative titles like Payday 2 and TF2's Mann vs. Machine mode are great fun online with a good team, but it's just so much easier to communicate and coordinate in person that it ends up making things move more smoothly even when they're going horribly wrong in-game, making it more fun win or lose. Competitive titles are usually built for more people so we'd need closer to our normal of 10-12 for most of them to work, but topically enough a Starcraft II community gamemode called Squadron Tower Defense works brilliantly for 2v2 through 4v4 (1v1 is doable but has no margin for error).
Look around and if you live near a populated area I'll bet there's at least one public LAN event within 50 miles in the next few weeks.
As a side benefit the whole ability to really be face-to-face with the other players tends to eliminate a lot of the problems experienced in online gaming. Dickheads can't hide behind a dynamic IP and username, so trolling tends to be limited to good natured pranks and the like. Obviously there is the risk of some participants being intolerable either for their personality or occasionally their hygiene, but a good group will weed those out over time.
And while we're at it, why do you need to control your house temperature with anything other than your finger pushing a button on the thermostat? Is there some level of complexity to a thermostat that I'm missing? Is your thermostat located somewhere other than inside your house? Do you have some interesting situation that would require you to remotely change the temperature of your house? If so, what is it (the situation)?
Not much of a thinker, eh? Ever gone on vacation? Ever realized at the airport that you should have set your thermostat lower/higher to save energy while you're gone?
Ever gotten back after having perfectly remembered to do the above, walked in to your house, and wished there was some way you could have fired off the A/C or heat remotely and brought it back to normal living temperature before you got home?
It's a legitimate convenience, so don't act like there's no good reason someone would want this ability.
Well for the obvious one, hack to control the temperature in your building. That could be done for a variety of reasons; an employee who finds the officially set temperature inappropriate, a prankster, or with malicious intent there are plenty of situations where out-of-control climate control could cause damage and/or put people in danger.
One way or another, as with any networked device security is important and we've all seen how little the vendors care when skipping security lets them get a cheaper product on the market sooner.
Except that many important security holes affecting the general population have been found this way. "Grey hat" pentesting (which I'm defining as unapproved but without malicious intent) is of critical importance for pretty much any public-facing system. The "black hat" crowd will be hitting it anyways, and who would you rather have find the problem? The one who'll report it or the one who'll exploit it?
Sure it's a risky thing to do and I sure wouldn't intentionally associate any such behavior with my real identity, but its something we should be encouraging because the other option is worse.
This is the sort of thinking that leads to me still finding IE6 in active use. If you don't already understand why that's a problem I truly hope I get contracted to replace you when your technical debt catches up to you.