If you are smart you realize the potential savings of having a common hardware and software platform for engine ECU across manufacturers, cutting down on the "VERY expensive" development costs. Simplified logistics, less expensive diagnostics. There is a reason embedded development has converged to Linux; it makes economic sense. Unfortunately the auto industry only seems interested in making cars more expensive, usually a sign of stagnation.
TFA (requires obnoxious CAPTCHA just to read, wtf) makes it clear the payload is inside a media file attached to an MMS. Myself I do not use MMS since it seems to require OTA data to download the MMS payload, which is exceedingly expensive on my current prepaid plan. Old phones are pretty likely to be used like this; voice only, data only over wifi, so it might lessen the impact. Anyways, I am on Lollipop.
Thank you a thousand times to the link to the handbook! Now I can ditch the boring William Stallings crypto book which I never finished AND I don't need a physical copy!
Does anyone know why you want encryption directly in the filesystem rather than the layered approach being offered for years by the dm-crypt kernel filesystem? The Phoronix article mentions that is intended for Android systems, so my immidiate thinking was that it had something to do with flash storage specifics. Generally I do not like it when a generic, simple solution like dm-crypt gets reimplemented at another layer, increasing complexity, but maybe there is a reason for this?
Another article mentions F2FS (Flash-Friendly File System) as a possible merge target. Suggests it serves needs for flash memory. I guess exposing the filesystem structure/metadata without actually revealing the data itself makes more efficient flash utilization possible. Or maybe it makes it easier for law enforcement to bypass it, if your tinfoil hat is on.
The mailing list entry itself is here: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane....
Links to a design document in the mailing list was dead at time of writing.
I agree with you. I use a Motorola Moto G 2nd gen dual SIM myself, costing about $200 new. That is my upper limit for a phone, simply because it is disposable in my eyes. No amount of cheap replacement parts helps if it gets stolen. I would never pay for a top-of-the-line unit; less so when I get a device whose performance might make it useless once new upgrades of the software rolls out. The allure of the expensive units has always been that they usually lasts longer.
The crux is that 'ethics' and 'sustainability' always gets used as a crutch for holding up an otherwise sub-par product. It smells of snake-oil, of selling to gullible hippies; people will fear being made fools off. I do not belive that ethical and sustainable products would have to be more than 20%-30% more expensive than comparable products, if done right. But most of the time it seems like a way for people in the supply chain to make more money by targeting people who do not care about price. This in fact hampers adoption of these products.
They started to cripple the Linux client as well; since last year it ONLY supports PulseAudio. And it natively supported pure ALSA before that, so it is a feature being removed and replaced with an inferior solution.
Luckily someone created apulse, an emulation layer that allows you to run Skype without the hentai-tentacle-monster known as PulseAudio:
The best part is how they tout the fact that "Hi there, Skype works without Pulse Audio for features like chat as well as sharing files and photos." on their blog, like anyone would use Skype for the text chat features, and that it would somehow make up for the lost functionality: http://blogs.skype.com/2014/06...
I agree fully; I recently bought a 48" Samsung 5000-series HDTV without any "smart" features for this reason. Basically I would be happy to remove the tuner and speakers as well, since it will be hooked up to a PC and external amplifier and speakers. However, we are a minority; this is the reason most TV stores still display some compressed, crappy TV signal on their exhibition screens.
To me it would make the most sense to display a fully uncompressed demo movie which could test/show all the different TV sets image quality fully. However, in practice most people just view the same old SDTV signal, and to a large degree what they care about is the scaling ability and motion compensation features. Or at least that what the store clerk wants them to look at. My experience is that even an old crappy, cheap laptop will outperform most TV sets in terms of output quality. Just feed the TV 1080P with 1:1 pixelmapping and do all the processing on your Linux box.
What further amazes me is how crappy your average remote control is these days. Back in the day we had a VCR remote that you could literally bounce of two walls, from another room and it would still register with the receiver. The ones sold today is more like a laser-tag gun when used. I mean, yes the old remote was larger and it was a more expensive piece of equipment. But have you seen the end user experience with a crappy remote? It is like tryng to eat a steak with plastic, single-use cutlery.
"Confound these ancestors.... They've stolen our best ideas!" - Ben Jonson