I was thinking more Seaquest DSV
I was thinking more Seaquest DSV
According to Snopes, this is an urban legend: http://www.snopes.com/autos/te...
It wouldn't work, or otherwise the DOJ would have set up an automated cloning of the phone and trying 10 password attempts at a time. What I've gathered from reading the various articles is that each IPhone has it's decryption key stored in hardware, with no way to copy it. Easily, that is, I suppose they could break open the chip and try and chart the pathways using a scanning tunneling microscope, but that would take a great deal of effort, and it would be easy to accidentally destroy the key doing so.
So what they're trying to do is get Apple to create a signed version of IOS which when installed, won't wipe the phone after 10 failed password attempts. They obviously have a way to install new versions of IOS even without a user entering a password. Which is actually sensible, if you think about it.. when an IPhone accidentally gets bricked when an update fails (or deliberately, witness the recent "Error 53"), it makes sense for there to be a way to force reload a fresh version from scratch without destroying the user's phone. The only reaason the DOJ needs Apple's help is, likely, that there's protection in place on IPhones to prevent unsigned code from being installed. Hence they want Apple to create the "poisoned" version of IOS that, when installed, makes doing a brute-force cracking of the phone easier.
I haven't RTFA yet, but If the analysis is solely based on network delays, then a VPN company could simply introduce randomized delays to all it's users, even the local ones. Then an analysing service wouldn't be able to definitively say whether any given user is geo-spoofing or not. The best they could say is that the connecting service is likely a VPN.
It's an unfortunate sign of the times, but I've read far too many articles about people being arrested and jailed for unknowingly violating the technicalities of various different laws.. consenting partners under 18 being jailed as sex offenders and being listed for life, insulting heads of state or reporting on human rights abuses, jailed for having cartoon porn / weird tentacle thing stuff from Japan that still gets branded as child pornography, or even for whistle-blowing. And particularly for America, reading in recent times, the attitude of border agents that they're outside the law and no-one has any constitutional rights.. frankly, if you are a journalist reporting about things your government (either American or elsewhere) are doing, you'd be a fool not to have everything strongly encrypted, and give them the leisure to browse through your stuff to find something to charge you with.
Yes. "Software Patents".
I also chuckled at the classic literary reference in the article title.. "from the mice-of-nimh dept"
Ah. That makes sense. So yes, it's history repeating itself all over again.
Even from reading TFA, I'm not sure I understand.. I take it that that version of Windows 10 comes with Bing hardcoded, but only for Internet Explorer (or whatever it is that they're calling the Windows 10 replacement)? I presume there's still nothing stopping users, once they get it, from installing Chrome or Firefox, and choosing whatever search engine they want?
Some cases I've used them for that I didn't feel dirty about are:
* checking for failure conditions from calls to sub-methods, and jumping to a common cleanup and exit code block. Difficult to replicate cleanly without massive if blocks, or abusing exceptions.
* Cleanly breaking out of multiple nested loops
* I've used them for an implementation of coroutines, which simulates threading for systems which don't have threads. In this case the GOTOs were nested inside macros and stub classes for holding context, but the whole scheme wouldn't have worked without them.
Amen to that. It's like the old argument of the GOTO keyword. Sure it can easily be abused. But for certain limited cases, it's a godsend for making clean code. As the OP says, if someone's a bad programmer, they're going to write bad code no matter what language is used. Straight-jacketing people as to what they can use may help newbies, but you end up constraining what experienced programmers can do.
Wouldn't be possible. Believe it or not, Lego bricks are produced with a high degree of precision, with tolerances less than 10 micro-metres in order to be able to have the pieces 'snap' together properly (see the Wikipedia Lego article). Currently available 3D printers simply can't do that degree of accuracy. Don't know about these new "faster" printers, but I'd suspect that they've concentrated more on "fast" than "precise".
What I would have loved to see in C would be a different keyword for break for exiting a loop versus ending a switch case. 90% of the times in recent years that I've been tempted to use goto have been when I've written a switch statement in a loop, and need to break out of the loop from one of the cases. I have to steel myself and either rewrite the particular case as an if statement before the switch (nasty), or fiddle around with flags to break out of the loop after the switch statement, or check it as part of the loop condition.
If anyone's particularly interested in coroutines, we in the ScummVM project, which provides a reimplementation of lots of old classic adventure games, implemented a fairly clean C++ coroutine implementation, which we already use for two different games were originally threaded. ScummVM runs on a variety of different hardware, not all of which support threading, so we had to come up with a way to run these games using only a single thread. See https://github.com/scummvm/scu... and coroutines.cpp if you're interested.
If that's the case, then a possible solution would be an encryption that unlocks on one specific finger's fingerprint, but deletes all phone data for the other nine fingers. Since the ruling says you have to provide your fingerprints fine, but the knowledge of which finger's fingerprint is the correct one is knowledge in your brain, which doesn't have to be divulged. This would also, obviously, need to be combined with secure hardware that prevents the cops from simply copying the data and trying the fingerprints one at a time with the copy.
That way, you still have the convenience of a fingerprint unlock, but extra security against seisure, since the cops would only have a 10% chance of guessing the right finger.