Reply to Re: Millimeter talks about copyright
If you don't have an account, just leave the password field blank.
... may largely be a "make work" project with the benefit of serving also as a distraction from other events.
What other events are you referring to?
The Gyroscope acts as a transmitter to the device
It does? I'm not familiar with the technology; how do they work? Are there moving parts involved?
Do I understand you correctly that the gyroscope only emits the information that it is present? Most of the time, I would not be worried about that, but in some cases it is of course a concern.
I think open source may be a more viable option for those technically inclined, but not necessarily for the average person.
One feature of open source is that everything happens in the open. A downside to that is that it gives it a reputation of not working, because people have used it before it was ready for them. (It doesn't help that people who see the potential are usually too quick with recommending it to people.)
And while there is always some software that is not ready for the average person, the basic stable system certainly is. Ten years ago, it was normal for people to try it and be disappointed. I haven't heard that for quite a while now.
Windows 8 is doing so well
Is it? I've heard almost only complaints about it. The only "positive" comment I've heard is that it doesn't crash all the time (which of course if more of a negative comment about previous versions).
I agree that open source provides a way to see if malicious code has been injected, but the majority don't know how to understand even rudimentary code, nor do the care to.
This is a common misconception about why open source is better. It's a misconception, because people's ability to inspect the code is only half of what's happening. The other half is that everything is open, so that when someone finds a problem, it is normally shared with the programmers and fixed in the official code. Because of this, people who don't do any coding themselves still benefit from the fixes that other people do.
But we shouldn't get too excited: this system works well for big projects with many users, but not for small projects with only a few users. For those, open source still gives users more freedom, so I prefer it, but it doesn't magically fix bugs.
anything wireless is already in the open air and can be picked up by anyone choosing to listen.
Not if you do it right. If you use good encryption, only the sender and receiver of the data can understand it. For example, a network attached storage device that connects over WiFi to a local network is not unsafe (if it uses good encryption). The difference between that and cloud storage is that the NAS is under your own control, while the server in the cloud is managed by some unknown person who probably passes your data on to the NSA, and possibly (knowingly or not) to criminals. Of course it is possible to use encrypted storage (where the encryption and decryption happens on the client), but none of the cloud services make it easy to use that, because they want to look at your data.
the fact that there is a wire at all, means there is still a potential connection point.
If you run a good operating system, there is no danger in a connection point. It's the same with a door in a house. You can say that a house without doors is safer against break ins. I say that if you have a good lock on your door, it protects you just as well.
This is fortunate because the best protection is simply to educate the masses into becoming conscious of how they are giving themselves away.
You are more optimistic than me when it comes to average people's intelligence.
I completely agree that education is often a better solution than technical measures (and many times, a combination is best). I'm not too hopeful about the effects of education though.
What other events are you referring to?
The Gyroscope acts as a transmitter to the device
It does? I'm not familiar with the technology; how do they work? Are there moving parts involved?
Do I understand you correctly that the gyroscope only emits the information that it is present? Most of the time, I would not be worried about that, but in some cases it is of course a concern.
I think open source may be a more viable option for those technically inclined, but not necessarily for the average person.
One feature of open source is that everything happens in the open. A downside to that is that it gives it a reputation of not working, because people have used it before it was ready for them. (It doesn't help that people who see the potential are usually too quick with recommending it to people.)
And while there is always some software that is not ready for the average person, the basic stable system certainly is. Ten years ago, it was normal for people to try it and be disappointed. I haven't heard that for quite a while now.
Windows 8 is doing so well
Is it? I've heard almost only complaints about it. The only "positive" comment I've heard is that it doesn't crash all the time (which of course if more of a negative comment about previous versions).
I agree that open source provides a way to see if malicious code has been injected, but the majority don't know how to understand even rudimentary code, nor do the care to.
This is a common misconception about why open source is better. It's a misconception, because people's ability to inspect the code is only half of what's happening. The other half is that everything is open, so that when someone finds a problem, it is normally shared with the programmers and fixed in the official code. Because of this, people who don't do any coding themselves still benefit from the fixes that other people do.
But we shouldn't get too excited: this system works well for big projects with many users, but not for small projects with only a few users. For those, open source still gives users more freedom, so I prefer it, but it doesn't magically fix bugs.
anything wireless is already in the open air and can be picked up by anyone choosing to listen.
Not if you do it right. If you use good encryption, only the sender and receiver of the data can understand it. For example, a network attached storage device that connects over WiFi to a local network is not unsafe (if it uses good encryption). The difference between that and cloud storage is that the NAS is under your own control, while the server in the cloud is managed by some unknown person who probably passes your data on to the NSA, and possibly (knowingly or not) to criminals. Of course it is possible to use encrypted storage (where the encryption and decryption happens on the client), but none of the cloud services make it easy to use that, because they want to look at your data.
the fact that there is a wire at all, means there is still a potential connection point.
If you run a good operating system, there is no danger in a connection point. It's the same with a door in a house. You can say that a house without doors is safer against break ins. I say that if you have a good lock on your door, it protects you just as well.
This is fortunate because the best protection is simply to educate the masses into becoming conscious of how they are giving themselves away.
You are more optimistic than me when it comes to average people's intelligence.
I completely agree that education is often a better solution than technical measures (and many times, a combination is best). I'm not too hopeful about the effects of education though.
