Skip to main content

Home/ Future of the Web/ Group items tagged major

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Filter: All | Bookmarks | Topics Simple Middle
Gonzalo San Gil, PhD.

How operating companies can stop patent trolls: Cut off the ammo | Ars Technoica - 0 views

arstechnica.com/...patent-trolls-cut-off-the-ammo

patent trolls stopped operating companies cut off amm

shared by Gonzalo San Gil, PhD. on 10 Jul 14 - No Cached
  • Gonzalo San Gil, PhD. on 10 Jul 14
     
    "Six tech companies have kicked off a new program that they hope will put a major dent in patent trolling, even with Congress unable to pass patent reform."
  • Gonzalo San Gil, PhD. on 10 Jul 14
     
    "Six tech companies have kicked off a new program that they hope will put a major dent in patent trolling, even with Congress unable to pass patent reform."
Gonzalo San Gil, PhD.

NSA - NoScript Anywhere - Next Generation Mobile NoScript for Android Smartphones and T... - 0 views

noscript.net/nsa

nsa noscript everywhere firefox android mobile counter script browsing secure Mozilla Electr open surce free software Electrolysis

shared by Gonzalo San Gil, PhD. on 17 Nov 14 - No Cached
  • Gonzalo San Gil, PhD. on 17 Nov 14
     
    "What's NoScript Mobile UI NoScript Anywhere (NSA) is the nickname for the next major iteration of the NoScript security add-on (NoScript 3.x), whose guts have been turned upside down in order to match Mozilla's Electrolysis multiprocessing architecture and implement a porting for Firefox Mobile, available on Android smartphones and tablets. " [# ! The Acronym... # ! ... it's just a coincidence... # ! ;) # ! The #App is #security for #Your (#opensource driven) #device...]
  • Gonzalo San Gil, PhD. on 17 Nov 14
     
    "What's NoScript Mobile UI NoScript Anywhere (NSA) is the nickname for the next major iteration of the NoScript security add-on (NoScript 3.x), whose guts have been turned upside down in order to match Mozilla's Electrolysis multiprocessing architecture and implement a porting for Firefox Mobile, available on Android smartphones and tablets. "
Gonzalo San Gil, PhD.

How we used an open source meme generator to promote our journalism - Digital Times - M... - 0 views

medium.com/...te-our-journalism-a0f963aa7465

open source meme generator journalism digital times medium.com

shared by Gonzalo San Gil, PhD. on 15 Feb 15 - No Cached
  • Gonzalo San Gil, PhD. on 15 Feb 15
     
    "From Meme to CardKit One of the tasks of a digital team in any major news organisation is to make the newsroom more efficient. "
  • Gonzalo San Gil, PhD. on 15 Feb 15
     
    "From Meme to CardKit One of the tasks of a digital team in any major news organisation is to make the newsroom more efficient. "
Gonzalo San Gil, PhD.

MPAA to Undergo Major Changes Following Studio Disquiet | TorrentFreak - 0 views

torrentfreak.com/llowing-studio-disquiet-150206

MPAA undergo major changes following studio disquiet

shared by Gonzalo San Gil, PhD. on 07 Feb 15 - No Cached
  • Gonzalo San Gil, PhD. on 07 Feb 15
     
    " Andy on February 6, 2015 C: 0 Breaking Sony almost withdrew from the MPAA after the movie trade group failed to support the studio as it faced an unprecedented cyber-attack last year. As disquiet continues over the way the MPAA operates while burning through huge amounts of cash, big changes now lie ahead for the Hollywood group."
  • Gonzalo San Gil, PhD. on 07 Feb 15
     
    " Andy on February 6, 2015 C: 0 Breaking Sony almost withdrew from the MPAA after the movie trade group failed to support the studio as it faced an unprecedented cyber-attack last year. As disquiet continues over the way the MPAA operates while burning through huge amounts of cash, big changes now lie ahead for the Hollywood group."
Gary Edwards

Google's ARC Beta runs Android apps on Chrome OS, Windows, Mac, and Linux | Ars Technica - 0 views

arstechnica.com/...roid-apps-on-most-desktop-oses

Google-ARC

shared by Gary Edwards on 02 Apr 15 - No Cached
  • So calling all developers: You can now (probably, maybe) run your Android apps on just about anything—Android, Chrome OS, Windows, Mac, and Linux—provided you fiddle with the ARC Welder and submit your app to the Chrome Web Store.
  • The App Runtime for Chrome and Native Client are hugely important projects because they potentially allow Google to push a "universal binary" strategy on developers. "Write your app for Android, and we'll make it run on almost every popular OS! (other than iOS)" Google Play Services support is a major improvement for ARC and signals just how ambitious this project is. Some day it will be a great sales pitch to convince developers to write for Android first, which gives them apps on all these desktop OSes for free.
  • Gary Edwards on 02 Apr 15
     
    Thanks Marbux. ARC appears to be an extraordinary technology. Funny but Florian has been pushing Native Client (NaCL) since it was first ported from Firefox to Chrome. Looks like he was right. "In September, Google launched ARC-the "App Runtime for Chrome,"-a project that allowed Android apps to run on Chrome OS. A few days later, a hack revealed the project's full potential: it enabled ARC on every "desktop" version of Chrome, meaning you could unofficially run Android apps on Chrome OS, Windows, Mac OS X, and Linux. ARC made Android apps run on nearly every computing platform (save iOS). ARC is an early beta though so Google has kept the project's reach very limited-only a handful of apps have been ported to ARC, which have all been the result of close collaborations between Google and the app developer. Now though, Google is taking two big steps forward with the latest developer preview: it's allowing any developer to run their app on ARC via a new Chrome app packager, and it's allowing ARC to run on any desktop OS with a Chrome browser. ARC runs Windows, Mac, Linux, and Chrome OS thanks to Native Client (abbreviated "NaCL"). NaCL is a Chrome sandboxing technology that allows Chrome apps and plugins to run at "near native" speeds, taking full advantage of the system's CPU and GPU. Native Client turns Chrome into a development platform, write to it, and it'll run on all desktop Chrome browsers. Google ported a full Android stack to Native Client, allowing Android apps to run on most major OSes. With the original ARC release, there was no official process to getting an Android app running on the Chrome platform (other than working with Google). Now Google has released the adorably-named ARC Welder, a Chrome app which will convert any Android app into an ARC-powered Chrome app. It's mainly for developers to package up an APK and submit it to the Chrome Web Store, but anyone can package and launch an APK from the app directly."
Gonzalo San Gil, PhD.

Top 10 Open Source Developments of 2015 | Business | LinuxInsider - 0 views

www.linuxinsider.com/...evelopments-of-2015-82816.html

top 10 open source developments 2015

shared by Gonzalo San Gil, PhD. on 04 Dec 15 - No Cached
  • Gonzalo San Gil, PhD. on 04 Dec 15
     
    "Open source is driving an ever-expanding market. The notion of community-driven development is a growing disruption to proprietary software controlled by commercial vendors, and the free open source software concept has become a major disruption in industry and technology."
  • Gonzalo San Gil, PhD. on 04 Dec 15
     
    "Open source is driving an ever-expanding market. The notion of community-driven development is a growing disruption to proprietary software controlled by commercial vendors, and the free open source software concept has become a major disruption in industry and technology."
Paul Merrell

Cy Vance's Proposal to Backdoor Encrypted Devices Is Riddled With Vulnerabilities | Jus... - 0 views

www.justsecurity.org/...evices-riddled-vulnerabilities

surveillance state encryption-backdoors Vance

shared by Paul Merrell on 11 Dec 15 - No Cached
  • Less than a week after the attacks in Paris — while the public and policymakers were still reeling, and the investigation had barely gotten off the ground — Cy Vance, Manhattan’s District Attorney, released a policy paper calling for legislation requiring companies to provide the government with backdoor access to their smartphones and other mobile devices. This is the first concrete proposal of this type since September 2014, when FBI Director James Comey reignited the “Crypto Wars” in response to Apple’s and Google’s decisions to use default encryption on their smartphones. Though Comey seized on Apple’s and Google’s decisions to encrypt their devices by default, his concerns are primarily related to end-to-end encryption, which protects communications that are in transit. Vance’s proposal, on the other hand, is only concerned with device encryption, which protects data stored on phones. It is still unclear whether encryption played any role in the Paris attacks, though we do know that the attackers were using unencrypted SMS text messages on the night of the attack, and that some of them were even known to intelligence agencies and had previously been under surveillance. But regardless of whether encryption was used at some point during the planning of the attacks, as I lay out below, prohibiting companies from selling encrypted devices would not prevent criminals or terrorists from being able to access unbreakable encryption. Vance’s primary complaint is that Apple’s and Google’s decisions to provide their customers with more secure devices through encryption interferes with criminal investigations. He claims encryption prevents law enforcement from accessing stored data like iMessages, photos and videos, Internet search histories, and third party app data. He makes several arguments to justify his proposal to build backdoors into encrypted smartphones, but none of them hold water.
  • Before addressing the major privacy, security, and implementation concerns that his proposal raises, it is worth noting that while an increase in use of fully encrypted devices could interfere with some law enforcement investigations, it will help prevent far more crimes — especially smartphone theft, and the consequent potential for identity theft. According to Consumer Reports, in 2014 there were more than two million victims of smartphone theft, and nearly two-thirds of all smartphone users either took no steps to secure their phones or their data or failed to implement passcode access for their phones. Default encryption could reduce instances of theft because perpetrators would no longer be able to break into the phone to steal the data.
  • Vance argues that creating a weakness in encryption to allow law enforcement to access data stored on devices does not raise serious concerns for security and privacy, since in order to exploit the vulnerability one would need access to the actual device. He considers this an acceptable risk, claiming it would not be the same as creating a widespread vulnerability in encryption protecting communications in transit (like emails), and that it would be cheap and easy for companies to implement. But Vance seems to be underestimating the risks involved with his plan. It is increasingly important that smartphones and other devices are protected by the strongest encryption possible. Our devices and the apps on them contain astonishing amounts of personal information, so much that an unprecedented level of harm could be caused if a smartphone or device with an exploitable vulnerability is stolen, not least in the forms of identity fraud and credit card theft. We bank on our phones, and have access to credit card payments with services like Apple Pay. Our contact lists are stored on our phones, including phone numbers, emails, social media accounts, and addresses. Passwords are often stored on people’s phones. And phones and apps are often full of personal details about their lives, from food diaries to logs of favorite places to personal photographs. Symantec conducted a study, where the company spread 50 “lost” phones in public to see what people who picked up the phones would do with them. The company found that 95 percent of those people tried to access the phone, and while nearly 90 percent tried to access private information stored on the phone or in other private accounts such as banking services and email, only 50 percent attempted contacting the owner.
  • ...8 more annotations...
  • Vance attempts to downplay this serious risk by asserting that anyone can use the “Find My Phone” or Android Device Manager services that allow owners to delete the data on their phones if stolen. However, this does not stand up to scrutiny. These services are effective only when an owner realizes their phone is missing and can take swift action on another computer or device. This delay ensures some period of vulnerability. Encryption, on the other hand, protects everyone immediately and always. Additionally, Vance argues that it is safer to build backdoors into encrypted devices than it is to do so for encrypted communications in transit. It is true that there is a difference in the threats posed by the two types of encryption backdoors that are being debated. However, some manner of widespread vulnerability will inevitably result from a backdoor to encrypted devices. Indeed, the NSA and GCHQ reportedly hacked into a database to obtain cell phone SIM card encryption keys in order defeat the security protecting users’ communications and activities and to conduct surveillance. Clearly, the reality is that the threat of such a breach, whether from a hacker or a nation state actor, is very real. Even if companies go the extra mile and create a different means of access for every phone, such as a separate access key for each phone, significant vulnerabilities will be created. It would still be possible for a malicious actor to gain access to the database containing those keys, which would enable them to defeat the encryption on any smartphone they took possession of. Additionally, the cost of implementation and maintenance of such a complex system could be high.
  • Privacy is another concern that Vance dismisses too easily. Despite Vance’s arguments otherwise, building backdoors into device encryption undermines privacy. Our government does not impose a similar requirement in any other context. Police can enter homes with warrants, but there is no requirement that people record their conversations and interactions just in case they someday become useful in an investigation. The conversations that we once had through disposable letters and in-person conversations now happen over the Internet and on phones. Just because the medium has changed does not mean our right to privacy has.
  • In addition to his weak reasoning for why it would be feasible to create backdoors to encrypted devices without creating undue security risks or harming privacy, Vance makes several flawed policy-based arguments in favor of his proposal. He argues that criminals benefit from devices that are protected by strong encryption. That may be true, but strong encryption is also a critical tool used by billions of average people around the world every day to protect their transactions, communications, and private information. Lawyers, doctors, and journalists rely on encryption to protect their clients, patients, and sources. Government officials, from the President to the directors of the NSA and FBI, and members of Congress, depend on strong encryption for cybersecurity and data security. There are far more innocent Americans who benefit from strong encryption than there are criminals who exploit it. Encryption is also essential to our economy. Device manufacturers could suffer major economic losses if they are prohibited from competing with foreign manufacturers who offer more secure devices. Encryption also protects major companies from corporate and nation-state espionage. As more daily business activities are done on smartphones and other devices, they may now hold highly proprietary or sensitive information. Those devices could be targeted even more than they are now if all that has to be done to access that information is to steal an employee’s smartphone and exploit a vulnerability the manufacturer was required to create.
  • Vance also suggests that the US would be justified in creating such a requirement since other Western nations are contemplating requiring encryption backdoors as well. Regardless of whether other countries are debating similar proposals, we cannot afford a race to the bottom on cybersecurity. Heads of the intelligence community regularly warn that cybersecurity is the top threat to our national security. Strong encryption is our best defense against cyber threats, and following in the footsteps of other countries by weakening that critical tool would do incalculable harm. Furthermore, even if the US or other countries did implement such a proposal, criminals could gain access to devices with strong encryption through the black market. Thus, only innocent people would be negatively affected, and some of those innocent people might even become criminals simply by trying to protect their privacy by securing their data and devices. Finally, Vance argues that David Kaye, UN Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression and Opinion, supported the idea that court-ordered decryption doesn’t violate human rights, provided certain criteria are met, in his report on the topic. However, in the context of Vance’s proposal, this seems to conflate the concepts of court-ordered decryption and of government-mandated encryption backdoors. The Kaye report was unequivocal about the importance of encryption for free speech and human rights. The report concluded that:
  • States should promote strong encryption and anonymity. National laws should recognize that individuals are free to protect the privacy of their digital communications by using encryption technology and tools that allow anonymity online. … States should not restrict encryption and anonymity, which facilitate and often enable the rights to freedom of opinion and expression. Blanket prohibitions fail to be necessary and proportionate. States should avoid all measures that weaken the security that individuals may enjoy online, such as backdoors, weak encryption standards and key escrows. Additionally, the group of intelligence experts that was hand-picked by the President to issue a report and recommendations on surveillance and technology, concluded that: [R]egarding encryption, the U.S. Government should: (1) fully support and not undermine efforts to create encryption standards; (2) not in any way subvert, undermine, weaken, or make vulnerable generally available commercial software; and (3) increase the use of encryption and urge US companies to do so, in order to better protect data in transit, at rest, in the cloud, and in other storage.
  • The clear consensus among human rights experts and several high-ranking intelligence experts, including the former directors of the NSA, Office of the Director of National Intelligence, and DHS, is that mandating encryption backdoors is dangerous. Unaddressed Concerns: Preventing Encrypted Devices from Entering the US and the Slippery Slope In addition to the significant faults in Vance’s arguments in favor of his proposal, he fails to address the question of how such a restriction would be effectively implemented. There is no effective mechanism for preventing code from becoming available for download online, even if it is illegal. One critical issue the Vance proposal fails to address is how the government would prevent, or even identify, encrypted smartphones when individuals bring them into the United States. DHS would have to train customs agents to search the contents of every person’s phone in order to identify whether it is encrypted, and then confiscate the phones that are. Legal and policy considerations aside, this kind of policy is, at the very least, impractical. Preventing strong encryption from entering the US is not like preventing guns or drugs from entering the country — encrypted phones aren’t immediately obvious as is contraband. Millions of people use encrypted devices, and tens of millions more devices are shipped to and sold in the US each year.
  • Finally, there is a real concern that if Vance’s proposal were accepted, it would be the first step down a slippery slope. Right now, his proposal only calls for access to smartphones and devices running mobile operating systems. While this policy in and of itself would cover a number of commonplace devices, it may eventually be expanded to cover laptop and desktop computers, as well as communications in transit. The expansion of this kind of policy is even more worrisome when taking into account the speed at which technology evolves and becomes widely adopted. Ten years ago, the iPhone did not even exist. Who is to say what technology will be commonplace in 10 or 20 years that is not even around today. There is a very real question about how far law enforcement will go to gain access to information. Things that once seemed like merely science fiction, such as wearable technology and artificial intelligence that could be implanted in and work with the human nervous system, are now available. If and when there comes a time when our “smart phone” is not really a device at all, but is rather an implant, surely we would not grant law enforcement access to our minds.
  • Policymakers should dismiss Vance’s proposal to prohibit the use of strong encryption to protect our smartphones and devices in order to ensure law enforcement access. Undermining encryption, regardless of whether it is protecting data in transit or at rest, would take us down a dangerous and harmful path. Instead, law enforcement and the intelligence community should be working to alter their skills and tactics in a fast-evolving technological world so that they are not so dependent on information that will increasingly be protected by encryption.
Alexandra IcecreamApps

Android vs. iPhone - Icecream Tech Digest - 0 views

icecreamapps.com/...android-vs-iphone

android vs iphone ios best smartphone mobile operating system os smartphones ssystem

shared by Alexandra IcecreamApps on 17 Dec 15 - No Cached
  • Alexandra IcecreamApps on 17 Dec 15
     
    Lately, smartphone users are divided into two groups: Android supporters and iPhone worshipers. Not mentioning Windows phones, basically the majority of all users tend to have either an Android phone or an iPhone. The Android vs. iPhone battle is a …
  • Alexandra IcecreamApps on 17 Dec 15
     
    Lately, smartphone users are divided into two groups: Android supporters and iPhone worshipers. Not mentioning Windows phones, basically the majority of all users tend to have either an Android phone or an iPhone. The Android vs. iPhone battle is a …
Gonzalo San Gil, PhD.

The unique qualities of people in open source | Opensource.com [# ! Note...] - 0 views

opensource.com/...nique-about-open-source-people

unique qualities open source people openess kindness generosity character challenging char

shared by Gonzalo San Gil, PhD. on 13 Jan 16 - No Cached
    • Gonzalo San Gil, PhD.
      Gonzalo San Gil, PhD. on 13 Jan 16
       
      "... building friendships and trust... There is a kindness, a generosity, and a humility to most open source people... challenging the limits..."
  • Gonzalo San Gil, PhD. on 13 Jan 16
     
    "...Before I joined GitHub, I worked at an organization called the XPRIZE Foundation. For those of you unfamiliar with it, XPRIZE runs incentive competitions that solve major challenges that face humanity. ..."
  • Gonzalo San Gil, PhD. on 13 Jan 16
     
    "...Before I joined GitHub, I worked at an organization called the XPRIZE Foundation. For those of you unfamiliar with it, XPRIZE runs incentive competitions that solve major challenges that face humanity. ..."
Paul Merrell

Open Access Can't Wait. Pass FASTR Now. | Electronic Frontier Foundation - 1 views

www.eff.org/...ccess-cant-wait-pass-fastr-now

Openweb OpenAccess EFF legislation

shared by Paul Merrell on 25 Aug 17 - No Cached
  • When you pay for federally funded research, you should be allowed to read it. That’s the idea behind the Fair Access to Science and Technology Research Act (S.1701, H.R.3427), which was recently reintroduced in both houses of Congress. FASTR was first introduced in 2013, and while it has strong support in both parties, it has never gained enough momentum to pass. We need to change that. Let’s tell Congress that passing an open access law should be a top priority.
  • Tell Congress: It’s time to move FASTR The proposal is pretty simple: Under FASTR, every federal agency that spends more than $100 million on grants for research would be required to adopt an open access policy. The bill gives each agency flexibility to implement an open access policy suited to the work it funds, so long as research is available to the public after an “embargo period” of a year or less. One of the major points of contention around FASTR is how long that embargo period should be. Last year, the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee approved FASTR unanimously, but only after extending that embargo period from six months to 12, putting FASTR in line with the 2013 White House open access memo. That’s the version that was recently reintroduced in the Senate.  The House bill, by contrast, sets the embargo period at six months. EFF supports a shorter period. Part of what’s important about open access is that it democratizes knowledge: when research is available to the public, you don’t need expensive journal subscriptions or paid access to academic databases in order to read it. A citizen scientist can use and build on the same body of knowledge as someone with institutional connections. But in the fast-moving world of scientific research, 12 months is an eternity. A shorter embargo is far from a radical proposition, especially in 2017. The landscape for academic publishing is very different from what it was when FASTR was first introduced, thanks in larger part to nongovernmental funders who already enforce open access mandates. Major foundations like Ford, Gates, and Hewlett have adopted strong open access policies requiring that research be not only available to the public, but also licensed to allow republishing and reuse by anyone.
  • Just last year, the Gates Foundation made headlines when it dropped the embargo period from its policy entirely, requiring that research be published openly immediately. After a brief standoff, major publishers began to accommodate Gates’ requirements. As a result, we finally have public confirmation of what we’ve always known: open access mandates don’t put publishers out of business; they push them to modernize their business models. Imagine how a strong open access mandate for government-funded research—with a requirement that that research be licensed openly—could transform publishing. FASTR may not be that law, but it’s a huge step in the right direction, and it’s the best option on the table today. Let’s urge Congress to pass a version of FASTR with an embargo period of six months or less, and then use it as a foundation for stronger open access in the future.
Alexandra IcecreamApps

How to Extend the Battery Life of Your Smartphone - Icecream Tech Digest - 0 views

icecreamapps.com/...extend-battery-life-smartphone

battery life extend battery life extend battery how to extend battery life how to increase battery life how to prolong battery life prolong battery life

shared by Alexandra IcecreamApps on 07 Oct 16 - No Cached
  • Alexandra IcecreamApps on 07 Oct 16
     
    The usage of the smartphones has become so widely spread that for the majority of people it’s impossible to get through a day without such a device. Indeed, you are always aware of all the latest news and updates from … Continue reading →
  • Alexandra IcecreamApps on 07 Oct 16
     
    The usage of the smartphones has become so widely spread that for the majority of people it’s impossible to get through a day without such a device. Indeed, you are always aware of all the latest news and updates from … Continue reading →
Gonzalo San Gil, PhD.

Why Privileged Users Are a Major Security Risk - 0 views

www.cioinsight.com/...are-a-major-security-risk.html

priviledge users adminstrators admin major security risk danger watch your trust

shared by Gonzalo San Gil, PhD. on 01 Oct 16 - No Cached
  • Gonzalo San Gil, PhD. on 01 Oct 16
     
    " Privileged users are a key concern for IT leaders because inadvertent leaks from unsanctioned app usage are more likely to originate from this user group."
Paul Merrell

Apple Being Investigated By "Majority" Of States Over Claims Of Deliberately Slowing Ol... - 0 views

www.zerohedge.com/...liberately-slowing-old-iphones

Apple iPhone slowdowns deceptive-trade-practices litigation Attorneys-General

shared by Paul Merrell on 01 Aug 20 - No Cached
  • Right around the time that Apple stock was surging to new highs thanks to a better than expected earnings report and stock split, another story was surfacing: Arizona is leading a multi-state investigation into whether or not Apple is deliberately slowing its old iPhones, and whether such practices would violate deceptive trade laws.  A probe has been ongoing "since 2018" and investigators are focusing on data that shows "unexpected shutdowns" of old Apple iPhones and the company's potential slowing down of devices using power management software, according to Reuters.  Documents obtained last week from a Texas watchdog group showed that the Texas AG was also involved in the investigation. Sources told Reuters that a "majority of U.S. states", with AGs spanning both parties, are involved and are "teaming up" together in the probe. 
  • Apple agreed to pay up to $500 million to settle a related class action lawsuit earlier this year. 
Gonzalo San Gil, PhD.

Better Society - Horizon 2020 - the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation - E... - 0 views

ec.europa.eu/...index_en.cfm

european research innovation programme framework horizon society

shared by Gonzalo San Gil, PhD. on 06 Jan 13 - No Cached
  • Gonzalo San Gil, PhD. on 06 Jan 13
     
    [Horizon 2020 reflects the policy priorities of the Europe 2020 strategy and addresses major concerns shared by citizens in Europe and elsewhere. A challenge-based approach will bring together resources and knowledge across different fields, technologies and disciplines, including social sciences and the humanities. This will cover activities from research to market with a new focus on innovation-related activities, such as piloting, demonstration, test-beds, and support for public procurement and market uptake. It will include establishing links with the activities of the European Innovation Partnerships (EIP).]
Paul Merrell

Lawrence, KS To Get Gigabit Fiber - But Not From Google - Slashdot - 0 views

tech.slashdot.org/...abit-fiber-but-not-from-google

gigabit ISP broadband roll-out Google

shared by Paul Merrell on 27 Apr 13 - No Cached
  • "Just 40 miles west on the Kansas Turnpike from Kansas City Kansas sits Lawrence, KS. With the slow rollout of Google fiber in their neighbor city, it was looking like their 89,000 people were not going to get the gigabit fiber to the home for quite some time. Up steps Wicked Broadband, a local ISP. With a plan remarkably similar to Google's they look to build out fiber to the home, business, and so on with gigabit speed and similar rates, symmetric bandwidth and no caps. Wicked Fiber's offer is different than Google Fiber's, with more tiers — with cute names. The "Flying Monkey" gigabit plan is $100/month, "Tinman" at 100Mbps is $70/month. They offer TV as well but strangely put Internet streaming and Roku to the fore. They are even using Google's method of installing first in the neighborhoods with the most pre-registration to optimize efficiency, and installing only where there is enough demand. It seems Google's scheme to inspire competition in broadband access is working — if Wicked Fiber gets enough subscribers to make it pay. If this succeeds it may inspire similar ISPs near us to step up to gigabit fiber so let's root for them."
  • Paul Merrell on 27 Apr 13
     
    It shouldn't take a lot of similar initiatives from companies other than Google to force major ISPs to begin rolling out gigabit ISP services in the U.S. in order to protect their market share from predation. To be followed by lower charges, hopefully. 
Paul Merrell

Haavard - 300 million users strong, Opera moves to WebKit - 1 views

my.opera.com/...webkit

webkit Opera HTML5

shared by Paul Merrell on 14 Feb 13 - No Cached
  • Today, we announced that Opera has reached 300 million active users. At the same time, we made the official announcement that Opera will move from Presto to WebKit as the engine at the core of the browser.
  • It was always a goal to be compatible with the real web while also supporting and promoting open standards.That turns out to be a bit of a challenge when you are faced with a web that is not as open as one might have wanted. Add to that the fact that it is constantly changing and that you don't get site compatibility for free (which some browsers are fortunate enough to do), and it ends up taking up a lot of resources - resources that could have been spent on innovation and polish instead.
  • Although I was skeptical at first when I started hearing about the switch, I am now fully convinced that it is the right thing to do. Not only will it free up significant engineering resources at Opera and allow us to do more innovation instead of constantly trying to adapt to the web, but our users should benefit from better site compatibility and more innovative features and polish.This move allows us to focus even more on the actual user experience.
  • ...2 more annotations...
  • If switching to WebKit allows us to accelerate our growth and become an important contributor to the project (we will contribute back to WebKit, and have already submitted our first patch (bug)), we may finally have a direct impact on the way web sites are coded. We want sites to be coded for open standards rather than specific browsers.
  • WebKit has matured enough that it is actually possible to make the switch, and we can help it mature even further. In return, we get to spend more resources on a better user experience, and less on chasing an ever-changing web.This move allows us to create a platform for future growth because it allows us to focus our resources on things that can actually differentiate Opera from the competition, and could help the web move in the right direction.
  • Paul Merrell on 14 Feb 13
     
    And so there will be only three major web page rendering engines, webkit, mozilla's gecko, and MSIE. with only webkit in the ascendancy. 
Paul Merrell

AT&T Mobility LLC, et al v. AU Optronics Corp., et al :: Ninth Circuit :: US Courts of ... - 0 views

law.justia.com/...11-16188-2013-02-14.html

device components LCD panels antitrust price-fixing

shared by Paul Merrell on 15 Feb 13 - No Cached
  • Paul Merrell on 15 Feb 13
     
    This page includes the opinion of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on an interlocutory appeal from a district court decision to dismiss two California state law causes of action from an ongoing case, leaving only the federal law causes of action. The Ninth Circuit disagreed, vacated the district court's decision, and remanded for consideration of the dismissal issue under the correct legal standard. This was a pro-plaintiff decision that makes it very likely that the case will continue with the state law causes of action reinstated against all or nearly all defendants. This is an unusually important price-fixing case with potentially disruptive effect among mobile device component manufacturers and by such a settlement or judgment's ripple effects, manufacturers of other device components globally. Plaintiffs are several major  voice/data communications services in the U.S. with the defendants being virtually all of the manufacturers of LCD panels used in mobile telephones. One must suspect that if price-fixing is in fact universal in the LCD panel manufacturing industry, price-fixing is likely common among manufacturers of other device components. According to the Ninth Circuit opinion, the plaintiffs' amended complaint includes detailed allegations of specific price-fixing agreements and price sharing actions by principles or agents of each individual defendant company committed within the State of California, which suggests that plaintiffs have very strong evidence that the alleged conspiracy exists. This is a case to watch.    
Gonzalo San Gil, PhD.

Configuring WINE with Winetricks - 0 views

linuxconfig.org/nfiguring-wine-with-winetricks

WINE winetricks windows windoz on Linux GNU-linux machines virtual

shared by Gonzalo San Gil, PhD. on 28 Oct 16 - No Cached
  • Gonzalo San Gil, PhD. on 28 Oct 16
     
    "If winecfg is a screwdriver, winetricks is a power drill. They both have their place, but winetricks is just a much more powerful tool. Actually, it even has the ability to launch winecfg. While winecfg gives you the ability to change the settings of WINE itself, winetricks gives you the ability to modify the actual Windows layer. It allows you to install important components like .dlls and system fonts as well as giving you the capability to edit the Windows registry. It also has a task manager, an uninstall utility, and file browser. Even though winetricks can do all of this, the majority of the time, you're going to be using it to manage dlls and Windows components."
Gonzalo San Gil, PhD.

Ardour 5.0 Open Source DAW Officially Released with Tabbed User Interface - 0 views

news.softpedia.com/...ed-user-interface-507261.shtml

ardour open source DAW digital audio workstation sound music production tech

shared by Gonzalo San Gil, PhD. on 14 Aug 16 - No Cached
  • Gonzalo San Gil, PhD. on 14 Aug 16
     
    "Now available for GNU/Linux, Mac OS X, and Windows OSes Aug 12, 2016 18:40 GMT · By Marius Nestor · Share: Currently one of the best cross-platform, open-source and freely distributed DAW (Digital Audio Workstation) software pieces, Ardour has received today, August 12, 2016, a major milestone that introduces a multitude of new features and countless improvements."
Gonzalo San Gil, PhD.

The World Wide Web Consortium is being followed by protests | Defective by Design - 0 views

www.defectivebydesign.org/...ortium_being_followed_protests

protests www consortium W3C people society vs DRM restrictions web

shared by Gonzalo San Gil, PhD. on 16 Sep 16 - No Cached
  • Gonzalo San Gil, PhD. on 16 Sep 16
     
    "Submitted by Zak Rogoff on September 15, 2016 - 9:18am Next week, demonstrators will gather at a meeting of the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) in Lisbon, Portugal. They will make the same demand that we made at the last major W3C meeting in March: stop streaming companies from inserting Digital Restrictions Management (DRM) into the HTML standard on which the Web is based."
« First ‹ Previous 41 - 60 of 242 Next › Last »
Showing 20▼ items per page