macplusplus

Use an effective ad blocker and disable "Open safe files after downloading" option in Safari and note that "safe" is written in double quotation marks. Remember that there is no safe file on the Internet. 

Ad networks distribute malware by means of several obscure redirections. Even if you don't click anything on the infected page, anything as in not only the ad but nothing on that page, the payload is sent to your computer. The display of the wrapper ad is enough to infect your computer. The payload mostly comes in one of the archive formats such as .zip, .dmg, .pkg, that list being not exhaustive. You may want to check your Downloads folder right now and move all of the said archive files to the Trash, don't even try to open any of them, you can download legitimate installers anytime from the legitimate sources.

Download by redirection may occur on any web page, not only ads. Be careful when binge browsing expecially on questionable sites, watch what your browser does after clicking a link, does the link open a pop-up window or does it redirect to a download before opening the target page? And check your Downloads folder frequently to spot any suspicious download.

bkkcanuck said:

I disagree with the Federal Court.  

API is just the interface (e.g. add(operand1, operand2) - i.e. no implementation to that - and implementation is basically 99%+ of the code).

Being able to use an API for compatibility purposes is no different than for example Open Office being able to implement the file format for Word.  The need for competition outweighs the argument as an API protected IP.   Google's implementation uses the API (common) and then the implementation code which is probably more than 99% of the code base.  As long as Google did not copy the code itself the API itself should be fair use.  Languages and APIs should not be able to be protected as API.  

The court has already previously ruled that you cannot protect interfaces for hardware for the purposes of locking out the competition on things like printer cartridges etc.  An API is not much different than the software equivalent.  

API is not just the interface, it is everything. You can build some library this way or that way, what distinguishes your IP protected work is how you design your libraries. You are not obligated to replicate the exact libraries Oracle has built; write your own functions and collect them in your own libraries to build your unique IP protected API. That is the whole point of the lawsuit. Oracle is right.

Apple should shut down iCloud instead of developing a mass surveillance method for the government.

peteo said:

Rayz2016 said:

mike_galloway said:

It would be helpful (rather than just trashing the offered fix from Apple) to offered an alternative solution - unless we wish to state that there is not a problem to solve.

Criticism is easy but solutions are difficult - buts lets try.

I’ll have a think. 

we already know what the solution is. Only run this in the cloud on iCloud photos. Do not run it on the users device. Of course, I believe they can not do this since iCloud photos are encrypted when in the cloud?

iCloud Photos are encryped on the cloud with Apple's keys, not devıce (user's) keys.

netrox said:

Why is that they predict a pencil for iphone when you ALREADY can use a stylus? Having a $100 pencil on iPhone makes no sense.

You can’t write, sign, or draw with a stylus. Apple Pencil is not a stylus, it is... a digital pencil. It is the first and foremost digital clone of an analog tool, a technological breakthrough on its own.  It requires a higher screen refresh rate to match the natural fluidity of an analog pencil’s movement.

StrangeDays said:

All the boneheads claiming Apple created a "backdoor" -- nope. All the tech companies do this (Dropbox, Microsoft, Google), and Apple did 100% server-side CSAM scanning a year ago:

https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2020/01/09/apples-scanning-icloud-photos-for-child-abuse-images/

...you dudes are simply panicking and clutching your pearls because you didn't know about it before.

That article is an argument against Apple, not in favor of. Since they are already performing that scan on their servers, what is the point in injecting another mechanism into the device itself? I have no authority on iCloud servers, those are Apple's property, but I have authority on my device and I don't want it to be used to inspect me. This is not different than planting a camera into your house to monitor if you abuse your children or your wife.

Previously, Apple had rejected government's request to develop a custom iOS in order to break into criminals' iPhones. That would work on case-by-case basis, but Apple had still rejected it because it would set a precedent. And now, Apple sets that precedent voluntarily, and not on case-by-case basis but for the whole ecosystem...

wozwoz said:

Nice review

>  iMac Pro now has four (Thunderbolt 3) ports

And there immediately is the first problem with the iMac all-in-one design:  if you have four Thunderbolt 3 connections + USB thingies in and out ... + ethernet etc ...  the wires going into this thing will start looking mayhem on your desk, elevated from the back of the monitor. That's another reason why a modular design, like the R2D2 Mac Pro is just a better design for the pro market. You can have all the wires either on the floor, or at desk level to the side ... and just a single cable running to your monitor.

Use a hub. There, it is modular now.

dangermouse2 said:

jdw said:

crowley said:

Apple's software, Apple's services, no breakage.

LOL.  I can't wait to hear Tim Cook quote your words on his next TV interview about how Apple is defending privacy as a right...

Interviewer: "Mr. Cook, you have long defended Privacy as a right and outlined in detail the steps Apple has taken to protect that right.  How do you harmonize your current plan to hash-scan for CSAM images on-device prior to their being uploaded to iCloud?"

Tim Cook: "Apple's software. Apple's services. No privacy broken!"

LOL.

Now your phrase
“hash-scan for CSAM images on-device prior to their being uploaded to iCloud”
makes me think of how your luggage is x-rayed before being put on a plane.

They don't scan your luggage in your house before being put on a plane.

A Touch UI based macOS is not a dream, but a possibility. So Apple’a port of macOS to the iPad would be a great and respectable endeavor that every Mac enthousiast would embrace. I can well imagine a Finder lying behind this on-screen keyboard, showing a folder name touch-selected, ready to be replaced by what I type on my iPad keyboard. Actually a touch-selection can well replace a mouse-selection in terms of accuracy. The problem was the multi-tasking performance compromise introduced by multiple overlapping windows, but macOS has already resolved this issue by full-screen windows and the swipe gesture to navigate between them. That feature is just waiting for an iPad powerful enough to handle Mac-like true multitasking, the power of M2 makes this problem obsolete. Wouldn’t a tablet Mac kill the iPad? Well, not necessarily. The iPad  may continue to survive with the A series, and the tablet Mac may thrive on the M series, iPadOS and macOS being their respective OS. 

Apple is being pushed to higher and higher end by Chinese companies. This is a deliberate tactic and Apple may need to develop a substantial maneuver to regain the entry level market and even the mid-range. One day it will find itself at the peak of performance and state-of-the-art production as the sole owner of the niche market corner into which it painted itself.