derekcurrie

😂🤣🤪😹😎

Apple has already pointed out the LEGAL solution to this problem. Qualcomm doesn't care and is taking their carelessness to court. Waste, waste, waste all for the sake of illegal greed on Qualcomm's part. :-P

Lawyers love it. Thanks Qualcomm!

Fine. Apple can make a 'Stupid iOS' version for the self-destructive, totalitarian rectal pores in Australia, China, Russia, ad nauseam.... The rest of us get REAL security.

The next day, the backdoor into Stupid iOS becomes public knowledge and the free world SHAMES Australia, ad nauseam.

For those who'd enjoy learning about the fruits of totalitarian surveillance, the estate of George Orwell very kindly provides a FREE copy of the book 'Nineteen Eighty-Four' to read online here:

http://www.george-orwell.org/1984/index.html

"The telescreen received and transmitted simultaneously. Any sound that Winston made, above the level of a very low whisper, would be picked up by it, moreover, so long as he remained within the field of vision which the metal plaque commanded, he could be seen as well as heard. There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment. How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork. It was even conceivable that they watched everybody all the time. But at any rate they could plug in your wire whenever they wanted to. You had to live -- did live, from habit that became instinct -- in the assumption that every sound you made was overheard, and, except in darkness, every movement scrutinized. . . ."

Have fun Australia. I personally will NEVER give up my human right to PRIVACY or my right to NOT INCRIMINATE MYSELF. It's built into my country's Constitution. Sad to be you. Happy to enjoy Apple's devotion to human rights!

Oh and Australia: The Terrorists Just WON. You lost.

This is the very long awaited implementation of 'Something You Have' as a method of authentication. Ideally, this is combined with 'Something You Know', such as a password, and 'Something You Are', such as your fingerprint or face. These are the standard three factors of multi-factor authentication. A fourth factor, already available to smartphone users, is 'Somewhere You Are', as in GPS coordinates matching an approved authentication site or verification that the net user is located in their specified home or office.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-factor_authentication

I've had a Yubikey for 10 years, waiting for Internet security to catch up. Meanwhile, Yubikey has added NFC authentication as well as FIDO U2F, FIDO 2, OpenPGP, OATH and FIPS 140-2 compliance. Apparently, it took Google getting into the USB key business this year to kickstart universal interest. *sigh* Better late than...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YubiKey
https://www.yubico.com

chasm said:

derekcurrie said:

(various fact-based things peppered with tinfoil-hat material)

I notice you omitted any mention from that study of how much wireless radiation is required to achieve reliable issues. I'm not suggesting the whole concept is ridiculous and I'm not trying to be dismissive of this study at all, but context is everything -- and a blanket insinuation that radiation is bad would lead to no more x-rays, bananas, microwave ovens, carbon-dating, nuclear anything, or any sort of modern wireless service from FM to cell phones and beyond, so your quotes are missing (to put it mildly) supporting evidence that "5G" is any more harmful than any previous wireless standard, just for starters.

I'm reasonably sure even your scaremongering selective quotes weren't intended to be that extremist, since you're obviously using a computer with wireless capability of some sort to even participate here, but either present the data in context or wait until you have that context next time.

I notice you actually read the linked article. Thank you. 99% of the time I get mean spirited replies like your's from people who never bothered to read the material I offered.

But, you are being mean spirited. "Tinfoil-hat material'. I prefer the term AFDB, aluminum foil deflector beanie. But that has nothing to do with what I personally said, does it. Attribute what you don't like to the actual source. What I did was offer the conclusion quote of the report, which was a profound statement by the authors. Go back and read it again. How could you disagree with its importance?

But you decided to call the whole thing 'scaremongering'. How Trumpian of you, well worth my ignoring seeing as you're promoting the case of ignorance.

And no, I'm not in charge of selecting what you read or of cherry picking or any other nonsense you wish I'd perpetrated. You got the link. You read the article. You make you your own mind. The scientists who created the report made up their mind and I posted their conclusion. That's not 'scaremongering', is it.

There, happy now? I replied and called you out. That was your entire point wasn't it, to have someone deservedly cut you down. That's called masochism. I happily oblige not for your sake, but for the sake of those you mislead with your rubbish.

Now, everyone, go read the article I linked. That was my entire intention. If you don't like the conclusion of the study, go talk to the authors about it. Not me. I didn't write it. Instead, I'm amazed how idiocracy rules human thought in these Trumpian days of deceptive 'truth'. Keep that problem to yourself please. Science is far preferable to dumbassery. (^_^)