I’d say something smartassed about Turkish Airlines, but it’s been 42 years (exactly) since I’ve flown them — SZF-IST, if you’re keeping score — and they might have hired new personnel since then.
Archive for PEBKAC
As a public service, Sippican Cottage offers a rule of thumb for gauging future Internet success:
Twitter is really, really creepy. Uber was creepy long before you found out exactly how it was creepy. The only human thing about anyone who worked there was their hamhanded attempts to grope the help, now that I think of it. When that’s the top of your interpersonal heap, Dante Alighieri should write your yearly reports. Facebook, and the avaricious little twerp that runs it, is the creepiest thing I’ve ever encountered on this world, and I’ve renovated apartments that had a dead body in them. Google is creepy turtles, all the way down.
Snapchat prospers, if you define success as the ability to use up borrowed money for a longer period of time than your creep competitors before the laws of supply, demand, and plain old addition and subtraction start to apply. Snapchat gives their users the impression they can get away with being a creep on their service. Being creepy is the appeal. Google Glass failed because they lied, and said it wasn’t supposed to be creepy. Snapchat makes the same thing, and touts creepiness as a feature, not a bug. That’s how you do it fellows. You’ll be able to borrow another half-a-tril with that approach.
Then again, the baseline for creepiness creeps (of course) upward all the time. Twitter keeps looking for new ways to be creepy in a desperate attempt to keep the venture-capital wolves from the door. (See, for instance, their alleged “safety” squad, Marxist to the core, a blatant attempt by @jack to avoid doing his job.) Facebook has seemingly all the money in the world, and is willing to spend it on new ways to be assimilated by the Zuckerborg Collective. And I figure Snapchat, which boasted that one’s texts would disappear after a certain period, is working on a way to disable the ever-popular Print Screen function.
About four o’clock Central, this place will be going (temporarily) dark(ish):
We will be working to improve service on your MySQL server this Wednesday, March 22nd, starting at 2PM PDT. This maintenance is estimated to take up to 2-3 hours to complete with a total of roughly 2 hours of downtime. Databases will not be available during this 2 hour period.
As part of this improvement, we will be upgrading your MySQL server to improve stability as well as patching it for potential vulnerabilities. There should be no data loss, but connectivity will be affected by this maintenance, and changes to your databases should not be made until the maintenance is complete.
I’m interpreting this to mean that a cached copy of the front page will still appear, and all the old static pages will remain available, but the latest and greatest will be even later, if not necessarily greater.
Key Source International builds computer keyboards for use in healthcare facilities. Their latest product is the KSI-1801 SX B, a hospital-grade,
disinfectable backlit keyboard. Features:
- Backlit keys are easy to read in the dark
- Quick USB detachment saves time
- Sealed surface available in colors
- LinkSmart™ locks keys for easy cleaning
- San-a-Key® provides real-time analytics
- Compact design fits most medical carts
- Aids in control of cross contamination
- Scrubbable, sprayable, disinfectable
- Three levels of illumination
One rather expects this to be priced somewhere in the upper stratosphere, in the manner of the $15 Tylenol® tablet. It’s not; in fact, it’s priced right with premium keyboards that aren’t the least bit sprayable. And buying a keyboard that’s billed as “dishwasher-safe” will probably not save you:
Not only is removal of keyboards at hundreds of individual workstations a daunting task, but it’s also a costly endeavor that wastes hospital resources and precious man hours. More important, dishwasher-safe keyboards are, in reality, a detriment to good infection control practices. Why? Because most keyboards are never removed from service to be washed.
I can believe that.
When I was younger, IBM was the bee’s knees, tha shiznit. Fifteen years ago, I got a $5,000 check from IBM for some consulting work. I had it blown up and framed. Working with IBM meant that you were one of the best. They didn’t do anything by half measures. And they built stunning technological masterpieces from the ThinkPads to their xServers to the mighty copper-core z-mainframes.
What does IBM do now? Well, as far as I can tell they still have some impressive R&D. By and large. however, they sell “services.” Which means that they hire a bunch of know-nothings at the lowest rate possible, many of them H1-Bs fresh from six-month technical degrees at mystery-meat educational facilities of dubious standing, and they incompetently deliver on vaguely-scoped products for prices that are calculated to bleed the client just short of bankruptcy.
At least they’re still properly supporting their midrange hardware; if they weren’t, I’d probably be out of a job.
It’s pathetic, seeing the company that invented the Selectric and the Model M and the best mainframe computer in history turn into a services reseller. Think of Jaco Pastorius begging for spare change outside of Birdland, then make it fifty times worse. And then look at me typing this up on the descendant of IBM’s intellectual property, abandoned by a bunch of moronic market-watchers who didn’t understand that greatness only comes from creation, not sales or marketing.
He’s pounding away on a Lenovo. And if I ever need another Model M — my current keyboard dates to, um, 1990 — the guys who own that sliver of IBM intellectual property are here and ready to sell.
In the Morse Code era, the phrase “fist” referred to the unique style that every telegraph operator brought to their communications. The phrase “recognized the fist” comes up again and again in various wartime and spy literature; it refers to hearing someone tapping out Morse Code and being able to distinguish the operator by their style. This was far from a trivial detail of the telegraph era; in more than one case lives were saved (or lost) because someone was able to differentiate between who an operator was supposed to be and who they actually were.
Fast-forward a hundred years, and it’s now possible to spy on what someone is typing by leaving a phone on their desk and having it pick up the vibrations from the physical activity of typing. (A laser mike pointed at your window works equally well, unfortunately.) Your typing style is like a fingerprint. It doesn’t even take a high-power microprocessor to determine what you’re doing on a computer. My first wife claimed to be able to tell, from a distance of across our house, whether I was programming, writing for a website, engaging in an Instant Messenger chat, or arguing with someone online on my old IBM Model M mechanical keyboard. Well, I shouldn’t say “claimed.” More like she just plain knew. Her accuracy rate was effectively 100%. Never once did she accuse me of not working when I was working, or vice versa.
Incidentally, this idea of being able to identify patterns in communications behavior is also how most cryptography is undone. There’s a brilliant scene in the novel Cryptonomicon where a highly complex cipher is broken because a cipher clerk doesn’t always close her eyes when she reaches into a bowl full of wooden balls — and although that scene is written right at the edge of the reader’s credulity, it has mathematical basis in fact. The whole difference between “128-bit” and “2048-bit” encryption is how effective the method is in reducing the “fist” or “fingerprint” of a conversation.
I do believe that tale of the first Mrs Baruth; I bang on a Model M to this day, and what it sounded like when I wrote this paragraph is nothing like what it sounded like when I recapped the Thunder-Spurs game. I don’t think anyone is listening — why would they care? — but I have learned not to be surprised.
The young programmer — and he was no slouch; he’d recently created a custom version of the computer language “C” for his employer, finishing only a little behind the release of “C+” — took on this task with hope; after all, he’d got his start back when the clever students enjoying finding new ways to crash the nearby university’s big IBM mainframe, doing so in the dead of night, and showing the console operators how they’d done it so the vulnerability could be remedied!†
He thought and he thought and everything he came up with — had a hole in it. Allow unrestricted public access to a computer, and people you don’t want in it will get in. Passwords are a trivial problem, given time. Even air-gapping didn’t work, especially if media traveled both directions across the air-gap. Nope, the only way to be mostly safe was to run the support system on an isolated computer from which nothing ever, ever came back to his employer’s network — and that still left the users vulnerable, especially if the support machine was used to distribute software.
The general rule he evolved was this: “If you want to keep a computer safe, you cannot allow any form of unrestricted access. If it is accessible, people you don’t want in will inevitably get in.” That’s Stockman’s Law: if your computer has to be secure, it can have no network connection, no removable media, no unvetted users, no nothing but a display and HIDs — and even that can be defeated by a malicious authorized user. And then what good is it?
Actually, Swift is a bit more forgiving than that:
You cannot just buy “security.” It is something obtained through simple choices and knowledge. Tragically, these aren’t even hard to do or obscure to learn. But no one makes money telling you how to use what you already have. What you need is someone who doesn’t care about your money or looking smart by spouting off fancy words of no consequence — just that you not be a victim.
It pains me to see people who distrust and fear their computers, and who feel powerless in that fear. Because that’s not what I see when I look at computers and phones and websites. I see tools I trust with the story of my life, and the secrets I leave out when I tell that story to others. Everyone should be able to feel like that.
Which is about where I find myself. There is, of course, no way to fight off the most determined hackish types forever. Fortunately, most of the vandals on the far side of the firewall are looking for easy marks, and I work diligently to avoid appearing easy.
There are people who believe that everything should be connected to the Internet, and these people must be stopped at any cost:
So if you hadn’t been paying attention, most of the “smart” products you buy are anything but intelligent when it comes to your privacy and security. Whether it’s your refrigerator leaking your gmail credentials or your new webcam being hacked in minutes for use in massive new DDoS attacks, the so-called “smart” home is actually quite idiotic. So-called smart-televisions have been particularly problematic, whether that has involved companies failing to encrypt sensitive data, to removing features if you refuse to have your daily viewing habits measured and monetized.
Last month Vizio joined this not-so-distinguished club when it was discovered that the company’s TVs had been spying on users for the last several years. Vizio’s $2.2 million settlement with the FTC indicates that the company at no time thought it might be a good idea to inform customers this was happening. The snooping was part of a supposed “Smart Interactivity” feature deployed in 2014 that claimed to provide users with programming recommendations, but never actually did so. In short, it wasn’t so much what Vizio was doing, it was the fact the company tried to bullshit its way around it.
And just in case they thought they were off the hook:
And while Vizio may have settled the FTC investigation into its snooping televisions, the company now faces an additional class action after a California federal judge late last week denied the company’s motion to dismiss. The court ruled that Vizio customers’ claimed injuries were “sufficiently concrete” to bring suit under the Video Privacy Protection and Wiretap Acts.
California, you may know, is not exactly well-known for granting absolution to medium-sized companies that have sinned.
(Via Holly Dunagan.)
It helps to have been there long enough to be able to remember fine details like this:
[W]hen you get right down to it peer-to-peer social networking has existed since the birth of the internet.
It’s called email. Or blogging or texting. And while it’s true that it isn’t truly “peer-to-peer” in the non-social networking sense, it does satisfy one major issue people have with Facebook and Twitter: it doesn’t go through Facebook or Twitter.
And “peer” fits, sort of: everyone’s mail client sucks to greater or lesser extent, so there’s not much reason for anyone to claim technical superiority.
Patch Tuesday came and went this week, and Microsoft issued no Windows patches. What gives? This is the explanation they provided:
Our top priority is to provide the best possible experience for customers in maintaining and protecting their systems. This month, we discovered a last minute issue that could impact some customers and was not resolved in time for our planned updates today.
After considering all options, we made the decision to delay this month’s updates.
Previously, Microsoft could delay a single patch — when, for example, that patch had been previously announced but had not been completed in time — without impeding the company’s ability to release all other fixes. That occurrence, while uncommon, was not extraordinary.
But as soon as Microsoft began packaging all patches into single item — as it did with Windows 7 and Windows 8.1 in November — it lost the power to postpone one fix while still releasing others. Although Microsoft security updates have become all-or-nothing affairs for customers, who must accept every patch or none, without any middle way, the same holds true for the Redmond, Wash. company as well: It must release all its scheduled patches, or none of them.
So the next Patch Tuesday will be on the 14th of March, which is in fact a Tuesday.
Everyone who’s ever owned an inkjet printer knows that the major expense is not the printer itself, but the ink it keeps demanding. Meh.com was frank about this day before yesterday:
The cheap-printer hustle is just a recent iteration of an age-old game. The manufacturer takes a loss to get you hooked with a cheap printer. They give you all this molded plastic and tooled metal, all this sophisticated circuitry, this array of precision sprayers, for less than it cost them to make.
Because they know that once you buy the printer, they can put the screws to you for years of overpriced ink. Only once you see the eye-watering prices of replacement ink do you realize you’ve been conned. You’ll be paying over and over for that “good deal” on the printer. But what are you gonna do? Go buy some other printer and start the dance all over again?
So we decided to stretch the absurdity. Heighten the contradiction. Bend this angle to its ultimate extreme. We found a good, cheap inkjet printer for an even cheaper price and slashed our margin to the cheapest possible point.
And so it came to pass that they would sell a Canon 2820 printer, with no ink cartridges and no USB cable, for the absurd sum of ten bucks. (Plus, of course, five bucks shipping.) Limit one per customer, and that’s what I bought.
I get the impression that Samsung is somehow on the wrong side of the Wheel of Karma these days:
Just when you almost forgot about what a shitty time Samsung’s been having, a literal garbage fire broke out at the company’s battery supplier in Tianjin, China. The cause? Discarded faulty batteries.
Reuters reports that it was just a “minor fire,” but we all know that this is a major “fuck you” for the company that lost a reported $5.3 billion in profits due to exploding Galaxy Note 7 phones. That extended nightmare, of course, was also caused by faulty batteries that were made by Samsung SDI, the aforementioned victim of the garbage fire. It’s so far unclear if the discarded faulty batteries were related to the Note 7 debacle.
Some days it just doesn’t pay to gnaw through the straps.
(Via Jeff Faria.)
For some reason, WordPress has removed the underline button in the editor. I can bold, and italicize, but not underline for some reason. I have zero idea why there was such a burning need to eliminate this pretty basic feature of an editor. I suppose I can go in and manually add in html codes, but why bother with an editor if I have to do that kind of cr*p.
Evidently it’s been so long since I felt the need to underline that the disappearance of the button didn’t draw my attention at all.
That said, almost any deficiency in WordPress can be addressed in some way or another, and usually it’s via plugin, which it is here.
The Web host I have used since 2001 offers some 350 different top-level domains, from ten bucks a year to several thousand. Pricing, one assumes, is at least somewhat based on demand, which may or may not explain this:
For some reason, they don’t have .gop or .socialist.
I don’t have a “smart” set, and I might never if this becomes the order of the day:
Consumers have bought more than 11 million internet-connected Vizio televisions since 2010. But according to a complaint filed by the FTC and the New Jersey Attorney General, consumers didn’t know that while they were watching their TVs, Vizio was watching them. The lawsuit challenges the company’s tracking practices and offers insights into how established consumer protection principles apply to smart technology.
Starting in 2014, Vizio made TVs that automatically tracked what consumers were watching and transmitted that data back to its servers. Vizio even retrofitted older models by installing its tracking software remotely. All of this, the FTC and AG allege, was done without clearly telling consumers or getting their consent.
What did Vizio know about what was going on in the privacy of consumers’ homes? On a second-by-second basis, Vizio collected a selection of pixels on the screen that it matched to a database of TV, movie, and commercial content. What’s more, Vizio identified viewing data from cable or broadband service providers, set-top boxes, streaming devices, DVD players, and over-the-air broadcasts. Add it all up and Vizio captured as many as 100 billion data points each day from millions of TVs.
Vizio then turned that mountain of data into cash by selling consumers’ viewing histories to advertisers and others. And let’s be clear: We’re not talking about summary information about national viewing trends. According to the complaint, Vizio got personal. The company provided consumers’ IP addresses to data aggregators, who then matched the address with an individual consumer or household. Vizio’s contracts with third parties prohibited the re-identification of consumers and households by name, but allowed a host of other personal details — for example, sex, age, income, marital status, household size, education, and home ownership. And Vizio permitted these companies to track and target its consumers across devices.
I have been very happy with my Vizio set, especially now, since it’s too old to pull any of that crap. (I infer from the article that the retrofitting went back to 2010 models, and mine is a couple years older than that; certainly it’s not running a Net connection, though I suppose it could grab one from the cable were it, um, smart enough.)
I’m not sure, though, that this is the one I want:
Edwin comes from Carmel, Indiana (probably via some place along the Pacific Rim) and sells for $50.
(Via Nancy Friedman.)
Call it “adtech.” It pretends to be advertising, but, says Doc Searls, it’s more closely directed to direct marketing:
Like junk mail, adtech is driven by data, intrusively personal, looking for success in tiny-percentage responses, and oblivious to harms it causes, which include wanton and unwelcome surveillance, annoying the shit out of people and filling the world with crap.
But adtech is far worse, because it also funds hyper-partisan news flows, including vast rivers of fake news, much of it from pop-up publishers that are as fake as the clickbait they maximize. Without adtech, fake news would be marginalized to the digital equivalent of supermarket tabloids.
And this, explains Searls, is why journalism these days is “in a world of hurt”: “[I]t has been marginalized by a new business model that requires maximizing ‘content’ instead.”
So I got curious and followed up a link spammed at me, and discovered this annoying little product:
WORDAI is first multi-languages article spinner that actually understands that words have different meanings, for you as customer that means that you will be able to create human readable articles with single click of your mouse.
With WordAI you can easily create and spin articles in these languages: English, Spanish, French and Italian which makes WordAI one of the best article spinners available (according to SEO and marketing forums it is the best article spinner out there.)
And we all know what I think about SEO and marketing forums.
Unlike other spinners, WordAi fully understands what each word content means. It doesn’t view sentences as just a list of words, it views them as real things that interact with each other. This human like understanding allows WordAI to automatically rewrite entire sentences from scratch. This high level of rewriting ensures that Google and Copyscape can’t detect your content while still remaining human readable!
Original Sentence: Nobody has been arrested by the police officers, but the suspect is being interrogated by them.
Automatic Rewrite: Law enforcement are interrogating the defendant, although they have not detained anybody.
I rather suspect that this particular sentence is more the exception than the rule.
- WordAi not only understands what each word means, but also how each word interacts with each other
- It looks for possible ways to rewrite your article based on what the article truly means
- WordAi will often completely rewrite sentences so they share nothing in common with the original sentence
- This means your article is unique and can’t be detected by Google as spun content!
I give Google maybe three weeks to get past this — and not to tell anyone, of course.
This package sells for $49.95 a month. Six hundred dollars a year — oh, wait, there’s a discount for a full-year license — to enable someone to steal someone else’s content.
I would like to feed their fingers to the wolverines. And if there’s anything left, there’s always the acid bath.
Computer magazines of the 1980s, as I recall, occasionally had difficulty differentiating themselves from the competition, though I’m pretty sure no one went so far as the Yugoslavians who published this mag:
Definitely gets one’s attention. And it’s been a long time since I’ve seen a package of Xywrite.
At the link: a couple of dozen more covers with similar intent.
(Via Jeff Faria.)
A San Diego TV station sparked complaints this week — after an on-air report about a girl who ordered a dollhouse via her parents’ Amazon Echo caused Echoes in viewers’ homes to also attempt to order dollhouses.
Telly station CW-6 said the blunder happened during a Thursday morning news package about a Texan six-year-old who racked up big charges while talking to an Echo gadget in her home. According to her parents’ Amazon account, their daughter said: “Can you play dollhouse with me and get me a dollhouse?” Next thing they knew, a $160 KidKraft Sparkle Mansion dollhouse and four pounds of sugar cookies arrived on their doorstep.
During that story’s segment, a CW-6 news presenter remarked: “I love the little girl, saying ‘Alexa ordered me a dollhouse’.”
That, apparently, was enough to set off Alexa-powered Echo boxes around San Diego on their own shopping sprees. The California station admitted plenty of viewers complained that the TV broadcast caused their voice-controlled personal assistants to try to place orders for dollhouses on Amazon.
Lesson learned: voice-command ordering is ON by default on these devices.
Just one more precaution we’ll have to learn as we surround ourselves with the Internet of God Knows What.
This is the message the victims get:
- The sum asked by the attackers is, at this writing, a ridiculous $270,000;
- Said attackers do not in fact know how to decrypt your files.
No one has paid; this is a good thing, even for victims laden with cash, since the attackers cannot decrypt files because encryption keys are not saved locally or transmitted to command and control servers.
“Let us emphasise that the cyber criminals behind this KillDisk variant cannot supply their victims with the decryption keys to recover their files, despite those victims paying the extremely large sum demanded by this ransomware,” ESET researchers Robert Lipovsky and Peter Kalnai say.
Greedy and incompetent. I see a political future for these crooks.
If you’ve grown to hate the Blue Screen of Death, Windows 10 test builds offer something sort of new:
Windows’ infamous Blue Screen of Death (BSOD) is turning a shade of green for Windows 10 testers soon. A leaked preview build of Windows 10 (build 14997) emerged on the internet earlier this week, and it includes a number of new features and changes. One of the biggest is a Green Screen of Death instead of the regular BSOD. Microsoft employee Matthijs Hoekstra teased the change on Twitter, and MSPoweruser reports that it was eventually discovered by Twitter user Chris123NT.
OK, I'll give 1 hint. Green!
— Matthijs Hoekstra (@mahoekst) December 28, 2016
Why bother, you ask?
It’s not clear why Microsoft has picked green over blue for its Windows 10 Insider builds, but Hoekstra confirms this new color scheme is only for preview participants. It’s likely that Microsoft wants to distinguish between genuine BSOD issues and problems and crashes that are more likely to occur during the testing of Windows 10 builds. A number of Windows 10 preview users publish issues like BSODs publicly on blogs or social networks, and turning the color green will help Microsoft identify them during the test phase. Microsoft last updated the BSOD with QR codes, years after adding a frowning face for Windows 8.
Then again, just using Windows 8 would precipitate a frowning face.
“It’s a Smart TV,” we are told. And yet it does dumb things like this:
— Darren Cauthon (@darrencauthon) December 25, 2016
The “letter,” ostensibly signed by FBI head James Comey, warns you about your wicked ways and imposes a penalty of $500, payable however they so specify. (Hint: It’s not going to the Feds in any way, shape, size or form.) If this be ransomware, it’s cheap; but I suspect it’s just intended for the lulz, not for the Bitcoin.
People buying computers in South Carolina would be limited in their access to porn online under newly proposed legislation.
A bill pre-filed this month by state Rep. Bill Chumley would require sellers to install digital blocking capabilities on computers and other devices that access the internet to prevent the viewing of obscene content.
The proposal also would prohibit access to any online hub that facilities prostitution and would require manufacturers or sellers to block any websites that facilitate trafficking.
Chumley, a Spartanburg Republican, presumably did not offer a definition of “obscene.”
Both sellers and buyers could get around the limitation, for a fee. The bill would fine manufacturers that sell a device without the blocking system, but they could opt out by paying $20 per device sold. Buyers could also verify their age and pay $20 to remove the filter.
Money collected would go toward the Attorney General Office’s human trafficking task force.
“Step right up and get yer PORN LICENSE! Only twenty bucks!”
I have no idea how the South Carolina General Assembly, which is largely Republican, will vote on this thing, though undoubtedly there will be Republicans playing the Jesus card, and I can see several Democrats homing in on that twenty-dollar
For over a decade, through three different desktops, I have been pumping sound through the PC Works 2.1 speaker system — so old, it was never called “2.1” — made by Cambridge SoundWorks, which also made the Model 88 radio with the sacred name of Henry Kloss on the front. (I have two of those, of similar vintage.)
This weekend, PC Works, which I’d kept going through a series of cleanings — the little potentiometer that served as a remote volume control attracted desk debris — finally turned on me by refusing to turn on: the power button popped out whenever pushed. I have no idea if this was a bad switch or a circuit breaker, though I suspect the former, inasmuch as I was able to keep it running for a couple of days by taping down the switch.
Yesterday I replaced it with this apparatus, without the holiday bow. It does not sound quite as good, but it will do for a spur-of-the-moment sound system, especially at this modest price. Already its little potentiometer that serves as a remote volume control is decidedly wonky.
What are these people thinking?
This is the first time I’ve ever seen a “please disable private browsing” warning (when comparing hotel prices) on a site. pic.twitter.com/yDx6snfPW8
— Jason Cosper (@boogah) December 11, 2016
Privacy mode or “private browsing” or “incognito mode” is a privacy feature in some web browsers to disable browsing history and the web cache. This allows a person to browse the Web without storing local data that could be retrieved at a later date. Privacy mode will also disable the storage of data in cookies and Flash cookies. This privacy protection is only on the local computing device as it is still possible to identify frequented websites by associating the IP address at the web server.
“If you don’t let us track you, you can’t use our site.”
Okay, fine. Maybe I don’t want to use your damn site.
I defy anyone to read this whole thing without busting out laughing. Here’s the question:
And here’s the rest of it:
I believe my ISP is actively filtering out certain materials from being viewed from my Internet service that could have been used as evidence by me in getting some other people prosecuted for slandering my name and image since 2010. I have had lies spread to neighbouring suburbs and businesses well before I signed up for a broadband service from one of my ISPs shop front located in a suburb where lies have spread to.
I am unable to locate chain-posts containing lies and pictures about me that random people have taken after bullying me, but the treatment I get out in public looks very much like someone has been posting lies about me while people choosing to believe in these lies and bully me are taking photos of me and publishing them somewhere (there’s always a trend of random bullying each time someone successfully takes a photo of me)
This is apparently what it’s like to be off one’s meds.
Notification from Amazon last night:
Alexa, the brain behind Amazon Echo, is now available on Fire tablets. Voice responses from Alexa are enhanced with visuals for certain questions. See your calendar, view the weather forecast, play music and Audible books, see sports scores, and more. When connected to Wi-Fi, just press the home button for 1 second and ask:
- “How’s the weather?”
- “Tell me a joke.”
- “Reorder paper towels.”
- “What’s my Sports Update?”
- “Add laundry to my to-do list.”
If you really loved me, Alexa, you’d figure out some way to keep laundry off my to-do list.
(I think it’s time to watch Her again.)
For all Muni Metro passengers knew, the free rides they were getting Friday night and Saturday were a holiday gift from the transit system. Little did they know Muni was under attack from a hacker trying to squeeze $73,000 in ransom to unlock the agency’s computer systems.
Muni refused to pay up. Instead, officials shut down the system’s ticket machines, threw open the fare gates as a precautionary move, and contacted the Department of Homeland Security and their own technology division to contain the attack, they said.
“Considering paying that ransom was never an option,” said Paul Rose, an MTA spokesman.
I like the sound of that.
The anonymous hacker used a ransomware attack — malicious software sent via email — to lock up employee computers at 900 workstations, shut down Muni’s email system and knock out the time-tracking portion of its payroll system, Rose said.
The hacker displayed messages on otherwise dark computer screens declaring “You hacked,” and asking for 100 bitcoins, a digital currency, or about $73,000. Muni never communicated nor negotiated with the hacker, Rose said. Instead, Muni officials relied on advice from federal officials and a backup system to restore the network.
Apparently the attack didn’t reach the Muni control systems or customer records; the hacker supposedly announced that he had customer records, but Muni says no chance.
Credit for keeping a straight face, though:
I used to watch his videos but the supreme gentleman hasn’t uploaded since 2014! Has he quit YouTube?
Um, not exactly. The creepy little weirdo, in his one act of true selflessness, turned the gun on himself. So the guy with the first answer to this question was correct: “No wifi in hell.”