36 stories


6 Comments and 16 Shares
Premature optimization is the root of all evil, so to start this project I'd better come up with a system that can determine whether a possible optimization is premature or not.
Read the whole story
590 days ago
I don't optimize, where else will new 6 Sigma project come from if I did.
Columbus, Indiana
Share this story
5 public comments
584 days ago
The eternal question...

And I think this answer is too glib. :)
Lincoln, NE
589 days ago
Optimizing code is like folding a tortilla: If you wait too long, it gets all stale and crumbly and you can't make a good burrito out of it.
Moses Lake, WA
590 days ago
Happens to all men of a certain age
New York, NY
590 days ago
There is no such thing as premature optimization.
Los Angeles, California, USA
590 days ago
You don't say.
590 days ago
I've been calling this premature refactoriing or prefactoring as in "Don't prefactor your code. You'll likely only have to defactor it later."
590 days ago
Premature optimization is the root of all evil, so to start this project I'd better come up with a system that can determine whether a possible optimization is premature or not.

WP.org to WordPress

1 Comment

Over the last year and a half, if you typed in the domain wp.org, then you were redirected to WPBeginner. This was an unexpected and unpleasant surprise for many because you really wanted to visit WordPress.org, home of the popular content management system. Today, I’m pleased to announce that we have donated the domain to the WordPress Foundation.

For majority of you, this doesn’t mean anything and life goes on as usual. For those who’re more involved in the WordPress community, this is a huge deal because now you can type wp.org in your Tweets, Slack messages, Facebook statuses, etc without cursing at me or WPBeginner.

I know this redirect was frustrating because many of you tweeted at me or sent us angry emails. To all of you and even those who took the high road, I want to apologize for my actions.

Now you’re probably wondering what changed?

The short answer is A LOT.

My wife and I are pregnant with our first baby. This has given me a new perspective on life as whole.

Balkhi Baby

From ironing out a new will to working on expanding my life insurance coverage, there’s a lot happening. For the first time in my life, I’m thinking about unforseen circumstances. Some of you who’re older and much wiser will call this “growing up”.

I wrote down all the things that are very important to me, and among the top after my family is WordPress. It is my extended family, and you can see that if you meet me at any of the WordCamps. I have been using WordPress for the last 10 years and WPBeginner has been around for almost 7 years.

In other words, WordPress has been part of me for 40% of my life.

As I think about all what WordPress has done for me, donating wp.org to the WordPress Foundation is the least that I could do.

WordPress is far bigger than one person or one organization. That’s the reason why the WordPress Foundation exists. Now if something is to happen to me, at least I know this domain won’t be auctioned off to the highest bidder (rather it’ll be safe at home) with the Foundation.

My only regret is that I didn’t do this sooner. But I’m glad that I did now.

Life teaches us new lessons every day, and I’m sure I’ll be learning a lot with the new baby.

I want to thank everyone who has supported me, and I look forward to continue serving the WordPress community.

Yours Truly,

Syed Balkhi
Founder of WPBeginner

The post WP.org to WordPress appeared first on WPBeginner.

Read the whole story
595 days ago
Columbus, Indiana
Share this story

Take care.

1 Comment and 2 Shares

Take care.

Bonus Panel
Read the whole story
660 days ago
Can't stop watching the wasps.
Columbus, Indiana
Share this story

Estimating Time

7 Comments and 25 Shares
Corollary to Hofstadter's Law: Every minute you spend thinking about Hofstadter's Law is a minute you're NOT WORKING AND WILL NEVER FINISH! PAAAAAANIIIIIIC!
Read the whole story
668 days ago
Realistic time estimation.
Columbus, Indiana
Share this story
6 public comments
665 days ago
I resemble this so much
that I probably should not admit it in public.
Mountain View, California
666 days ago
668 days ago
Thta's even better than Wayne's estimating method.
Earth, Sol system, Western spiral arm
668 days ago
There is way too much truth to this for most organizations.
Orange County, California
668 days ago
Ha. :)
Atlanta, GA
669 days ago
Corollary to Hofstadter's Law: Every minute you spend thinking about Hofstadter's Law is a minute you're NOT WORKING AND WILL NEVER FINISH! PAAAAAANIIIIIIC!

Apple, the FBI, and Security

1 Comment and 2 Shares

The dispute between Apple and the FBI is a much closer question than it is being framed as in most of the tech press. In large part this is because the dispute itself is being serially mischaracterized by both Apple supporters and detractors.

Apple supporters are, in my estimation, too easily conflating the security issues at hand with the more fundamental debate about encryption; detractors are trivializing the the significance of the FBI’s request by suggesting they simply want Apple to unlock the phone.

My goal with this piece is to, in as plain of language as possible, lay out the issues at hand, give a framework to think about them, and explain why I am ultimately supporting Apple’s decision.

Three Debates

The first thing to understand about the issue at hand is that there are three separate debates going on: the issue at hand, the encryption debate, and the PR battle. To understand the issue it is necessary to separate them, but to figure out which side may win it is equally critical to understand how they relate to each other.

The Issue At Hand

As I laid out last week, iPhones running iOS 8 or later have all of their contents encrypted on-disk with very strong encryption that is practically unbreakable. Therefore, the most realistic way to get access to the contents of the iPhone in question in this case is to brute force — i.e. try every possible combination — the passcode on the device. This passcode, in conjunction with the iPhone’s unique ID key (UID) that is embedded at manufacture and unknown by Apple, forms a “key” that unlocks the contents of the disk.

Given that this is an obvious way to break into an iPhone, Apple has instituted a number of software-based protections against brute force attacks, specifically an (user-selected) option to delete the contents of the disk after 10 failed passcode entries1 and a five-second delay between passcode entries. In addition, the passcode must be entered on the device’s touchscreen.

The FBI is asking Apple to remove these limitations: allow more than 10 passcode tries, remove the five-second delay (there would still be an 80-millisecond delay if the computation is done on the device due to a hardware limitation), and allow passcodes to be entered by a separate device instead of a human finger. The FBI cannot do this themselves because removing this limitation would require the installation of a new version of the iOS, which itself requires its own key that is known only to Apple.

Moreover, the FBI is insisting that this is a one-time ask for one device: Apple would be able to use the device’s Unique Device Identifier (UDID), which is different than the aforementioned UID and is known to Apple (and anyone else with the device), to ensure the custom version of iOS could only run on the device in question. In fact, the FBI is even offering to let Apple install the custom version of iOS themselves to ensure it does not leave Apple’s campus.

The Encryption Debate

What the FBI is not asking in this case is that Apple defeat the device’s on-disk encryption, and for good reason: as I noted above the iPhone’s on-disk encryption is practically unbreakable. Small wonder that when, in 2014 with the debut of iOS 8, Apple extended this encryption to all of an iPhone’s data, law enforcement agencies everywhere were aghast. FBI Director James Comey, in an October 2014 speech at the Brookings Institute stated:

Encryption isn’t just a technical feature; it’s a marketing pitch. But it will have very serious consequences for law enforcement and national security agencies at all levels. Sophisticated criminals will come to count on these means of evading detection. It’s the equivalent of a closet that can’t be opened. A safe that can’t be cracked. And my question is, at what cost?…

Cyber adversaries will exploit any vulnerability they find. But it makes more sense to address any security risks by developing intercept solutions during the design phase, rather than resorting to a patchwork solution when law enforcement comes knocking after the fact. And with sophisticated encryption, there might be no solution, leaving the government at a dead end—all in the name of privacy and network security.

“Intercept solutions during the design phase” entail the creation of a so-called “golden key”: a built-in solution to an encryption algorithm that is independent of the user’s passcode. Basically, Comey has for a few years now been agitating that Apple’s on-disk encryption be designed like a TSA-compliant luggage lock: it opens with either the owner’s passcode or with a universal key owned by a government agency.

This is an unacceptable outcome that has to date been rightly rejected by Congress. While a “golden key” can not, contrary to conventional wisdom, be guessed, it can be stolen (much like the TSA luggage key has been). Worse, once said key is stolen every single device governed by said key would be vulnerable without anyone knowing any better: that includes not only devices that hold personal details, but also corporate secrets, classified information, in short, nearly everything of value that underpins the United States economy. And no one would know when and if it was being stolen.

Again, though, while Comey and the FBI have been the most outspoken advocates of this destructive golden key, that is not an issue in this current case. If it were, my support of Apple would be unequivocal, because a golden key is an issue where there is simply no compromise. compromise; because it’s not an issue, the issue deserves further consideration.

The PR Battle

Before I engage in such consideration, it’s important to acknowledge the PR aspect of this case: this is where details like the fact Apple helped the FBI bypass the passcode on non-encrypted iPhones goes, along with the fact that the San Bernardino County, under direction from the FBI, reset the iCloud password associated with the iPhone in question. That’s not to say that PR doesn’t matter, but none of the surrounding details have anything to do with the substance of the question at hand: is Apple right to resist the FBI’s request to weaken software-based secure measures (which do not entail breaking encryption)?

Three Contexts

As is the case with many contentious questions, the correct answer depends on the context with which you evaluate the problem.

The Technology Industry’s Perspective

Apple’s opposition to the FBI’s request, and the support they have received from most major technology companies, is completely understandable.

First off, complying with this order will be a burden (the degree of said burden will be the critical factor on which the court’s decision will turn). Apple will need to design a new version of iOS, figure out a way to secure said version to ensure it doesn’t become widely available, and develop an infrastructure to deal with the inevitable flood of requests from law enforcement agencies seeking similar assistance to the FBI. It not simply an issue of “unlocking” an iPhone: it is far more complex and dangerous than that.

Secondly, Apple’s ability to resist government pressure in foreign countries — particularly China — will be severely compromised should Apple be forced to acquiesce in this case.

Third, as much as it clearly irked Apple when the FBI framed the company’s opposition as a “marketing stunt,” there is no disputing the fact that the company has made privacy and security a core part of the iPhone value proposition. Forcing the company to actively undo its own security measures certainly works against that proposition.

The FBI’s Perspective

All that said, technologists do their case a disservice by dismissing the FBI’s position out of hand. The fact of the matter is that privacy of information is not an absolute: the Fourth Amendment both prohibits “unreasonable searches and seizures” and affirms an exception for warrants “upon probable cause”. Needless to say, the FBI has pretty damn compelling probable probably cause in this case,2 and I don’t doubt that future requests along these lines will be accompanied by warrants as well.

Moreover, while it’s true the FBI and other law enforcement agencies have access to more information than ever before, both thanks to cloud services and also the expansion of the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA), which compels carriers and ISPs to provide the government with the capability to intercept communications, there very well may be information on devices that are never transmitted (or that are encrypted upon transmission).

More broadly, while I argued an absolutists’ position above with regards to encryption, that is because absolutism is the only option: data is either securely encrypted or its not.3 Given that, one can certainly make the argument that given the inescapable reality that some amount of data will be “dark” because of encryption, it behooves the technology industry to cooperate on all requests that don’t entail compromising on something (encryption) that, by definition, cannot be compromised on. To put it another way, I can sympathize with law enforcement’s irritation that the position of companies like Apple when it comes to security leaves no room for the FBI’s enforcement of a different type of security: that of the public at large.

The U.S. Perspective

That noted, the FBI’s position itself is more limited than they themselves likely realize: the FBI is primarily concerned with domestic crimes, and their perspective is that of an investigator seeking to uncover a secret.

However, the United States does not exist in a vacuum: there are plenty of entities that would like nothing more than to uncover American secrets, whether those be on the individual level (compromising information, identity, credit cards, etc.), corporate level (trade secrets, financial information, strategic documents, etc.), or government level (military information, government communications, counter-espionage, etc.). Moreover, given the fact the United States is the richest country in the world with the largest economy, powered by corporations overwhelmingly based on intellectual property, defended by the largest and most sophisticated military in the world, the United States collectively has by far the most to gain from strong security. This is why people like Michael Hayden, former director of the NSA — no civil liberties ideologue, to say the least! — say the FBI is wrong. From USA Today:

“Look, I used to run the NSA, OK?” Hayden told USA TODAY’s weekly video newsmaker series. “Back doors are good. Please, please, Lord, put back doors in, because I and a whole bunch of other talented security services around the world — even though that back door was not intended for me — that back door will make it easier for me to do what I want to do, which is to penetrate.

“But when you step back and look at the whole question of American security and safety writ large, we are a safer, more secure nation without back doors,” he says. With them, “a lot of other people would take advantage of it.”

The fact that weaker security helps the FBI doesn’t change the fact that the United States has more to lose from weaker security than any other country on earth. By far.

Winning the Security Game

There’s one more way to look at the question of security in the context of the United States broadly. Consider a sports analogy: in a game like basketball you need to play both defense and offense; the FBI, given their responsibilities, is primarily concerned with offense — uncovering secrets. However, the agency’s haste to score buckets has the effect of weakening the United States’ defense.

This is particularly unnecessary because the United States already has the best offense in the world! Consider the iPhone in question: the fact of the matter is that the data could be extracted without Apple’s help.

  • The first potential method would be to leverage a zero-day exploit that would allow the device to run code that is not signed by Apple;4 in other words, it is almost certainly possible that someone other than Apple could install the necessary software to bypass the 10 passcode entry limitation (the National Security Agency (NSA) is widely thought to possess several zero day exploits)
  • The second potential method would be to extract the data from the memory chips, and then de-cap the phone’s processor to uncover the device’s unknown UID and the algorithm used to encrypt the data, and then conduct a brute force attack on the passcode a separate computer designed to do just that5

Both of these processes are hugely difficult and expensive, which means they can only realistically be done by agencies with massive resources. Like, for example, the NSA — which is a big advantage for the United States. If there is strong security everywhere (i.e. everyone has the same defensive capability), then the country with the biggest advantage is the country with the most resources to overcome that security (i.e. not everyone has the same offensive capability). To lower the bar when it comes to defense is to give up one of the United States’ biggest strategic advantages.

Note what I have not discussed in this article: privacy. In fact, I do agree that there are significant privacy concerns around the FBI’s insistence that Apple explicitly weaken iPhone security, and I would personally lean towards the privacy side of the debate when it comes to the privacy-security tradeoff.

That said, as I articulated above, I understand the FBI’s concerns about going dark, and the agency could hardly have picked a more compelling example to make their case for tech company cooperation.6 I am not surprised that a majority of Americans say Apple “Should unlock the terror suspect’s iPhone.”

That is why it is critical to make the argument that the FBI’s request weakens security by compelling something much deeper than merely “unlocking an iPhone.” In other words, given the context of the United States as a whole, an argument for privacy and an argument for security are not a tradeoff at all, but rather two paths to the same outcome: stronger, not weaker iPhones.7

  1. Specifically, the “key” for the disk is deleted, meaning the content is encrypted forever
  2. Not to mention the explicit permission of San Bernardino County, the owner of the phone in question
  3. It’s math: just as 2 + 2 can only equal 4, data is secure from everyone or no one
  4. We know these exist: they are the foundation of jailbreaks
  5. Which, thanks to Bitcoin, are cheaper than ever before
  6. That this case is being leveraged is almost certainly not an accident
  7. One final point: Apple may lose, and that will be ok. This case is a close one, and such an outcome — facilitated brute force attacks — may prove to be the compromise that brings law enforcement to peace with encryption. That would be the hope anyways, because legislation limiting encryption would be a devastating outcome for everyone. One hopes Apple’s resistance in this case doesn’t lay the groundwork for an even worse outcome in the future

The post Apple, the FBI, and Security appeared first on Stratechery by Ben Thompson.

Read the whole story
695 days ago
Great disection of the Apple vs FBI Debate
Columbus, Indiana
Share this story

Meet the Mormons Official Movie (International Version) - Full HD

1 Comment
From: MormonMessages
Duration: 1:17:50

The Meet the Mormons movie examines the very diverse lives of six devout members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons). Filmed across the globe, Meet the Mormons takes viewers on a journey into the day-to-day realities of individuals living in the U.S., Costa Rica, Nepal and beyond. From their individual passions to their daily struggles, each story paints a picture as rich and unique as the next while challenging the stereotypes that surround the Mormon faith.

The official, full-length version of the movie will only be available on YouTube for a limited time. Learn more about Meet the Mormons at meetthemormons.com. Meet the Mormons is also available on Netflix worldwide.

This is the official Meet the Mormons movie. To buy a personal copy visit Walmart (http://goo.gl/jtziC9), Deseret Book (https://deseretbook.com/p/meet-mormons-excel-entertainment-95142) or Amazon (http://goo.gl/3yh2vf) .

Meet the Mormons is available on YouTube in 29 languages or dialects!

Watch in Spanish (Neutral): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8rSf7-Q3mHw
Watch in Portuguese (Brazilian): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=okdV-dwnyGU
Watch in French: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5LTgpzDoo5U
Watch in Italian: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ciaeh3ByWvI
Watch in German: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRh84WNGLTM
Watch in Japanese: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKGEo_vJcvM
Watch in Korean: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P4jgKyEe64M
Watch in Russian: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UdIz39DE9RE
Watch in Spanish (Euro): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu56B1ZwSfg
Watch in Spanish (Mexican): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szf3mdT8bu0
Watch in Portuguese (Euro): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ykBP2jR-uyg
Watch in Armenian: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBc-AtKBY0M
Watch in Bulgarian: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nq5jFlfES80
Watch in Estonian: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N5gS5THoljE
Watch in Hungarian: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uMQeRtyA5II
Watch in Latvian: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUvPrMbx5VY
Watch in Lithuanian: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vn7I6VCJoFM
Watch in Romanian: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SA2svO1fusU
Watch in Danish: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MmJaruLErcI
Watch in Dutch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MmJaruLErcI
Watch in Finnish: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MmJaruLErcI
Watch in Icelandic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MmJaruLErcI
Watch in Mandarin: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5uoGMZbt9U
Watch in Cantonese: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5P84OSt9kc
Watch in Norwegian: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MmJaruLErcI
Watch in Polish: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MmJaruLErcI
Watch in Swedish: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MmJaruLErcI
Watch in English: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iS6PZh6tCC0

More about the unique the stories covered in the Meet the Mormons full movie:

Meet the Humanitarian -

After leaving his village to receive a degree in Engineering, Bishnu Adhikari returned to his home in Nepal with a newfound faith and a determination to help improve the living conditions of the area. Bishnu now travels to remote villages in the Himalayan Mountains to build roads, schools and water systems, all while living with his faith and respecting his culture and his family’s expectations.

Meet the Coach -

As Head Football Coach of the U.S. Naval Academy in Annapolis, Maryland, Ken Niumatalolo balances the pressures of his high-stress job by putting his family and faith first. In the competitive, high-stakes world of college football, he made the shocking decision to cancel staff meetings on Sundays, traditionally seen as critical to the team’s success, to instead honor the Sabbath day.

Meet the Fighter -

With her husband’s help, extreme sports enthusiast Carolina Muñoz Marin has fought her way to the top of women’s amateur kickboxing in Costa Rica, challenging the traditional stereotypes of a Mormon woman. In between family time and training for competitions, Carolina and her husband run a charity to help those in Costa Rica who are less fortunate.

Meet the Bishop -

Jermaine Sullivan works full-time as an academic counselor to 200 students in order to support his wife and three kids. He also volunteers full-time as a Bishop of a Mormon church in Atlanta, Georgia. He leads his diverse congregation with youthful exuberance while shattering stereotypes of what it means to be a Mormon Bishop.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

Read the whole story
695 days ago
Good to see this movie available in all these languages.
Columbus, Indiana
Share this story
Next Page of Stories