It's fairly well known, worldwide, that US immigration is farcical. People do stuff like wipe their devices because otherwise your guys might think it's reasonable to steal all of their data.
Annoying? Sure. Conspiratorial? eh. Their loss.
Sounds vaguely like a job interview. I'm reminded of the guy who wrote homebrew, yet couldn't get hired at Google.
He applied for an ESTA and was denied, but you only need an ESTA to come to USA by air/sea.
From what it seems, DS had an approved ESTA, didn’t check its status before leaving for another US trip and found out at check-in that it was cancelled.
DS could still try coming by land via Canada (or Mexico). Not sure if there are any cases out there of ESTA denials that were non-issues at a land crossing though...
At least any denial is face to face and may offer some relevant information. Future Mozilla All Hands, if in Canada, should be within a 1-2 hour drive of USA.
DS should apply for a Canadian ETA (equivalent of ESTA) just to see if he gets approved. The two governments share a lot of info...
The EU is working on its own “it’s not a visa, but it’s basically a visa” system for visa-exempt people to fly there.
> Also, I have yet to figure out how to unhack the hackers from my Instagram so if you change your mind and want to restore my Instagram to its original form as well as help me secure my account from future privacy breaches, I'd be extremely grateful.
Somehow I would get calls, or people commenting with their account numbers.
I don’t know why people thought my default theme was the bank or a federal government, but that they did.
These answers are always very helpful and polite, doesn't matter if the question is smart or stupid.
Daniel seems a very nice person just as he's a great programmer, and I think curl success is due to its quality as much as it's due to how Daniel cares about it's users.
With power comes responsibility, of course.
>That is good, if it is YOUR car. (emphasis added)
This my concern, if I can download anything I want to MY car, how hard/easy would it be for me to do it someone else's car?
If you are in a position where you can execute something on an appliance, all bets are off
Any source on this? Sounds interesting. There's only so many reasonable places you could put an antenna, given that vehicles are mostly metallic. So, if so many cars are have cell modems, they should be easy to find.
I'm aware of OnStar, but that certainly doesn't cover "most" cars. GM has less than 20% of the US market .
You have pretty good reception inside your car, right? So does your car.
I have an engineer friend who works on the 2/3G modems for a German automotive brand. He told me anecdotally many years ago. And the public generally learned from the security breaches and vulnerability exposures. Here is one:
As you can see in the article above, by "most" I meant pretty much everybody. Just like gorilla glass are standard for smartphones, car connectivity is a standard feature on modern cars, and it doesn't cost much to the manufacturers to add that on - given the upstream auto suppliers producing these TCUs (telematics control unit) in a massive scale, which is also why all these car brands were affected (sourced from the same supplier.) And they can up-sell connectivity based subscription features with higher profit margin.
Would the manufacturer want to be paying a few dollars per car per month just in the hope the user might upgrade to OnStar later?
But maybe keep to what's installed by default in your image ?
That can be everything from OTAs to weather services, vehicle assistance services, positioning things, etc. Every feature of a "connected car" might be powered by a HTTP-based backend. And if the application inside the car is written in C/C++, using libcurl is a reasonable thing for interacting with those.
Eventually: spying on the passengers and turning the operator's behavior profile into an alternate revenue stream.
I'm not familiar with this functionality of curl. Is there some undocumented flag for that?
Programming level: tesla
wget would never be even a remote consideration for them. They would hire a developer to write something before using a quality freely available tool that forced them to be open with their source code.
And the car would be a little more expensive to make, this price inevitably paid by the rest of us who want to buy the car.
As if no one could have developed a non-GPL licensed implementation.
GPL has its place, but berating those who have or would choose a non-copyleft license is not productive. We are all free to make licensing choices, are we not?
Just like I have the right to know what is in the sausages I bought for lunch, I should have the right to know what is in the .exe I bought to run my accounting system
I can write a shell script that invokes wget, but that doesn't mean my shell script is subject to GPL.
I can use wget on a Windows machine, it doesn't mean Microsoft has to give me the Windows source code.
They don't want a 10 billion dollar lawsuit to come down to the judge's interpretation of a license.
Usually licenses are on a flat good or bad list.
Practically speaking this would require providing access to replace the entire system (though as you say the GPL wouldn't apply to separate programs as that is generally considered to not be a derivative work from a copyright perspective).
Interestingly GPLv2 has similar but lighter requirements -- you have to provide instructions ("scripts") on how to build and install the software. But obviously many people believe that this was not strong enough to deal with firmware-locked systems and thus GPLv3 was born.
Car manufacturers are never willingly going to use software that lets drivers hack their own cars. That sucks, but don't pretend it's the third-party software devs' fault.