Cheap -- Great Review with only 200 bucks you can own this
https://play.google.com/store/devices/details?id=nexus_7_8gb
https://play.google.com/store/devices/details?id=nexus_7_8gb
After many rumours, Valve has now officially confirmed that it is porting its Steam game distribution platform to Linux. A port of the first-person shooter game Left 4 Dead 2 (L4D2) is also being worked on. The announcement coincides with the launch of a new Valve Linux Team blog, which will provide a first hand account of future Linux developments at the company.
Dedicated games servers for Valve games have long been running under Linux. In 2011, the company decided to put together a Linux team to port the Steam client and L4D2 to Ubuntu. Valve has since added 11 people to a growing team of Linux developers.
According to the company, it now has native Linux versions of both Steam and Left 4 Dead 2, the former is still missing some functionality. Valve's Linux team is now working on a full-featured Linux version of the Steam client and on optimising L4D2 for OpenGL. The objective is to have the game running just as well on Linux as it does on Windows; Mac OS X is also supported. For now, Valve is concentrating its Linux efforts on supporting Ubuntu, but other distributions will be supported later, said the company in its statement. Other games will also be supported in the future, if all goes according to plan.
Previously, users have had to resort to Wine or CrossOver to install Steam for Windows under Linux. This works in principle, but the Steam client and most games can be very buggy under these systems.
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2012/...ort-of-steam-source-engine-and-left-4-dead-2/
Game console for 100 bucks ?
$99 Ouya wants to bust down console gaming’s walled gardens
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2012/07/99-ouya-wants-to-bust-down-console-gamings-walled-gardens/
$99 Ouya wants to bust down console gaming’s walled gardens
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2012/07/99-ouya-wants-to-bust-down-console-gamings-walled-gardens/
There's no doubt that mirrorless cameras are on the up, but one company's been conspicuously late to the party — the world's largest DSLR maker, Canon. That's set to change soon if rumors are to be believed, as an image of a camera called the EOS M has sprung up on Japanese site Digicame, which claims it came straight from a retailer. The camera looks to use a new lens mount called EF-M, and is pictured with a 22mm f/2 STM macro lens.
The sensor size remains unclear. Canon Watch's sources claim the EOS M will employ an APS-C sensor, but it's possible that Canon could reuse the slightly smaller 1.5-inch chip found in the G1 X. Otherwise it looks to be a small, simple, and accessible camera — there's no mode dial or viewfinder in sight, and the design is decidedly closer to the Nikon J1 or Panasonic GF5 than the enthusiast-focused Sony NEX-7 or Fujifilm X-Pro1. There doesn't appear to be a pop-up flash, either, though it does have a hotshoe mount. Of course, the image could turn out to be a well-done fake, but with the official reveal said to be coming on Monday we might not have long to find out.
The sensor size remains unclear. Canon Watch's sources claim the EOS M will employ an APS-C sensor, but it's possible that Canon could reuse the slightly smaller 1.5-inch chip found in the G1 X. Otherwise it looks to be a small, simple, and accessible camera — there's no mode dial or viewfinder in sight, and the design is decidedly closer to the Nikon J1 or Panasonic GF5 than the enthusiast-focused Sony NEX-7 or Fujifilm X-Pro1. There doesn't appear to be a pop-up flash, either, though it does have a hotshoe mount. Of course, the image could turn out to be a well-done fake, but with the official reveal said to be coming on Monday we might not have long to find out.
[h=1]US maps Afghanistan’s geology… from 50,000 feet[/h] [h=2]Data intended to help the country identify its $1 trillion in mineral deposits.[/h]
When Afghanistan made the news in June of 2010, it wasn’t for the usual reasons. The US Government had brought in geologists to evaluate Afghanistan’s mineral resources and their conclusions were spit-take worthy. The iron, copper, gold, lithium, and rare earth elements present are worth something in the neighborhood of $1 trillion. This is a country whose GDP has recently climbed to $30 billion.
Ongoing work by the United States Geological Survey has developed the information Afghanistan will need to begin exploiting the resources that promise to revolutionize its economy. Last week, the USGS announced the release of incredibly detailed maps of Afghan geology. The maps (which are available for download) were created using airborne spectral surveys. In areas of bare rock or thin soil, the instruments can identify minerals in bedrock by the spectral fingerprint of the sunlight reflected off the surface. This technique had been used in targeted areas previously, but the coverage now extends nearly to the nation’s borders.
In a place like Afghanistan, it would take a very long time for geologists to cover all that ground by foot, and an understanding of the geology is critical to hunting down mineral deposits. In the press release, USGS Director Marcia McNutt says, “When compared with conventional ground mapping, use of this technology has accelerated by decades the identification of the most promising areas for economic development in Afghanistan.”
http://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/sim3152ahyperspectal_map.jpg
When Afghanistan made the news in June of 2010, it wasn’t for the usual reasons. The US Government had brought in geologists to evaluate Afghanistan’s mineral resources and their conclusions were spit-take worthy. The iron, copper, gold, lithium, and rare earth elements present are worth something in the neighborhood of $1 trillion. This is a country whose GDP has recently climbed to $30 billion.
Ongoing work by the United States Geological Survey has developed the information Afghanistan will need to begin exploiting the resources that promise to revolutionize its economy. Last week, the USGS announced the release of incredibly detailed maps of Afghan geology. The maps (which are available for download) were created using airborne spectral surveys. In areas of bare rock or thin soil, the instruments can identify minerals in bedrock by the spectral fingerprint of the sunlight reflected off the surface. This technique had been used in targeted areas previously, but the coverage now extends nearly to the nation’s borders.
In a place like Afghanistan, it would take a very long time for geologists to cover all that ground by foot, and an understanding of the geology is critical to hunting down mineral deposits. In the press release, USGS Director Marcia McNutt says, “When compared with conventional ground mapping, use of this technology has accelerated by decades the identification of the most promising areas for economic development in Afghanistan.”
http://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/sim3152ahyperspectal_map.jpg
Most of you probably use pulse on your android phone (tablet) / iphone / ipad ... it is agreat application where you can see all the news and headlines very fast ...
--> Now it is also available on their web-site so you can enjoy it on your dekstop / labptop
http://pulse.me
--> Now it is also available on their web-site so you can enjoy it on your dekstop / labptop
http://pulse.me
Apple v. Samsung verdict is in: $1 billion loss for Samsung
A jury of seven men and two women has just read the Apple v. Samsung verdict to a packed courtroom—and it was all bad news for Samsung. The Korean electronics giant has been found to infringe all of Apple's utility patents and all but one of the four design patents asserted, and was ordered to pay $1.05 billion in damages to Apple.
That's less than the $2.75 billion Apple asked for, but still a huge sum. If it holds up on appeal, it will stand as the largest patent verdict of all time. More importantly, it gives Apple a huge leg-up in the corporate patent wars, and immeasurably strengthens the company's negotiating position with regard to the Android phones it is struggling against.
Since Samsung's patent infringement was found to be willful in many cases, the $1.05 billion damages figure could go up. Patent law allows for up to triple damages in cases where infringement is found to be willful, although judges rarely grant that much in additional damages.
Samsung has been the number one seller of smartphones in the U.S. in the past few years, and this verdict will surely alter the balance of power. Apple's ultimate target is Google, which created the Android operating system that runs on Samsung smartphones. Steve Jobs thought Android was a rip-off of Apple products, and vowed to declare "thermonuclear war" on the competing OS, according to his biography.
Now, the world will get a chance to see just what the results of Jobs' promised nuclear attack will be. There's a danger that Samsung products could be kicked off the market following this verdict. However, that decision will have to be made in the coming weeks by U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh, who oversaw the case. Koh has scheduled a hearing on that issue for Sept. 20.
During closing arguments, Apple portrayed Samsung as a enthusiastic copycat that took a shortcut to profits, engaging in a three-month copying spree that piggybacked on the years of hard work Apple witnesses said it took to create the iPhone. Samsung, meanwhile, denied those copying allegations, and accused Apple of being a courtroom bully that refused to compete in the marketplace.
Apple's three utility patents, all found infringed, cover features like double-tapping to zoom and the "bounce back" technology that snaps images back into place. The company's four design patents cover elements like the contours and shape of the iPhone.
The jury also rejected Samsung's arguments that the patents were invalid. Samsung escaped an infringement finding on only one of Apple's patents, a design patent asserted only against two Samsung tablets.
Samsung's counterattack against Apple, using six of its own patents, went nowhere. The jury found that Samsung's patents weren't infringed, and Samsung won't get any of the $422 million it was asking for.
The jury of seven men and two women returned the verdict faster than expected, after just two and a half days of deliberations in the San Jose federal courthouse. The jury was given access to one of each of the accused phones, which could be turned on and used, but did not have Internet access. At the end of the day, they had to fill out a complex 20-page jury verdict form [PDF] that includes hundreds of individual patent and trademark accusations against each company. Closing arguments took place late Tuesday.
The case, which began with opening arguments on July 31, has been an unusually tense one, with US District Judge Lucy Koh often sniping at lawyers on both sides.
The verdict was originally reported as $1.051 billion, but there were "inconsistencies" in the jury form, and the jury spent about an hour working those out. That lowered the final damages amount by $2.4 million, for reported total of $1,049,343,540.
Below is a copy of the verdict form, which the jury used to make its ruling.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/103860463/Signed-Verdict-Form
Apple v. Samsung verdict is in: $1 billion loss for Samsung
Huge penalty could shift the balance of power among smartphone makers.
by Joe Mullin - Aug 24 2012, 2:57pm PDT
Apple, Inc.
Intellectual Property
iOS & iDevices
Lawsuits
836
Aurich Lawson
Apple v. Samsung
Ban this: Apple lists 8 Samsung devices it wants kept out of the US
Samsung, Apple rally employees after US patent verdict
Apple v. Samsung juror: we "wanted to send a message"
In closing arguments, Apple lawyer tells Samsung: "Make your own phones"
Apple v. Samsung lawyers wage final battles over complex, 22-page jury form
View all…
A jury of seven men and two women has just read the Apple v. Samsung verdict to a packed courtroom—and it was all bad news for Samsung. The Korean electronics giant has been found to infringe all of Apple's utility patents and all but one of the four design patents asserted, and was ordered to pay $1.05 billion in damages to Apple.
That's less than the $2.75 billion Apple asked for, but still a huge sum. If it holds up on appeal, it will stand as the largest patent verdict of all time. More importantly, it gives Apple a huge leg-up in the corporate patent wars, and immeasurably strengthens the company's negotiating position with regard to the Android phones it is struggling against.
Since Samsung's patent infringement was found to be willful in many cases, the $1.05 billion damages figure could go up. Patent law allows for up to triple damages in cases where infringement is found to be willful, although judges rarely grant that much in additional damages.
Samsung has been the number one seller of smartphones in the U.S. in the past few years, and this verdict will surely alter the balance of power. Apple's ultimate target is Google, which created the Android operating system that runs on Samsung smartphones. Steve Jobs thought Android was a rip-off of Apple products, and vowed to declare "thermonuclear war" on the competing OS, according to his biography.
Now, the world will get a chance to see just what the results of Jobs' promised nuclear attack will be. There's a danger that Samsung products could be kicked off the market following this verdict. However, that decision will have to be made in the coming weeks by U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh, who oversaw the case. Koh has scheduled a hearing on that issue for Sept. 20.
During closing arguments, Apple portrayed Samsung as a enthusiastic copycat that took a shortcut to profits, engaging in a three-month copying spree that piggybacked on the years of hard work Apple witnesses said it took to create the iPhone. Samsung, meanwhile, denied those copying allegations, and accused Apple of being a courtroom bully that refused to compete in the marketplace.
Apple's three utility patents, all found infringed, cover features like double-tapping to zoom and the "bounce back" technology that snaps images back into place. The company's four design patents cover elements like the contours and shape of the iPhone.
The jury also rejected Samsung's arguments that the patents were invalid. Samsung escaped an infringement finding on only one of Apple's patents, a design patent asserted only against two Samsung tablets.
Samsung's counterattack against Apple, using six of its own patents, went nowhere. The jury found that Samsung's patents weren't infringed, and Samsung won't get any of the $422 million it was asking for.
The jury of seven men and two women returned the verdict faster than expected, after just two and a half days of deliberations in the San Jose federal courthouse. The jury was given access to one of each of the accused phones, which could be turned on and used, but did not have Internet access. At the end of the day, they had to fill out a complex 20-page jury verdict form [PDF] that includes hundreds of individual patent and trademark accusations against each company. Closing arguments took place late Tuesday.
The case, which began with opening arguments on July 31, has been an unusually tense one, with US District Judge Lucy Koh often sniping at lawyers on both sides.
The verdict was originally reported as $1.051 billion, but there were "inconsistencies" in the jury form, and the jury spent about an hour working those out. That lowered the final damages amount by $2.4 million, for reported total of $1,049,343,540.
Below is a copy of the verdict form, which the jury used to make its ruling.
The verdict follows closely after a South Korean court decided that both companies infringed each others' patents, a ruling seen to favor Samsung. However, the US battle is the centerpiece of the worldwide legal battle between the two smartphone companies, and is by far the most significant.
In addition to patent and trade dress claims, Apple also made antitrust and breach-of-contract claims, saying that Samsung was using its industry-standard patents in an illegal way. Those claims failed, but were a tiny part of Apple's case.
This win also strengthens Apple's hand in a newer lawsuit [PDF] filed against Samsung in the same court. That lawsuit, scheduled to go to trial in 2014, accuses a newer generation of phones of infringing Apple patents and trademarks. Apple's position is that Samsung has continued to make illegal copies of its product, releasing no less than 17 phones in the last part of 2011 that infringe Apple patents, including various Galaxy II models, the Galaxy Nexus, the Stratosphere, and others.
An Apple spokeswoman made this statement on the verdict:
"The mountain of evidence presented during the trail showed that Samsung’s copying went far deeper than even we knew. The lawsuits between Apple and Samsung were about much more than patents or money. They were about values. At Apple, we value originality and innovation and pour our lives into making the best products on earth. We make these products to delight our customers, not for our competitors to flagrantly copy. We applaud the court for finding Samsung’s behavior willful and for sending a loud and clear message that stealing isn’t right."
In an e-mailed comment, a Samsung spokesperson said the verdict was a loss for consumers, and promised the fight isn't over:
"Today’s verdict should not be viewed as a win for Apple, but as a loss for the American consumer. It will lead to fewer choices, less innovation, and potentially higher prices. It is unfortunate that patent law can be manipulated to give one company a monopoly over rectangles with rounded corners, or technology that is being improved every day by Samsung and other companies... This is not the final word in this case or in battles being waged in courts and tribunals around the world, some of which have already rejected many of Apple’s claims.”
Following the verdict, the jury chose not to speak to the throng of media outside the court building. Court staff escorted the nine jurors out of the building through a back exit.
A jury of seven men and two women has just read the Apple v. Samsung verdict to a packed courtroom—and it was all bad news for Samsung. The Korean electronics giant has been found to infringe all of Apple's utility patents and all but one of the four design patents asserted, and was ordered to pay $1.05 billion in damages to Apple.
That's less than the $2.75 billion Apple asked for, but still a huge sum. If it holds up on appeal, it will stand as the largest patent verdict of all time. More importantly, it gives Apple a huge leg-up in the corporate patent wars, and immeasurably strengthens the company's negotiating position with regard to the Android phones it is struggling against.
Since Samsung's patent infringement was found to be willful in many cases, the $1.05 billion damages figure could go up. Patent law allows for up to triple damages in cases where infringement is found to be willful, although judges rarely grant that much in additional damages.
Samsung has been the number one seller of smartphones in the U.S. in the past few years, and this verdict will surely alter the balance of power. Apple's ultimate target is Google, which created the Android operating system that runs on Samsung smartphones. Steve Jobs thought Android was a rip-off of Apple products, and vowed to declare "thermonuclear war" on the competing OS, according to his biography.
Now, the world will get a chance to see just what the results of Jobs' promised nuclear attack will be. There's a danger that Samsung products could be kicked off the market following this verdict. However, that decision will have to be made in the coming weeks by U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh, who oversaw the case. Koh has scheduled a hearing on that issue for Sept. 20.
During closing arguments, Apple portrayed Samsung as a enthusiastic copycat that took a shortcut to profits, engaging in a three-month copying spree that piggybacked on the years of hard work Apple witnesses said it took to create the iPhone. Samsung, meanwhile, denied those copying allegations, and accused Apple of being a courtroom bully that refused to compete in the marketplace.
Apple's three utility patents, all found infringed, cover features like double-tapping to zoom and the "bounce back" technology that snaps images back into place. The company's four design patents cover elements like the contours and shape of the iPhone.
The jury also rejected Samsung's arguments that the patents were invalid. Samsung escaped an infringement finding on only one of Apple's patents, a design patent asserted only against two Samsung tablets.
Samsung's counterattack against Apple, using six of its own patents, went nowhere. The jury found that Samsung's patents weren't infringed, and Samsung won't get any of the $422 million it was asking for.
The jury of seven men and two women returned the verdict faster than expected, after just two and a half days of deliberations in the San Jose federal courthouse. The jury was given access to one of each of the accused phones, which could be turned on and used, but did not have Internet access. At the end of the day, they had to fill out a complex 20-page jury verdict form [PDF] that includes hundreds of individual patent and trademark accusations against each company. Closing arguments took place late Tuesday.
The case, which began with opening arguments on July 31, has been an unusually tense one, with US District Judge Lucy Koh often sniping at lawyers on both sides.
The verdict was originally reported as $1.051 billion, but there were "inconsistencies" in the jury form, and the jury spent about an hour working those out. That lowered the final damages amount by $2.4 million, for reported total of $1,049,343,540.
Below is a copy of the verdict form, which the jury used to make its ruling.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/103860463/Signed-Verdict-Form
Apple v. Samsung verdict is in: $1 billion loss for Samsung
Huge penalty could shift the balance of power among smartphone makers.
by Joe Mullin - Aug 24 2012, 2:57pm PDT
Apple, Inc.
Intellectual Property
iOS & iDevices
Lawsuits
836
Aurich Lawson
Apple v. Samsung
Ban this: Apple lists 8 Samsung devices it wants kept out of the US
Samsung, Apple rally employees after US patent verdict
Apple v. Samsung juror: we "wanted to send a message"
In closing arguments, Apple lawyer tells Samsung: "Make your own phones"
Apple v. Samsung lawyers wage final battles over complex, 22-page jury form
View all…
A jury of seven men and two women has just read the Apple v. Samsung verdict to a packed courtroom—and it was all bad news for Samsung. The Korean electronics giant has been found to infringe all of Apple's utility patents and all but one of the four design patents asserted, and was ordered to pay $1.05 billion in damages to Apple.
That's less than the $2.75 billion Apple asked for, but still a huge sum. If it holds up on appeal, it will stand as the largest patent verdict of all time. More importantly, it gives Apple a huge leg-up in the corporate patent wars, and immeasurably strengthens the company's negotiating position with regard to the Android phones it is struggling against.
Since Samsung's patent infringement was found to be willful in many cases, the $1.05 billion damages figure could go up. Patent law allows for up to triple damages in cases where infringement is found to be willful, although judges rarely grant that much in additional damages.
Samsung has been the number one seller of smartphones in the U.S. in the past few years, and this verdict will surely alter the balance of power. Apple's ultimate target is Google, which created the Android operating system that runs on Samsung smartphones. Steve Jobs thought Android was a rip-off of Apple products, and vowed to declare "thermonuclear war" on the competing OS, according to his biography.
Now, the world will get a chance to see just what the results of Jobs' promised nuclear attack will be. There's a danger that Samsung products could be kicked off the market following this verdict. However, that decision will have to be made in the coming weeks by U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh, who oversaw the case. Koh has scheduled a hearing on that issue for Sept. 20.
During closing arguments, Apple portrayed Samsung as a enthusiastic copycat that took a shortcut to profits, engaging in a three-month copying spree that piggybacked on the years of hard work Apple witnesses said it took to create the iPhone. Samsung, meanwhile, denied those copying allegations, and accused Apple of being a courtroom bully that refused to compete in the marketplace.
Apple's three utility patents, all found infringed, cover features like double-tapping to zoom and the "bounce back" technology that snaps images back into place. The company's four design patents cover elements like the contours and shape of the iPhone.
The jury also rejected Samsung's arguments that the patents were invalid. Samsung escaped an infringement finding on only one of Apple's patents, a design patent asserted only against two Samsung tablets.
Samsung's counterattack against Apple, using six of its own patents, went nowhere. The jury found that Samsung's patents weren't infringed, and Samsung won't get any of the $422 million it was asking for.
The jury of seven men and two women returned the verdict faster than expected, after just two and a half days of deliberations in the San Jose federal courthouse. The jury was given access to one of each of the accused phones, which could be turned on and used, but did not have Internet access. At the end of the day, they had to fill out a complex 20-page jury verdict form [PDF] that includes hundreds of individual patent and trademark accusations against each company. Closing arguments took place late Tuesday.
The case, which began with opening arguments on July 31, has been an unusually tense one, with US District Judge Lucy Koh often sniping at lawyers on both sides.
The verdict was originally reported as $1.051 billion, but there were "inconsistencies" in the jury form, and the jury spent about an hour working those out. That lowered the final damages amount by $2.4 million, for reported total of $1,049,343,540.
Below is a copy of the verdict form, which the jury used to make its ruling.
The verdict follows closely after a South Korean court decided that both companies infringed each others' patents, a ruling seen to favor Samsung. However, the US battle is the centerpiece of the worldwide legal battle between the two smartphone companies, and is by far the most significant.
In addition to patent and trade dress claims, Apple also made antitrust and breach-of-contract claims, saying that Samsung was using its industry-standard patents in an illegal way. Those claims failed, but were a tiny part of Apple's case.
This win also strengthens Apple's hand in a newer lawsuit [PDF] filed against Samsung in the same court. That lawsuit, scheduled to go to trial in 2014, accuses a newer generation of phones of infringing Apple patents and trademarks. Apple's position is that Samsung has continued to make illegal copies of its product, releasing no less than 17 phones in the last part of 2011 that infringe Apple patents, including various Galaxy II models, the Galaxy Nexus, the Stratosphere, and others.
An Apple spokeswoman made this statement on the verdict:
"The mountain of evidence presented during the trail showed that Samsung’s copying went far deeper than even we knew. The lawsuits between Apple and Samsung were about much more than patents or money. They were about values. At Apple, we value originality and innovation and pour our lives into making the best products on earth. We make these products to delight our customers, not for our competitors to flagrantly copy. We applaud the court for finding Samsung’s behavior willful and for sending a loud and clear message that stealing isn’t right."
In an e-mailed comment, a Samsung spokesperson said the verdict was a loss for consumers, and promised the fight isn't over:
"Today’s verdict should not be viewed as a win for Apple, but as a loss for the American consumer. It will lead to fewer choices, less innovation, and potentially higher prices. It is unfortunate that patent law can be manipulated to give one company a monopoly over rectangles with rounded corners, or technology that is being improved every day by Samsung and other companies... This is not the final word in this case or in battles being waged in courts and tribunals around the world, some of which have already rejected many of Apple’s claims.”
Following the verdict, the jury chose not to speak to the throng of media outside the court building. Court staff escorted the nine jurors out of the building through a back exit.
One of the world's biggest producers of liquefied natural gas has been hit by a malware attack that has taken down its website and e-mail servers. This is the second documented computer attack to hit a large energy company this month.
Officials with Qatar-based RasGas first identified an "unknown virus" on Monday and took their RasGas.com website and e-mail servers offline in response, Bloomberg News and other news agencies reported on Thursday morning, citing company representatives. Operational systems weren't affected and production and deliveries remain intact. A joint venture between Qatar Petroleum and ExxonMobil, RasGas exports about 36.3 million tons of liquefied natural gas per year.
News of the attack comes four days after Saudi Aramco, the world's largest oil producer, confirmed it was the victim of a separate malware attack that took down 30,000 workstations. The assault against the Saudi Arabia-based company was launched on August 15 as the malware entered through its network of personal computers. Oil production wasn't affected, company officials have said.
The attacks come as security researchers are tracking a malware campaign directed at unspecified companies in the energy industry. "Shamoon," as the trojan has been dubbed, wreaks havoc on its victims by attempting to permanently wipe the hard drives of the computers it infects and prevents them from restarting. In a blog post, Symantec researchers said that the Shamoon malware, which also goes by the name "Disttrack," struck at least one unnamed company in the energy industry.
A separate advisory by Israel-based Seculert said that Shamoon attacked "several specific companies in a few industries." The Seculert post went on to say the wiping function was only one of two stages found in the malware. Company researchers speculate the disk erasure may have been put in place to remove traces of the other action, which may have been surveillance or data theft.
So far, there's no confirmation that Shamoon is the same malware that struck either RasGas or Saudi Aramco.
"Usually, targeted attacks are being used against companies at the same vertical," Seculert CTO Aviv Raff wrote in an e-mail to Ars. "So it is not surprising to see such an attack against another company in the oil and energy industry. I believe that if it's indeed the same attack, they are probably using this to cover their tracks of the actual intended action against RasGas."
He said a non-disclosure agreement bars him from naming the companies affected or identifying their industries.
Based on the information that is publicly available, the attacks on RasGas and Saudi Aramco appear to be major inconveniences rather than catastrophic events. Assuming that's truly the case, the unsung heroes are the engineers who separated e-mail and Web servers from critical energy production and delivery systems. With confirmation of attacks against two of the world's biggest energy producers, it's worth investigating how and if all companies in this industry are designing their systems to withstand such campaigns.
Officials with Qatar-based RasGas first identified an "unknown virus" on Monday and took their RasGas.com website and e-mail servers offline in response, Bloomberg News and other news agencies reported on Thursday morning, citing company representatives. Operational systems weren't affected and production and deliveries remain intact. A joint venture between Qatar Petroleum and ExxonMobil, RasGas exports about 36.3 million tons of liquefied natural gas per year.
News of the attack comes four days after Saudi Aramco, the world's largest oil producer, confirmed it was the victim of a separate malware attack that took down 30,000 workstations. The assault against the Saudi Arabia-based company was launched on August 15 as the malware entered through its network of personal computers. Oil production wasn't affected, company officials have said.
The attacks come as security researchers are tracking a malware campaign directed at unspecified companies in the energy industry. "Shamoon," as the trojan has been dubbed, wreaks havoc on its victims by attempting to permanently wipe the hard drives of the computers it infects and prevents them from restarting. In a blog post, Symantec researchers said that the Shamoon malware, which also goes by the name "Disttrack," struck at least one unnamed company in the energy industry.
A separate advisory by Israel-based Seculert said that Shamoon attacked "several specific companies in a few industries." The Seculert post went on to say the wiping function was only one of two stages found in the malware. Company researchers speculate the disk erasure may have been put in place to remove traces of the other action, which may have been surveillance or data theft.
So far, there's no confirmation that Shamoon is the same malware that struck either RasGas or Saudi Aramco.
"Usually, targeted attacks are being used against companies at the same vertical," Seculert CTO Aviv Raff wrote in an e-mail to Ars. "So it is not surprising to see such an attack against another company in the oil and energy industry. I believe that if it's indeed the same attack, they are probably using this to cover their tracks of the actual intended action against RasGas."
He said a non-disclosure agreement bars him from naming the companies affected or identifying their industries.
Based on the information that is publicly available, the attacks on RasGas and Saudi Aramco appear to be major inconveniences rather than catastrophic events. Assuming that's truly the case, the unsung heroes are the engineers who separated e-mail and Web servers from critical energy production and delivery systems. With confirmation of attacks against two of the world's biggest energy producers, it's worth investigating how and if all companies in this industry are designing their systems to withstand such campaigns.
You can now to chatting in thunderbird e-mail client:
www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Thunderbird-15-activates-instant-messaging-1677823.html
www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Thunderbird-15-activates-instant-messaging-1677823.html
A court in Tokyo on Friday dismissed Apple Inc.'s claim that Samsung had infringed on its patent — the latest ruling in the global legal battle between the two technology titans over smartphones.
The Japanese court case addressed only the synchronizing technology that allows media players to share data with personal computers and was not comparable in scope to the much larger victory that Apple won in the U.S. last week.
Samsung Electronics Co. of South Korea, the world's largest maker of phones, welcomed the Tokyo District Court ruling that its technology that allows media players and personal computers to share music files and other content did not infringe on Apple patents as confirming its "long-held position."
"We will continue to offer highly innovative products to consumers and continue our contributions toward the mobile industry's development," the company said in a statement.
The Apple lawyer present at the courthouse declined comment, and the company said later it had no comment, including whether it intended to appeal. In the past, Apple has accused Samsung of copying Apple products.
[h=3]Lawsuit dismissed[/h]In a session lasting just a few minutes, Judge Tamotsu Shoji said he did not think Samsung products fell into the realm of Apple technology and dismissed the lawsuit, filed by Apple in August last year.
Apple, the Cupertino, Calif.-based maker of the hit iPhone and iPad, is embroiled in similar legal tussles around the world over whether Samsung smartphones, which rely on Google Inc.'s Android technology, illegally used Apple designs, ideas or technology.
In one such case, a jury in California ruled last week that Samsung products illegally used such Apple creations as the "bounce-back" feature when a user scrolls to an end image, and the ability to zoom text with a tap of a finger.
The jury awarded Apple $1 billion US in damages, and a judge is now evaluating Apple's request to have eight Samsung products pulled from store shelves and banned from the U.S. market, including popular Galaxy model smartphones.
Samsung's latest hit, Galaxy S3, was not part of the U.S. ruling.
[h=3]More cases before Japanese courts[/h]Friday's ruling was the first held in Japan in the Samsung-Apple global court battle, but other technology is being contested by the two companies in separate legal cases in Japan.
Seo Won-seok, an analyst at Seoul-based Korea Investment & Securities, said the Tokyo verdict showed that the lawsuits around the world are largely isolated and may not be affected by Apple's major victory in California.
"The favourable ruling for Samsung convinces me that lawsuits in other countries may play out differently from the one in the U.S.," he said.
Apple products are extremely popular among Japanese consumers, but major Japanese carriers such as NTT DoCoMo sell Samsung smartphones as well. Japanese electronics maker Sony Corp. also makes smartphones and tablet devices similar to Samsung's, using Android technology.
Samsung has sold more than 50 million Galaxy S and Galaxy S2 smartphones around the world. The legal battle also involves Samsung's Tab device, which Apple claims infringes on patents related to the iPad tablet.
The Japanese court case addressed only the synchronizing technology that allows media players to share data with personal computers and was not comparable in scope to the much larger victory that Apple won in the U.S. last week.
Samsung Electronics Co. of South Korea, the world's largest maker of phones, welcomed the Tokyo District Court ruling that its technology that allows media players and personal computers to share music files and other content did not infringe on Apple patents as confirming its "long-held position."
"We will continue to offer highly innovative products to consumers and continue our contributions toward the mobile industry's development," the company said in a statement.
The Apple lawyer present at the courthouse declined comment, and the company said later it had no comment, including whether it intended to appeal. In the past, Apple has accused Samsung of copying Apple products.
[h=3]Lawsuit dismissed[/h]In a session lasting just a few minutes, Judge Tamotsu Shoji said he did not think Samsung products fell into the realm of Apple technology and dismissed the lawsuit, filed by Apple in August last year.
Apple, the Cupertino, Calif.-based maker of the hit iPhone and iPad, is embroiled in similar legal tussles around the world over whether Samsung smartphones, which rely on Google Inc.'s Android technology, illegally used Apple designs, ideas or technology.
In one such case, a jury in California ruled last week that Samsung products illegally used such Apple creations as the "bounce-back" feature when a user scrolls to an end image, and the ability to zoom text with a tap of a finger.
The jury awarded Apple $1 billion US in damages, and a judge is now evaluating Apple's request to have eight Samsung products pulled from store shelves and banned from the U.S. market, including popular Galaxy model smartphones.
Samsung's latest hit, Galaxy S3, was not part of the U.S. ruling.
[h=3]More cases before Japanese courts[/h]Friday's ruling was the first held in Japan in the Samsung-Apple global court battle, but other technology is being contested by the two companies in separate legal cases in Japan.
Seo Won-seok, an analyst at Seoul-based Korea Investment & Securities, said the Tokyo verdict showed that the lawsuits around the world are largely isolated and may not be affected by Apple's major victory in California.
"The favourable ruling for Samsung convinces me that lawsuits in other countries may play out differently from the one in the U.S.," he said.
Apple products are extremely popular among Japanese consumers, but major Japanese carriers such as NTT DoCoMo sell Samsung smartphones as well. Japanese electronics maker Sony Corp. also makes smartphones and tablet devices similar to Samsung's, using Android technology.
Samsung has sold more than 50 million Galaxy S and Galaxy S2 smartphones around the world. The legal battle also involves Samsung's Tab device, which Apple claims infringes on patents related to the iPad tablet.
RAYONG, Thailand - Ford Motor Co. says its Focus small car is on track to become the bestselling car in the world this year, trumping the Toyota Corolla.
Ford sold 489,616 Focus sedans and hatchbacks worldwide in the first half of 2012. That was almost 27,000 more than the perennial bestseller, the Toyota Corolla.
Ford made the announcement at its assembly plant in Rayong, which opened in May to build the Focus. The Thailand plant, which is one of Ford's most advanced, has the capacity to produce 150,000 cars per year for sale in Thailand, Vietnam, Australia and other countries in the region.
Ford's recently revamped Focus is sold in more than 100 countries worldwide. It's a strong seller in the U.S., where Focus sales were up 31 per cent in the first half of the year compared with 2011. But the Corolla is still king in the U.S., where it outsold the Focus by nearly 27,500 in the first half of the year.
The Corolla could still top the Focus worldwide, too. Last year at this time the Focus was ahead of the Corolla, but the Corolla pulled through in the end, outselling the Focus by around 100,000 vehicles, according to IHS Global Insight, an industry consulting firm.
At the plant Friday, Ford executives were also celebrating the production of the 350 millionth vehicle Ford has made since its founding 109 years ago.
Ford sold 489,616 Focus sedans and hatchbacks worldwide in the first half of 2012. That was almost 27,000 more than the perennial bestseller, the Toyota Corolla.
Ford made the announcement at its assembly plant in Rayong, which opened in May to build the Focus. The Thailand plant, which is one of Ford's most advanced, has the capacity to produce 150,000 cars per year for sale in Thailand, Vietnam, Australia and other countries in the region.
Ford's recently revamped Focus is sold in more than 100 countries worldwide. It's a strong seller in the U.S., where Focus sales were up 31 per cent in the first half of the year compared with 2011. But the Corolla is still king in the U.S., where it outsold the Focus by nearly 27,500 in the first half of the year.
The Corolla could still top the Focus worldwide, too. Last year at this time the Focus was ahead of the Corolla, but the Corolla pulled through in the end, outselling the Focus by around 100,000 vehicles, according to IHS Global Insight, an industry consulting firm.
At the plant Friday, Ford executives were also celebrating the production of the 350 millionth vehicle Ford has made since its founding 109 years ago.
If Intel manages to get its Atom-powered smartphones into consumers' hands, it'll be the biggest upset in the smartphone processor industry in a decade. The ZTE Grand X IN isn't the first Intel-powered phone, but it's the first to come with Android 4.0, and from a manufacturer with an already-successful smartphone business.
Motorola looks primed to launch an Intel-powered phone in mid-September, and between them, the Motorola and ZTE devices could offer carriers reliable low- and high-end Intel options.
Motorola looks primed to launch an Intel-powered phone in mid-September, and between them, the Motorola and ZTE devices could offer carriers reliable low- and high-end Intel options.
This is great for people who want to learn Python or any new programming language in that matter
It executes the code for you online
http://www.pythontutor.com/
It executes the code for you online
http://www.pythontutor.com/
HTML5 to be completed by the end of 2014
The chairs of the W3C's HTML Working Group have presented a plan to approve a stable HTML5 specification before the end of 2014. The plan proposes to formally define a stable set of features as HTML 5.0, but when the HTML Working Group will approve this plan is as yet unknown. Features for which no stable specification is available by then could be moved to an extended "HTML 5.1" set of features that could be completed by 2016.
That the HTML5 concept is inherently designed to be modular would benefit this strategy, according to the chairs. "Many technologies that were originally defined in HTML5 itself" – for example Web Workers, WebSockets and Microdata – "are now defined in separate specifications, either in the HTML WG or in other Working Groups", they explained, adding that further areas could be removed temporarily to be re-integrated at a later stage.
The plan appears to be motivated by the fact that despite efforts such as the appointment of new co-editors in late July 2012, too many areas remain under construction, and there is too much variation in the development status of many others, to complete them all by 2014.
For web developers, the development of the official specification may seem rather irrelevant as, despite their unofficial status, many HTML5 features have long been integrated into the major browsers and are being used extensively. However, the absence of a definitive written standard continues to produce deviations that are based on interpretation, as well as "experimental" variations and extensions in implementations. Only an official ratification will create clarity, at least in terms of the approved features. In addition, the W3C's patent policy that intends to provide HTML5 as a royalty-free standard can only come into force once the specification has been approved.
The chairs of the W3C's HTML Working Group have presented a plan to approve a stable HTML5 specification before the end of 2014. The plan proposes to formally define a stable set of features as HTML 5.0, but when the HTML Working Group will approve this plan is as yet unknown. Features for which no stable specification is available by then could be moved to an extended "HTML 5.1" set of features that could be completed by 2016.
That the HTML5 concept is inherently designed to be modular would benefit this strategy, according to the chairs. "Many technologies that were originally defined in HTML5 itself" – for example Web Workers, WebSockets and Microdata – "are now defined in separate specifications, either in the HTML WG or in other Working Groups", they explained, adding that further areas could be removed temporarily to be re-integrated at a later stage.
The plan appears to be motivated by the fact that despite efforts such as the appointment of new co-editors in late July 2012, too many areas remain under construction, and there is too much variation in the development status of many others, to complete them all by 2014.
For web developers, the development of the official specification may seem rather irrelevant as, despite their unofficial status, many HTML5 features have long been integrated into the major browsers and are being used extensively. However, the absence of a definitive written standard continues to produce deviations that are based on interpretation, as well as "experimental" variations and extensions in implementations. Only an official ratification will create clarity, at least in terms of the approved features. In addition, the W3C's patent policy that intends to provide HTML5 as a royalty-free standard can only come into force once the specification has been approved.