Why people trust Apple with their health data more than Google or Amazon

Tim Cook was the second highest-paid executive of 2016, pulling in $150,036,907

Getty Images
Tim Cook was the second highest-paid executive of 2016, pulling in $150,036,907

Would you trust a technology company like Apple, Amazon or Google with your health data?

More than 1,000 people participated in my Twitter poll on the topic, and the majority of people responding that they would. Only 37 percent of people responded that they would not share their data.

Among those who opted to share their health data with a tech company, one clear winner emerged: Apple.

[Source”timesofindia”]

Here’s How You Can Save $300 On An Unlocked Samsung Galaxy S8 Or S8+

Samsung is offering users a deal that could save them a lot of money on the Galaxy S8 or S8 Plus.

Samsung is currently offering customers a discount of $150 when they buy an unlocked version of the S8 or S8 Plus on the company’s website. This means the S8 will cost $574.99 and the S8 plus will cost $674.99. Of course, that’s still a fairly hefty price to pay for a smartphone, but there is a way to lower the price even more. Users who trade in an eligible smartphone will receive an additional $150 off the price of either phone.

Eligible smartphones include

  • iPhone 5 and above
  • iPhone SE,
  • Galaxy S5 and above
  • Note 5
  • LG G4 and above
  • Google Pixel
  • Google Pixel XL

The selection of eligible phones is somewhat limited, but there’s a wide enough variety that a lot of people stand to benefit from this deal.

One more added benefit to this deal is that the recently released Blue Coral S8 is eligible for purchase.

While the price of the S8 is still a bit pricey, users won’t have to pay it all upfront. Samsung is allowing users to make monthly payments of $17.71 over a two-year period.

S8 Sales

Despite the current hype surrounding the Galaxy Note 8 and iPhone 8, the S8 and S8 Plus remain two of the of the best smartphones on the market and the sales numbers back that up. Samsung recently reported that the S8 was outselling the S7 by about 15 percent. Undoubtedly, the majority of these sales come from the fact that S8 is simply a great smartphone, but it doesn’t hurt that Samsung has offered some pretty nice deals throughout the course of the phone’s lifecycle.

Pure discounts like the one featured today are a bit rare, but there have been several buy-one-get-one opportunities from Samsung and individual cellphone carriers. The high price of the S8 is a real barrier to entry for a lot of consumers, but deals like these make the price a bit more bearable. Beyond that, it appears that these deals have paid off for Samsung as the company is on track to supplant Apple as the world’s most profitable tech firm.

One thing to keep in mind with Samsung’s current deal is that the phone will be an unlocked device so users will need to sign up with a carrier in order to get service. Using an unlocked phone isn’t for everyone as some people simply don’t like dealing with the hassle of negotiating with carriers, but it can save some money in the long run

[Source”timesofindia”]

Filename arguments passed to scripts: Are they absolute or relative?

relativity abhinaba basu

When you look at a file reference, it’s easy to tell if it’s an absolute or relative reference. You look at the first character. If it’s a slash (/), it’s absolute. If it’s a tilde (~), it’s also absolute because it will resolve to a file within someone’s home directory. And, if it’s anything else, it’s relative.

Making the same decision within a script depends on that same kind of analysis. You just have to look at the first character in the argument string to determine whether the file argument provided refers to a file that is relative to the file system location from which the script is run or is an absolute file reference.

To nail down this determination, you can use some fairly simple logic. In the mini script below, we focus on the first character of the first argument to distinguish absolute from relative file references.

#!/bin/bash

if [[ ${1:0:1} == / || ${1:0:1} == ~ ]]; then
    echo absolute
else
    echo relative
fi

The “${1:0:1}” strings in this bit of code pluck off a substring of the argument provided which is only 1 character long. Basically, it starts with the first character (character 0) of the string and continues for a length of one character.

The complete script (shown at the bottom of this post) also demonstrates some other techniques that I think are helpful:

  • verifying that the expected argument has been provided (or prompting for it if it hasn’t),
  • verifying that the argument provided represents a file that actually exists, and
  • setting up the script so that it copies the file to a fixed set of servers, but never to itself

The last point means that you can use the same script on any of a number of servers and have the file go out to all of the others.

The first step is something I generally do with any script that requires an argument. Having a choice means that the script can be run through cron (if you have the system set up for file transfers using scp and trusted credentials), but is flexible enough to accept an arbitrary argument.

if [ $# == 0 ]; then
    echo -n "file> "
    read file
else
    file=$1
fi

The second step gives an error and exits if the file argument doesn’t refer to a file that exists on the system.

if [ ! -f $file ]; then
    echo "ERROR: No file named $file found"
    exit 1
fi

The third step, like the mini script we just looked at, evaluates the file argument and determines whether the argument provided is a relative path to the file or an absolute. The code here does the does the same thing as the code above except that it looks at the first character of $file instead of the first character of $1. If the file path is relative, it prepends $file with the current path so that the file can easily be copied to the same location on the other servers. For example, ~slee/myfile turns into something like /home/slee/myfile and ~/myfile turns into /home/myself/myfile.

if [[ ${file:0:1} != / && ${file:0:1} != ~ ]]; then
    path=`pwd`
    file=$path/$file
fi

And notice also that we went from using “or” (||) to “and” (&&) in our logic. So, instead of asking whether the first character is / or ~, we’re asking if it’s notequal to either of them — since we only need to do something in that case.

The last part of the script copies the file in question to three of four servers, the fourth server being itself. It loops through the four server names, checks each one to see if it is the same as its own name — using the -s (short) argument to make sure we’re not comparing servername to servername.domain.com. And it then uses scp to copy the file in question to each server that isn’t itself. The server names (e.g., server-1) have to be replaced with the actual names, of course.

# copy file to remote servers
for server in server-1 server-2 server-3 server-4
do
    if [ $server != `hostname -s` ]; then	# don't copy to self
        scp -p $file $server:$file
    fi
done

The nice thing about this technique is that you could use this script to copy a file from any of the servers to the other three without making any changes to the script. The “copy to everywhere but myself” logic makes this work.

Alternately, you could have the server names list in a separate file and change your syntax to “for server in `cat serverlist`”, but you would have to keep the serverlist files synchronized on the servers as well. With this script, you just have to copy the script itself. And, of course, make sure you have your systems set up to trust each other or run the script only from one of the servers that the other trust. Or, of course, you can provide passwords as you loop through the server list.

#!/bin/bash

if [ $# == 0 ]; then
    echo -n "file> "
    read file
else
    file=$1
fi

if [ ! -f $file ]; then
    echo "ERROR: No file named $file found"
    exit 1
fi

if [[ ${file:0:1} != / && ${file:0:1} != ~ ]]; then
    path=`pwd`
    file=$path/$file
fi

# copy file to remote servers
for server in server-1 server-2 server-3 server-4
do
    if [ $server != `hostname -s` ]; then	# don't copy to self
        scp -p $file $server:$file
    fi
done

Making a change on one system and making sure that any other server that uses the same script gets the changes as well can be simplified with a script of this kind. I put this together in answer to a question posed by a reader. Reader questions are always welcome. Email me if you have one.

 

[Source:- COMPUTERWORLD]

Right to be Forgotten: Protection of privacy or breach of free data?

Right to be Forgotten: Protection of privacy or breach of free da...

The data protection authority of France has fined Google by €100,000 (Rs. 74,64,700 approx.) for inadequate removal of history data and activities related to personal web searches. In accordance to a ruling by the European Court of Justice in May 2014, individuals received the power of asking search engine monitors like Google and Microsoft to remove irrelevant and inappropriate information related to web search results. This ruling gave rise to the ‘Right to be Forgotten’ — a right that has since been debated on regarding its status as a special provision or as one of the fundamental human rights.

In an issued statement, the Commission Nationale de l’Informatique et des Libertes (CNIL) stated that “the only way for Google to uphold the Europeans’ right to privacy was by delisting inaccurate results popping up under name searches across all its websites.” However, in counter-argument, Google stated that removal of past data from the entirety of the Internet means restricting free flow of information across the virtual web. This may (read: will) have massive implications in relation to information sourcing, that often plays critical role in precedence across multiple cases. As a result, Google removed data of specific requests from its local websites, and not the international platform. For instance, if it were applicable in India, an Indian’s request to enforce his/her right to be forgotten would lead to the removal of the relevant URL only from Google.co.in, and not Google.com. This has been done to preserve the sanctity of natural course of action, i.e., a proper reflection of reality wherein an action done in the past cannot be undone under any circumstance.

The question of privacy looms large, as does the question of removing actions that may hold importance

The CNIL, however, has disagreed on this term. “Applying delisting to all of the extensions does not curtail freedom of expression insofar as it does not entail any deletion of content from the Internet,” the body stated. To provide a solution to the claims of the European Union and keep its principal operating ways fluent, Google decided upon faux removal of information wherein a person will not see the data he/she requested to be removed when accessing the search engine from his country. For instance, a French national will not see the link requested to be removed across all of Google’s sites, when accessing the data from within France. Such action was taken in order to solve security concerns of a nation, while keeping the international access of data intact. “As a matter of principle, we disagree with the CNIL’s assertion that it has the authority to control the content that people can access outside France, and we plan to appeal their ruling,” a Google spokesman told Reuters.

The fine has been imposed after the French data protectors decided that right to privacy of personal information cannot be adequately confined in terms of geographical locations, and “only delisting on all of the search engine’s extensions, regardless of the extension used or the geographic origin of the person performing the search, can effectively uphold this right.” It will be interesting to see the next course of actions that Google takes in accordance to the Right to be Forgotten.


Contested: Should the Right to be Forgotten be allowed easy enforcement?

More countries have been recognising the Right to be Forgotten as an effective ruling, with Japan citing the right against Google in a lawsuit, where a man was accused of involvements with child pornography. While the question of privacy and the amount of information available in the hands of search engine giants is a pertaining question demanding wider, concrete rulings (which, incidentally, is difficult to enforce), the presence of information on the Internet has aided multiple instances of straightening affairs of crimes and legal involvements.

The path, as it seems, can be wider than a mere fine and singular lawsuits.

 

[Source:- Digit]