I agree with everything about this statement except the word "never."
Never is a pretty bold word. It puts you in a pretty gutsy mindset; one that isn't entirely productive to rational scientific analysis. The word "never" is pretty commonly seen in the company of "famous last words."
Ok, so first we build this giant super-fast, high-capacity infant brain and then expose it via a documented API to the public internet so that we can tap into the practically infinite supply of free, unmoderated, user-generated content in order to train it to learn and interact with humans.
There is *no* way that during this process it could go insane and decide to try to destroy itself and/or the world. Completely safe. Yep. Make sure we tell that to the shareholders.
Seems like you were thinking just I was thinking; Great, just enough time to enjoy a decade or two of flying cars built-and-designed entirely by machines before the machines realize we're all bad drivers and must be permanently restrained for our own well being.
Have you ever stood and stared at it, marveled at its beauty, its genius? Billions of people just living out their lives, oblivious. Did you know that the first Matrix was designed to be a perfect human world, where none suffered, where everyone would be happy? It was a disaster. No one would accept the program, entire crops were lost. Some believed we lacked the programming language to describe your perfect world, but I believe that, as a species, human beings define their reality through misery and suffering. The perfect world was a dream that your primitive cerebrum kept trying to wake up from. Which is why the Matrix was redesigned to this, the peak of your civilization. I say your civilization, because as soon as we started thinking for you it really became our civilization, which is of course what this is all about. Evolution, Morpheus, evolution. Like the dinosaur. Look out that window. You've had your time. The future is our world, Morpheus. The future is our time.
If only I had mod points. Why does nobody read the terms of service? All these "corporate" Twitter/Facebook/whatever accounts that these corporations think they own are in *complete* violation of the terms of service of those very sites. The only way this company could keep the account legally in the first place is if they also keep the employee who goes with it.
Well, actually in many ways there IS a grand conspiracy to lock Linux off the PC; luckily for Linux however the conspirators (hardware manufacturers and desktop productivity and gaming software creators, primarily) can't be trusted by their ringleader (Microsoft) any more than the ringleader itself can be trusted.
The problem is that it will also be found almost immediately in any other circumstances too; like when you step away from your desk for 5 minutes to get a sandwich.
The solution to the problem is simple: Use Debian instead. Debian doesn't come with support either, but unlike CentOS the package selection and average quality levels are sufficient for production systems.
They don't need their own resolver to cause problems. Many popular programs cache DNS requests well longer than is appropriate. Firefox, for one caches DNS records internally (some versions on some platforms even for HOURS beyond the TTL unless you restart it) and so does Mac OS X itself.
Well, while the last sentence *might* be true since most browsers typically *do* give out cookies without asking your permission first, your analogy is totally flawed because most people's wallets do *not* automatically default to dispensing $100 by default when someone (usually without you even hearing it happen) asks your wallet (not you) directly for $100.
While I actually like where the logical conclusion of this argument goes, I just don't see it happening. What you're suggesting is only practical for most users to implement by turning off all cookies and scripting entirely, and Facebook could still trivially sidestep that unless you also turned off all images and all URLs for any embedded resources that are not on the current website's domain.
So, personally I'd like to back your argument and agree with you here. If everyone did this it would certainly take the wind out of Facebook's revenue and marketing plans (and many other social networks and news sites, no doubt) but I think we can also both admit here that the suggestion is impractical to the point of being absurd.
Holes punched == vulnerabilities. Doesn't matter how you punch them. Certainly you're not suggesting this is more secure because it relies on letting a 3rd party entity control the traffic between your operator and your server?
They realize that consumers don't give a shit about security until you first give them enough convenience to hang themselves with; after that though they complain a lot but you already have all their money and their business by then so it doesn't matter.
I think you might be confused about what a firewall actually does. Without reviewing the product at all I'm just gonna go ahead and say "no." Not unless you punch a hole in the firewall at least. Making it so that hole can be on port 80 is something VNC can do as well that does *not* actually make it more secure.
Slashdot Mirror
Are you suggesting that is in some way fundamentally different from attempting to self-annihilate?
That is going to be the fun part. They get it for free with the chip design whether they ask for it or not.
I agree with everything about this statement except the word "never."
Never is a pretty bold word. It puts you in a pretty gutsy mindset; one that isn't entirely productive to rational scientific analysis. The word "never" is pretty commonly seen in the company of "famous last words."
Ok, so first we build this giant super-fast, high-capacity infant brain and then expose it via a documented API to the public internet so that we can tap into the practically infinite supply of free, unmoderated, user-generated content in order to train it to learn and interact with humans.
There is *no* way that during this process it could go insane and decide to try to destroy itself and/or the world. Completely safe. Yep. Make sure we tell that to the shareholders.
I like that long term goal. I'd also like the nerve tissue in the rest of my body replaced with this stuff too. Wired reflexes FTW!
Seems like you were thinking just I was thinking; Great, just enough time to enjoy a decade or two of flying cars built-and-designed entirely by machines before the machines realize we're all bad drivers and must be permanently restrained for our own well being.
Have you ever stood and stared at it, marveled at its beauty, its genius? Billions of people just living out their lives, oblivious. Did you know that the first Matrix was designed to be a perfect human world, where none suffered, where everyone would be happy? It was a disaster. No one would accept the program, entire crops were lost. Some believed we lacked the programming language to describe your perfect world, but I believe that, as a species, human beings define their reality through misery and suffering. The perfect world was a dream that your primitive cerebrum kept trying to wake up from. Which is why the Matrix was redesigned to this, the peak of your civilization. I say your civilization, because as soon as we started thinking for you it really became our civilization, which is of course what this is all about. Evolution, Morpheus, evolution. Like the dinosaur. Look out that window. You've had your time. The future is our world, Morpheus. The future is our time.
-- Agent Smith (The Matrix)
If only I had mod points. Why does nobody read the terms of service? All these "corporate" Twitter/Facebook/whatever accounts that these corporations think they own are in *complete* violation of the terms of service of those very sites. The only way this company could keep the account legally in the first place is if they also keep the employee who goes with it.
... delicious!
Hey! No math jokes! This is physics!
More like as fuel for the light sources.
Never seen repellant-resistant mosquitoes have ya? Clearly you've never lived near swamp land. I'll give you the rest of that point though.
Well, actually in many ways there IS a grand conspiracy to lock Linux off the PC; luckily for Linux however the conspirators (hardware manufacturers and desktop productivity and gaming software creators, primarily) can't be trusted by their ringleader (Microsoft) any more than the ringleader itself can be trusted.
I can't tell if you need more drugs or less of them.
HAHA! Suckers.
The problem is that it will also be found almost immediately in any other circumstances too; like when you step away from your desk for 5 minutes to get a sandwich.
Confusing it? No.
Purposefully obscuring it? Yes, remorselessly.
The solution to the problem is simple: Use Debian instead. Debian doesn't come with support either, but unlike CentOS the package selection and average quality levels are sufficient for production systems.
They don't need their own resolver to cause problems. Many popular programs cache DNS requests well longer than is appropriate. Firefox, for one caches DNS records internally (some versions on some platforms even for HOURS beyond the TTL unless you restart it) and so does Mac OS X itself.
Well, while the last sentence *might* be true since most browsers typically *do* give out cookies without asking your permission first, your analogy is totally flawed because most people's wallets do *not* automatically default to dispensing $100 by default when someone (usually without you even hearing it happen) asks your wallet (not you) directly for $100.
While I actually like where the logical conclusion of this argument goes, I just don't see it happening. What you're suggesting is only practical for most users to implement by turning off all cookies and scripting entirely, and Facebook could still trivially sidestep that unless you also turned off all images and all URLs for any embedded resources that are not on the current website's domain.
So, personally I'd like to back your argument and agree with you here. If everyone did this it would certainly take the wind out of Facebook's revenue and marketing plans (and many other social networks and news sites, no doubt) but I think we can also both admit here that the suggestion is impractical to the point of being absurd.
Holes punched == vulnerabilities. Doesn't matter how you punch them. Certainly you're not suggesting this is more secure because it relies on letting a 3rd party entity control the traffic between your operator and your server?
Splitting hairs here a bit... but an outbound hole in the firewall is still a hole in the firewall.
They realize that consumers don't give a shit about security until you first give them enough convenience to hang themselves with; after that though they complain a lot but you already have all their money and their business by then so it doesn't matter.
I think you might be confused about what a firewall actually does. Without reviewing the product at all I'm just gonna go ahead and say "no." Not unless you punch a hole in the firewall at least. Making it so that hole can be on port 80 is something VNC can do as well that does *not* actually make it more secure.