How do these work? Electromagnetics? Background radiation? Quantum unknowns? Even without being a physicist, I can imagine flaws in systems based on most of these.
You're absolutely right, because we have to believe what they tell us with respect to hardware - it's no different from closed source. Even if the thing is based on a sound physical principle, it can be backdoored and is untrustworthy for anything critical. The only way I can see it working is with an open source software solution based on an open hardware solution, for example a home made source of hardware randomness.
I mean, it might seem reasonable that the NSA needs to have keys to everyone's safes, but anything they can do, the crims will be able to do shortly afterwards.
Now researchers at Cornell University have shown how to accelerate this process -- by adding a radio transmitter, they are able to speed up atomic-level microscopy by a factor of at least 100. A typical STM currently has a sampling rate of about one KHz. This new radio-frequency STM can operate a thousand times faster. .. but isn't one KHz already pretty fast. I mean, I can't take pictures with my digital camera that fast... more like 0.5Hz.
Seriously, ask a lawyer, not slashdot. I highly doubt a contract like that is enforceable (seriously, they own work you create for your next employer?) but I would talk to a lawyer. And I wouldn't even think of signing it. A friend of mine had to sign one in order to start work at Agilent / HP. They can't really 'own' you, but because they own any ideas you come up with during your time at the company, they can screw you for any derivations on your previous work.. at least they say they can. I haven't heard of a case where this was challenged in court, but frankly, any company that wants this from an employee shouldn't have an employee. I think it was Oscar Wilde who said something like, "If this is how the Queen treats per prisoners, then she doesn't deserve to have any!".
Mac users, don't feel bad that your system won't come with it. You get iLife.:-) At least the malware is not as easy to find and wasn't put there by the Chinese government.
So quick to dismiss this? I understand that most of you probably have no particular religious beliefs, or none at all, but what's to say that DaVinci wasn't the kind of man to try to disguise something inside one of his paintings? I still like to think it takes a truly open mind to discover the places technology can truly take us. Da Vinci may not have been religious himself, but he was no fool. He was known to hide riddles in his paintings and painted with his audience in mind - in this case monks. Why wouldn't he have placed something a bit more subtle than just an obviously female looking John and fairly obvious perspective lines and other features which stand out at a glance? The claimed discovery contained more than music - Giovanni Maria Pala also found some ancient Hebrew text.
Please don't insult the thousands of honest security consultants by calling this guy a "security consultant." The title of "con artist" would be far more accurate.
Ok, but what is a security consultant? I have a friend who is a colour consultant but she has no education and drives around in a small car telling people what curtains to buy and clothes to wear. Another colour consultant I met almost made me buy pink curtains... whew, lucky I checked her credentials. She was colour blind!
These days, using the word "consultant" outside of strictly regulated industries (eg: medical field) is just a method of social 'privilege escalation', as far as I'm concerned.
We'll soon have a law preventing free learning materials. I initially misinterpreted your comment by jumping to an idea - what if learning materials were not just free as in beer but free as in speech? If it meant that nobody needs a publisher to produce learning materials, then people with expertise everywhere would be able to publish their works with target audiences being children and teenagers, particularly in the field of history I could well see that being made illegal. No government wants its taxpayers to think any more than absolutely necessary.
Alternatively, you could... you know... install the relevant applications to provide the missing features? Like back in the stone-age (oh, i dunno, say 4 years ago or more?) Yeah but the problem with that is that Ubuntu integrates well with what they give you and tends to integrate less well with other random stuff. I could run a proper debian installation with a custom kernel and compiled this and compiled that, but.. well, I'd rather be sitting here laughing at slashdot comments whilst drinking my pilzner beer.
The future of internet is encrypted internet. For those of you who can't read microdots, the last fullstop of the sentence contains "backdoored by the NSA"
Very scary stuff. It's getting quite worrying indeed. I mean, don't get me wrong, I am sure our goodie goodie's welcome our new NSA overlords, but they are becoming like the dirty old man at the toilet block - backdooring everything that comes past them. What happens though, when sugardaddy NSA isn't the only dirty old man at the toilet block, and you get every dirty old crim lining up for a go too.
Re:The first trolls failed to RTFA
on
Is SETI Worth It?
·
· Score: 1
Maybe they should donate their money to Slashdot, thereby promoting intelligent life on Earth.
... I'm still deciding if that is meant to be sarcastic or not.
They copied a bunch of stuff Windows has had for years (policy) or just got (advanced audio). Hard to say what is a logical progression and what is copying. I mean, AppGuard (Suse) is not much different from having policies, and that has been around for a while now. Improving audio as a default is just a good idea, period. What disappoints me is that every time I choose a Linux OS to install on my systems, another brand comes up with some cool tricks that I wish I had. I just installed Ubuntu on my macbook, and now I'm tempted to go and try Fedora again after years of not touching it.
...for reading all of my long-winded messages and posting thoughtful responses. Its nice to have that level of reciprocation from time to time. Well it's nice to actually learn something beyond the basics, so thanks also!
I do take your point, but I guess my argument was kind of a bit different - not that there should be no research, but that all the number crunching and so forth does consume a fair bit of power. Computers and associated components already account for 3% of energy expenditure and something like two thirds of office computers are never switched off. I guess you could say "use the switched on ones for folding @ home", but why not switch them off instead?
Why shouldn't drug companies provide the computing power instead? They make the biggest investment in research but also get the economic benefits.
I do empathize for anyone who has a chronic / terminal illness, the sacrifices they have to make and how it can devastate families, and that, knowing there are no true cures, people who have had cancer are always having a cloud over their head. But denying them a cure was never my point.
I want a google maps mashup that tells me who in my neighborhood has herpes. Just get a job at the health department and you can do it on their intranet.. just click "Intranet -> Diseases -> Who's Got The Clap -> Search by Suburb", and make sure you check the "Show me on a Map" box. Oh and the Community Comments feature on it is hilarious!
...but frankly, I think these are some pretty heavy conclusions to draw from the discussed studies. I hope his mentor doesn't get to read that comment. It might cost him his PhD.
...and did a number for the planet and closed the client.
Definitely a better idea to use the internet for communication and to use electricity for things that benefit the household/office directly. I wouldn't be surprised if the cost in reduced years of life from increasing the pollution from running these distributed tasks outweigh the years of life extended by treating cancers.
Oh, they'll give you free access to all the papers you want. But nobody said anything about charging for the ink. All of the journals I read are published online as well as in print form. Some (such as the BMJ) already open up their papers after a period, but enforcing this to happen within 1 year of publication is _fantastic_ news, because, even if I am 12 months behind my boss who paid for his articles, I am still 4 or 5 years ahead of my juniors who have only just finished reading their textbook.
This isn't a technology news site. Or at least, not just a technology news site. "News for nerds, stuff that matters" means roughly "stuff the editors find interesting". Always has. They're interested in technology but they're interested in other stuff too. Indeed. Nerds occasionally happen to be lawyers, political scientists, military strategists and so on. This article at least has some intellectual fibre, unlike even some technology related articles.
How is this nerd news? Who cares? It's just more political crap about how the internet is the source of all evil and we need to shut everyone up who speaks their mind...etc..etc.
It does not address any issue or topic that won't get trumpeted to death on your local commercial news network and has no technical implications for anybody.
Give 2, get 0. Why would anyone want one of these other than for novelty? It'll sit in your closet after you mess around with it for an hour. I want two for my kids. That way I don't have to worry about them trashing my fancynancy uberpriced mac.
To get electricity into all their towns they're going to need electricians, draughtsmen, civil engineers, town planners, surveyors, miscellaneous paper-shufflers and so on. To get those they're going to need education. Not to mention accountants and lawyers, but if they get those before they get electricity, then they are probably never going to get anything, because it would have been deemed too expensive and illegal in any case.
I'd hate to sound like someone who is praising someone who sounds like a fanboy but...
Most of this thread reads like a bunch of people stumbling and saying either:
It's just a cheap gimmick with a pretty face
Don't worry, we'll have something like this for Linux in no time
Mine already does it and I didn't have to pay for it
Oh.. they did something clever? Well I for one think doing something clever is stupid, so there! {promptly puts head back in the ground}
The plain fact is you're right - Time Machine is a good product and is a credit to Apple. My only dilemma is whether to fork out the money and install Leopard, or to do what I was going to - discard my Tiger installation and install Linux as the sole OS on my macbook. As much as Apple has bells and whistles, I don't trust them any more than Microsoft. It's just that Microsoft is not as good at hiding their built-in backdoors.
Slashdot Mirror
You're absolutely right, because we have to believe what they tell us with respect to hardware - it's no different from closed source. Even if the thing is based on a sound physical principle, it can be backdoored and is untrustworthy for anything critical. The only way I can see it working is with an open source software solution based on an open hardware solution, for example a home made source of hardware randomness.
I mean, it might seem reasonable that the NSA needs to have keys to everyone's safes, but anything they can do, the crims will be able to do shortly afterwards.
Ok, but what is a security consultant? I have a friend who is a colour consultant but she has no education and drives around in a small car telling people what curtains to buy and clothes to wear. Another colour consultant I met almost made me buy pink curtains... whew, lucky I checked her credentials. She was colour blind!
These days, using the word "consultant" outside of strictly regulated industries (eg: medical field) is just a method of social 'privilege escalation', as far as I'm concerned.
Maybe they should donate their money to Slashdot, thereby promoting intelligent life on Earth.
... I'm still deciding if that is meant to be sarcastic or not.
...for reading all of my long-winded messages and posting thoughtful responses. Its nice to have that level of reciprocation from time to time. Well it's nice to actually learn something beyond the basics, so thanks also!I do take your point, but I guess my argument was kind of a bit different - not that there should be no research, but that all the number crunching and so forth does consume a fair bit of power. Computers and associated components already account for 3% of energy expenditure and something like two thirds of office computers are never switched off. I guess you could say "use the switched on ones for folding @ home", but why not switch them off instead?
Why shouldn't drug companies provide the computing power instead? They make the biggest investment in research but also get the economic benefits.
I do empathize for anyone who has a chronic / terminal illness, the sacrifices they have to make and how it can devastate families, and that, knowing there are no true cures, people who have had cancer are always having a cloud over their head. But denying them a cure was never my point.
Heck, one look at drivers, TV, and movies today could've told ya that for a LOT less money. Erm.. shouldn't that read "for a LOT less monkey"?
...but frankly, I think these are some pretty heavy conclusions to draw from the discussed studies. I hope his mentor doesn't get to read that comment. It might cost him his PhD.
...and did a number for the planet and closed the client.Definitely a better idea to use the internet for communication and to use electricity for things that benefit the household/office directly. I wouldn't be surprised if the cost in reduced years of life from increasing the pollution from running these distributed tasks outweigh the years of life extended by treating cancers.
How is this nerd news? Who cares? It's just more political crap about how the internet is the source of all evil and we need to shut everyone up who speaks their mind...etc..etc.
It does not address any issue or topic that won't get trumpeted to death on your local commercial news network and has no technical implications for anybody.
I'd hate to sound like someone who is praising someone who sounds like a fanboy but...
Most of this thread reads like a bunch of people stumbling and saying either:
The plain fact is you're right - Time Machine is a good product and is a credit to Apple. My only dilemma is whether to fork out the money and install Leopard, or to do what I was going to - discard my Tiger installation and install Linux as the sole OS on my macbook. As much as Apple has bells and whistles, I don't trust them any more than Microsoft. It's just that Microsoft is not as good at hiding their built-in backdoors.