> The government claims that encrypted communications are "increasingly being used by terrorist groups and organized criminals to avoid detection and disruption," without citing evidence
I know it isn't popular to say that a claim should be accepted without evidence, but I think it would be ignorant to assume that more and more terrorist groups and organized criminals are not using encrypted communications.
Well the study isn't linked and there is no citation. The summary alludes to how ridiculous the claim is though. You cannot compare a 30 second television spot in the middle of a show that a viewer is engaged in and listening to with an online advertisement. They are two different things.
I suspect this isn't at all related to millennials. Probably more of a people thing.
They are betting pretty big on enough people paying up that they will make money.
Seems poorly thought out though. On the one hand, doing it quickly without notice means some people are more likely to pony up to fix things quickly. On the other hand, changing terms without notice breaks trust and probably isn't good for the long haul.
Maybe they are trying to nab a lot of cash before calling it quits.
Perhaps where you're from... most people I know who have gone to physiotherapy have ended up in physio sessions three times a week doing various stretching and exercise.
Over the weekend, somebody put together a useless tool that scans executable files for PNG images containing useless Adobe Extensible Metadata Platform (XMP) metadata. Some small amount of extra data was found, and a report was written about it. The report might be useful to somebody, but slashdot doesn't need or use this stuff. Thanks to editors and reviewers who don't pay any attention, it's very easy for these reports to get published amongst actual news. So easy, many news sites like reddit are chock full of them. But you can appreciate my surprise when I discovered the report on slashdot itself!
The summary says this specifically with respect to hard drives, which actually makes some sense, especially in the age of SSDs.
I don't know how many articles I've read here on the subject of recycling computers and the number of commenters who have said the only way to do it is to take the platters out and drive a nail through them and such.
Would you not expect Apple to do the same?
SSDs are even trickier because you can't do something like the secure wipe procedures where you overwrite with 1s and then 0s repeatedly. When SSDs exhaust their write cycles they mark the particular segment as no longer usable and leave them as they are. However, the data stays, so if you can bypass the drive controller I presume you could still read the data.
Eh... I don't think automated car people want you to believe driving is risky. I think all that is desired is the recognition that some risk exists, and just because there is risk involved in automated cars does not mean it is riskier than human driving.
Not the OP, but I don't think that's what was meant... it was more a statement of the fact that if somebody has the money to pay $5 for a coffee or $100 a month for a cell phone plan, then they aren't foregoing the theatre because they can't afford it. Rather, they are choosing to spend money on coffee and cell phone plans instead.
Codec is short for encode/decode. So a hardware codec would be a chip that performs encoding and decoding of an audio stream. They probably could have used a software codec and ran it on the CPU, but seemingly instead opted to use a hardware codec that would be more optimized for the particular algorithm they were using.
But the kind of interesting thing here is that discriminating on things based on language skills (deemed to be directly related to the job here by the government), are usually limitations of the law *allowing* employer's to be discriminatory. In this case, the government is *requiring* the employer (Uber) to discriminate and apply these standards.
It would be interesting if there was some way to get a sense of what the baseline language expectations are? Is this just trying to stick it to Uber because they don't like them and are trying to find a way to make it harder for them (and thus are the language expectations, as Uber claimed, too stringent?) or do these drivers really not understand enough language to perform the job competently?
I'm struggling to understand why Uber drivers would need to much proficiency in written English; but maybe that's just me (have only taken Uber a few times but have never had the driver have to write something down).
It depends what you're trying to protect. One might be more interested in protecting company secrets than hiding evidence. Sort of like the case a while back where a NASA engineer (might have been a difference agency - don't recall exactly) had his device searched at the border. He hadn't committed a crime, but there were secrets on his phone that might need to be protected from unauthorized access.
I wonder if that is why the words "a certain type of fasting diet can trigger the pancreas to regenerate itself" were chosen, and not just "a fasting diet can trigger..."
Remember the thread yesterday about police subpoenaing Amazaon's Alexa recordings on a murder investigation? Can an email provider such as google or microsoft be required to supply email threads in a discovery proceeding? What about third party planning/scheduling/defect management/configuration management software? It is one thing if the data resides in the customer's computers/servers and the software vendor never had access to the data. But now a days I see lots of "cloud based" software doing this. Many companies use companies with names like AgileRally or CloudCentral. The entire history of user stories, discussions, projects plans, defects and corrections are archived at some fine grained detail in their servers. If they get subpoenaed in some discovery proceeding on such a patent lawsuit, how strongly would they protect their client's confidentiality? They might have contract to protect it, but at some point the cost of protecting the client might not be worth it for them and they might throw them under the bus.
I don't think there's any question that Google or Microsoft could be required to provide email threads and other data. I think what was novel about the Alexa recordings was the realization that the data exists and that a conversation could be recorded without necessarily being aware that it was.
There is no such expectation with email - when you send an email there is no question that the recipient is going to have a record of it; and most people are clueful enough to realize that their email provider and the recipient email provider also have a copy.
The more interesting question is probably whether Waymo can get Google to provide email records and such without court involvement. Though if you're going to do that sort of thing like steal secrets from Google, you'd have to be pretty daft to host your email with Google.
I don't think the name really has anything to do with it. The big worry about this technology is liability, and there is the idea out there that manufacturers are trying to be care ful about advertising what the car can and cannot do.
Tesla I'm sure makes it abundantly clear that the car needs driver attendance. But if you sit there long enough and the car continually makes good decisions, you are gradually going to become complacent and maybe start to think that it really can do more than you thought. This is when you get into trouble because the technology has made enough progress to be convincing but isn't quite all the way there.
The article claims that in 2017, about 600k deaths are project in the US due to cancer.
According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/..., the population of the world around 3000 BC (assuming this is roughly the Mesopotamian era) was about 14 million.
600k in a year back then would be roughly 4% of the population. This seems very unlikely. If you accept the premise that we are surrounded by carcinogens moreso today than back then, you would expect the cancer death rate to be lower back then. I would also suspect that other forms of death would be more prevalent than cancer.
Definitely... I've been to Florida in August (Orlando - not even as far south as Miami and the southern tip) and it is uncomfortable and disgusting. Will not go back in August.
Palm Springs, CA can be oppressively hot in the summer too, but that's not where tech is - Silicon Valley is pretty habitable all year round.
I come from up north and we get winter, which I tolerate OK, but my coworkers in the valley think I'm crazy.
Although unpopular among many here, in Canada we are moving towards a system of community mailboxes, which is essentially what you describe. Rather than a postal worker delivering mail to each house, there are banks of mailboxes where people get their mail (all their mail). You are issued a key for your mailbox so you can go get it whenever you want, and it is secure. Packages that fit inside the mailbox just go in the regular spot. There are also compartments for packages that are larger to accommodate larger packages. In this case, you receive a key in your mailbox and the box that your package is in. You retrieve your package, and then drop the key off into the mail slot again for reuse.
Works pretty well and for most packages, solves the problem.
In some respects yes, in others, not so much. Think about a corporate setting where within the context of an office people might leave their machines accessible on a regular basis. They go off to lunch, leave their laptop at their desk. Anybody can now go and grab their laptop, do a hard reboot and extract the passwords. Conveniently, a lot of people probably have filevault passwords that are the same as their network passwords. Now you have another user's network passwords and can do a whole bunch of things on their behalf.
How on earth is it okay, in 2016, to store plaintext passwords for a file encryption tool?
The other potential exploit for this is to bake it into commercially available Thunderbolt 2 devices. Bribe a janitor to leave stick 100 crafted VGA dongles in meeting rooms of the company you want to infiltrate and have the device send passwords either over the network or via some wireless protocol.
Another alternative is Nexus, which gets you pre-check as well. It costs $50 for a five year term. Isn't an intensive process either - you fill out some stuff online and then go in for a orientation session, and a few weeks later you get your card. Also helps at customs and immigration going into and out of Canada/US.
Slashdot Mirror
> The government claims that encrypted communications are "increasingly being used by terrorist groups and organized criminals to avoid detection and disruption," without citing evidence
I know it isn't popular to say that a claim should be accepted without evidence, but I think it would be ignorant to assume that more and more terrorist groups and organized criminals are not using encrypted communications.
I think the editor left off the sponsored tag.
Well the study isn't linked and there is no citation. The summary alludes to how ridiculous the claim is though. You cannot compare a 30 second television spot in the middle of a show that a viewer is engaged in and listening to with an online advertisement. They are two different things.
I suspect this isn't at all related to millennials. Probably more of a people thing.
Maybe so.
They are betting pretty big on enough people paying up that they will make money.
Seems poorly thought out though. On the one hand, doing it quickly without notice means some people are more likely to pony up to fix things quickly. On the other hand, changing terms without notice breaks trust and probably isn't good for the long haul.
Maybe they are trying to nab a lot of cash before calling it quits.
Perhaps where you're from... most people I know who have gone to physiotherapy have ended up in physio sessions three times a week doing various stretching and exercise.
Yes... haven't you heard of micro aggressions? (i.e. aggressions against devices with microprocessors) It's all the talk these days.
Over the weekend, somebody put together a useless tool that scans executable files for PNG images containing useless Adobe Extensible Metadata Platform (XMP) metadata. Some small amount of extra data was found, and a report was written about it. The report might be useful to somebody, but slashdot doesn't need or use this stuff. Thanks to editors and reviewers who don't pay any attention, it's very easy for these reports to get published amongst actual news. So easy, many news sites like reddit are chock full of them. But you can appreciate my surprise when I discovered the report on slashdot itself!
The summary says this specifically with respect to hard drives, which actually makes some sense, especially in the age of SSDs.
I don't know how many articles I've read here on the subject of recycling computers and the number of commenters who have said the only way to do it is to take the platters out and drive a nail through them and such.
Would you not expect Apple to do the same?
SSDs are even trickier because you can't do something like the secure wipe procedures where you overwrite with 1s and then 0s repeatedly. When SSDs exhaust their write cycles they mark the particular segment as no longer usable and leave them as they are. However, the data stays, so if you can bypass the drive controller I presume you could still read the data.
Eh... I don't think automated car people want you to believe driving is risky. I think all that is desired is the recognition that some risk exists, and just because there is risk involved in automated cars does not mean it is riskier than human driving.
Not the OP, but I don't think that's what was meant... it was more a statement of the fact that if somebody has the money to pay $5 for a coffee or $100 a month for a cell phone plan, then they aren't foregoing the theatre because they can't afford it. Rather, they are choosing to spend money on coffee and cell phone plans instead.
Codec is short for encode/decode. So a hardware codec would be a chip that performs encoding and decoding of an audio stream. They probably could have used a software codec and ran it on the CPU, but seemingly instead opted to use a hardware codec that would be more optimized for the particular algorithm they were using.
I noticed that too, but assumed it meant they had a hardware codec chip. Something like: http://www.ebay.com/itm/AKM-AK...
But the kind of interesting thing here is that discriminating on things based on language skills (deemed to be directly related to the job here by the government), are usually limitations of the law *allowing* employer's to be discriminatory. In this case, the government is *requiring* the employer (Uber) to discriminate and apply these standards.
It would be interesting if there was some way to get a sense of what the baseline language expectations are? Is this just trying to stick it to Uber because they don't like them and are trying to find a way to make it harder for them (and thus are the language expectations, as Uber claimed, too stringent?) or do these drivers really not understand enough language to perform the job competently?
I'm struggling to understand why Uber drivers would need to much proficiency in written English; but maybe that's just me (have only taken Uber a few times but have never had the driver have to write something down).
It depends what you're trying to protect. One might be more interested in protecting company secrets than hiding evidence. Sort of like the case a while back where a NASA engineer (might have been a difference agency - don't recall exactly) had his device searched at the border. He hadn't committed a crime, but there were secrets on his phone that might need to be protected from unauthorized access.
I wonder if that is why the words "a certain type of fasting diet can trigger the pancreas to regenerate itself" were chosen, and not just "a fasting diet can trigger..."
Remember the thread yesterday about police subpoenaing Amazaon's Alexa recordings on a murder investigation? Can an email provider such as google or microsoft be required to supply email threads in a discovery proceeding? What about third party planning/scheduling/defect management/configuration management software? It is one thing if the data resides in the customer's computers/servers and the software vendor never had access to the data. But now a days I see lots of "cloud based" software doing this. Many companies use companies with names like AgileRally or CloudCentral. The entire history of user stories, discussions, projects plans, defects and corrections are archived at some fine grained detail in their servers. If they get subpoenaed in some discovery proceeding on such a patent lawsuit, how strongly would they protect their client's confidentiality? They might have contract to protect it, but at some point the cost of protecting the client might not be worth it for them and they might throw them under the bus.
I don't think there's any question that Google or Microsoft could be required to provide email threads and other data. I think what was novel about the Alexa recordings was the realization that the data exists and that a conversation could be recorded without necessarily being aware that it was.
There is no such expectation with email - when you send an email there is no question that the recipient is going to have a record of it; and most people are clueful enough to realize that their email provider and the recipient email provider also have a copy.
The more interesting question is probably whether Waymo can get Google to provide email records and such without court involvement. Though if you're going to do that sort of thing like steal secrets from Google, you'd have to be pretty daft to host your email with Google.
I don't see why, if he drove the car. On the other hand, if he sat there while the computer drove, that's a different story.
And 99 Yen in Japan ($0.87 USD)? And 99 Pesos in Mexico ($4.62 USD)? And 99 Rubles in Russia? ($1.65 USD)
I don't think the name really has anything to do with it. The big worry about this technology is liability, and there is the idea out there that manufacturers are trying to be care ful about advertising what the car can and cannot do.
Tesla I'm sure makes it abundantly clear that the car needs driver attendance. But if you sit there long enough and the car continually makes good decisions, you are gradually going to become complacent and maybe start to think that it really can do more than you thought. This is when you get into trouble because the technology has made enough progress to be convincing but isn't quite all the way there.
The article claims that in 2017, about 600k deaths are project in the US due to cancer.
According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/..., the population of the world around 3000 BC (assuming this is roughly the Mesopotamian era) was about 14 million.
600k in a year back then would be roughly 4% of the population. This seems very unlikely. If you accept the premise that we are surrounded by carcinogens moreso today than back then, you would expect the cancer death rate to be lower back then. I would also suspect that other forms of death would be more prevalent than cancer.
Definitely... I've been to Florida in August (Orlando - not even as far south as Miami and the southern tip) and it is uncomfortable and disgusting. Will not go back in August.
Palm Springs, CA can be oppressively hot in the summer too, but that's not where tech is - Silicon Valley is pretty habitable all year round.
I come from up north and we get winter, which I tolerate OK, but my coworkers in the valley think I'm crazy.
Although unpopular among many here, in Canada we are moving towards a system of community mailboxes, which is essentially what you describe. Rather than a postal worker delivering mail to each house, there are banks of mailboxes where people get their mail (all their mail). You are issued a key for your mailbox so you can go get it whenever you want, and it is secure. Packages that fit inside the mailbox just go in the regular spot. There are also compartments for packages that are larger to accommodate larger packages. In this case, you receive a key in your mailbox and the box that your package is in. You retrieve your package, and then drop the key off into the mail slot again for reuse.
Works pretty well and for most packages, solves the problem.
In some respects yes, in others, not so much. Think about a corporate setting where within the context of an office people might leave their machines accessible on a regular basis. They go off to lunch, leave their laptop at their desk. Anybody can now go and grab their laptop, do a hard reboot and extract the passwords. Conveniently, a lot of people probably have filevault passwords that are the same as their network passwords. Now you have another user's network passwords and can do a whole bunch of things on their behalf.
How on earth is it okay, in 2016, to store plaintext passwords for a file encryption tool?
The other potential exploit for this is to bake it into commercially available Thunderbolt 2 devices. Bribe a janitor to leave stick 100 crafted VGA dongles in meeting rooms of the company you want to infiltrate and have the device send passwords either over the network or via some wireless protocol.
This was misfiled - it should be in funfacts.slashdot.org.
Another alternative is Nexus, which gets you pre-check as well. It costs $50 for a five year term. Isn't an intensive process either - you fill out some stuff online and then go in for a orientation session, and a few weeks later you get your card. Also helps at customs and immigration going into and out of Canada/US.