What usually happens is something like the following: you have several Windows PCs on a LAN. One user on the LAN decides it's a good idea to open the quarterly_results.xlsx.exe attachment that came from the company's Nigerian branch. Or maybe they're curious to see what's on the thumb drive that somebody 'accidentally' left in the restroom. Every organization from the grocery store on the corner to the NSA has someone working for them who will think that's a good idea.
Now you have an exploited system inside the firewall. If any drives or other resources are shared among computers on the LAN -- which after is the whole idea behind a LAN -- the machines hosting those resources are at substantial risk. Even something as harmless as a shared printer can serve as a staging area for attacks.
This is why compromising Windows Update to turn it into a marketing vehicle was such a monstrous thing for Microsoft to do. Giving users an incentive to turn off automatic updates was just incredibly stupid and counterproductive. But they did it anyway, because, after all, "We're Microsoft. Who's going to stop us?"
Again, I'm afraid you're facing a future in which your worldview does not prevail. The question you should be asking is, "Why do human drivers get a pass?"
At the end of the day, the only rules are "Don't hit anything. If you have to hit something, don't hit people." Combined with recent advances in machine vision, the ML techniques used to solve one of these problems are similar to those that will be effective at attacking the other.
The burden of proof is decisively on anyone who claims that this isn't the case. Disagree? Get used to being proved wrong, over and over.
A self driving car is driving down a road in slippery conditions and an object appears in the road moving from right to left out from between two parked cars. If it is a child's toy such as a ball, a human would anticipate a child running after it and therefore slow down and wait for the child. In a microsecond, a human might look for queues from the yard that the ball came from, such as another child with a baseball mitt. AI will lack this reasoning, so if they cannot see a child they won't anticipate one running into the street. Until AI can understand all objects that might appear in the road and what they might mean, it will be weak at driving
That war, if fought by using cruise missiles solely, would set you back $20.8Billion just to replace your expended ordnance.
You cited quite a few numbers but you left out the biggest one of all, which is the cost of the pilot. Depending on what source you refer to, it takes anywhere from $6M/yr to $10M/yr to train a single combat pilot. This is why pilots get in more trouble for heroically nursing a crippled aircraft back to base than for ejecting at the first sign of smoke. They are worth more than anything else in the equation.
I might be partially wrong about the specifics -- for instance, I took your advice to Google "flight hours" but couldn't immediately tell if they have some way to fold pilot training into those cost-per-hour figures. Regardless, anyone who thinks human pilots will still be flying combat aircraft 10, 25, 50, or 100 years from now is obviously mistaken. It's just a matter of which of those timeframes is right. Using humans to fly combat missions is stupidly expensive and increasingly pointless.
Drones may work well against unsophisticated opponents with minimal resources (the only place they've been used so far). But I have a hard time believing that they would be effective in a real war, one with opponents that have sophisticated jamming & vast resources.
I used to think that way, too, and then I saw a computer beat a 9-dan Go player within an inch of his life.
On the rare chance you happen to have a hardware configuration that doesn't work, there are already channels (through your MS support rep) to properly report it and get a fix.
Agreed. I've left Windows Update completely off since the first appearance of GWX. So how exactly did I get an unsolicited 447-megabyte installation of Silverlight 5.1.50428.0 on August 6? I still run Security Essentials scans every so often, and I allow to update its malware definitions each time. I'm guessing that's where the Silverlight installation came from. Must be one of those "malware definitions."
Clearly a monthly rollup is the right thing to do, considering how long it takes to bring a new Windows installation up to speed. But given their track record, I'd be crazy to allow Microsoft to make changes to my system that can't be rolled back. It would be different if I could trust them to act in my interests in addition to their own. Instead, the continuous stream of lies and incompetence we've seen from the Windows Update team over the past couple of years, including a number of "bugs" and "mistakes" whose effects suspiciously seem to accrue exclusively to Microsoft's benefit, have made it inadvisable to do so.
It's not the policy that annoys me, it's the bullshit.
In a democratic republic, it's necessary for the people to watch their hired watchmen, because nobody else will. Snowden's "treachery" was an act of patriotism and -- not coincidentally -- of self-sacrifice.
Conversely there's no public interest in the disclosure of Hulk Hogan's sex tape. That puts it on different legal footing.
You're talking past each other. Read what you're responding to carefully. x86 is still x86, but new optional features are still being added that will require newer Windows versions.
Slashdot Mirror
What usually happens is something like the following: you have several Windows PCs on a LAN. One user on the LAN decides it's a good idea to open the quarterly_results.xlsx.exe attachment that came from the company's Nigerian branch. Or maybe they're curious to see what's on the thumb drive that somebody 'accidentally' left in the restroom. Every organization from the grocery store on the corner to the NSA has someone working for them who will think that's a good idea.
Now you have an exploited system inside the firewall. If any drives or other resources are shared among computers on the LAN -- which after is the whole idea behind a LAN -- the machines hosting those resources are at substantial risk. Even something as harmless as a shared printer can serve as a staging area for attacks.
This is why compromising Windows Update to turn it into a marketing vehicle was such a monstrous thing for Microsoft to do. Giving users an incentive to turn off automatic updates was just incredibly stupid and counterproductive. But they did it anyway, because, after all, "We're Microsoft. Who's going to stop us?"
We didn't have immigration laws until the 1920s
Who's "We," paleface?
Oooookey-dokey, then.
Again, I'm afraid you're facing a future in which your worldview does not prevail. The question you should be asking is, "Why do human drivers get a pass?"
They don't have to be perfect. They just have to kill fewer than 30,000 people a year.
At the end of the day, the only rules are "Don't hit anything. If you have to hit something, don't hit people." Combined with recent advances in machine vision, the ML techniques used to solve one of these problems are similar to those that will be effective at attacking the other.
The burden of proof is decisively on anyone who claims that this isn't the case. Disagree? Get used to being proved wrong, over and over.
A self driving car is driving down a road in slippery conditions and an object appears in the road moving from right to left out from between two parked cars. If it is a child's toy such as a ball, a human would anticipate a child running after it and therefore slow down and wait for the child. In a microsecond, a human might look for queues from the yard that the ball came from, such as another child with a baseball mitt. AI will lack this reasoning, so if they cannot see a child they won't anticipate one running into the street. Until AI can understand all objects that might appear in the road and what they might mean, it will be weak at driving
Let's get Lee Sedol's take on this.
The computer in question was on the other side of the planet.
That war, if fought by using cruise missiles solely, would set you back $20.8Billion just to replace your expended ordnance.
You cited quite a few numbers but you left out the biggest one of all, which is the cost of the pilot. Depending on what source you refer to, it takes anywhere from $6M/yr to $10M/yr to train a single combat pilot. This is why pilots get in more trouble for heroically nursing a crippled aircraft back to base than for ejecting at the first sign of smoke. They are worth more than anything else in the equation.
I might be partially wrong about the specifics -- for instance, I took your advice to Google "flight hours" but couldn't immediately tell if they have some way to fold pilot training into those cost-per-hour figures. Regardless, anyone who thinks human pilots will still be flying combat aircraft 10, 25, 50, or 100 years from now is obviously mistaken. It's just a matter of which of those timeframes is right. Using humans to fly combat missions is stupidly expensive and increasingly pointless.
Drones may work well against unsophisticated opponents with minimal resources (the only place they've been used so far). But I have a hard time believing that they would be effective in a real war, one with opponents that have sophisticated jamming & vast resources.
I used to think that way, too, and then I saw a computer beat a 9-dan Go player within an inch of his life.
Time to change your mind.
Don't worry. As soon as they find oil on Mars, they'll change their tune.
It will take a miracle for Trump to win the White House.
He already beat about a dozen guys who said God told them to run for President, remember.
Here you go. It's in there somewhere. Good luck.
No, do not run the Disk Cleanup wizard on Windows 7 under any circumstances. It has at least one system-destroying bug.
See:
http://www.cnet.com/forums/dis...
http://www.winhelponline.com/b... ... and many other links.
In my case it nuked \windows\system32, which I was able to restore by copying the files from another system. Lucky me.
It's almost as if we're coming out of an ice age, or something.
On the rare chance you happen to have a hardware configuration that doesn't work, there are already channels (through your MS support rep) to properly report it and get a fix.
Whatever they're paying you, it's not enough.
Take that however you wish.
Agreed. I've left Windows Update completely off since the first appearance of GWX. So how exactly did I get an unsolicited 447-megabyte installation of Silverlight 5.1.50428.0 on August 6? I still run Security Essentials scans every so often, and I allow to update its malware definitions each time. I'm guessing that's where the Silverlight installation came from. Must be one of those "malware definitions."
Clearly a monthly rollup is the right thing to do, considering how long it takes to bring a new Windows installation up to speed. But given their track record, I'd be crazy to allow Microsoft to make changes to my system that can't be rolled back. It would be different if I could trust them to act in my interests in addition to their own. Instead, the continuous stream of lies and incompetence we've seen from the Windows Update team over the past couple of years, including a number of "bugs" and "mistakes" whose effects suspiciously seem to accrue exclusively to Microsoft's benefit, have made it inadvisable to do so.
It's not the policy that annoys me, it's the bullshit.
Totemism! It's OK when we do it.
Did MS force you to install their OS on your machine?
Yes, in at least some cases, and they're facing a mounting number of lawsuits for it.
Keep in mind that you're probably arguing with someone who's paid to argue back.
There's no way to win, unless the rest of us hire our own zombie army.
In a democratic republic, it's necessary for the people to watch their hired watchmen, because nobody else will. Snowden's "treachery" was an act of patriotism and -- not coincidentally -- of self-sacrifice.
Conversely there's no public interest in the disclosure of Hulk Hogan's sex tape. That puts it on different legal footing.
they are slowly crippling Steam in favor of their app store
How so? I haven't heard this before.
BSD: Free as in speech
Linux: Free as in beer
Windows 10: Free as in herpes
You're talking past each other. Read what you're responding to carefully. x86 is still x86, but new optional features are still being added that will require newer Windows versions.
No shit. You think James Cameron has to put up with any of those things when he goes out to the movies?
His comments bring an entirely new degree of reality to the phrase "out of touch."