I run a hospital network that I consider (in my provincial way) "critical." However, I guess I'm a 'fucking retard' because I allow connections to the internet--in fact, rely on them to get medical info out to rural clinics and get info in to the doctors.
But I'd like to change my ways and NOT be retarded anymore. So I'll be severing the internet connection tonight. So, when all the systems fail tomorrow I'll tell them "According to Jethro Rose, critical infrastructure cannot be on the internet!"
Then I'll tell them about the much better system you have devised. Which is...?
but there's a real world out there, and it's far more important than the fucking internet.
I disagree.
There's a world out there because we have knowledge that lets us build it. That knowledge is MORE important than the thing itself. If we lose the electric power, we can begin work to restore it. If we lose the KNOWLEDGE OF ELECTRIC POWER, it will never be restored again.
The internet represents access to all accumulated human knowledge. It is more important than anything we have ever built.
Come out to my neck of the woods. If you are injured and call and ambulance, it'll be here in about 40 minutes. But using the internet to get the information allowing you to deal with the injury takes only 40 seconds. WHICH IS MORE IMPORTANT NOW?
I have seen the videos of the stars at the center of our galaxy whipping around a central unseen mass. These images are compelling. Now I'm going to propose something and I really want someone with a grasp on mechanics to explain why it is impossible:
We know that a mass doesn't actually orbit around another mass, it orbits around the center of gravity of the 2 mass system. So now let's look at 3 masses. They each orbit the center of mass of the 3 mass system. Now let's look at a 400 billion mass system. Don't the masses orbit the CENTER OF MASS of the entire system? So the stars in the center of the galaxy are simply orbiting a point, NOT AN ACTUAL MASS. They are just being pulled by the combined gravitation of all the stars around.
Why is this wrong? What am I missing? Thanks in advance for clearing up my naive misconception.
First, a hero is someone who risks his life to successfully save a person who is in danger of imminent death. If you didn't risk your own life, you're not a hero. If the person isn't saved, you're not a hero. Trying to save someone doesn't make you a hero, it means you TRIED to be a hero (which is admirable--just not heroic).
Confronting a criminal in a crowded place and relying on innocent bystanders to help is, I think, the OPPOSITE of a hero. Getting a good description and letting him leave (away from innocents) would have been the courageous thing to do. Fer crissakes, they had him on video. What the hell are YOU confronting him for? That's just asking to get bystanders hurt.
But even if I agree with all your points that counterfeiting is bad and sharing is not, the LAW MAKES NO DISTINCTION.
87 people shipping a warehouse of sugar pills branded as Lipitor? GO TO JAIL.
1 kid sharing a song with a friend? GO TO JAIL.
So stuff your justification, because we know that the amount of random filesharer abuse will FAR EXCEED the number of counterfeiting operations shut down.
Am I the only one who remembers the protesters around Cape Canaveral when Cassini launched? That's because its initial trajectory was unbelievably convoluted: the ship actually traveled to Venus first, got a gravity boost then traveled back out and used the Earth for its next boost.
The protesters feared that a miscalculation could cause Cassini to re-enter Earth's atmosphere on this near-miss flyby and disgorge its thermopile of plutonium into the stratosphere.
I agree with the math wizards here: It hardly matters whether this channel is secure or not since the attack will come in the form of a man-in-the-middle with both parties (incorrectly) convinced they are talking to the other. This is an attack on the certification system, not the encryption system.
With CAs already caught handing out faked certs to the authorities so they can MITM an SSL channel, the ship has already sailed on any encryption system where remote trust is required.
Something is dreadfully wrong with the whole setup.
People, who hear that millions of people are literally starving to death, still want to fuck. That leads to having 7 billion people stuffed into the ecosystem. That leads to long lines of cars filled with idiots who should never have been born.
Something IS dreadfully wrong with the whole setup.
This is a bunch of crap. Watch companies do this all the time to bump up the interest in 'collecting' their wares. The plan is simple:
1) Buy the item in a private sale at whatever price.
2) Hand it over to an auction house for sale.
3) Have an accomplice bid for the piece. If you want real big numbers (so you get the free publicity), bring 2 friends to bid against each other.
4) Advertise that your company's 'collectibles' are worth these huge prices, based on the auction price.
5) Profit when everyone runs out to buy the next big 'collectible.'
1850: Slaves that run away are criminals. They shouldn't have rights.
1910: Women who try to vote are criminals. They shouldn't have rights.
1940: Jews trying to leave the ghetto are criminals. They shouldn't have rights.
Yeah, that's a helluva world you're trying to build there.
Maybe there's a reason we judge a society by how it treats the least of its members.
He only had to do all that "probable cause" thing because you were there. Without you in tow, the cop could have stopped the driver and just SAID the driver had broken some law. And who's the judge gonna believe?
And when the massive tracking database of 'observations' is hacked and used against the populace, this will be seen as evidence of a need for MORE surveillance.
When it comes to data:
To PROTECT it,
Don't COLLECT it.
The slippery slope is your attitude that "if it's in the open, they can record it." Because for the last ten thousand years of human civilization THIS HAS NOT BEEN TRUE. So to say there is no effect from this radical change in human circumstances is either naive or disingenuous.
Anyone else notice that they give 2 examples of 1965 prices and their 2010 equivalents? From TFA:
The portable TV is $200 ($1400 in 2010 dollars). The VCR is $400 ($2700 in 2010 dollars).
Um, anyone else think it's funny that the average car cost $2,650 in 1965 and $26,500 in 2010, a median home cost $21,000 in 1965 and $210,000 in 2010 and yet the government figures claim prices rose 7 times?
How'd they do that? That's because in 1965 you bought a car. But in 2010 you bought a car, an airbag (which is counted as extra because it wasn't on the 1965 version), and anti-lock brakes, and long lasting tires, and etc, etc. There's a technical term for this money-saving (and people-screwing) accounting trick, it's called 'LYING LIKE A RUG.'
Let's say the population of inter-breedable humans went continuously up so population rose every year. In this case you could still have genetics that indicated "near extinctions." That's because some families died out even as other families were thriving. So even though the population never went down, it'd still look like we were down to just a few couples (my gosh, we were nearly extinct!) since only their descendants made it all the way through.
This implies that had those families not survived, some others would have and it would still seem like we were on the brink (a different brink perhaps) of extinction. That is to say, WE WERE NEVER IN DANGER OF EXTINCTION.
On the other side, the shear number of IPv6 addresses means that every network connected device can have it's own unique IP address hard coded at the factory, specific for the region where it is to be sold.
That's called a MAC address and it cannot substitute for an IP address. How's the factory going to know what logical structure the servers are going to inhabit? Your scheme eliminates the ability to do cut-through routing--that's a big hit in performance especially when there's 128 bits to read.
Time to bone up on the differences between physical and logical addresses.
You guys are all shouting about how you don't want libraries to disappear. And yet you also say you'll switch over to e-books if the price is low enough.
I'll assume you understand that as soon as more money is made from e-books than real books, the real books go away. And the day after that, the libraries go with them because the only DRM allowed will be pay-per-read.
Yes, he got into trouble because twitter is a PUBLIC forum. But what forum do we have to communicate with each other where we can expect NO ONE IS EAVESDROPPING? Because the REAL problem is there is NO SUCH FORUM.
It's interesting that in this thread you posted an actual THREAT.
"We will use illegal detention and questioning to harass you." sure sounds like a threat to me. If a law officer had made it, he'd be an ex-officer, because I WOULD KILL HIM.
This is a backdoor because the obvious way to store search data is to aggregate it immediately and delete the source. Which is what any sane engineer would do.
Enter the cops: Don't delete that data, I might want to spy on someone. What do you mean China is using that data to spy on someone? How dare they!
Slashdot Mirror
I run a hospital network that I consider (in my provincial way) "critical." However, I guess I'm a 'fucking retard' because I allow connections to the internet--in fact, rely on them to get medical info out to rural clinics and get info in to the doctors.
But I'd like to change my ways and NOT be retarded anymore. So I'll be severing the internet connection tonight. So, when all the systems fail tomorrow I'll tell them "According to Jethro Rose, critical infrastructure cannot be on the internet!"
Then I'll tell them about the much better system you have devised. Which is...?
An internet forum is debating the proper formalism for creating neologisms on a user-edited encyclopedia.
Would I even be able to give my grandmother the slightest glimmer of what this is about?
but there's a real world out there, and it's far more important than the fucking internet.
I disagree.
There's a world out there because we have knowledge that lets us build it. That knowledge is MORE important than the thing itself. If we lose the electric power, we can begin work to restore it. If we lose the KNOWLEDGE OF ELECTRIC POWER, it will never be restored again.
The internet represents access to all accumulated human knowledge. It is more important than anything we have ever built.
Come out to my neck of the woods. If you are injured and call and ambulance, it'll be here in about 40 minutes. But using the internet to get the information allowing you to deal with the injury takes only 40 seconds. WHICH IS MORE IMPORTANT NOW?
I have seen the videos of the stars at the center of our galaxy whipping around a central unseen mass. These images are compelling. Now I'm going to propose something and I really want someone with a grasp on mechanics to explain why it is impossible:
We know that a mass doesn't actually orbit around another mass, it orbits around the center of gravity of the 2 mass system. So now let's look at 3 masses. They each orbit the center of mass of the 3 mass system. Now let's look at a 400 billion mass system. Don't the masses orbit the CENTER OF MASS of the entire system? So the stars in the center of the galaxy are simply orbiting a point, NOT AN ACTUAL MASS. They are just being pulled by the combined gravitation of all the stars around.
Why is this wrong? What am I missing? Thanks in advance for clearing up my naive misconception.
Hero?
First, a hero is someone who risks his life to successfully save a person who is in danger of imminent death. If you didn't risk your own life, you're not a hero. If the person isn't saved, you're not a hero. Trying to save someone doesn't make you a hero, it means you TRIED to be a hero (which is admirable--just not heroic).
Confronting a criminal in a crowded place and relying on innocent bystanders to help is, I think, the OPPOSITE of a hero. Getting a good description and letting him leave (away from innocents) would have been the courageous thing to do. Fer crissakes, they had him on video. What the hell are YOU confronting him for? That's just asking to get bystanders hurt.
My verdict: Boo.
But even if I agree with all your points that counterfeiting is bad and sharing is not, the LAW MAKES NO DISTINCTION.
87 people shipping a warehouse of sugar pills branded as Lipitor? GO TO JAIL. 1 kid sharing a song with a friend? GO TO JAIL.
So stuff your justification, because we know that the amount of random filesharer abuse will FAR EXCEED the number of counterfeiting operations shut down.
Am I the only one who remembers the protesters around Cape Canaveral when Cassini launched? That's because its initial trajectory was unbelievably convoluted: the ship actually traveled to Venus first, got a gravity boost then traveled back out and used the Earth for its next boost.
The protesters feared that a miscalculation could cause Cassini to re-enter Earth's atmosphere on this near-miss flyby and disgorge its thermopile of plutonium into the stratosphere.
So it was a crazy flight from the very first day.
I agree with the math wizards here: It hardly matters whether this channel is secure or not since the attack will come in the form of a man-in-the-middle with both parties (incorrectly) convinced they are talking to the other. This is an attack on the certification system, not the encryption system.
With CAs already caught handing out faked certs to the authorities so they can MITM an SSL channel, the ship has already sailed on any encryption system where remote trust is required.
Something is dreadfully wrong with the whole setup.
People, who hear that millions of people are literally starving to death, still want to fuck. That leads to having 7 billion people stuffed into the ecosystem. That leads to long lines of cars filled with idiots who should never have been born.
Something IS dreadfully wrong with the whole setup.
This is a bunch of crap. Watch companies do this all the time to bump up the interest in 'collecting' their wares. The plan is simple:
1) Buy the item in a private sale at whatever price.
2) Hand it over to an auction house for sale.
3) Have an accomplice bid for the piece. If you want real big numbers (so you get the free publicity), bring 2 friends to bid against each other.
4) Advertise that your company's 'collectibles' are worth these huge prices, based on the auction price.
5) Profit when everyone runs out to buy the next big 'collectible.'
You don't actually believe this BS, do you?
When it comes to data:
To PROTECT it,
Don't COLLECT it.
1850: Slaves that run away are criminals. They shouldn't have rights.
1910: Women who try to vote are criminals. They shouldn't have rights.
1940: Jews trying to leave the ghetto are criminals. They shouldn't have rights.
Yeah, that's a helluva world you're trying to build there.
Maybe there's a reason we judge a society by how it treats the least of its members.
For that other 5%, jailbreaking is trivial and allows complete control.
Last I checked, circumventing DRM is ILLEGAL with real prison sentences and everything. How is that TRIVIAL?
So we can have control of our devices, but we might have to go to prison for it. Nice.
He only had to do all that "probable cause" thing because you were there. Without you in tow, the cop could have stopped the driver and just SAID the driver had broken some law. And who's the judge gonna believe?
And when the massive tracking database of 'observations' is hacked and used against the populace, this will be seen as evidence of a need for MORE surveillance.
When it comes to data:
To PROTECT it,
Don't COLLECT it.
The slippery slope is your attitude that "if it's in the open, they can record it." Because for the last ten thousand years of human civilization THIS HAS NOT BEEN TRUE. So to say there is no effect from this radical change in human circumstances is either naive or disingenuous.
The portable TV is $200 ($1400 in 2010 dollars). The VCR is $400 ($2700 in 2010 dollars).
Um, anyone else think it's funny that the average car cost $2,650 in 1965 and $26,500 in 2010, a median home cost $21,000 in 1965 and $210,000 in 2010 and yet the government figures claim prices rose 7 times?
How'd they do that? That's because in 1965 you bought a car. But in 2010 you bought a car, an airbag (which is counted as extra because it wasn't on the 1965 version), and anti-lock brakes, and long lasting tires, and etc, etc. There's a technical term for this money-saving (and people-screwing) accounting trick, it's called 'LYING LIKE A RUG.'
Let's say the population of inter-breedable humans went continuously up so population rose every year. In this case you could still have genetics that indicated "near extinctions." That's because some families died out even as other families were thriving. So even though the population never went down, it'd still look like we were down to just a few couples (my gosh, we were nearly extinct!) since only their descendants made it all the way through.
This implies that had those families not survived, some others would have and it would still seem like we were on the brink (a different brink perhaps) of extinction. That is to say, WE WERE NEVER IN DANGER OF EXTINCTION.
On the other side, the shear number of IPv6 addresses means that every network connected device can have it's own unique IP address hard coded at the factory, specific for the region where it is to be sold.
That's called a MAC address and it cannot substitute for an IP address. How's the factory going to know what logical structure the servers are going to inhabit? Your scheme eliminates the ability to do cut-through routing--that's a big hit in performance especially when there's 128 bits to read.
Time to bone up on the differences between physical and logical addresses.
I love stories that tell you that "too much" is bad for you. Too much sitting? Bad for you!
Maybe it's because THE DEFINITION OF "TOO MUCH" IS "THE AMOUNT THAT'S BAD FOR YOU."
Fer chrissakes, "too much" water is bad for you, because you've only had "too much" once you've drowned.
You guys are all shouting about how you don't want libraries to disappear. And yet you also say you'll switch over to e-books if the price is low enough.
I'll assume you understand that as soon as more money is made from e-books than real books, the real books go away. And the day after that, the libraries go with them because the only DRM allowed will be pay-per-read.
Far fetched? Just wait....
Yes, he got into trouble because twitter is a PUBLIC forum. But what forum do we have to communicate with each other where we can expect NO ONE IS EAVESDROPPING? Because the REAL problem is there is NO SUCH FORUM.
Sometimes you think there's no hope for humanity. Then there's a post like this.
Hear, hear, radtea. I wish I could mod up your entire philosophy.
It's interesting that in this thread you posted an actual THREAT.
"We will use illegal detention and questioning to harass you." sure sounds like a threat to me. If a law officer had made it, he'd be an ex-officer, because I WOULD KILL HIM.
Now someone do me.
This is a backdoor because the obvious way to store search data is to aggregate it immediately and delete the source. Which is what any sane engineer would do.
Enter the cops: Don't delete that data, I might want to spy on someone. What do you mean China is using that data to spy on someone? How dare they!
And that's why it's a back door.