Toronto's another good example. Bigger on mass transit than SF and with a level of cultural diversity that would make America shit its collective pants.
This is why I think that all fly/drive-by-wire vehicles that don't absolutely require computer-assisted control (like the EF2000 which would go out of control immediately if the computer failed because it's inherently unstable) should have a simple override system that can be triggered manually. Say the Airbus computer goes nuts, the pilots should be able to flip a hard switch to go to a simple backup system that just translates their control inputs directly into control surface movements, simulating mechanical controls, no fly-by-wire interference whatsoever. The plane would be harder to fly but it could save the life of everyone on board. The first test flight of one of these craft crashed due to a software glitch (the vid of the plane gliding straight into a forest in France on takeoff, I'm sure you've all seen it).
Mechanical parts aren't as safe as you think. On aircraft, hairline fractures in some parts can lead to catastrophic failures (like the Comet explosion, or failures in just about any moving engine part). A little flex can cause a big disaster (like early 747 cargo door latches that flexed open in flight and caused explosive decompression). And then there's the nightmare of maintaining carbon fiber parts, which are being used more and more in recent models (the A380 has A LOT of CF in it).
The mistake is the part where you assume that premiums going down automatically means less profits. Premiums *may* decrease, but you can be sure they won't do so in a way that reduces profits.
But you'll still own the vehicle right? You insure the cars you own (driverless or not), airlines insure airplanes, and you can bet there's insurance on those subway trains too.
We are well into a cyberpunk dystopia, it just doesn't look that way because the fashion never caught on (and to add insult to injury, we got fucking tight jeans for men instead!)
Don't use TOR for torrents, it bogs the network down while some guy is trying to leak info from China before the government goons bust the door down. Use I2P if you want to run torrents over a darknet.
Most people (myself included) use a web based email client, where the plain text form of the email would be easily snatchable by the one party with any likely chance to actually intercept an email.
Exactly, no point encrypting your email unless you're already hosting your own.
Even then, you have to exchange PGP keys with the people you're emailing and have recipients use an email client that can decrypt the email. Good luck doing that with every Average Joe out there.
In the end, is it worth it for most of the emails you send, especially personal emails? I don't think so.
THIS! This article is frightening and full of ignorantly terrible advice that will sound like great "fight the man" rhetoric to dumb PHBs that couldn't tell the difference between IT security and a hole in the ground, and want their board room bling, consequences be damned. It is a perfect recipe for disaster.
I get why calling things toys is harsh, even if they're toys (we call them "toys" because they aren't full-featured computers that give the end user root access and the ability to install arbitrary apps, not because they aren't useful). Not all execs want an iShiny because they're in style (but many do, I have first-hand knowledge of this). Maybe there's a really sweet app on your iPad/iPhone that saves you tons of time and makes your job easier, and hosts all your files in convenient cloud storage so you can get to them anywhere. And we'd be happy to help you use that capability, but can't in the current form because it violates every policy we have to enforce six ways from Sunday and is a security/confidentiality timebomb waiting to go off when the next script kiddie blows this two-bit cloud service wide open or you leave your phone in a taxi and it ends up in the hands of your real enemies.
Why do phones have tighter requirements than laptops? Because the laptops have centralized AV/IDS, centralized administration and laptops don't get taken to nightclubs where they're lost and stolen. We don't have a double standard for mobiles, the current mobiles have to meet the same standards an iPhone/Android phone would. They're called Blackberries, I know they're lame and boring and about as fashionable as a sweater from Grandma but they meet the security standards. And if your company isn't using full-disk encryption on their laptops already, they should be working on it.
I often use this analogy to explain the security problem with these toys: Imagine you're running physical security for an area where you have to keep thieves and terrorists out, and they DO want to infiltrate the place, they're trying their best 24/7, we can see them poking around. Everyone who comes in has to go through a metal detector, get patted down and have their bags searched. Then here comes the boss' new personal assistant - a guy wearing a trenchcoat and carrying a duffel bag who we can't touch at all because he's the boss' BFF. He gets to come and go as he pleases with full access. Does he want to rob us blind or wreck the place? Who knows? This guy is the hot new toy the boss wants.
Imagine how much it would suck if the denialists' mysterious natural source of warming turned out to exist...they'd be proven right completely by coincidence.
Although I doubt a natural methane source could go completely unaccounted for, if there were some hole in the ground in some undiscovered corner of the earth with fossil CO2 gushing out of it (it would have to be like a mega-volcano of CO2, since actual volcanic eruptions are nothing compared to human activity), it would be pretty hard to account for historically, especially with so many years of completely unknown modern-scale man-made CO2 emissions from Soviet Russia.
You do know that most major racing groups use radios to communicate to their drivers? That Rally car racing drivers are constantly talking to their navigators. If it is that much of a performance drop they would not be using them. Cell phones are no different than that. The problem is training and education and not gadgets.
That's true but there's a world of difference between a rally driver and your average soccer mom, at least in training and experience, and possibly in some kind of inherent/instinctual skill, it's really not a valid comparison. Also navigators are in the car so that brings up the in-car awareness argument. Pit teams can also see what the driver's doing and know when not to interrupt, a lot of F1 drivers tell the crew not to talk to them in corners.
Almost all good racing drivers were on karts and/or simulators from childhood, and even some who've done so can't cut it when the competition gets tough.
Oh I thought you meant some kind of under-floor hidden compartment. A false floor can work for hatchbacks and SUVs, but would probably be too obvious on the others that don't have a space enclosed by the back of a bench seat and the rear hatch.
Slashdot Mirror
Executes them excellently? More like dumbs them down so that every grandma can use them, at the expense of functionality.
LMFAO!! XD
Best line of the post:
...before Apple came up with touch.
Good thing I wasn't drinking when I read that! XD
Becoming? This isn't 2007 anymore. Apple *is* an evil empire, at least on par with Microsoft.
I'd hope for regulation preventing the withholding of safety fixes to older models and used purchases but who am I kidding.
I'd say it's worth it as soon as the driverless car surpasses the safety of a human driver. 1/10th as many is way more than good enough.
Toronto's another good example. Bigger on mass transit than SF and with a level of cultural diversity that would make America shit its collective pants.
This is why I think that all fly/drive-by-wire vehicles that don't absolutely require computer-assisted control (like the EF2000 which would go out of control immediately if the computer failed because it's inherently unstable) should have a simple override system that can be triggered manually. Say the Airbus computer goes nuts, the pilots should be able to flip a hard switch to go to a simple backup system that just translates their control inputs directly into control surface movements, simulating mechanical controls, no fly-by-wire interference whatsoever. The plane would be harder to fly but it could save the life of everyone on board. The first test flight of one of these craft crashed due to a software glitch (the vid of the plane gliding straight into a forest in France on takeoff, I'm sure you've all seen it).
Mechanical parts aren't as safe as you think. On aircraft, hairline fractures in some parts can lead to catastrophic failures (like the Comet explosion, or failures in just about any moving engine part). A little flex can cause a big disaster (like early 747 cargo door latches that flexed open in flight and caused explosive decompression). And then there's the nightmare of maintaining carbon fiber parts, which are being used more and more in recent models (the A380 has A LOT of CF in it).
Quite different from the story of Boeing forcing all engineers to take a seat on the first test flight of new models...
The mistake is the part where you assume that premiums going down automatically means less profits. Premiums *may* decrease, but you can be sure they won't do so in a way that reduces profits.
But you'll still own the vehicle right? You insure the cars you own (driverless or not), airlines insure airplanes, and you can bet there's insurance on those subway trains too.
So is Microsoft working on a driverless car or is just slinging mud at Google for any reason part of your job?
We are well into a cyberpunk dystopia, it just doesn't look that way because the fashion never caught on (and to add insult to injury, we got fucking tight jeans for men instead!)
Don't use TOR for torrents, it bogs the network down while some guy is trying to leak info from China before the government goons bust the door down. Use I2P if you want to run torrents over a darknet.
I think it's largely pointless anyway...
Most people (myself included) use a web based email client, where the plain text form of the email would be easily snatchable by the one party with any likely chance to actually intercept an email.
Exactly, no point encrypting your email unless you're already hosting your own.
Even then, you have to exchange PGP keys with the people you're emailing and have recipients use an email client that can decrypt the email. Good luck doing that with every Average Joe out there.
In the end, is it worth it for most of the emails you send, especially personal emails? I don't think so.
This is exactly the kind of "smart user" that IT needs to keep a special eye on. Just "smart" enough to be dangerous.
I wish the author of TFA could see this.
THIS! This article is frightening and full of ignorantly terrible advice that will sound like great "fight the man" rhetoric to dumb PHBs that couldn't tell the difference between IT security and a hole in the ground, and want their board room bling, consequences be damned. It is a perfect recipe for disaster.
I get why calling things toys is harsh, even if they're toys (we call them "toys" because they aren't full-featured computers that give the end user root access and the ability to install arbitrary apps, not because they aren't useful). Not all execs want an iShiny because they're in style (but many do, I have first-hand knowledge of this). Maybe there's a really sweet app on your iPad/iPhone that saves you tons of time and makes your job easier, and hosts all your files in convenient cloud storage so you can get to them anywhere. And we'd be happy to help you use that capability, but can't in the current form because it violates every policy we have to enforce six ways from Sunday and is a security/confidentiality timebomb waiting to go off when the next script kiddie blows this two-bit cloud service wide open or you leave your phone in a taxi and it ends up in the hands of your real enemies.
Why do phones have tighter requirements than laptops? Because the laptops have centralized AV/IDS, centralized administration and laptops don't get taken to nightclubs where they're lost and stolen. We don't have a double standard for mobiles, the current mobiles have to meet the same standards an iPhone/Android phone would. They're called Blackberries, I know they're lame and boring and about as fashionable as a sweater from Grandma but they meet the security standards. And if your company isn't using full-disk encryption on their laptops already, they should be working on it.
I often use this analogy to explain the security problem with these toys: Imagine you're running physical security for an area where you have to keep thieves and terrorists out, and they DO want to infiltrate the place, they're trying their best 24/7, we can see them poking around. Everyone who comes in has to go through a metal detector, get patted down and have their bags searched. Then here comes the boss' new personal assistant - a guy wearing a trenchcoat and carrying a duffel bag who we can't touch at all because he's the boss' BFF. He gets to come and go as he pleases with full access. Does he want to rob us blind or wreck the place? Who knows? This guy is the hot new toy the boss wants.
A couple of years? The dangers of swallowing magnets have been known for decades.
Yep it's been done by a few countries:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_ape_personhood
Imagine how much it would suck if the denialists' mysterious natural source of warming turned out to exist...they'd be proven right completely by coincidence.
Although I doubt a natural methane source could go completely unaccounted for, if there were some hole in the ground in some undiscovered corner of the earth with fossil CO2 gushing out of it (it would have to be like a mega-volcano of CO2, since actual volcanic eruptions are nothing compared to human activity), it would be pretty hard to account for historically, especially with so many years of completely unknown modern-scale man-made CO2 emissions from Soviet Russia.
Yep that's me. I can tell you're a Bajan from the username, haha.
You do know that most major racing groups use radios to communicate to their drivers? That Rally car racing drivers are constantly talking to their navigators. If it is that much of a performance drop they would not be using them. Cell phones are no different than that. The problem is training and education and not gadgets.
That's true but there's a world of difference between a rally driver and your average soccer mom, at least in training and experience, and possibly in some kind of inherent/instinctual skill, it's really not a valid comparison. Also navigators are in the car so that brings up the in-car awareness argument. Pit teams can also see what the driver's doing and know when not to interrupt, a lot of F1 drivers tell the crew not to talk to them in corners.
Almost all good racing drivers were on karts and/or simulators from childhood, and even some who've done so can't cut it when the competition gets tough.
Oh I thought you meant some kind of under-floor hidden compartment. A false floor can work for hatchbacks and SUVs, but would probably be too obvious on the others that don't have a space enclosed by the back of a bench seat and the rear hatch.
Well there's the Schizophrenic Party and the Batshit Insane Party...
This guy's pretty straightforward compared to you:
http://www.theonion.com/articles/fiscally-im-a-rightwing-nutjob-but-on-social-issue,20486/