Good entrepreneurs will almost certainly drop out anyway (there's nothing for them there but lost time). Those dropouts will need MIT graduates as scientists and engineers, but then that just shows the difference.
If the CRA had forced bad loans onto the market then the market would have let the banks sit on them... that didn't happen.
They sold mortgages because there was a bubble and they could sell of 100% of the risk for free money, selling mortgages was strictly profitable... there was literally no risk to the banks no matter how bad the lender. Everyone kept buying MBS's regardless. You'd think the banks would have been smart enough not to buy their own BS and not own those MBS's themselves, you'd be wrong though... no one forced them to do that, they knew the quality of the mortgages and yet they happily _chose_ to own them because the market could go nowhere but up.
Depends on what they are targeting, if they are targeting the money directly... sure. If they are however targeting the bank and it's stock price things can get very ugly.
Lets say that at the moment there is yet another remote hole in windows making a large percentage of computers vulnerable. A hacker exploits that and installs trojans and instead of making a botnet logs bank transactions for a while, then with enough data it starts falsifying them but engineered in such a way to avoid heuristics. Best case you transfer 100s of millions before they catch on... worst case you transfer millions before they catch on but have to shut down their online banking entirely (your trojan isn't going to go away in a hurry, if it's a well written rootkit nothing except a reinstall is going to help) and clean up an ungodly mess.
Just for instance... it can connect to a server, retrieve a transaction from it and validate it with the key you just entered. The server at the same time sends off a couple of SMS to money mules.
Online banking with a single factor security is silly (two passwords are not two factors). I don't feel entirely safe with the code calculator my bank gives, but at least I know how to recognise large transactions (you can see by the way you have to enter the website verification number, not that they tell you that) so trojans could only ever hijack a small transaction.
It's a good approach, almost... but it doesn't stop trojans at all. Why didn't they go the extra mm and make it secure? This is no better than the little calculator I have at home which generates a random number using my card and my pin, which doesn't stop trojans either.
What they should have done is send the transaction details and the confirmation code in the same SMS.
Obviousness though it should be a defence is abhorred by lawyers for it's complete subjectiveness and has been driven out of the patent system altogether, and to a jury in Texas very little is obvious. Gaming the patent system is about finding problems no one has thought about yet but which will become relevant soon, the solutions will be trivial but because the problem is not one currently relevant no one will describe the solutions... the solutions will thus be novel, and that's all the justice system cares about.
That ATI's choice of going open source hasn't pay'd off yet is unfortunate... but what does it have to do with Linux hardware support? NVIDIA has a closed source Linux driver (with a GPL shim) ya know and it's not like hardware support on the BSD side is better.
The Qt license in no way resembles MIT/X/BSD/Apache licenses... it's basically the GPL to begin with, just intentionally made in such a way that it is almost impossible to create a fork with.
I don't quite understand the IOI's emphasis on rote memorization of algorithms... how well do you think you would be able to do after a few years without reference materials?
ATI cards are programmable, Brook+ is just a little too high level for writing simple computational kernels (you drop too much performance) and CAL too low level for most people (it's basically assembly). So generally people just stick to CUDA, even in the few cases where ATI's architecture is superior.
This problem is ideal for ATI, very little input necessary (NVIDIA has more texture samplers) and no inter thread communication necessary (ATI does not have random writes on it's local data share at the moment, making that communication harder than it is with NVIDIA). So basically it just comes down to FLOPS and ATI wins big there.
Basically this was done in CAL because it was done by a hacker and not by an academic researcher (who doesn't really care about performance if he can just as easily get his paper published on a slower GPU with less effort, easier in fact since editors know CUDA).
Yep, there are both collision checkers and crackers for CUDA too... ATI is significantly faster though (this kind of computation bound stuff is ideal for them).
I'm sure that somewhere in the App Store SDK EULA there is something about you indemnifying Apple for any copyright violations... so I doubt pushing it off on Apple would succeed.
We are not free to jump the hoops, we are free to try... with no guarantee of success and with a substantial monetary cost.
Platforms which don't allow modified GPL software to run are inherently problematic, I do feel it goes against the spirit of the GPL to even distribute software on such platforms. I'm not really the only one, it was a major impetus behind GPL v3 after all.
The main speed up provided by hardware raid is reliable deep write buffering... I don't see how parallel file systems will make that advantage go away.
So the first guy was drunk and waved a gun around and then pay'd the corrupt cops... the second an organized crime shoot out again with corrupt cop protection? The fact that money overrides racism in Russia is interesting, but in the end it's just plain old corruption... it doesn't really say anything about the leanings of the government quite like a political assassination.
Slashdot Mirror
Good entrepreneurs will almost certainly drop out anyway (there's nothing for them there but lost time). Those dropouts will need MIT graduates as scientists and engineers, but then that just shows the difference.
If the CRA had forced bad loans onto the market then the market would have let the banks sit on them ... that didn't happen.
They sold mortgages because there was a bubble and they could sell of 100% of the risk for free money, selling mortgages was strictly profitable ... there was literally no risk to the banks no matter how bad the lender. Everyone kept buying MBS's regardless. You'd think the banks would have been smart enough not to buy their own BS and not own those MBS's themselves, you'd be wrong though ... no one forced them to do that, they knew the quality of the mortgages and yet they happily _chose_ to own them because the market could go nowhere but up.
Glad to hear some banks get it right ... a bit too far out of my neck of the woods unfortunately.
"What they should have done is send the transaction details and the confirmation code in the same SMS."
What if you want to authorize a transaction but they just change the transaction to one they had already lined up earlier?
Depends on what they are targeting, if they are targeting the money directly ... sure. If they are however targeting the bank and it's stock price things can get very ugly.
Lets say that at the moment there is yet another remote hole in windows making a large percentage of computers vulnerable. A hacker exploits that and installs trojans and instead of making a botnet logs bank transactions for a while, then with enough data it starts falsifying them but engineered in such a way to avoid heuristics. Best case you transfer 100s of millions before they catch on ... worst case you transfer millions before they catch on but have to shut down their online banking entirely (your trojan isn't going to go away in a hurry, if it's a well written rootkit nothing except a reinstall is going to help) and clean up an ungodly mess.
Just for instance ... it can connect to a server, retrieve a transaction from it and validate it with the key you just entered. The server at the same time sends off a couple of SMS to money mules.
Automation is the key.
He didn't even mention copper.
Why do you bank with them?
Online banking with a single factor security is silly (two passwords are not two factors). I don't feel entirely safe with the code calculator my bank gives, but at least I know how to recognise large transactions (you can see by the way you have to enter the website verification number, not that they tell you that) so trojans could only ever hijack a small transaction.
It's a good approach, almost ... but it doesn't stop trojans at all. Why didn't they go the extra mm and make it secure? This is no better than the little calculator I have at home which generates a random number using my card and my pin, which doesn't stop trojans either.
What they should have done is send the transaction details and the confirmation code in the same SMS.
Obviousness though it should be a defence is abhorred by lawyers for it's complete subjectiveness and has been driven out of the patent system altogether, and to a jury in Texas very little is obvious. Gaming the patent system is about finding problems no one has thought about yet but which will become relevant soon, the solutions will be trivial but because the problem is not one currently relevant no one will describe the solutions ... the solutions will thus be novel, and that's all the justice system cares about.
AFAICS these people succeeded.
That ATI's choice of going open source hasn't pay'd off yet is unfortunate ... but what does it have to do with Linux hardware support? NVIDIA has a closed source Linux driver (with a GPL shim) ya know and it's not like hardware support on the BSD side is better.
The Qt license in no way resembles MIT/X/BSD/Apache licenses ... it's basically the GPL to begin with, just intentionally made in such a way that it is almost impossible to create a fork with.
There's an h in algorithm ;)
I don't quite understand the IOI's emphasis on rote memorization of algorithms ... how well do you think you would be able to do after a few years without reference materials?
LTspice looks very cool.
ATI cards are programmable, Brook+ is just a little too high level for writing simple computational kernels (you drop too much performance) and CAL too low level for most people (it's basically assembly). So generally people just stick to CUDA, even in the few cases where ATI's architecture is superior.
This problem is ideal for ATI, very little input necessary (NVIDIA has more texture samplers) and no inter thread communication necessary (ATI does not have random writes on it's local data share at the moment, making that communication harder than it is with NVIDIA). So basically it just comes down to FLOPS and ATI wins big there.
Basically this was done in CAL because it was done by a hacker and not by an academic researcher (who doesn't really care about performance if he can just as easily get his paper published on a slower GPU with less effort, easier in fact since editors know CUDA).
Yep, there are both collision checkers and crackers for CUDA too ... ATI is significantly faster though (this kind of computation bound stuff is ideal for them).
I'm sure that somewhere in the App Store SDK EULA there is something about you indemnifying Apple for any copyright violations ... so I doubt pushing it off on Apple would succeed.
We are not free to jump the hoops, we are free to try ... with no guarantee of success and with a substantial monetary cost.
Platforms which don't allow modified GPL software to run are inherently problematic, I do feel it goes against the spirit of the GPL to even distribute software on such platforms. I'm not really the only one, it was a major impetus behind GPL v3 after all.
http://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Using_Btrfs_with_Multiple_Devices
I don't see any immediate reason why piracy would be up on the PC at the moment ... it hasn't gotten easier or more difficult really.
The DS is a different issue, flash card penetration and availability has still been growing.
The main speed up provided by hardware raid is reliable deep write buffering ... I don't see how parallel file systems will make that advantage go away.
So the first guy was drunk and waved a gun around and then pay'd the corrupt cops ... the second an organized crime shoot out again with corrupt cop protection? The fact that money overrides racism in Russia is interesting, but in the end it's just plain old corruption ... it doesn't really say anything about the leanings of the government quite like a political assassination.
Problem is that the quality of the patent is judged by a Texas jury ... so in the end the quality of the lawyers is more important than the ideas.
That they will do anything that it takes to prevent this from happening again.