I have yet to see a web cam which was useful. These are the people who treat technology like some sort of crystal ball. "Look, I can see the airport parking lot. Sure it took 10 minutes to update, and the resolution is too low to tell if there are any free spaces, but look--the airport parking lot!" It is sometimes necessary to speak.
I have to feel for the reporters, a little bit. I wrote for the student paper one year, and know all too well how hard it can be to report on things that aren't actually news. So when a real story comes along, the adrenaline starts pumping and disbelief is suspended. I almost got sucked in by a rumor of hidden cameras on campus, but luckily I went to the trouble of doing a little research. What I don't understand is how come the reporter didn't pick up on the fact that the email was obviously written by 14 year olds. In addition to the horrid grammar, there was the sentence "Everytime you sign on AOL your account will be messed around with." That just screams pre-teenager who's run out of threats. Granted, script-kiddies can do some damage, but if they'd really cracked The Password and had access to all those credit cards, would they send a threatening email or go shopping? It is sometimes necessary to speak.
Intel is not mentioned in the article, and Microsoft only in the context of crippling their own software. So why do you use them as examples? While you are probably right on this and your other point, they are perpendicular to the thrust of the article. While I find it hard to believe all that is insinuated, if I had a backdoor into encrypted files and a couple million $$ worth of hardware (an amount that wouldn't even dent a government budget) I could do most of what was stated. It's not like they have to actually crack anything. What I find harder to swallow is that they would be so easily caught on someone's logs. On the one hand they're being made out to be almost omnipotent, and on the other hand they don't even disguise thier IP?
And good riddance, if you ask me. When you see things like this working in science fiction it assumes a totally secure system, which we all know cannot be built. I would much rather see advances in smart-cards and e-cash, something that retains the anonimity of paper money (anyone read Shadowrun?). If this doesn't get shot down, 10 years from now you won't have any cards, you'll just get your eye scanned everywhere. That gives crackers way more power, because once the system is breached your whole identity can be stolen. If someone steals your drivers license, you can get a new one and invalidate the old. If someone replaces your iris scan with thier own, how do you prove you were ever you? Besides which, are PIN's really that insecure? The people who get thier accounts raided are the ones SMRT enough to write it on the card, or use 1111. Do we really need to give away all our privacy to protect morons from themselves?
It is not in Microsoft's interest to make software which runs well on a 200. Remember, these are the people who practically invented the upgrade cycle, and part of that is making each software release require better hardware. It keeps people in the mindset that this is just how the computer world works, and no one will question whether it needs to be that way. They don't just want to sell you a bridge, they want to sell you the same bridge every year till you die.
If you could do it convincingly, you could not only sell characters but also the bots themselves. Especially if they were somewhat customisable, because a lot of people would like their character to become better at a skill without having to actually go through the pracitice. And if you could do it without getting caught... there's a market there.
Crackers don't make money, Hackers need new name
on
"Hackers" are Dumb
·
· Score: 1
Outside of the hacker/cracker debate, the article also seemed to lump in a third group--true white collar criminals. And they used all their terms interchangably, further confusing the issue. How hard would it really be for Wired to either hire or interview someone who understands the topics they discuss? Too hard, evidently.
I found it interesting how Moyers kept relating Star Wars to Christian myths, and Lucas had to keep pointing out that the myths are not religion-specific.
I read (most of) this article, hoping there would be some hard numbers to back up the headline's claim. But there were none, not even a percentage of IT workers vs regular people in that age range, or an increase in recent years. In fact, there was nothing except annecdotal evidence based on the testimonial of a bunch of 'hackers' in Britain. (Since when is a web designer a hacker, by the way.)
As far as I can see, they interviewed a bunch of young people involved in the Brittish rave/drug scene who happen to work in IT. They could easily have done the same for any other industry which hires young people, and it would've had the same level of relevance.
I have to wonder if M$ is dropping the 'Linux is a competitor' line because a settlement has already been worked out. Either that or Bill's brain is running Windows 2000.
Slashdot Mirror
I have yet to see a web cam which was useful. These are the people who treat technology like some sort of crystal ball. "Look, I can see the airport parking lot. Sure it took 10 minutes to update, and the resolution is too low to tell if there are any free spaces, but look--the airport parking lot!"
It is sometimes necessary to speak.
It is sometimes necessary to speak.
I have to feel for the reporters, a little bit. I wrote for the student paper one year, and know all too well how hard it can be to report on things that aren't actually news. So when a real story comes along, the adrenaline starts pumping and disbelief is suspended. I almost got sucked in by a rumor of hidden cameras on campus, but luckily I went to the trouble of doing a little research.
What I don't understand is how come the reporter didn't pick up on the fact that the email was obviously written by 14 year olds. In addition to the horrid grammar, there was the sentence "Everytime you sign on AOL your account will be messed around with." That just screams pre-teenager who's run out of threats. Granted, script-kiddies can do some damage, but if they'd really cracked The Password and had access to all those credit cards, would they send a threatening email or go shopping?
It is sometimes necessary to speak.
What I find harder to swallow is that they would be so easily caught on someone's logs. On the one hand they're being made out to be almost omnipotent, and on the other hand they don't even disguise thier IP?
It is sometimes necessary to speak.
If this doesn't get shot down, 10 years from now you won't have any cards, you'll just get your eye scanned everywhere. That gives crackers way more power, because once the system is breached your whole identity can be stolen. If someone steals your drivers license, you can get a new one and invalidate the old. If someone replaces your iris scan with thier own, how do you prove you were ever you?
Besides which, are PIN's really that insecure? The people who get thier accounts raided are the ones SMRT enough to write it on the card, or use 1111. Do we really need to give away all our privacy to protect morons from themselves?
Huh, you know I... ah, never mind.
As far as I can see, they interviewed a bunch of young people involved in the Brittish rave/drug scene who happen to work in IT. They could easily have done the same for any other industry which hires young people, and it would've had the same level of relevance.
Thank you, that was very kind.
I have to wonder if M$ is dropping the 'Linux is a competitor' line because a settlement has already been worked out. Either that or Bill's brain is running Windows 2000.
It's only a matter of time before they get burned. The sooner the better, I say.