Richard Dawkins wrote an excellent book talking about that very scenario and pointing out how the individual gene is the "actor" of evolution, not the group or tribe.
But if the person already has a working smart phone, what's the point? They are going to keep the smart phone charged anyway. And if they are out of cell phone range in this day and age paging them isn't likely to be of much value. By the time they run back down the mountain to use the phone in the small town pub the emergency is over since some doctor near the hospital with a smart phone already responded.
So what are all the other hospitals in the world using? I am assuming from the disproportionate use in the UK that pagers are not universally used in medical settings for some reason like you describe. People are dying left and right where doctor's don't use pagers? Or is there some other system in place?
See also the Sleepless series of novels by Nancy Kress. A modification for one thing turns out to have a bunch of different enhancing side effects, leading eventually to a deep division between the "are" and "are nots"
How about instead of "right to repair" they just make restrictive covenants on consumer goods like this unenforceable? Let's get rid of the 'you are just licensing it' crap altogether.
This isn't about free speech, it is about whether advertisers should be able to target people with an interest in Nazism. It doesn't mention whether anyone ever used the category or what sort of ads were sent though. I think the idea is one could target pro-Nazi people and get them all riled up. Really just the PC mob in action, since nothing here indicates the target group was pro-Nazi as opposed to people with an historical interest.
Not questioning the conclusion, I just wonder why the other animals living in the same environment don't show the same sort of adaptation. Perhaps other species have stronger pressures from other threats. Or maybe a favorable mutation in some proto-zebra.
perhaps they could do a one pager where Sun-Man says 'look I am more popular than you', and Buddha replies 'Is that so?', smiles, and goes back to Nirvana.
It's not quite so simple. From what I've seen in pen tests and attacks, fake network nodes are not effective. Attackers aren't blindly flailing around breaking into whatever host they find. They are following various bits of information which they find on each link in the chain. Either by examining domain structures, local documents on a workstations, and the like. At least you would have to add your honeypots to AD or other information sources so attackers would find them, then tune out all the noise from legitimate tools and processes which try to access your honeypots for network inventory, vulnerability scans, host management, etc. Deception as a defense strategy is not a bad idea, it just takes some thought to put it where attackers are likely to find it but legitimate process or curious users don't stumble across it. Meanwhile, AD and system admins are cautious about injecting anomalous data into their babies.
Some folks are using virtual infrastructure to place fake workstations around, so that attackers in the early 'get any Windows credential hash and see where it leads' can trip across them and set off alarms. This is aimed at tools like Responder and the like which try to get other nodes to send them an authentication exchange. One thing that should exist, and AFAIK does not, is a way to add well disguised fake credentials to the local Windows system, since that is usually the first place an attacker will look once they gain their foothold. Their are commercial tools which will do this, for a price, but no reliable way to make a convincing decoy on the cheap.
Well, Crowdstrike sells endpoint detection and response software, so the claim has to be taken with a grain of salt. But the real problem lies here:
"Breakout time" refers to the time a hacker group takes from gaining initial access to a victim's computer to moving laterally through its network...The "breakout" metric is crucial for organizations, as this is the time they have to detect infections and isolate hacked computers before a simple intrusion turns into a compromise of its entire network.
Getting lateral movement is just one of the early steps in the chain, not the game over moment. Nor does it mean 'the entire network' is compromised. Attacker still has to locate what they need on the network and then get access to it, and then exfiltrate it (for stealing data) or break it. In other words, you still have a lot more than 20 minutes to detect and respond effectively.
Helpful tip for many: if you use Outlook at work, you can set up the junk mail filters to quarantine messages that aren't from you own domain or your contact list. Goodbye tons of marketing emails.
That aside, I have found that colleagues who do not answer relevant work related emails within a day or generally not worth working with. It is just basic time management. I recommend "Time Management for System Administrators" all the time
I understand the catch-22, but I recently decided I will avoid buying things directly from vendors and instead try to get them on Amazon. If I go vendor direct, I invariably get signed up for their chirp of the day email crap no matter how hard I look for opt-out tricks.
It's a lot cheaper to use rainbow tables which cracks in 14 seconds, as this article even states. While the technical aspects of how they did the cracking might be interesting, the security impact of this announcement is zero.
That is called equilibrium, not collusion. There once was a similar state in the US with breakfast cereals for a while, until one of the participants decided to break the equilibrium and lower prices to try to gain market share.
Yes it is a gamble, by definition. Whether everything that is, by definition, gambling either should or was ever intended to be prohibited by law I leave up to individual judgement. I would suggest however, that to say so is pretty absurd.
You do come out ahead. Instead of losing the full ticket price you only lose the price of the insurance policy. There is nothing in the definition of gambling that requires a net gain from the point in time the bet is made.
I'm not sure where this article is coming from, Google already had a nice low end phone called the Moto-G, though Motorola was since sold off. So this isn't a new strategy of Google's in an attempt to take advantage of Apple's price mis-step.
China is becoming more and more repressive each year
That like saying global warming is a hoax due to a small recent downtick in an otherwise upward trend. China today is light years better than in the past, judging from the stories I hear from my in-laws and read for myself. That doesn't mean everything is fine
I've been wondering the same thing. I used to manage the proxy at work and I used it to block ads, with a twist. The proxy didn't return a 403 code for the ads, since that would clutter up the pages with ugly block messages. I had the proxy just return an empty HTML page for the request instead. At that time, I never saw any of the 'you are running an ad blocker' redirects and I suspected there was some sort of code looking for a blocked or null response to an ad request, and my proxy returning a blank page instead fooled them. Good idea, I am going to try that at home this weekend and see how it works now.
Slashdot Mirror
Richard Dawkins wrote an excellent book talking about that very scenario and pointing out how the individual gene is the "actor" of evolution, not the group or tribe.
But if the person already has a working smart phone, what's the point? They are going to keep the smart phone charged anyway. And if they are out of cell phone range in this day and age paging them isn't likely to be of much value. By the time they run back down the mountain to use the phone in the small town pub the emergency is over since some doctor near the hospital with a smart phone already responded.
Isn't this a bit of a moot point when the person already has a smartphone that they reliably keep charged for a whole host of other reasons?
So what are all the other hospitals in the world using? I am assuming from the disproportionate use in the UK that pagers are not universally used in medical settings for some reason like you describe. People are dying left and right where doctor's don't use pagers? Or is there some other system in place?
Maybe because natural selection only favors variations which provide an advantage in reproductive success.
See also the Sleepless series of novels by Nancy Kress. A modification for one thing turns out to have a bunch of different enhancing side effects, leading eventually to a deep division between the "are" and "are nots"
How about instead of "right to repair" they just make restrictive covenants on consumer goods like this unenforceable? Let's get rid of the 'you are just licensing it' crap altogether.
This isn't about free speech, it is about whether advertisers should be able to target people with an interest in Nazism. It doesn't mention whether anyone ever used the category or what sort of ads were sent though. I think the idea is one could target pro-Nazi people and get them all riled up. Really just the PC mob in action, since nothing here indicates the target group was pro-Nazi as opposed to people with an historical interest.
More interesting, perhaps, is Facebook knew nothing about it and asked for their domains to be removed. At least that is what they said.
Not questioning the conclusion, I just wonder why the other animals living in the same environment don't show the same sort of adaptation. Perhaps other species have stronger pressures from other threats. Or maybe a favorable mutation in some proto-zebra.
perhaps they could do a one pager where Sun-Man says 'look I am more popular than you', and Buddha replies 'Is that so?', smiles, and goes back to Nirvana.
It's not quite so simple. From what I've seen in pen tests and attacks, fake network nodes are not effective. Attackers aren't blindly flailing around breaking into whatever host they find. They are following various bits of information which they find on each link in the chain. Either by examining domain structures, local documents on a workstations, and the like. At least you would have to add your honeypots to AD or other information sources so attackers would find them, then tune out all the noise from legitimate tools and processes which try to access your honeypots for network inventory, vulnerability scans, host management, etc. Deception as a defense strategy is not a bad idea, it just takes some thought to put it where attackers are likely to find it but legitimate process or curious users don't stumble across it. Meanwhile, AD and system admins are cautious about injecting anomalous data into their babies.
Some folks are using virtual infrastructure to place fake workstations around, so that attackers in the early 'get any Windows credential hash and see where it leads' can trip across them and set off alarms. This is aimed at tools like Responder and the like which try to get other nodes to send them an authentication exchange. One thing that should exist, and AFAIK does not, is a way to add well disguised fake credentials to the local Windows system, since that is usually the first place an attacker will look once they gain their foothold. Their are commercial tools which will do this, for a price, but no reliable way to make a convincing decoy on the cheap.
"Breakout time" refers to the time a hacker group takes from gaining initial access to a victim's computer to moving laterally through its network...The "breakout" metric is crucial for organizations, as this is the time they have to detect infections and isolate hacked computers before a simple intrusion turns into a compromise of its entire network.
Getting lateral movement is just one of the early steps in the chain, not the game over moment. Nor does it mean 'the entire network' is compromised. Attacker still has to locate what they need on the network and then get access to it, and then exfiltrate it (for stealing data) or break it. In other words, you still have a lot more than 20 minutes to detect and respond effectively.
Helpful tip for many: if you use Outlook at work, you can set up the junk mail filters to quarantine messages that aren't from you own domain or your contact list. Goodbye tons of marketing emails.
That aside, I have found that colleagues who do not answer relevant work related emails within a day or generally not worth working with. It is just basic time management. I recommend "Time Management for System Administrators" all the time
I understand the catch-22, but I recently decided I will avoid buying things directly from vendors and instead try to get them on Amazon. If I go vendor direct, I invariably get signed up for their chirp of the day email crap no matter how hard I look for opt-out tricks.
It's a lot cheaper to use rainbow tables which cracks in 14 seconds, as this article even states. While the technical aspects of how they did the cracking might be interesting, the security impact of this announcement is zero.
That's the definition of economic equilibrium, as used by economists, sure. But the states TFA and I described are also states of equilibrium.
That is called equilibrium, not collusion. There once was a similar state in the US with breakfast cereals for a while, until one of the participants decided to break the equilibrium and lower prices to try to gain market share.
Yes it is a gamble, by definition. Whether everything that is, by definition, gambling either should or was ever intended to be prohibited by law I leave up to individual judgement. I would suggest however, that to say so is pretty absurd.
You do come out ahead. Instead of losing the full ticket price you only lose the price of the insurance policy. There is nothing in the definition of gambling that requires a net gain from the point in time the bet is made.
I've been using them for years. my only complaint is they keep making the screen bigger which only reduces the usability.
I'm not sure where this article is coming from, Google already had a nice low end phone called the Moto-G, though Motorola was since sold off. So this isn't a new strategy of Google's in an attempt to take advantage of Apple's price mis-step.
Maybe the citizens of the state could get a refund on the multibillion dollar waste on high speed rail line project which was recently canceled.
China is becoming more and more repressive each year
That like saying global warming is a hoax due to a small recent downtick in an otherwise upward trend. China today is light years better than in the past, judging from the stories I hear from my in-laws and read for myself. That doesn't mean everything is fine
I've been wondering the same thing. I used to manage the proxy at work and I used it to block ads, with a twist. The proxy didn't return a 403 code for the ads, since that would clutter up the pages with ugly block messages. I had the proxy just return an empty HTML page for the request instead. At that time, I never saw any of the 'you are running an ad blocker' redirects and I suspected there was some sort of code looking for a blocked or null response to an ad request, and my proxy returning a blank page instead fooled them. Good idea, I am going to try that at home this weekend and see how it works now.
I've never used or needed NFC in China, not to pay for things (all QR based WeChat/AliPay) or for anything else.