... rpi kubernetes cluster for a few hundred bucks. You can run hadoop or spark or hbase or mesos on a cloud provider. Learn ansible, prometheus, go, python or loads of other things in your browser. You can show off your skills outside your job on github or bitbucket...
100% buzzword compliant. You list products that are 2 years old.
Which brings up the old joke about HR looking for someone with 10 years experience in X which has only been out for 5 years.
Yes, you can PLAY with all of those for very little money but you won't KNOW all of those. You will be a dilettante. And swapping out existing tools for whatever was released 2 years ago is a recipe for disaster.
No, there is nothing about you or your skills that is so unique that you cannot be replaced.
And if your severance package depends upon you teaching your replacement how to do your job (see Disney), you are even easier to replace.
I have skills that are useful and hard to find.
They may be useful, but they are not hard to find.
And yeah, I get that sucks. But the solution is to learn more skills so you can get the first type of job.
Unless you personally are working for Google or Facebook that kind of invalidates your position. You aren't so rare that Google is fighting to get you.
Look up "confirmation bias". You think that because your decisions have resulted in your position that anyone who has not achieved that position has made incorrect decisions. The reality is that when a company wants to cut their IT costs to save money, your skills will have nothing to do with their decision.
That's why it's "heart breaking" but she won't do anything about it.
Sure, some people suffer...
But corporations make bigger profits and spend money on lobbying and campaign contributions and put the friends and family of politicians on their boards.
So don't expect any change from her. You have to fight for it at the state level.
1. Any company TRYING to write code with the intention of killing/injuring the user will be sued out of existence.
2. Whichever executive ordered the techs to write such code would never work again.
3. Even if you allow a theoretical situation that bypasses #1 & #2, complex software is very difficult to write. The company (and executive and coders) would be sued out of existence when the car killed/injured the passenger to avoid running over a box of toy dolls.
And yet we keep seeing this bullshit on/. People here are supposed to be more informed on the topics of AI and robotics and programming than the average. But here we are, again.
The worse issue is that her server wasn't setup with a certificate. So no startTLS option.
So all the emails she sent to it were sent IN THE CLEAR.
So yeah, it seems like idiots all around this issue. None of them understood email or security or anything more than click-here-to-make-blackberry-work.
It's 2016. We know how to make backups. And databases compress nicely so the backup won't take anywhere near as much space as the original.
We'll see... but I'm willing to bet that there won't be ANY higher officers fired for this. Even though it means that some IG investigations/reports are now lost. Unless that is a feature that they wanted.
And whatever constitutes "teeming with aliens". Is that 10 planets per galaxy? 100? 1,000?
And the time involved. How long ago did life start on Earth? How many mass extinctions have there been? Would ANY of those have been detected by aliens on their home planet using technology equivalent to ours?
The Fermi "paradox" is based upon alien expansion. Which is, in turn, based upon tech advances that we don't have.
The galaxy could be "teeming with aliens" that we cannot detect and that we cannot reach with our technology. Nor can they detect us or reach us.
Netflix gets the username/password list AFTER the bad guys have put it up for sale. What other bad guys have also purchased it? What other sites have you used that password on?
Running widespread password lists against your own password database is a good security practice and you are indeed helping your users much more than trying to enforce a stupid password policy.
Not really. The users will just keep modifying their passwords until they pass your checks. Then they'll have a "good" password that they'll re-use on multiple sites.
It all comes down to how the password will be cracked by the bad guys. That's why re-use is the main concern. Because that means that the bad guys only need to try ONE password for your account on other sites.
And they've scripted those attacks. They can hit thousands of sites in seconds once they have your re-used password.
That's why more secure systems use things like the RSA key fobs. So that your password CANNOT be re-used.
And if they would stop and THINK for a moment they'd understand WHY.
The person willing to sell the weapon IN VIOLATION OF MANY FEDERAL LAWS (in the USofA) understands that he will... probably... be selling to someone LESS inclined to break those laws.
So WHY would the seller be inclined to take that risk for $800? Does he plan to make enough profit in volume? Repeat customers? Or does he just like the idea of spending time in prison?
This reads like "journalists" who spend too much time watching TV and movies.
Sure, but it is unlikely we will ever make contact with life outside our own galaxy.
It is also unlikely that we'll ever make contact with another intelligence in our own galaxy. It is 100,000 light years across.
Then comes the issues of whether: 1. They'd have died out before they could reach us. 2. We die out before they've gotten past the "bang the rocks together" stage.
So many things have to happen in just the right order at just the right time. Look at our evolution for an example (the only one we have).
I guess the question now is whether Trump will be willing to tone down the rhetoric, make some comprehensive, real-world arguments on important stuff like foreign policy, and basically be more presidential.
Or go the opposite route.
Imagine their first debate. Clinton makes a statement. Trump's rebuttal is that he pulls some pages out of his pocket and starts reading, what he claims, is one of her speeches to Wall Street.
It wouldn't even matter if it was real or something his people found on the Internet. Although he could spend enough to get a copy of a real speech from her.
The news would be 100% about that for the next week. And for the week leading into their second debate.
Trump understands that the "coverage" from the media is not about the real issues. It's about bigger and better circuses.
The voters (99.99% of them) couldn't name 3 cities in Syria or Libya without a map. They have no idea what political leaders are in which countries and what those leaders' issues are.
We need plumbers TODAY because the places we have plumbing were not designed to be serviced by robots.
In your peanut butter example, I'm sure they didn't just replace each human worker with a robot doing an identical task.
They probably re-built the facility so that the machines could handle the job in a way best suited to the machines.
The real issue won't be the magical A.I.s taking all our jobs. It will be when the INFRASTRUCTURE starts to be re-built so that machines can service it.
I agree. Machines are good at tasks which have repeatable actions in a defined space.
Your plumber still needs to know a LOT about plumbing (or you end up with a lot of water leaking). But machines are not good at working in the varied spaces that existing plumbing exists in.
In order for a machine to replace a plumber, the machine would have to be able to learn the work area, interact with the customer to determine his/her goals AND be able to manoeuvre in the work area.
And THAT is the problem with these "predictions" by random people. They postulate a future but they don't explain all the technological advances necessary to get there.
Because they don't know all of the requirements or how those requirements can be automated.
A magic A.I. will figure it out. Just need the magic A.I. and then... well... magic happens. And it's A.I.
Let's start with their name: The Center for Long-Term Cybersecurity.
whatever
Next, click on the link to go to a page that is, essentially, the summary posted here. Click on a link there to go to a page with summaries of the scenarios. Click on each one of those...
whatever
The scenarios:
1. The new normal - postulates that there is NOTHING you can do to stop crackers anywhere in the world from cracking your systems.
2. Omega - remember Isaac Asimov's "Hari Seldon" and "psychohistory"? Well this postulates exactly that but at an individual level. Each PERSON'S behaviour can be modelled and predicted.
3. Bubble 2.0 - advertising companies go bankrupt and criminals buy their data sets. Because their data is always so accurate.
4. Intentional Internet of Things - networked water meters and Internet connected fridges lead to a Utopia. But crackers seek to exploit the massive number of Things connected in your house.
5. Sensorium - your fitbit tells you (and the Internet) how far you've walked and how happy/sad you are. Crackers hack your hormones and endorphins.
whatever whatever whatever whatever whatever
I don't think "worst-case" means what they think it means. O "nightmares". Or "security".
Slashdot Mirror
100% buzzword compliant. You list products that are 2 years old.
Which brings up the old joke about HR looking for someone with 10 years experience in X which has only been out for 5 years.
Yes, you can PLAY with all of those for very little money but you won't KNOW all of those. You will be a dilettante. And swapping out existing tools for whatever was released 2 years ago is a recipe for disaster.
No, there is nothing about you or your skills that is so unique that you cannot be replaced.
And if your severance package depends upon you teaching your replacement how to do your job (see Disney), you are even easier to replace.
They may be useful, but they are not hard to find.
Unless you personally are working for Google or Facebook that kind of invalidates your position. You aren't so rare that Google is fighting to get you.
Look up "confirmation bias". You think that because your decisions have resulted in your position that anyone who has not achieved that position has made incorrect decisions. The reality is that when a company wants to cut their IT costs to save money, your skills will have nothing to do with their decision.
That's why it's "heart breaking" but she won't do anything about it.
Sure, some people suffer ...
But corporations make bigger profits and spend money on lobbying and campaign contributions and put the friends and family of politicians on their boards.
So don't expect any change from her. You have to fight for it at the state level.
1. Any company TRYING to write code with the intention of killing/injuring the user will be sued out of existence.
2. Whichever executive ordered the techs to write such code would never work again.
3. Even if you allow a theoretical situation that bypasses #1 & #2, complex software is very difficult to write. The company (and executive and coders) would be sued out of existence when the car killed/injured the passenger to avoid running over a box of toy dolls.
And yet we keep seeing this bullshit on /. People here are supposed to be more informed on the topics of AI and robotics and programming than the average. But here we are, again.
The worse issue is that her server wasn't setup with a certificate. So no startTLS option.
So all the emails she sent to it were sent IN THE CLEAR.
So yeah, it seems like idiots all around this issue. None of them understood email or security or anything more than click-here-to-make-blackberry-work.
Particularly because the majority of terrorist attacks in the USofA have been carried out by US citizens WHO WERE BORN IN THE USofA.
If you want to look at foreigners, those terrorists come here on tourism visas and such.
Very few immigrants commit any terrorist acts in the USofA.
He is responsible UNLESS the "victim" volunteered to be a victim. If the victim volunteers then the victim is responsible.
This isn't even a "robot".
That's my problem with this story.
It's 2016. We know how to make backups. And databases compress nicely so the backup won't take anywhere near as much space as the original.
We'll see ... but I'm willing to bet that there won't be ANY higher officers fired for this. Even though it means that some IG investigations/reports are now lost. Unless that is a feature that they wanted.
Yep, it's the distance.
And whatever constitutes "teeming with aliens". Is that 10 planets per galaxy? 100? 1,000?
And the time involved. How long ago did life start on Earth? How many mass extinctions have there been? Would ANY of those have been detected by aliens on their home planet using technology equivalent to ours?
The Fermi "paradox" is based upon alien expansion. Which is, in turn, based upon tech advances that we don't have.
The galaxy could be "teeming with aliens" that we cannot detect and that we cannot reach with our technology. Nor can they detect us or reach us.
Not exactly "security done the right way".
This is mitigation.
Netflix gets the username/password list AFTER the bad guys have put it up for sale. What other bad guys have also purchased it? What other sites have you used that password on?
Not really. The users will just keep modifying their passwords until they pass your checks. Then they'll have a "good" password that they'll re-use on multiple sites.
It all comes down to how the password will be cracked by the bad guys. That's why re-use is the main concern. Because that means that the bad guys only need to try ONE password for your account on other sites.
And they've scripted those attacks. They can hit thousands of sites in seconds once they have your re-used password.
That's why more secure systems use things like the RSA key fobs. So that your password CANNOT be re-used.
Yeah, it matters. Unless you really are using a hash function you probably aren't as unique as you believe.
Remember, the crackers have hundreds of millions of passwords to dig through to find patterns.
Check haveibeenpwned.com to see if your email address has already been compromised. And if so, at how many sites.
#1. But I can't remember all those passwords.
- use a password manager
#2. But I like the formula I use. It's my name + the website name.
- no. Just use a password manager
#3. How will I know that my password isn't in a dictionary list?
- use a password manager and have it generate random passwords
#4. But I cannot remember long passwords.
- use a password manager
Also, "ieatkale88" can now be cracked in the same number of tries as "iloveyou" or "pAsswOrd" because they are now all added to common dictionaries.
Once you publish your "secure" password someone will add it to a dictionary.
http://arstechnica.com/security/2016/06/how-linkedins-password-sloppiness-hurts-us-all/
#1. No password re-use. Ever.
#2. Not formulaic.
#3. Not in a dictionary list.
#4. Long. I prefer 32 characters long.
No. Voice recognition is voice recognition. As with my "whether" / "weather" example.
Intelligence can distinguish between the two based upon context.
Siri cannot.
And using Siri as a demonstration of AI is stupid. :)
Siri is voice recognition + standardized queries. I'm in Seattle and I say "whether" to Siri. The reply is the current weather report.
So, of course people aren't going to trust AI yet. Because AI isn't here yet.
And if they would stop and THINK for a moment they'd understand WHY.
The person willing to sell the weapon IN VIOLATION OF MANY FEDERAL LAWS (in the USofA) understands that he will ... probably ... be selling to someone LESS inclined to break those laws.
So WHY would the seller be inclined to take that risk for $800? Does he plan to make enough profit in volume? Repeat customers? Or does he just like the idea of spending time in prison?
This reads like "journalists" who spend too much time watching TV and movies.
Pretty much.
Unless the attack can be summarized as "used a previously unknown 0-day exploit" then what they're really saying is "got past our defenses".
"Sophisticated" merely means "knows more than than our person responsible for defenses".
And I'm sure that many of you have seen some rather ... unintelligent ... security decisions made.
It is also unlikely that we'll ever make contact with another intelligence in our own galaxy. It is 100,000 light years across.
Then comes the issues of whether:
1. They'd have died out before they could reach us.
2. We die out before they've gotten past the "bang the rocks together" stage.
So many things have to happen in just the right order at just the right time. Look at our evolution for an example (the only one we have).
But the UNIVERSE is huge. With billions of galaxies. And each galaxy has billions of star systems.
The question isn't whether we are the only planet where life evolved.
The question is whether any other life will ever be able to contact us.
The universe could have a million planets with intelligent life. And not one of them within a million light years of another.
Or go the opposite route.
Imagine their first debate. Clinton makes a statement. Trump's rebuttal is that he pulls some pages out of his pocket and starts reading, what he claims, is one of her speeches to Wall Street.
It wouldn't even matter if it was real or something his people found on the Internet. Although he could spend enough to get a copy of a real speech from her.
The news would be 100% about that for the next week. And for the week leading into their second debate.
Trump understands that the "coverage" from the media is not about the real issues. It's about bigger and better circuses.
The voters (99.99% of them) couldn't name 3 cities in Syria or Libya without a map. They have no idea what political leaders are in which countries and what those leaders' issues are.
Yeah. Not much of a "warning". More of an "advertisement".
We need plumbers TODAY because the places we have plumbing were not designed to be serviced by robots.
In your peanut butter example, I'm sure they didn't just replace each human worker with a robot doing an identical task.
They probably re-built the facility so that the machines could handle the job in a way best suited to the machines.
The real issue won't be the magical A.I.s taking all our jobs. It will be when the INFRASTRUCTURE starts to be re-built so that machines can service it.
I agree. Machines are good at tasks which have repeatable actions in a defined space.
Your plumber still needs to know a LOT about plumbing (or you end up with a lot of water leaking). But machines are not good at working in the varied spaces that existing plumbing exists in.
In order for a machine to replace a plumber, the machine would have to be able to learn the work area, interact with the customer to determine his/her goals AND be able to manoeuvre in the work area.
And THAT is the problem with these "predictions" by random people. They postulate a future but they don't explain all the technological advances necessary to get there.
Because they don't know all of the requirements or how those requirements can be automated.
A magic A.I. will figure it out. Just need the magic A.I. and then ... well ... magic happens. And it's A.I.
Let's start with their name:
The Center for Long-Term Cybersecurity.
whatever
Next, click on the link to go to a page that is, essentially, the summary posted here. Click on a link there to go to a page with summaries of the scenarios. Click on each one of those ...
whatever
The scenarios:
1. The new normal - postulates that there is NOTHING you can do to stop crackers anywhere in the world from cracking your systems.
2. Omega - remember Isaac Asimov's "Hari Seldon" and "psychohistory"? Well this postulates exactly that but at an individual level. Each PERSON'S behaviour can be modelled and predicted.
3. Bubble 2.0 - advertising companies go bankrupt and criminals buy their data sets. Because their data is always so accurate.
4. Intentional Internet of Things - networked water meters and Internet connected fridges lead to a Utopia. But crackers seek to exploit the massive number of Things connected in your house.
5. Sensorium - your fitbit tells you (and the Internet) how far you've walked and how happy/sad you are. Crackers hack your hormones and endorphins.
whatever whatever whatever whatever whatever
I don't think "worst-case" means what they think it means. O "nightmares". Or "security".
And now go a step further.
Suppose you were treated for depression years ago. So now you're on The List.
What is there to stop employers from using that list for "background checks" on potential employees?
Now you are also unemployable.
And yes, The List WOULD be abused in exactly that fashion.