I can't *install* anything on the lab machines in my university. I can however create a bash script and leave it running so long as it only uses commands which my account has permission to use. I don't have admin rights on those machines but I'm fairly sure I could write and run a script to do something like TFA described and leave it running in the background. That doesn't mean I've hacked the machines.
I doubt he had to elevate his privileges in order to do this.
Addendum- In a few countries there are official tolerances to account for possible inaccuracies in measurment devices although this is rare. What's more common is that in many places they simply don't go after people who are within a few mph of the limit, they're still breaking the law but it could be hard to convict as the accuracy of the equipment could potentially be disputed. (quick note- "Do you know how fast you were going in that 70 mph zone?" "Oh only 71 or 72 officer" will fuck you over well as you have now admitted guilt and unless the tolerance is written into law effectively making the real speed limit the marked speed + the tolerance they're going to convict you even if there is an unofficial tolerance of 3 or 4 mph as you've handed it to them on a silver platter.)
And to correct a statement above- some states treat speeding as a civil offense when very close to the limit to make it harder to challenge in court as the standard of proof is lower.
Ok now I know you're one of those fuckers who should never have been given a pass in their test. 15+ over the limit is not where it becomes illegal. Speeding is a criminal offence. Speeding is a criminal offence, and a conviction results in a criminal record. If asked you are obliged to disclose it, unless it is spent, although many companies - prospective employers for example - will often ask for details of convictions excluding minor traffic or speeding offences. If it's a 70mph zone you're breaking the law if you are going 71mph no matter how retarded you are. By the way the speedometers in cars are rarely completely accurate and can be off by 2 or 3 mph so unless you've tested your own speedometer it's only safe to stay 3 or 4 mph bellow the limit.
Get this through your skull. If you're overtaking and go 71 in a 70 zone you are speeding, you have broken the law and if caught and convicted you have a criminal record. You don't have to be zip-zaging from lane to lane although that itself can constitute dangerous driving even if you're within the speed limit. You don't have to cut into a gap that is barely a foot or so larger than your car to break the law.
Now on the other hand you have no obligation to be polite. Those fuckers who insist on driving at the speed limit when you want to go 10mph faster(not 15 though since you seem to think that's the limit) are not breaking the law by doing so. At all.
"I was driving in the left hand lane" is not a defence. "I was only doing 75 in a 70 zone" is not a defence, in fact it's an admission of guilt.
What some guy told you in the pub is not the law.
They need to tighten the driving test down and make sure chumps like you aren't allowed on the road until you have a fucking clue what's illegal and what's not.
random guess- you like to drive fast and after even a minute or 2 of being forced to drive behind something traveling slower than you'd like to go you start to grind your teeth, grip the steering wheel tighter and start acting like an aggressive asshole.
Machine marking is more likely to avoid lawsuits. It's hard to make sure that humans don't mark down an SA because they believe for one reason or another that the writer is black, gay, jewish etc etc etc but a machine doesn't have the same problem unless a coder on the project works hard to make it so.
Ok so they stop you at the border with what is most certainly encrypted data or a key. it makes literally no difference, either could be viewed as the key to the other. If they're the suspicious type they arrest you, while you're in custody they raid your house since you obviously have something to hide and find the data.
it isn't enough for it to be unbreakable or even just deniable like truecrypt. It also has to be pretty much undetectable.
So how about this: you cross the border with a large photo album on your hard drive. Every photo is harmless, nothing but landscapes and puppies. But encoded in the least significant bit of each pixel of each photo is a hidden volume, lets say a truecrypt volume. To open that you need a password which is locked away in your head to open and access the hidden plans for your death ray, gang accounts or etc.
That defeats the problems above as we have stenography, deniability and security. No way in hell would you be caught.
When you're trying to sell a buisness or even encourage investment you're going to get asked "what are you doing that someone else couldn't do with a few months work? What do you have that's unique? Do you own the IP your buisness runs on?" and the last thing, the very very last thing you want to say is "It's pretty simple, anyone who knew what they were doing could do it, actually it's all based on this open source code and we don't own the IP"
I thought it was a pretty awesome AI, we just need to make sure that when we build it we don't give it an ancient document written by revolutionaries and rather have programmers write it some "no murdering your admins" rules
The point is that idiots always like to call it theft when it is a completely different offense. Or when some kid steals from my store should I call it rape when talking about it. If someone punches me should I refer to him as a murderer.
People who accept free copies of copyrighted works without permission of the copyright holder are freeloaders not thieves. People who steal from a shop, depriving the owner of their goods are thieves, not rapists. People who distribute copies of copyrighted works without permission of the copyright holder are infringing copyright law, they are not war criminals.
Anything else is just trying to distort the issue. Call them what they are- freeloaders. As they are not thieves.
Ah yes I see now. You're being discriminated against by the weak, the needy, the helpless and women who wear short skirts and so you want an open licence to fuck them up whenever you want and keep them in their place.
wow, people really think "personal responsibility" covers getting stolen from, getting the shit beaten out of you by nutjobs and getting raped and that by not preventing those things you're not living up to your responsibilities. unfortunatly life is not a jackie chan movie. In real life that 300 pound lummox more than likely has some skill at fighting himself.
but no. It's the fault of the weak for being weak, and the fault of women who was raped for being sexy and not being able to subdue someone who has 200 pounds on her.
Personally I'm a strong enough guy that I rarely had any trouble but your attitude is the most moronic thing I've ever seen.
if it gives no advantage or even a tiny disadvantage because your body is expending energy on a defence against something which hasn't been encountered in generations then it will become less common in the population.
Anyone want to help out with a back of the envelope calculation on how expensive this might be?
costs:
1: Perhaps an old oil tanker or other suitably large vessel. 2: Cost of fitting it with some kind of large collapseable/retractable scoop mechanism to draw the material in towards the intake. 3: cost of crew 4: cost of processing the material gathered into a form suitable for dropping into a furnace, a recycling plant or whatever suits.
Income: 1: Sale of material or products. 2: Grants and subsidies(if you can find a government willing to give you some funding)
I imagine the densities out there would have a big effect, if you'd have to make many passes through the dense areas to fill up your tanker then it would be a no go, if you could fill up on a few runs then it would mean faster turnaround etc. Scoop size and how much useless crap turns up in your intake would also affect it.
How many staff and how complex would your machinery have to be?
I guess the most important question is:
Is there anyone willing to pay cash money for massive volumes of unsorted soggy salty bottle caps, bird feathers, wood, used condoms and other random crap.
I imagine no since I don't see anyone digging up the landfills....
Fines keep people from littering, and because the benefit is great and the cost is tiny nobody complains to have the fines repealed.
Wait so you say this in the middle of something that can be summed up as "lets not bother doing this on a grander scale" It's never going to work 100% of the time but requiring an incinerator in the US to filter out the worst crap does not mean that another one opens in the 3rd world. it might if you set restrictions which are too costly but that's where negotiation comes in.
Imagine watching a petri dish full of bacteria which are slowly secreting toxins into their environment until they kill themselves. Now imagine that they're all sentient rational actors which know what they're doing and could stop but won't because trying is hard.
"23 year olds shouldn't be fucking 15 year olds." what people mean when they say this is that they want to have that bad influence punk their daughter is dating locked up. they don't even think of the developmentally disabled 23 year old girl being taken advantage of by a 15 year old scumbag.
in a moral crusade any amount of collateral damage is acceptable
And no, I'm not talking about 17yo fucking his 16 year old neighbor over the summer, because they are bored. I'm talking about the TRUE perverts who are predators, the 23 year old trolling High Schools. The 40 year old man with a pocket of candy. The crazy psycho teacher chick who is doing her 12 year old student.
And you know what? Odds are that none of these people are after your kid.
Think of some close family members, your brother, sister, father, mother or good friends. Odds are that if there's anyone sexually abusing your kids it's one of them. Not some creepy guy trolling the highschool, not some old guy with candy, not some predatory teacher. It's the people you trust, the people close to you and your family who are most likely to hurt your children.
as for the "when is it creepy" I live by the 6 year rule:-D f(x)=x/2+6. Might functions make for better definitions of when it's creepy? Why not even have a sliding scale of punishments?
15-17? f(17)=14.5 fine.
15-18 f(18)=15 right on the line but still within limits
15-19 getting creepy, misdemenour perhaps
15-20 max sentence 1 year
15-21 max sentence 3 year
15-22 max sentence 5 year
etc
at least with this the border cases wouldn't be hit too hard and the more creepy the higher the possible penalty.
But to most politicians functions are some weird idea and so we have lines where there should be gradients like this:
15-17 - fine 15-18 - 20 years in pound you in the ass prison + lifetime on the register + etc
it'd probably knock a lot of oldies off the roads due to them being incompetent to drive with their slower reaction and thus it would get challenged as discriminatory.
Another fucked up consequence of those registers is that it reinforces the idea that strangers are the threat. And so the concerned parents leave little suzy with oh so familiar uncle Mcbuggery while they go out to lynch anyone who's name sounds a little bit like that of someone on the register.
Strangers aren't the danger, it's friends and family who are most likely to rape your kids.
Slashdot Mirror
I can't *install* anything on the lab machines in my university.
I can however create a bash script and leave it running so long as it only uses commands which my account has permission to use.
I don't have admin rights on those machines but I'm fairly sure I could write and run a script to do something like TFA described and leave it running in the background.
That doesn't mean I've hacked the machines.
I doubt he had to elevate his privileges in order to do this.
Addendum-
In a few countries there are official tolerances to account for possible inaccuracies in measurment devices although this is rare.
What's more common is that in many places they simply don't go after people who are within a few mph of the limit, they're still breaking the law but it could be hard to convict as the accuracy of the equipment could potentially be disputed. (quick note- "Do you know how fast you were going in that 70 mph zone?" "Oh only 71 or 72 officer" will fuck you over well as you have now admitted guilt and unless the tolerance is written into law effectively making the real speed limit the marked speed + the tolerance they're going to convict you even if there is an unofficial tolerance of 3 or 4 mph as you've handed it to them on a silver platter.)
And to correct a statement above- some states treat speeding as a civil offense when very close to the limit to make it harder to challenge in court as the standard of proof is lower.
Ok now I know you're one of those fuckers who should never have been given a pass in their test.
15+ over the limit is not where it becomes illegal.
Speeding is a criminal offence.
Speeding is a criminal offence, and a conviction results in a criminal record. If asked you are obliged to disclose it, unless it is spent, although many companies - prospective employers for example - will often ask for details of convictions excluding minor traffic or speeding offences.
If it's a 70mph zone you're breaking the law if you are going 71mph no matter how retarded you are.
By the way the speedometers in cars are rarely completely accurate and can be off by 2 or 3 mph so unless you've tested your own speedometer it's only safe to stay 3 or 4 mph bellow the limit.
Get this through your skull. If you're overtaking and go 71 in a 70 zone you are speeding, you have broken the law and if caught and convicted you have a criminal record.
You don't have to be zip-zaging from lane to lane although that itself can constitute dangerous driving even if you're within the speed limit.
You don't have to cut into a gap that is barely a foot or so larger than your car to break the law.
Now on the other hand you have no obligation to be polite.
Those fuckers who insist on driving at the speed limit when you want to go 10mph faster(not 15 though since you seem to think that's the limit) are not breaking the law by doing so. At all.
"I was driving in the left hand lane" is not a defence.
"I was only doing 75 in a 70 zone" is not a defence, in fact it's an admission of guilt.
What some guy told you in the pub is not the law.
They need to tighten the driving test down and make sure chumps like you aren't allowed on the road until you have a fucking clue what's illegal and what's not.
fair enough but while that is a solvable technical problem the problem with the humans who marked your training data an mark actual exams isn't.
random guess- you like to drive fast and after even a minute or 2 of being forced to drive behind something traveling slower than you'd like to go you start to grind your teeth, grip the steering wheel tighter and start acting like an aggressive asshole.
Machine marking is more likely to avoid lawsuits.
It's hard to make sure that humans don't mark down an SA because they believe for one reason or another that the writer is black, gay, jewish etc etc etc but a machine doesn't have the same problem unless a coder on the project works hard to make it so.
Ok so they stop you at the border with what is most certainly encrypted data or a key. it makes literally no difference, either could be viewed as the key to the other.
If they're the suspicious type they arrest you, while you're in custody they raid your house since you obviously have something to hide and find the data.
it isn't enough for it to be unbreakable or even just deniable like truecrypt.
It also has to be pretty much undetectable.
So how about this: you cross the border with a large photo album on your hard drive. Every photo is harmless, nothing but landscapes and puppies.
But encoded in the least significant bit of each pixel of each photo is a hidden volume, lets say a truecrypt volume.
To open that you need a password which is locked away in your head to open and access the hidden plans for your death ray, gang accounts or etc.
That defeats the problems above as we have stenography, deniability and security.
No way in hell would you be caught.
very true.
When you're trying to sell a buisness or even encourage investment you're going to get asked "what are you doing that someone else couldn't do with a few months work? What do you have that's unique? Do you own the IP your buisness runs on?" and the last thing, the very very last thing you want to say is "It's pretty simple, anyone who knew what they were doing could do it, actually it's all based on this open source code and we don't own the IP"
I thought it was a pretty awesome AI, we just need to make sure that when we build it we don't give it an ancient document written by revolutionaries and rather have programmers write it some "no murdering your admins" rules
The point is that idiots always like to call it theft when it is a completely different offense.
Or when some kid steals from my store should I call it rape when talking about it.
If someone punches me should I refer to him as a murderer.
People who accept free copies of copyrighted works without permission of the copyright holder are freeloaders not thieves.
People who steal from a shop, depriving the owner of their goods are thieves, not rapists.
People who distribute copies of copyrighted works without permission of the copyright holder are infringing copyright law, they are not war criminals.
Anything else is just trying to distort the issue.
Call them what they are- freeloaders.
As they are not thieves.
Any chance you'd be willing to link the article?
I feel like adding some [citation needed] tags to something.
Ah yes I see now.
You're being discriminated against by the weak, the needy, the helpless and women who wear short skirts and so you want an open licence to fuck them up whenever you want and keep them in their place.
Sounds real reasonable.
wow, people really think "personal responsibility" covers getting stolen from, getting the shit beaten out of you by nutjobs and getting raped and that by not preventing those things you're not living up to your responsibilities.
unfortunatly life is not a jackie chan movie.
In real life that 300 pound lummox more than likely has some skill at fighting himself.
but no.
It's the fault of the weak for being weak, and the fault of women who was raped for being sexy and not being able to subdue someone who has 200 pounds on her.
Personally I'm a strong enough guy that I rarely had any trouble but your attitude is the most moronic thing I've ever seen.
unfortunately in the real world having everyone armed doesn't play out like that.
guy 1 is 6'10'' and looks like this:
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_YGLQQZTHoU0/R--tYCHQNGI/AAAAAAAABy0/i-suLNPSqRY/s400/skinhead.jpg
Guy 2 is 4'11' and looks like this:
http://savvygeek.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/026_lucky_nerd.jpg
Guy 1:
GIMME 5 FUCKING BUCKS!
Guy 2:
*Quivering in terror, paralised with fear*BBB... *hands over 5 dollars with a hand shaking like a leaf*
so if you download it from a country where it's legal are you guilty of importing it?
Guy 1: Hey, Dude, can I have $5? ...(passed out drunk)
Guy 2:
Guy 1: Thanks mate! *takes 5 bucks from Guy 1's wallet*
I don't see a "no". I don't see any resistance. Would it be wildly unfair to call that theft? No.
if it gives no advantage or even a tiny disadvantage because your body is expending energy on a defence against something which hasn't been encountered in generations then it will become less common in the population.
don't forget objectionable thoughts, lobotomies for all!
Anyone want to help out with a back of the envelope calculation on how expensive this might be?
costs:
1:
Perhaps an old oil tanker or other suitably large vessel.
2:
Cost of fitting it with some kind of large collapseable/retractable scoop mechanism to draw the material in towards the intake.
3:
cost of crew
4:
cost of processing the material gathered into a form suitable for dropping into a furnace, a recycling plant or whatever suits.
Income:
1:
Sale of material or products.
2:
Grants and subsidies(if you can find a government willing to give you some funding)
I imagine the densities out there would have a big effect, if you'd have to make many passes through the dense areas to fill up your tanker then it would be a no go, if you could fill up on a few runs then it would mean faster turnaround etc.
Scoop size and how much useless crap turns up in your intake would also affect it.
How many staff and how complex would your machinery have to be?
I guess the most important question is:
Is there anyone willing to pay cash money for massive volumes of unsorted soggy salty bottle caps, bird feathers, wood, used condoms and other random crap.
I imagine no since I don't see anyone digging up the landfills....
Fines keep people from littering, and because the benefit is great and the cost is tiny nobody complains to have the fines repealed.
Wait so you say this in the middle of something that can be summed up as "lets not bother doing this on a grander scale"
It's never going to work 100% of the time but requiring an incinerator in the US to filter out the worst crap does not mean that another one opens in the 3rd world. it might if you set restrictions which are too costly but that's where negotiation comes in.
Imagine watching a petri dish full of bacteria which are slowly secreting toxins into their environment until they kill themselves.
Now imagine that they're all sentient rational actors which know what they're doing and could stop but won't because trying is hard.
"23 year olds shouldn't be fucking 15 year olds."
what people mean when they say this is that they want to have that bad influence punk their daughter is dating locked up.
they don't even think of the developmentally disabled 23 year old girl being taken advantage of by a 15 year old scumbag.
in a moral crusade any amount of collateral damage is acceptable
And no, I'm not talking about 17yo fucking his 16 year old neighbor over the summer, because they are bored. I'm talking about the TRUE perverts who are predators, the 23 year old trolling High Schools. The 40 year old man with a pocket of candy. The crazy psycho teacher chick who is doing her 12 year old student.
And you know what?
Odds are that none of these people are after your kid.
Think of some close family members, your brother, sister, father, mother or good friends.
Odds are that if there's anyone sexually abusing your kids it's one of them.
Not some creepy guy trolling the highschool, not some old guy with candy, not some predatory teacher.
It's the people you trust, the people close to you and your family who are most likely to hurt your children.
as for the "when is it creepy" I live by the 6 year rule :-D f(x)=x/2+6.
Might functions make for better definitions of when it's creepy?
Why not even have a sliding scale of punishments?
15-17?
f(17)=14.5
fine.
15-18
f(18)=15
right on the line but still within limits
15-19
getting creepy, misdemenour perhaps
15-20
max sentence 1 year
15-21
max sentence 3 year
15-22
max sentence 5 year
etc
at least with this the border cases wouldn't be hit too hard and the more creepy the higher the possible penalty.
But to most politicians functions are some weird idea and so we have lines where there should be gradients like this:
15-17 - fine
15-18 - 20 years in pound you in the ass prison + lifetime on the register + etc
it'd probably knock a lot of oldies off the roads due to them being incompetent to drive with their slower reaction and thus it would get challenged as discriminatory.
Another fucked up consequence of those registers is that it reinforces the idea that strangers are the threat.
And so the concerned parents leave little suzy with oh so familiar uncle Mcbuggery while they go out to lynch anyone who's name sounds a little bit like that of someone on the register.
Strangers aren't the danger, it's friends and family who are most likely to rape your kids.