Straight to it then. The similarity measure this researcher used has not been shown to be what humans use when they, for instance, falsely identify someone in court or mistake two people on clear video.
The similarity measure she used is designed to detect the differences between very specific and quantifiable points on the human face (interpupilary distance for instance). These landmarks are (largely) immutable over time and anyway amenable to analysis by computers scanning hi-res images.
However, these quantifiable landmarks have not been shown to be the same as the features humans use to distinguish two faces. It's not just likely, but 100% certain, that two faces which are virtually indistinguishable to humans - "my god, it's the same person!" - would be clearly distinguishable to a computer.
At least in this context, ourb cultures definition of doppleganger is up for grabs. Is it two faces so similar that they look the same to humans - a low and easily met criteria - or is it two faces so similar that a computer cannot tell them apart.
There is a real moral issue at stake here and that is what shall we let pass into general consensus regarding this new concept of facial "doppleganger"? Because if it comes be an accepted fact, thanks to this study or others like it, that dopplegangers don't exist then that has consequences. For instance, it is much more likely that false eye-witness identification will be accepted by prosecutors asnd juries and much harder to claim misidentification .
That's why I say the characterization of this study is misleading. In fact, I'll go further and say this Guardian (sorry, rag) headline downright dangerous.
Numerically, we have dopplegangers in exactly the number of people whose faces are practically indistinguishable to our own- as judged by other people. We know for a fact they exist, and they probably for exist everyone.
It's even more complex than that, since the judger is very heavily influenced by their familiarity with the race of the judged. How many Chinese of Japanese or Korean faces would the average caucausian confuse with each other even with a sincere, best effort in the best of circumstances ?
Of course, it works the other way also. One of the complaints of the father of a friend of mine who is first generation American and of Middle Eastern descent is all Americans men look exactly the same to him. It's amusing when you're the target of such confusion, like a parlor trick in reverse: "Wow, you can't do that. Are you serious? "
When I was 16 a friend of mine from another town insisted that I looked, talked and walked EXACTLY like a friend of hers. Of course I had to meet that person and, even by my own standards, it was shockingly true. I had the thought at the time that I hoped he was well behaved or at the very least, inclined to lawfulness.
We are very easily fooled depending on the context and we are fooled even outside of any judgement compromising context:
Future direction for reaseachers could productively include:
Just how different can two faces become before humans finally pick up on the it?
How do the landmarks used in this study relate - or not- to the features humans use when recognizing faces?
How do computers fare when using only those landmarks which humans use?
There are people, maybe a lot of them, that look exactly like you. They are your "dopplegangers". It would take a computer to tell you apart. You should hope they are well-behaved.
There are even more, perhaps multitudes, that are very very very similar. It's mostly an entertaining fact, but in some contexts, someone's life and freedom may hang in the balance.
I'ts not a coincidence that ISL and Nazi Germany and North Korea and SJWs and all the goddamn petrol-dictatorships in the Middle East BAN SPEECH in JUST they way you want to.
Wake the fuck up and catch up to the 21st century. Free speech is the best known cure to abusive regimes and policies. Why do you think every time you turn around some fascist government or fascist social movement is trying to clamp their hand around somene else's mouth?
Why do you think that is? Because their ideas about How Other People Should Live are vigorously reasoned and empirically sound that they can endure an unflinching examination by unsympathetic observers willing to level withering criticism?
Consider the hypotheticals which would be true if Tor were as secure as they say.
First, Tor would be knowingly aiding and abetting in the distribution and consumption of child pornography. They would be aware of this, but they would consider it the price you have to pay in order to keep people anonymous online.
Do you think that that is a realistic proposition?
Consider their recent actions against Jacob Applebaum.
This is a group of people who went after someone in full SJW witchhunt mode, which is to say it featured anonymous accusors making unsubstantiaABLE claims of a incindiary, sexual nature , a public appeal for more accusors to copycat them under the guise of "seeking more victims", and a Star Chamber style execution of the target.
And these are the exact same people who are going to aide and abet child pornographers - out of principle.
Then there's the people who are at the helm of Tor. For example, Sherri Steele (no Wikipedia entry!). Meet Sherri's husband:
"He is married to Shari Steele, former Executive Director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation,[5][6] currently Executive Director of the Tor Project.[7]
Prior to Liquid Robotics, he was the President and Chief Operating Officer of Sun Microsystems Federal (a Sun Microsystems subsidiary focusing on business with government organizations). He held numerous positions during his more than 10 years at Sun, including Vice-President of Corporate Software Services, Chief Security Officer for Sun IT, and Chief Information Officer (CIO). His background has a significant military and government presence, including a stint as an oversight CIO working underneath the Department of Defense's overall CIO. Before that, he was the Chief Technical Officer and Technical Lead for the U.S. Army's personnel systems.
I am sure he/she is onboard with the whole kiddie porn thing along with his employers.
Then there's the zombie issue of Who Funds Tor- the question that just won't die. What Tor says is it doesn't matter that the government holds the all the practical purse strings (yours and my donation is not keeping the Tor lights on) , the code is the code.
But the code is not the nodes, and let's face it, to maintain the number of servers needed to p0wn the Tor network would be less than the NSA spends on erasers in a month. It would be a rounding error. Think they spent that money? Just, do you?
If the FBI and the NSA are worth a shit, they now have people planted at every level of the Tor development project, people with the clout and numbers sufficient to make hire/ fire/ burn-at-the-stake decisions. That HAD to be a goal of theirs, right? Now do you think they're competent agencies? I sure do.
The reaility is, Tor works closely with the government ot catch badguys. JUST LIKE I WOULD, JUST LIKE YOU WOULD. Think about it. The government comes and says: "kiddie porn child sex trafficking terrorists etc etc etc we need to work together we promise we'll only nab these types promise promise promise" do you cooperate? Really, do you? I sure do and I understand the importance as much as anyone whose made a determined effort to hear all sides of the privacy-security debate and basically considers both extremes to represent mortal dangers to the Republic and civilization itself.
When you're in that position of having to side with one of two possible nightmare scenarios- a George Orwellian nightmare government which can never be vanquished or a terorist organization with, say an unstoppable lethal virus or other civilization-destroying WMD and a guarantee of kiddie porn rings harming real kids, which do you choose, because you HAVE to choose ?
I'll tell you who you choose.
You choose the government because you tell yourself, not untruthfully, that even in a worse case scenario, it's still an error civilization
Let's just be clear on what happened here. A library used to defend against malware itself has a zero-day which is targetable by malware. This from an industry that has decades of programming effort to doing just one thing, and attracts some of the best of the best as developers.
Just pointing this out explicitly for everyone who thinks that IoT won't wreak real physical harm, potentially on a on a scale previously unheard of and (as a consequence) programming same will be not be tightly regulated and licensed with fingerprints and code signing and background checks and everything else the national security state can think of. Because it will. Because, as this shows, you cannot stop malware no matter how hard you try.
IoT is going to end programming freedom as we know it.
It's more subtle and pervasive than that. We have a twit of a girl who thinks it's OK to report people shoplifting who merelyv rub her the wrong way.. she think's they're "sketchy". The only thing stopping those names and faces from being added to a list is we can rewind and see the person didn't do anything. Management won't fire her because people like her and she does her job well, plus she's pretty. But she has somehow learned that it' s OK to leverage security against people who "creep you out".
I can imagine other places aren't as circumspect. Any or all of our names and faces could be now or in the future added to a wide variety of "suspect" lists which companies trade between themselves. Being a nominee to such a list can serverly impact your ability to get a retail or really any other job.
When cars crash they'll both immediately go into negotiations as to relevant fault of the parties and the money will automatically be deducted from your bank account.
Seriously, we're a long way away from having these things being ubiquitous enough to impact insurance etc. They're still very much in quirks mode; there is real reason to question the ability of the neural nets to negotiate the reality of an environment filled with unpredictable weather, things and people...completely novel multi-factor physical situations, including the fact that these cars will accelerate, brake, stop and steer on computers hardsware and software which are both vastly more hackable and complex than those that control those systems today.
The belief is that between the computer simulation and modeling, the datamining of extant accident reports, the hours of test driving and the ability for Google engineers to imagine as many weird situations as possible, they'll be able to train the neural nets to perform in a way that doesn't regularly veer into insanity-behid-the-wheel.
Since neural nets admit of no analytic proof techniques that we know of- no one can look at a trained state of a NN - the nodes, their configuration and the weights between them- and and say what it does or why- there's no proof for any given circumstance that it will act in a reaosnable manner even if it's done so the last 10,000 under circumstances which were very similar from a human's perspective.
No one knows what the world looks like to a NN if you include the all important "what should I DO" in the definition of "looks like", as your should.
Then there's the issue with acceptance by humans who and their sly, lying ways whenever culpability or loss rears its ugly head.
>>the U.S. was acting to slow that nation's supercomputing development efforts.
How'd that work out for ya?
Well, at least according to Corney, they can't do crypto for shit.
Come to think of it, I wouldn't mind buying a computer with one of these Chinese chips in it. Better than one backdoored up the Yin Yang by a government that can actually ruin my chances in life for having the wrong opinions....Seriously, what do I care if the Chinese government spies on me? Why, that's correct, Mr Chen, my opinions on free speech are dangerously subsersive.... to China.
Right, I will forego the use of a device which many people have come to feel is a necessary part of their personal safety and lifeline to the outside world to join thousands of others who have done the same to watch Someone Special whose security maintains an airtight envelop aorund her at all times on and off the stage.
Because Alicia Keyes.
Alicia Keyes is now the very archetype of a person who needs to stick a fork into themselves because they're done.
Do you think our government or main stream media- CNN FOX MSNBC NBC CBS ABC or any of the newspapers including the NYTimes of WSJ have said peep about the TTP? Most Americans don't even know what it is and would be outraged if they understood it. This is Congress and the WH and the government operating as nothing less than a criminal gang. This is the 1%er doing what the 1%ers do- smashing democracy, destroying the 99%s living standards for their personal private benefit.
All these trade agreements have do nothing but destroyed the econoomies of the nations who signed onto them. Mexico is now nothing more than a narco state with entire swaths of it not even nominally under the control of the Mexican goverrnment. Virtually all able bodied males between the ages of 13 and 65 are in the US illegally or otherwise desperate for work their own nation can no longer provide them. This is the reality of NAFTA.
And where are the degenerate "free market" neoliberal think-tank sponsored "scholars" and economists who promised us all in 94 that NAFTA would result in unprecedented wealth for the average Mexican and benefit the US also? The CTO Institute freaks nad the "economists" from bought-off shithole universities like Chicago ? The Dan Griswolds of the world? No doubt they're still living large off the money the think tanks, corporations and 1%ers in the MSM and (NPR too!) gave them to shovel their bullshit economics on the Americna public's head.
You don't get to be a billionaire by playing nice and providing value. You get to be a billionaire by murdering people via proxy, bulldozing millions of other people's lives off a cliff, bribery, lying and controlling Congress by offering them deep seven figure jobs after their time acting as your personal footman and bitchboy in the Senate is over.
Linux is like an ecosystem , with some companies at the top of thew food chain and others who are forced to live underneath them.
What you THINK is Linus is at the top of that foodchain. In reality, Redhat is at the top of that foodchain, and Linus, Mark and everyone else - all other distros -get a lot of code RedHat writes forced onto them whether they like it or not. They are by far the biggest, most well funded, most prolific and most influential Linux distro Plenty of core functionality issues out of them, and because so many other device makers and 3rd party software makers write code which depends on their code, all other Linux distros are forced to follow suit.
Fo course, once code is depended-upon by a large number of 3rd parties, that dependency spreads like a cancer and all Linux distros are forced to include that depended upon code.
And what makes RedHat so sucessful, what lets them maintain their position as top dog / ecosystem dictator? One thing- the contracts it has with the US government.
And what code might I be talking about? I might be talking about Systemd.
You can read about it at this link and especially the ones below but tldr; It Came From Redhat and provoked nonthing less than a civil war in Linux over whether it will be included.
Shuttleworth proclaimed it would never be included in Ubuntu and Linus railed against it, but to no avail. In the end they both submitted to the power wielded by Redhat.
True, there's only a 99% chance this inscrutable mess of code, which has staged violent coup after violent coup against the territory previously held by nicely isolated and well understood parts of Linux *at the lowest levels* isn't a government sponsered backdoor-via-oopsie-a'lookie-at-that-bug-we-wrote ! but that's small comfort to the rest of us who need somewhere to run from the privacy-raping, eavesdropping, keystroke-logging, backdoored piece of shit Torjan known as Windows 10 when Windows 7 stops being habitable.
So yeah, the guy who has root on every Ubuntu installation in the world and was publicly submitted into bowing before and pledging his eternal allegience and fealty to His Majesty the King wants everyone to know that King's clothes are marvelous and all this talk of a naked King is just bunk.
The basic tension here is the use of technology by Bad Guys gives them preternatural power to do bad things in big ways. OTOH , the state sponsored panopticon which is deployed, in all earnestness- let us not pretend otherwise, seriously, I don't question their motives even a little - is a known recipe for the destruction of democracy, dissent and a death sentence for a healthy society. But only a free and healthy society has any hope to counter terrorism. Absent freedom of thought and freedom from intimidation, short-term, parochial local incentives borns of personal fiefdoms take over policy making completely and that society is doomed to fall, just like Rome.
We cannot allow ourselves to become Rome. The only way to do that is to prevent the government from deploying a system which could be used by future governments to crush dissent and independent thought. That is, to crush anonymous speech and the freedom to explore ideas and voicing opinions which run counter to powerful interests.
It not that terrorism doesn't have the potential to bring a doomsday to us all, they most certainly do, it's that through an indirect process which is nevertheless guaranteed to be realized, that potential turns into an absolute certainty if the government is able to get root on all our keystrokes.
Oh the irony of unjustly reaming out someone because you didn't read their post by acusingthem of unjustly reaming someone out because they didn't read someone else's post.
Double decker wow.
Read my post again.I took Fuckbook and Zuckerfuck to the shed , for exactly the points you're citing. I took timothy tot he shed for mis-representing zuckerfuck's "free services" as something other than exploitation, which is exactly what they are and what the article, and timothy, tried to hide.
"Indian government's disdain for free services..."
Wow. Just wow. Who is timothy and why does he have seemingly untrammelled access to posting slanted stories on Slashdot? Is he the new owner's nome de plume? Got a Facebook connection, or what?
The facts of matter are internet.org would provide India witha free walled garden Facebook-limited, Facebook-defined, Facebook-mined, Facebook-exploited subset of the real internet. It was nothing but digital colonialism, a new different of reservation for a different kind of indian (and that is most likely how it was joked about within Facebook itself).
Well, as many have observed lately Slashdot is going down hill. I think *timothy* and his posts pretty well sum up what's wrong with slashdot. It's turned into a tool, aimed at nerds and nerd-influencers, blantantly serving corporate interests, pushing corporate agendas.
So that's it for me. I can't in good conscience continue to contribute my energy, attention and effort making Slashdot profitable if it's just a tool for Facebook and its ilk to push their propoganda. The internet's a big place (no thanks toFacebook) and I'll find another home.
As a parting shot and look back to what Slashdot used to be, Stalman gave a great speech less than a month ago about the red hot, immediate danger the so called "unitary patent" being pushed by the corporate coke snorters is posing to software developers all over the globe; basically itspassage means American-style software patents for all nations in the EU. Thought you won that fight? Think again.
Thank god the government is doing this. Because it will end or at least greatly reduce the incidence of minors getting access to p0rn, that's for sure. Of course there will always be the troubling borderline cases of people linking to the metric tons of p0rn in all kinds of chat rooms and in all types of contexts, including political ones like, famously, Goatse:
but we can spend more time and money going after those sites and individuals later.
This is a great way for the government to appear to be doing something about something without incurring the statistical risks associated with taking political risks. It's awesomely futile but tailor-made for people for whom the world's real problems just seem overwhelming and intractable. You know things like global warming which may, even now, be on an unstoppable trajectory to wipe human civilization from the Earth, and then they're the refugee crisis and that damn thing *making* all those refugees, what's that place called? Syrianna.. no wait that was a George Clooney movie about something or other... camels and shit like that right? Oh wiat...Syria,...right?
Then there's the grotesque economic disparities which pose a real threat to the perceived legitimacy of the lawmaking process itself and then there's that whole thing with EU...
Fuck it. Gentlemen, man up. We're going after adult p0rn.
We may have grown up with *exactly* the same access to *exactly* the same images (there's a very limited number of positions the human body can assume and and only so many props which can be meaningfully included) and, truthfully our parents did too and, well, yes, our grandparents and so on in an unbroken chain going back at least to antiquity, in all cultures too, but dammit, we're going to stomp it out.... on the internet.
I know I am acting as a one-note musician of late, so feel free to skip this if you've heard it (from me) before but this is not just the shape things to come, it is one example of a force which will dictate every aspect of your life, every aspect of how governments are (re)structured, every one of our childrens' lives will be grounded in and determined in large part by this force. The force is simply the fact that technology is rapidly bestowing the power to cause very great destruction to very large number of people into the hands of smaller and smaller groups of people, tending towards one. In fact the level of destruction is tending towards "death" and the number of victims is tending towards "everyone". That is a world changing event sneaking up on us and no one is taking it all that seriously, at least, no one I have granola and lattes with.
It's not just genetics, it's all forms of DIYBio and eventually nanotechnology; it makes viruses ransomware and even city-closing SCADA attacks look like the good old days. If what happened in cyber happens in the real world it will look like this: hackers will toy with genetics and bio-based "stuff" under the hacker ethos of free exploration for everyone. Most of it will just come to nothing, but someone will find a way to turn all the algae in public fountains neon blue and everyone will think it's cool. Then the blackhats will start to get involved and create malicious wetware. Then the DIYBio hackers will try to step in and write wetware to protect us against wetware. We know where this goes. We know who has the upper hand and who is always playing catch-up in this cat and mouse game.
The problem, the real problem is we're a failed species. Because of the way we evolved, owing to evolutionary pressures where winning is strictly defined as making babies (DNA passing itself on through the device of making brains and bodies that want to pass it on.. any other type of DNA eventually gets shut out of existence), very many people are completely governed by genetically mediated impulses which serve fish, lions and apes well enough but spell doom for humans. Those impulses just keep driving people to *more* of certain behaviors, without limit. More money, more power, more land, more resources, more control over other people and what they do and think and of course who they fuck (religious zealots) . It's all about gathering to yourself and monopolizing as much as possible all money and power and therefore, women and thereby offspring. You have countless examples of exactly this behavior in medieval times where the local Lord would avail himself of any peasant bride the night before she was married or in with polygamous cultures like modern day Saudi Arabia or just being a NBA star or a corporate executive or a rock star.. it's the drive to control resources and be the alpha male in order to maximize your genetic fitness, and of course, it has to be pointed out that women overwhelming prefer such males.
Those are extreme examples all, but they go to the heart to of the issue with our species- it's why there's social inequities at all. It's why there's war and totalitarian dictatorships and income inequities and why a small group of people will band together to fuck over millions and billions of other people just to preserve their privileged status. It's about status which is about controlling resources which is about copulation and genetic success whether the bearers of those impulses are aware of it or not.
We *could* be a species whose members, as soon as they are assured they will always have enough immediately and determinedly set about to provide and lift up their fellow humans. We *could* be a species whose strongest desire is to make sure everyone in our community has the basics necessary for a decent living. Are we that species? Have you ever wondered why not? Why do billionaires offshore their wealth to tax havens and give less of their net income to charity than "average" people? Why do dictators dictate anything other than fairness and ec
Looked at from a certain perspective, the overwhelmingly bad threats we face going forward are all variations on a single theme- huge power over life and death is devolving into the hands of smaller and smaller groups of individuals. The size of the group needed to pull off an attack is shrinking, while the number of people harmed and the severity of that harm are both simultaneously going through the roof.
This characterizes the nature of the threat of terrorism - small arms fire is bad, automatic rifles are much worse and small groups of people flying planes (a high technology) into skyscrapers (another high technology) is worse yet. So this is yet another example of that phenomena, albeit a more obvious example.
We're going to bestow obscene weapons of ultimate destruction upon ourselves then, we're going to use them, just as the critics are saying. At some point it's got to happen that we wake up and realize that only path to survival for us is to attack the root cause of the problem- human thought and behavior- specifically terrorism comes from just two sources.
One is the obvious, the infliction of real economic and power injustices by a tiny ruling minority upon the majority. The minority essentially treat the lives and fortunes of the majority as an asset to be strip mined for their personal benefit. Call it what you want, dehumanization, oppression, exploitation, enslavement, rape it's all the same thing, the same strain of thought and impulse: over there is that other person- let me find a way to separate him from anything I may want and then turn the very act of his living, his existence, into an event which benefits only me.
This breeds huge criminal and extremist political movements all over the globe- in the Middle East, in Russia which is effectively a kleptocracy, and even in the US which is effectively a plutocracy.
The reason for a lot of the "crime" is because "crime" and the "black market" is the only rational way for people to put bread on their table. So also with extremist political movements. People know when they're treated unfairly, when their lives have been stripped of meaning and hope. Not everyone thinks the best choice is to set himself on fire, and if that widespread general malaise gets harnessed by a unifying narrative which promises to solve all those problems, then you have something like ISIS or al Queda.
Besides economic and social injustice, the other source of terrorism is sociobiologically driven impulses which for some reason are immune to satiety or attenuation of any form. They just keep driving people to *more* of the behavior without limit. More money, more power, more land, more resources, more control over other people and what their lives will be like. From a sociobiological perspective, all those drives serve one purpose- to advance the "cause" of your genes, to increase your personal reproductive fitness at the expense of your alleged competitors for the same reproductive-enhancing resources and opportunities.
And in fact, control over and access to all that stuff DID, over the course of evolutionary time, prove to be the deciding factors in who lived long enough to spread their genes and who was genetically shut out. As a consequence, we are all to a greater or lesser extent possessors of those impulses. But for some people, or for all people in some environments, those drives just never experience satiety or attenuation by other life events. They brutally and callously determine their bearers' behaviors and dominate their world view.
So bin Laden, who had many wives, and many children and tons of money STILL felt insulted, dismissed and humiliated when his offer to defend Saudi Arabia from Saddam Hussein was rebuffed by the Saudi royal family. So Saddam Hussein who had effective control over the land wealth and political power of a sovereign state only used it to aggrandize himself and seek yet more power. So John Rockefeller, Andrew Carnegie, and Bill Gates - who are known now by many for their charitable trus
You know you're lying. Just admit it. Just admit that you'd rather billions of people die than you have to admit that you're a bitch boy for billionaires, a fool and the sort of low information braying self and other destructive jackass you like to proclaim others to be Admit you'd rather destroy the entire world than be shown to be wrong, because you're , you know ego-dysfunctional, weak and basically a sociopathic predator with onlya loosely-defined grip on reality, basically, you're a subhuman piece of shit.
Know what the real difference betwen people like me and people like you is? In my worst imaginings, I give you a trial. In your best actions, you mass-murder hundreds of millions of innocent people and , thanks to the amount of Koch Libertarian crack you've shoved up your fucking nose over the years, in your life long role as a fool for billionaires' greed and indifference to human life, you aid and abet the worst crime any group of humans has ever inflicted on humanity and call it "Fweedom".
Slashdot Mirror
Headline: Microsoft offers free new laptop if your computer can't run Windows 10!
"Will it run Linux?", getting out my pen knife......
Straight to it then. The similarity measure this researcher used has not been shown to be what humans use when they, for instance, falsely identify someone in court or mistake two people on clear video.
The similarity measure she used is designed to detect the differences between very specific and quantifiable points on the human face (interpupilary distance for instance). These landmarks are (largely) immutable over time and anyway amenable to analysis by computers scanning hi-res images.
However, these quantifiable landmarks have not been shown to be the same as the features humans use to distinguish two faces. It's not just likely, but 100% certain, that two faces which are virtually indistinguishable to humans - "my god, it's the same person!" - would be clearly distinguishable to a computer.
At least in this context, ourb cultures definition of doppleganger is up for grabs. Is it two faces so similar that they look the same to humans - a low and easily met criteria - or is it two faces so similar that a computer cannot tell them apart.
There is a real moral issue at stake here and that is what shall we let pass into general consensus regarding this new concept of facial "doppleganger"? Because if it comes be an accepted fact, thanks to this study or others like it, that dopplegangers don't exist then that has consequences. For instance, it is much more likely that false eye-witness identification will be accepted by prosecutors asnd juries and much harder to claim misidentification .
That's why I say the characterization of this study is misleading. In fact, I'll go further and say this Guardian (sorry, rag) headline downright dangerous.
Numerically, we have dopplegangers in exactly the number of people whose faces are practically indistinguishable to our own- as judged by other people. We know for a fact they exist, and they probably for exist everyone.
It's even more complex than that, since the judger is very heavily influenced by their familiarity with the race of the judged. How many Chinese of Japanese or Korean faces would the average caucausian confuse with each other even with a sincere, best effort in the best of circumstances ?
Of course, it works the other way also. One of the complaints of the father of a friend of mine who is first generation American and of Middle Eastern descent is all Americans men look exactly the same to him. It's amusing when you're the target of such confusion, like a parlor trick in reverse: "Wow, you can't do that. Are you serious? "
When I was 16 a friend of mine from another town insisted that I looked, talked and walked EXACTLY like a friend of hers. Of course I had to meet that person and, even by my own standards, it was shockingly true. I had the thought at the time that I hoped he was well behaved or at the very least, inclined to lawfulness.
We are very easily fooled depending on the context and we are fooled even outside of any judgement compromising context:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...
Future direction for reaseachers could productively include:
Just how different can two faces become before humans finally pick up on the it?
How do the landmarks used in this study relate - or not- to the features humans use when recognizing faces?
How do computers fare when using only those landmarks which humans use?
There are people, maybe a lot of them, that look exactly like you. They are your "dopplegangers". It would take a computer to tell you apart. You should hope they are well-behaved.
There are even more, perhaps multitudes, that are very very very similar. It's mostly an entertaining fact, but in some contexts, someone's life and freedom may hang in the balance.
yeah as if they were critical to it. plus, cameras are all fingerprinted and backdoored just fyi..
I'ts not a coincidence that ISL and Nazi Germany and North Korea and SJWs and all the goddamn petrol-dictatorships in the Middle East BAN SPEECH in JUST they way you want to.
Wake the fuck up and catch up to the 21st century. Free speech is the best known cure to abusive regimes and policies. Why do you think every time you turn around some fascist government or fascist social movement is trying to clamp their hand around somene else's mouth?
Why do you think that is? Because their ideas about How Other People Should Live are vigorously reasoned and empirically sound that they can endure an unflinching examination by unsympathetic observers willing to level withering criticism?
Yeah, that must be it.
Spoken like a true cry-bully SJW who wants to dump the 1st, 2nd and 4th amendments into the gutter.
Go start your own fucking country, asshole. You obviously don't understand this one.
Consider the hypotheticals which would be true if Tor were as secure as they say.
First, Tor would be knowingly aiding and abetting in the distribution and consumption of child pornography. They would be aware of this, but they would consider it the price you have to pay in order to keep people anonymous online.
Do you think that that is a realistic proposition?
Consider their recent actions against Jacob Applebaum.
http://jacobappelbaum.net/
This is a group of people who went after someone in full SJW witchhunt mode, which is to say it featured anonymous accusors making unsubstantiaABLE claims of a incindiary, sexual nature , a public appeal for more accusors to copycat them under the guise of "seeking more victims", and a Star Chamber style execution of the target.
And these are the exact same people who are going to aide and abet child pornographers - out of principle.
Then there's the people who are at the helm of Tor. For example, Sherri Steele (no Wikipedia entry!). Meet Sherri's husband:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
"He is married to Shari Steele, former Executive Director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation,[5][6] currently Executive Director of the Tor Project.[7]
Prior to Liquid Robotics, he was the President and Chief Operating Officer of Sun Microsystems Federal (a Sun Microsystems subsidiary focusing on business with government organizations). He held numerous positions during his more than 10 years at Sun, including Vice-President of Corporate Software Services, Chief Security Officer for Sun IT, and Chief Information Officer (CIO). His background has a significant military and government presence, including a stint as an oversight CIO working underneath the Department of Defense's overall CIO. Before that, he was the Chief Technical Officer and Technical Lead for the U.S. Army's personnel systems.
I am sure he/she is onboard with the whole kiddie porn thing along with his employers.
Then there's the zombie issue of Who Funds Tor- the question that just won't die. What Tor says is it doesn't matter that the government holds the all the practical purse strings (yours and my donation is not keeping the Tor lights on) , the code is the code.
But the code is not the nodes, and let's face it, to maintain the number of servers needed to p0wn the Tor network would be less than the NSA spends on erasers in a month. It would be a rounding error. Think they spent that money? Just, do you?
If the FBI and the NSA are worth a shit, they now have people planted at every level of the Tor development project, people with the clout and numbers sufficient to make hire/ fire/ burn-at-the-stake decisions. That HAD to be a goal of theirs, right? Now do you think they're competent agencies? I sure do.
The reaility is, Tor works closely with the government ot catch badguys. JUST LIKE I WOULD, JUST LIKE YOU WOULD. Think about it. The government comes and says: "kiddie porn child sex trafficking terrorists etc etc etc we need to work together we promise we'll only nab these types promise promise promise" do you cooperate? Really, do you? I sure do and I understand the importance as much as anyone whose made a determined effort to hear all sides of the privacy-security debate and basically considers both extremes to represent mortal dangers to the Republic and civilization itself.
When you're in that position of having to side with one of two possible nightmare scenarios- a George Orwellian nightmare government which can never be vanquished or a terorist organization with, say an unstoppable lethal virus or other civilization-destroying WMD and a guarantee of kiddie porn rings harming real kids, which do you choose, because you HAVE to choose ?
I'll tell you who you choose.
You choose the government because you tell yourself, not untruthfully, that even in a worse case scenario, it's still an error civilization
Let's just be clear on what happened here. A library used to defend against malware itself has a zero-day which is targetable by malware. This from an industry that has decades of programming effort to doing just one thing, and attracts some of the best of the best as developers.
Just pointing this out explicitly for everyone who thinks that IoT won't wreak real physical harm, potentially on a on a scale previously unheard of and (as a consequence) programming same will be not be tightly regulated and licensed with fingerprints and code signing and background checks and everything else the national security state can think of. Because it will. Because, as this shows, you cannot stop malware no matter how hard you try.
IoT is going to end programming freedom as we know it.
And still we rush headlong into its arms.
It's more subtle and pervasive than that. We have a twit of a girl who thinks it's OK to report people shoplifting who merelyv rub her the wrong way.. she think's they're "sketchy". The only thing stopping those names and faces from being added to a list is we can rewind and see the person didn't do anything. Management won't fire her because people like her and she does her job well, plus she's pretty. But she has somehow learned that it' s OK to leverage security against people who "creep you out".
I can imagine other places aren't as circumspect. Any or all of our names and faces could be now or in the future added to a wide variety of "suspect" lists which companies trade between themselves. Being a nominee to such a list can serverly impact your ability to get a retail or really any other job.
So it's worse than you think.
This a million times.
Consider for example, systemD.
OK now tell me when you're done considering it.
When cars crash they'll both immediately go into negotiations as to relevant fault of the parties and the money will automatically be deducted from your bank account.
Seriously, we're a long way away from having these things being ubiquitous enough to impact insurance etc. They're still very much in quirks mode; there is real reason to question the ability of the neural nets to negotiate the reality of an environment filled with unpredictable weather, things and people ...completely novel multi-factor physical situations, including the fact that these cars will accelerate, brake, stop and steer on computers hardsware and software which are both vastly more hackable and complex than those that control those systems today.
The belief is that between the computer simulation and modeling, the datamining of extant accident reports, the hours of test driving and the ability for Google engineers to imagine as many weird situations as possible, they'll be able to train the neural nets to perform in a way that doesn't regularly veer into insanity-behid-the-wheel.
Since neural nets admit of no analytic proof techniques that we know of- no one can look at a trained state of a NN - the nodes, their configuration and the weights between them- and and say what it does or why- there's no proof for any given circumstance that it will act in a reaosnable manner even if it's done so the last 10,000 under circumstances which were very similar from a human's perspective.
No one knows what the world looks like to a NN if you include the all important "what should I DO" in the definition of "looks like", as your should.
Then there's the issue with acceptance by humans who and their sly, lying ways whenever culpability or loss rears its ugly head.
We're a long way from this. A long way.
good, now websites will be forced to present a version of themselves which is still usable without JavaScript.
What did that poll say, a quarter of /. readers surf with JavaScriopt disabled by default. God knows I do.
Sad to say, at some point around 2013 it became less about what the web could do for me and more about what the web could do to me.
Bueller...
Bueller...
That's what I thought.
>>the U.S. was acting to slow that nation's supercomputing development efforts.
How'd that work out for ya?
Well, at least according to Corney, they can't do crypto for shit.
Come to think of it, I wouldn't mind buying a computer with one of these Chinese chips in it. Better than one backdoored up the Yin Yang by a government that can actually ruin my chances in life for having the wrong opinions....Seriously, what do I care if the Chinese government spies on me? Why, that's correct, Mr Chen, my opinions on free speech are dangerously subsersive .... to China.
Right, I will forego the use of a device which many people have come to feel is a necessary part of their personal safety and lifeline to the outside world to join thousands of others who have done the same to watch Someone Special whose security maintains an airtight envelop aorund her at all times on and off the stage.
Because Alicia Keyes.
Alicia Keyes is now the very archetype of a person who needs to stick a fork into themselves because they're done.
Do you think our government or main stream media- CNN FOX MSNBC NBC CBS ABC or any of the newspapers including the NYTimes of WSJ have said peep about the TTP? Most Americans don't even know what it is and would be outraged if they understood it. This is Congress and the WH and the government operating as nothing less than a criminal gang. This is the 1%er doing what the 1%ers do- smashing democracy, destroying the 99%s living standards for their personal private benefit.
All these trade agreements have do nothing but destroyed the econoomies of the nations who signed onto them. Mexico is now nothing more than a narco state with entire swaths of it not even nominally under the control of the Mexican goverrnment. Virtually all able bodied males between the ages of 13 and 65 are in the US illegally or otherwise desperate for work their own nation can no longer provide them. This is the reality of NAFTA.
And where are the degenerate "free market" neoliberal think-tank sponsored "scholars" and economists who promised us all in 94 that NAFTA would result in unprecedented wealth for the average Mexican and benefit the US also? The CTO Institute freaks nad the "economists" from bought-off shithole universities like Chicago ? The Dan Griswolds of the world? No doubt they're still living large off the money the think tanks, corporations and 1%ers in the MSM and (NPR too!) gave them to shovel their bullshit economics on the Americna public's head.
You don't get to be a billionaire by playing nice and providing value. You get to be a billionaire by murdering people via proxy, bulldozing millions of other people's lives off a cliff, bribery, lying and controlling Congress by offering them deep seven figure jobs after their time acting as your personal footman and bitchboy in the Senate is over.
In case you weren't aware.
Linux is like an ecosystem , with some companies at the top of thew food chain and others who are forced to live underneath them.
What you THINK is Linus is at the top of that foodchain. In reality, Redhat is at the top of that foodchain, and Linus, Mark and everyone else - all other distros -get a lot of code RedHat writes forced onto them whether they like it or not. They are by far the biggest, most well funded, most prolific and most influential Linux distro Plenty of core functionality issues out of them, and because so many other device makers and 3rd party software makers write code which depends on their code, all other Linux distros are forced to follow suit.
Fo course, once code is depended-upon by a large number of 3rd parties, that dependency spreads like a cancer and all Linux distros are forced to include that depended upon code.
And what makes RedHat so sucessful, what lets them maintain their position as top dog / ecosystem dictator? One thing- the contracts it has with the US government.
And what code might I be talking about? I might be talking about Systemd.
http://www.infoworld.com/artic...
You can read about it at this link and especially the ones below but tldr; It Came From Redhat and provoked nonthing less than a civil war in Linux over whether it will be included.
Shuttleworth proclaimed it would never be included in Ubuntu and Linus railed against it, but to no avail. In the end they both submitted to the power wielded by Redhat.
True, there's only a 99% chance this inscrutable mess of code, which has staged violent coup after violent coup against the territory previously held by nicely isolated and well understood parts of Linux *at the lowest levels* isn't a government sponsered backdoor-via-oopsie-a'lookie-at-that-bug-we-wrote ! but that's small comfort to the rest of us who need somewhere to run from the privacy-raping, eavesdropping, keystroke-logging, backdoored piece of shit Torjan known as Windows 10 when Windows 7 stops being habitable.
So yeah, the guy who has root on every Ubuntu installation in the world and was publicly submitted into bowing before and pledging his eternal allegience and fealty to His Majesty the King wants everyone to know that King's clothes are marvelous and all this talk of a naked King is just bunk.
https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/8/1...
http://www.linuxuser.co.uk/fea...
The basic tension here is the use of technology by Bad Guys gives them preternatural power to do bad things in big ways. OTOH , the state sponsored panopticon which is deployed, in all earnestness- let us not pretend otherwise, seriously, I don't question their motives even a little - is a known recipe for the destruction of democracy, dissent and a death sentence for a healthy society. But only a free and healthy society has any hope to counter terrorism. Absent freedom of thought and freedom from intimidation, short-term, parochial local incentives borns of personal fiefdoms take over policy making completely and that society is doomed to fall, just like Rome.
We cannot allow ourselves to become Rome. The only way to do that is to prevent the government from deploying a system which could be used by future governments to crush dissent and independent thought. That is, to crush anonymous speech and the freedom to explore ideas and voicing opinions which run counter to powerful interests.
It not that terrorism doesn't have the potential to bring a doomsday to us all, they most certainly do, it's that through an indirect process which is nevertheless guaranteed to be realized, that potential turns into an absolute certainty if the government is able to get root on all our keystrokes.
cocaine.....
Seriously, what's to stop this fruitcake nation-state autocrat from becoming hopelessly addicted to substances which
1) make him feel poweful in the face of overwhleming odds, i.e. going up against the U.S.
2) seriously and permanently shift his reasoning and perception facilities deep into the megalomaniac-omnipotent spectrum ?
Answer- nothing and no one.
Hopefully the people around him have an Easy button under their desks they can push before he waddles them into nuclear oblivion.
Oh the irony of unjustly reaming out someone because you didn't read their post by acusingthem of unjustly reaming someone out because they didn't read someone else's post.
Double decker wow.
Read my post again.I took Fuckbook and Zuckerfuck to the shed , for exactly the points you're citing. I took timothy tot he shed for mis-representing zuckerfuck's "free services" as something other than exploitation, which is exactly what they are and what the article, and timothy, tried to hide.
Learn.To. Read.
"Indian government's disdain for free services..."
Wow. Just wow. Who is timothy and why does he have seemingly untrammelled access to posting slanted stories on Slashdot? Is he the new owner's nome de plume? Got a Facebook connection, or what?
The facts of matter are internet.org would provide India witha free walled garden Facebook-limited, Facebook-defined, Facebook-mined, Facebook-exploited subset of the real internet. It was nothing but digital colonialism, a new different of reservation for a different kind of indian (and that is most likely how it was joked about within Facebook itself).
Well, as many have observed lately Slashdot is going down hill. I think *timothy* and his posts pretty well sum up what's wrong with slashdot. It's turned into a tool, aimed at nerds and nerd-influencers, blantantly serving corporate interests, pushing corporate agendas.
So that's it for me. I can't in good conscience continue to contribute my energy, attention and effort making Slashdot profitable if it's just a tool for Facebook and its ilk to push their propoganda. The internet's a big place (no thanks toFacebook) and I'll find another home.
As a parting shot and look back to what Slashdot used to be, Stalman gave a great speech less than a month ago about the red hot, immediate danger the so called "unitary patent" being pushed by the corporate coke snorters is posing to software developers all over the globe; basically itspassage means American-style software patents for all nations in the EU. Thought you won that fight? Think again.
http://techrights.org/2016/01/...
The action you need to take is to call your representative and tell them this issue is important to you and you are watching it.
Bye Slashdot.
concision != clarity. This is a common misperception.
Thank god the government is doing this. Because it will end or at least greatly reduce the incidence of minors getting access to p0rn, that's for sure. Of course there will always be the troubling borderline cases of people linking to the metric tons of p0rn in all kinds of chat rooms and in all types of contexts, including political ones like, famously, Goatse:
http://gawker.com/finding-goat...
but we can spend more time and money going after those sites and individuals later.
This is a great way for the government to appear to be doing something about something without incurring the statistical risks associated with taking political risks. It's awesomely futile but tailor-made for people for whom the world's real problems just seem overwhelming and intractable. You know things like global warming which may, even now, be on an unstoppable trajectory to wipe human civilization from the Earth, and then they're the refugee crisis and that damn thing *making* all those refugees, what's that place called? Syrianna.. no wait that was a George Clooney movie about something or other... camels and shit like that right? Oh wiat...Syria, ...right?
Then there's the grotesque economic disparities which pose a real threat to the perceived legitimacy of the lawmaking process itself and then there's that whole thing with EU...
Fuck it. Gentlemen, man up. We're going after adult p0rn.
We may have grown up with *exactly* the same access to *exactly* the same images (there's a very limited number of positions the human body can assume and and only so many props which can be meaningfully included) and, truthfully our parents did too and, well, yes, our grandparents and so on in an unbroken chain going back at least to antiquity, in all cultures too, but dammit, we're going to stomp it out.... on the internet.
I know I am acting as a one-note musician of late, so feel free to skip this if you've heard it (from me) before but this is not just the shape things to come, it is one example of a force which will dictate every aspect of your life, every aspect of how governments are (re)structured, every one of our childrens' lives will be grounded in and determined in large part by this force. The force is simply the fact that technology is rapidly bestowing the power to cause very great destruction to very large number of people into the hands of smaller and smaller groups of people, tending towards one. In fact the level of destruction is tending towards "death" and the number of victims is tending towards "everyone". That is a world changing event sneaking up on us and no one is taking it all that seriously, at least, no one I have granola and lattes with.
It's not just genetics, it's all forms of DIYBio and eventually nanotechnology; it makes viruses ransomware and even city-closing SCADA attacks look like the good old days. If what happened in cyber happens in the real world it will look like this: hackers will toy with genetics and bio-based "stuff" under the hacker ethos of free exploration for everyone. Most of it will just come to nothing, but someone will find a way to turn all the algae in public fountains neon blue and everyone will think it's cool. Then the blackhats will start to get involved and create malicious wetware. Then the DIYBio hackers will try to step in and write wetware to protect us against wetware. We know where this goes. We know who has the upper hand and who is always playing catch-up in this cat and mouse game.
The problem, the real problem is we're a failed species. Because of the way we evolved, owing to evolutionary pressures where winning is strictly defined as making babies (DNA passing itself on through the device of making brains and bodies that want to pass it on.. any other type of DNA eventually gets shut out of existence), very many people are completely governed by genetically mediated impulses which serve fish, lions and apes well enough but spell doom for humans. Those impulses just keep driving people to *more* of certain behaviors, without limit. More money, more power, more land, more resources, more control over other people and what they do and think and of course who they fuck (religious zealots) . It's all about gathering to yourself and monopolizing as much as possible all money and power and therefore, women and thereby offspring. You have countless examples of exactly this behavior in medieval times where the local Lord would avail himself of any peasant bride the night before she was married or in with polygamous cultures like modern day Saudi Arabia or just being a NBA star or a corporate executive or a rock star.. it's the drive to control resources and be the alpha male in order to maximize your genetic fitness, and of course, it has to be pointed out that women overwhelming prefer such males.
Those are extreme examples all, but they go to the heart to of the issue with our species- it's why there's social inequities at all. It's why there's war and totalitarian dictatorships and income inequities and why a small group of people will band together to fuck over millions and billions of other people just to preserve their privileged status. It's about status which is about controlling resources which is about copulation and genetic success whether the bearers of those impulses are aware of it or not.
We *could* be a species whose members, as soon as they are assured they will always have enough immediately and determinedly set about to provide and lift up their fellow humans. We *could* be a species whose strongest desire is to make sure everyone in our community has the basics necessary for a decent living. Are we that species? Have you ever wondered why not? Why do billionaires offshore their wealth to tax havens and give less of their net income to charity than "average" people? Why do dictators dictate anything other than fairness and ec
Looked at from a certain perspective, the overwhelmingly bad threats we face going forward are all variations on a single theme- huge power over life and death is devolving into the hands of smaller and smaller groups of individuals. The size of the group needed to pull off an attack is shrinking, while the number of people harmed and the severity of that harm are both simultaneously going through the roof.
This characterizes the nature of the threat of terrorism - small arms fire is bad, automatic rifles are much worse and small groups of people flying planes (a high technology) into skyscrapers (another high technology) is worse yet. So this is yet another example of that phenomena, albeit a more obvious example.
We're going to bestow obscene weapons of ultimate destruction upon ourselves then, we're going to use them, just as the critics are saying. At some point it's got to happen that we wake up and realize that only path to survival for us is to attack the root cause of the problem- human thought and behavior- specifically terrorism comes from just two sources.
One is the obvious, the infliction of real economic and power injustices by a tiny ruling minority upon the majority. The minority essentially treat the lives and fortunes of the majority as an asset to be strip mined for their personal benefit. Call it what you want, dehumanization, oppression, exploitation, enslavement, rape it's all the same thing, the same strain of thought and impulse: over there is that other person- let me find a way to separate him from anything I may want and then turn the very act of his living, his existence, into an event which benefits only me.
This breeds huge criminal and extremist political movements all over the globe- in the Middle East, in Russia which is effectively a kleptocracy, and even in the US which is effectively a plutocracy.
The reason for a lot of the "crime" is because "crime" and the "black market" is the only rational way for people to put bread on their table. So also with extremist political movements. People know when they're treated unfairly, when their lives have been stripped of meaning and hope. Not everyone thinks the best choice is to set himself on fire, and if that widespread general malaise gets harnessed by a unifying narrative which promises to solve all those problems, then you have something like ISIS or al Queda.
Besides economic and social injustice, the other source of terrorism is sociobiologically driven impulses which for some reason are immune to satiety or attenuation of any form. They just keep driving people to *more* of the behavior without limit. More money, more power, more land, more resources, more control over other people and what their lives will be like. From a sociobiological perspective, all those drives serve one purpose- to advance the "cause" of your genes, to increase your personal reproductive fitness at the expense of your alleged competitors for the same reproductive-enhancing resources and opportunities.
And in fact, control over and access to all that stuff DID, over the course of evolutionary time, prove to be the deciding factors in who lived long enough to spread their genes and who was genetically shut out. As a consequence, we are all to a greater or lesser extent possessors of those impulses. But for some people, or for all people in some environments, those drives just never experience satiety or attenuation by other life events. They brutally and callously determine their bearers' behaviors and dominate their world view.
So bin Laden, who had many wives, and many children and tons of money STILL felt insulted, dismissed and humiliated when his offer to defend Saudi Arabia from Saddam Hussein was rebuffed by the Saudi royal family. So Saddam Hussein who had effective control over the land wealth and political power of a sovereign state only used it to aggrandize himself and seek yet more power. So John Rockefeller, Andrew Carnegie, and Bill Gates - who are known now by many for their charitable trus
https://deepclimate.org/
You know you're lying. Just admit it. Just admit that you'd rather billions of people die than you have to admit that you're a bitch boy for billionaires, a fool and the sort of low information braying self and other destructive jackass you like to proclaim others to be Admit you'd rather destroy the entire world than be shown to be wrong, because you're , you know ego-dysfunctional, weak and basically a sociopathic predator with onlya loosely-defined grip on reality, basically, you're a subhuman piece of shit.
Just , you know, admit it. You'll feel better.
Know what the real difference betwen people like me and people like you is? In my worst imaginings, I give you a trial. In your best actions, you mass-murder hundreds of millions of innocent people and , thanks to the amount of Koch Libertarian crack you've shoved up your fucking nose over the years, in your life long role as a fool for billionaires' greed and indifference to human life, you aid and abet the worst crime any group of humans has ever inflicted on humanity and call it "Fweedom".