Boston University already requires all their engineers to take a course in data science (http://www.bu.edu/today/2018/new-eng-curriculum-requires-data-science/). This makes more sense than an entire degree in the subject.
The Blizzard End User License Agreement has all sorts of nuggets, like their Consent to Monitor:
"... THE PLATFORM... MAY MONITORY YOUR COMPUTER... MEMORY FOR UNAUTHORIZED THIRD PARTY PROGRAMS..."
What can go wrong?
For what it's worth, many of these attack vectors have been known for a while (see https://www.degruyter.com/view...) - it was only a matter of desire for someone to weaponize them.
This appears to be an inherent security vulnerability in Alexa - it has no voice authentication (see, for example, https://youtu.be/zZ8TJGWdqn4, 7min 23 sec). In general, it is quite hard to authenticate voice in a manner that is not spoofable or replayable (without significantly damaging usability).
Saying things with conviction does not make them true (see Trump).
I knew someone like you would jump to a knee-jerk rebuttal, so I threw in an example that was wrong, but for subtle reasons. There is no way to disprove that the stars travel around the earth, because you can build an entirely consistent mathematical system around just this assumption (indeed, the Ptolemaic theory utilized the scientific method to develop a crazy epicycle theory that was entirely consistent with experimental data - if not, just add smaller circles).
Regarding your slander of the scientists I produced, Dick LIndzen was a professor of meterology at MIT with a background in middle-atmosphere. He has written on his positions over the last five years... did you even bother to look at this wikipedia entry before spewing your nonsense?
You are a the prototypical religious extremist - you support your own views with whatever half-truths and loud arguments you can without regard to the facts. If you're convinced, great for you.
First of all, it doesn't matter how many people agree or disagree with climate science. Science is not a democratic process, and skepticism of science is an inherent part of the scientific process... for thousands of years the world's leading scientists believe things like (i) the earth is flat, (ii) the stars travel around the earth, (iii) there are no limits on velocity... those who wish to shut up the skeptics are behaving more like religious zealots than scientists.
Second of all, there are scientists like Dick Lindzen (MIT, retired), Freeman Dyson (Institute for Advanced Study),... (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...) who make serious and informed arguments against the certainty of what is colloquially called "climate science".
Altavista tried to monetize their search by biasing results based on ad revenue; Google didn't (at first). It turns out, people aren't interested in a biased product, even if it's free.
If you can debug a generic memory leak or bounds overrun (which might not cause a crash until long after the breach), then you are no longer a beginner.
Bill is a marketer, businessman, and, of late, a philanthropist... but he knows blessed little about education. "Not all who excess in business are wise" - Ethics of the Fathers, 2:6.
I've seen too much poorly-written code to accept the statements that you don't need a degree
to code well. It is true that you can write code that works without getting a broader CS education,
much like you can do your own wiring or plumbing in your house. Much of the time, things will work.
But then, one time your incorrect wire gauge will start a fire that can burn down your house, or
(more likely in the business world) the house of the poor shmuck who bought the house from you
(or inherited your code).
I wouldn't hire someone who does not have a broad and systematic introduction to computer science.
There are effective and natural ways for mitigating laptop use in classrooms... the most obvious of
which is better, interactive classroom management. Of course, this is impossible in a 300 person class... but
maybe that says as much as about the colleges' priorities as the students'.
There is an entire field of study related to this topic, but, in short, Reed-Solomon codes are not currently the state of the art. There are much more efficient iterative codes (e.g. Low-Density Parity-Check codes) and there are also rateless codes for a more incremental protection. At any rate, the right place to use these is probably at the hardware level... even if efficiency is not an issue, they tend to require a fair amount of redundancy.
Slashdot Mirror
Boston University already requires all their engineers to take a course in data science (http://www.bu.edu/today/2018/new-eng-curriculum-requires-data-science/). This makes more sense than an entire degree in the subject.
The Blizzard End User License Agreement has all sorts of nuggets, like their Consent to Monitor: "... THE PLATFORM ... MAY MONITORY YOUR COMPUTER ... MEMORY FOR UNAUTHORIZED THIRD PARTY PROGRAMS ..."
What can go wrong?
For what it's worth, many of these attack vectors have been known for a while (see https://www.degruyter.com/view...) - it was only a matter of desire for someone to weaponize them.
This appears to be an inherent security vulnerability in Alexa - it has no voice authentication (see, for example, https://youtu.be/zZ8TJGWdqn4, 7min 23 sec). In general, it is quite hard to authenticate voice in a manner that is not spoofable or replayable (without significantly damaging usability).
So you mean that people never used gravity before it was discovered?
Saying things with conviction does not make them true (see Trump). I knew someone like you would jump to a knee-jerk rebuttal, so I threw in an example that was wrong, but for subtle reasons. There is no way to disprove that the stars travel around the earth, because you can build an entirely consistent mathematical system around just this assumption (indeed, the Ptolemaic theory utilized the scientific method to develop a crazy epicycle theory that was entirely consistent with experimental data - if not, just add smaller circles). Regarding your slander of the scientists I produced, Dick LIndzen was a professor of meterology at MIT with a background in middle-atmosphere. He has written on his positions over the last five years ... did you even bother to look at this wikipedia entry before spewing your nonsense?
You are a the prototypical religious extremist - you support your own views with whatever half-truths and loud arguments you can without regard to the facts. If you're convinced, great for you.
First of all, it doesn't matter how many people agree or disagree with climate science. Science is not a democratic process, and skepticism of science is an inherent part of the scientific process ... for thousands of years the world's leading scientists believe things like (i) the earth is flat, (ii) the stars travel around the earth, (iii) there are no limits on velocity ... those who wish to shut up the skeptics are behaving more like religious zealots than scientists.
Second of all, there are scientists like Dick Lindzen (MIT, retired), Freeman Dyson (Institute for Advanced Study), ... (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...) who make serious and informed arguments against the certainty of what is colloquially called "climate science".
I'll let you know ... in about a week.
You're telling me that, even though we cannot do certs properly for much more important applications, online testing is a solved problem???
This will just incentivize a black market of MOOC students for hire.
Altavista tried to monetize their search by biasing results based on ad revenue; Google didn't (at first). It turns out, people aren't interested in a biased product, even if it's free.
blocklist -> blacklist
Right ... but then you're still a beginner.
If you can debug a generic memory leak or bounds overrun (which might not cause a crash until long after the breach), then you are no longer a beginner.
Not everything that improves productivity is worth pursuing ...
Bill is a marketer, businessman, and, of late, a philanthropist ... but he knows blessed little about education. "Not all who excess in business are wise" - Ethics of the Fathers, 2:6.
Alexander Graham Bell was a BU professor initially ... interesting writeup at http://www.bu.edu/bridge/archi....
How do you steal 100 TB of sensitive data without any network, database or IDS alerts going off?
This will simply open up new attack surfaces on unsuspecting vehicles.
Pi day should be next year: 3/14/15 at 9:26:53.58 ...
I've seen too much poorly-written code to accept the statements that you don't need a degree to code well. It is true that you can write code that works without getting a broader CS education, much like you can do your own wiring or plumbing in your house. Much of the time, things will work. But then, one time your incorrect wire gauge will start a fire that can burn down your house, or (more likely in the business world) the house of the poor shmuck who bought the house from you (or inherited your code). I wouldn't hire someone who does not have a broad and systematic introduction to computer science.
There are effective and natural ways for mitigating laptop use in classrooms ... the most obvious of
which is better, interactive classroom management. Of course, this is impossible in a 300 person class ... but
maybe that says as much as about the colleges' priorities as the students'.
There is an entire field of study related to this topic, but, in short, Reed-Solomon codes are not currently the state of the art. There are much more efficient iterative codes (e.g. Low-Density Parity-Check codes) and there are also rateless codes for a more incremental protection. At any rate, the right place to use these is probably at the hardware level ... even if efficiency is not an issue, they tend to require a fair amount of redundancy.