So it's hard to see any logic behind what North Korea is doing.
There is a guy with no clue how to rule in charge of a country full of ignorant crazy people. There's already been one attempt to kill him and take his place. He now needs a distraction; any distraction. He is very likely to get killed soon, so he has nothing to lose by doing all sorts of crazy stuff.
Look up "nonstop". if you haven't soundproofed (and actually I mean all vibrations) your basement yet then you might as well be using Windows on the open iternet. I mean, get with the plan. This is, of course, after you have already built a Faraday cage and a fully independent power supply.
Where is it going to get the energy to get hot enough to burn through the containment box? There's only so much energy in that battery. Build a box to contain that and that's it - as long as the fools who can't wire batteries correctly don't figure out a way past that.
I would assume; well actually, I know that the battery is there for a reason. In the first few thousand hours of flights we have already had several failures. What is the chance that some time soonish the batteries burn out when they are needed. How do you feel about your fly by wire plane if the servos aren't working?
This is quite apart form the fact that having a battery like this in a place with no fire extinguisher seems like bad design to me.
Facebook created an ecosystem that companies like Facebook could use to push their brands.
Just like Google.
Which is the whole point. The mobile operators want a second source of something like Android so that they can push back against Apple safely.
The mobile operators realised that Skype is Microsoft's big plan to shaft them. They will allow it in on mobiles Microsoft agrees they control whilst Microsoft will get control via people's desktops in any case. Once that happens the mobile operators will be fucked since Microsoft will control their revenue.
Some of the operators (like AT&T) are so stupid they don't realise or corrupt they don't care but most of them saw what happened to the compiler industry or the word processor industry or Netscape or Sendo or anyone else who partnered with Microsoft. They want anyone, just anyone they can use as a second Apple alternative. As long as it isn't Microsoft.
Apple can Quattruple-AES-4096 encrypt the phone and close ALL Bugs including Jailbreak, if Paris uses "1234" as PIN, it won't matter (and i firmly belive that 1234 is too complex a password for her anyways...)
Not my quote please note. It is well known that to avoid the complexity of 1234 most people switch to 1111. This makes PIN codes terrible for exposed data.
If your default locking mechanism recommends a four digit PIN code and you have no way (like a bank) of enforcing a retry limit since it is possible to do a memory clone of your device, who is to blame if the mechanism fails? The customer who used it as it seemed to be designed or the engineer who chose the mechanism? The person who just went to a shop and assumed that the system they bought was fit for being a personal mobile device or the engineer who failed to make it that way.
iPhone has a 4 digit PIN, and full pass phrase, complete with timed lockout after multiple bad passwords, and with the option of wiping the device.
A six digit PIN would be nice, but would probably be birth dates too hohum.
It's typical for someone with little security experience to miss the fact that the attacker always goes for the weakest link. Having two different codes is likely to make things weaker than having one unless you are very very careful. In this particular case elcomsoft provides standard software which can use just the PIN to bypass all the other security measures. The hint that Apple got the implementation wrong is that the PIN still works after you have done a power on/off cycle. HoHumm indeed.
Samsung has come up with ideas such as facial recognition.
I thought that was cool too. But once I had fooled it with a (bad) photo of me displayed from my iPhone I decided that it was a terrible idea. I'm sure it would have problems with my habit of growing a beard and shaving it off every month or so too.
This is hardly new. The same problems apply to fingerprint readers and have been demonstrated many times. There are a number of solutions to this and it shouldn't be beyond Apple to come up with some of them. E.g. using the camera's focus make sure that the object is at the right distance for a face of its size; e.g. check for correct movement of the face and if the same movement repeats ask for a specific expression. E.g. check for three dimensionality using two separate cameras.
It would be perfectly possible to sell an RFID bracelet with the phone and unlock when within a few CM of it.
Yes, because RFID and NFC tokens can't be hacked, cloned or masqueraded as... http://www.libnfc.org/ has a nice toolkit there.
NFC is just an energy and data transfer standard. There is nothing to stop you implementing proper security behind that (e.g. even a public key challenge response crypto system).
Those are the ideas I can come up with in three seconds of thinking each of which is better than a PIN code.
And probably why you've not got a role in the IT security industry too, I'd wager?
I agree with your assertion that short PINs are a terrible idea, but biometrics are worse.
However, there's a huge gap between what a user will accept and what's accepted as good practice.
Users will undoubtably choose the lazy option.
Biometrics are really crap in some situations. For example on credit cards in dangerous countries where they can jus
Apple can Quattruple-AES-4096 encrypt the phone and close ALL Bugs including Jailbreak, if Paris uses "1234" as PIN, it won't matter (and i firmly belive that 1234 is too complex a password for her anyways...)
Typical blame the victim IT security type.
If your default locking mechanism recommends a four digit PIN code and you have no way (like a bank) of enforcing a retry limit since it is possible to do a memory clone of your device, who is to blame if the mechanism fails? The customer who used it as it seemed to be designed or the engineer who chose the mechanism? The person who just went to a shop and assumed that the system they bought was fit for being a personal mobile device or the engineer who failed to make it that way.
Samsung has come up with ideas such as facial recognition. Some devices allow full passphrases by default. It would be perfectly possible to sell an RFID bracelet with the phone and unlock when within a few CM of it. Those are the ideas I can come up with in three seconds of thinking each of which is better than a PIN code. Apple's designers should be able to do better with years and gigadollars on their side.
I know that failing to read the article is de rigueur. I do follow the new fashion on Slashdot of not reading the summary. However, failing to read the comment you are replying to is a new and excellent level of trolling. Well played that man. At no point in my comment did I claim Apple was involved but you just read a random sentence and then assumed I would. Cool.
Paris Hilton was a spokesperson for Danger's HipTop (Sidekick on T-Mobile). That was the phone that got hacked. And her endorsement of the phone was well known prior to the hacking. They had huge Hollywood parties and she appeared in public using the phone regularly.
Actually, it was widely publicised at the time that it the publicity campaign had been pretty much a failure up till the hack and that the hack caused a vast increase in sales. This teaches us several things
the public doesn't care about security
getting your systems hacked might be a major publicity win
there is no penalty.
This is not Apple's fault. In fact other offenders are worse. This is the fault of (in this order) a) the general public and b) the politicians and c) Microsoft (who taught this habit over long years) d) the rest of the industry which keeps failing to point this out.
Ask yourself whether Apple allows the plans for their latest secret product to be stored on their public cloud? I think you will find out that Apple knows fine well how to do security better than it currently chooses to.
Apple needs to get serious at the moment that it's customers care or at the moment someone put's legal liability on them and not a minute earlier. Given that the effect of Paris Hilton's phone getting hacked was to vastly increase the sales of the model, I don't think that's going to happen some time soon.
waves during a storm aren't rogue. They're waves. Rogue waves are the ones that appear suddenly, without warning.
Rogue waves can happen during a storm just as at any other time. The definition is simply that the wave is exceptional compared to the current height of waves. Obviously, a wave which is more than twice the significant wave height during a storm is going to be much more dangerous than a similarly exceptional wave on a calm day.
Furthermore, most rogue waves seem to involve nonlinear effects. This means that larger waves are more likely to trigger them and means that they actually probably are more likely to happen in a storm.
The irony of this was that, if Elop had just left Symbian and Meego alone, he would probably have had a better chance of driving Windows phone to success than he has now. Just look at how current Nokia phones are a generation behind the competition in terms of weight and features and think how much better they could be if Nokia just had the purchasing power for decent components. Have a look at how the user interface of many of their phones doesn't feel like anyone ever tested using it. Think what a difference it would have made if they didn't get rid of all their UI experts who would have been able to identify and start to fix all the problems in Windows 8.
Terrorism is the act of inducing fear into a society, to the point that individuals don't feel safe anymore.
You can, online, destroy the trust of people into banks, stalling any transactions because of fear/uncertainty. Without the loss of life.
Bullshit. Terrorism specifically involves violent acts towards civilians or military groups not currently involved in a war. Normally killing them in visible and public ways such as bombings.
Cyber-terrorism can be perfectly reasonably defined; things like: taking over train control systems and inducing the trains to crash into each other; opening dam flood gates and killing people; reprogramming medical systems to kill patients etc. etc.
People losing trust in banks which get broken into is called "good commercial sense". People publicising such attacks should be seen as "public spirited" given that they could just take the money and run.
All you'd be doing is converting fossil fuels --> energy --> hydrogen.
Why would you do that? There are lots of other sources of energy than fossil fuels.
One big use is for Nuclear plants. Nuclear power is a very big strain on a national grid since it must produce at a more or less constant rate 24 hours/day 356 days a year. Power usage of course varies very much depending on time of day and weather conditions so if you use more than a little bit of nuclear on your grid you have to have a way to dump the excess energy Nuclear plants generate when it's not needed. Pump storage is one place you can dump energy, however once your reservoirs are full you have a problem. This has even lead to the cost of electrical energy becoming negative at some points of time in some places. Being able to generate hydrogen at those times could soak up a whole load of excess energy. If you are being paid by the nuclear power plant to do that then it's even better.
Wind power is now one of the cheapest available sources of energy (e.g. 96 USD/MWh compared to 99 to 140 for coal depending on your generating system) but it has inherently variable output depending on how the wind is blowing so if you want to achieve reliability levels equivalent to other power sources you have to overbuild heavily. Now, wind is very convenient for a grid since it is easy to ramp up and reduce output almost instantly but the fact is that that's somewhat wasteful.
Instead of slowing down your wind generator when demand reduces below output, why not dump a load of that power into generating hydrogen. Remember also that the marginal cost of just leaving a wind generator running is extremely low even compared to the existing low price. The main cost of wind generation is capital cost and the additional wear may is marginal or may actually be negative (if you can avoid speed up/slow down cycles). This means that if you can generate hydrogen fast enough in a small enough space with a low enough capital investment it would really make sense to build plants like that close to large wind farms.
Apart from supply side stabilization, there's also plenty of value in building such storage systems close to large cities where nearby pump storage is unlikely to be available. This essentially allows the pre-existing transmission grid investment to be used more efficiently, evenly and continually. The hydrogen creation runs when consumer usage is low and electricity prices are cheap. When usage is high the gas can be burned to create energy. Whilst you are losing energy in the conversion process, you are saving plenty by getting essentially free transport on unused power lines.
Nope, I'm still ignorant. I thought all it took was a DC current and saltwater, with oxygen bubbling from one lead and hydrogen from the other?
Can one of you guys enlighten me? I hate being ignorant.
You are more or less right. That does work. However, the question is not just whether you can do it, but also how fast it happens and how much energy is lost in the process. Catalysts, like the one in the article, reduce energy barriers / increase the probability of a reaction and so make the whole thing more efficient. That can take things from "theoretically interesting" to "profitable industry".
]how would NK put a nuke on a container ship (do they even have those?) and ship it to the USA?
NK has this trading partner called "China". You may not have heard of them, but turn your mouse over and you will be in for a big surprise. Put a nuke on a ship to an obscure port in China; have your agent in the port move it onto a ship to the US.
Probably there's a 20% chance the Chinese catch this. Probably they would freak if they did. Whether anyone outside would ever hear about it is a completely different question.
.... nuclear power, namely electricity when you need it, not when the clouds allow for it..
There are several posts spreading this stupidity in this discussion once again. When running Nuclear plants produce power continually at a more or less constant rate. That is not even close to "when you need it". Electricity needs vary quite quickly. For example if there is a time when many people start cooking or boiling water. This happens on a big scale also when a nuclear plant has a failure and has to scram. In the normal operating range of a Nuclear plant changing output levels takes a long time and is undesirable because it makes the plant inefficient. Once you hear the reactor core you have to keep taking power it of it or you get problems like the ones in Japan not so long ago. This slow power output control is shared with coal plants but is much worse with nuclear.
There are a number of technologies which can give you direct control over the output. Batteries, flywheels and pump storage exist precisely for this but don't generate any electricity. Hydro is great but there are limits to how much you can afford to build. Gas fired are expensive but close to hydro in convenience. Solar and wind both provide you with real generating capacity which can easily be ramped up and shut down almost instantly. Tidal and wave power could also be okay in this way.
What this means is that any future "low carbon" electricity generating system, whether based on some imaginary low cost future nuclear system or on renewables just has to be able to store more of the generated electricity. Once you do this then there is really little benefit from Nuclear so the huge costs become unjustifiable.
What is really needed are reasonably efficient large scale ways of changing electricity and atmospheric carbon dioxide into hydrocarbons or alcohols. These are easy to store and could be used to generate power when needed or to power vehicles if there is an excess.
the fact that they already have all your traffic from outside the VPN logged elsewhere and that the court order they give says something like
from this day forward log all connections incoming from this customer and tell nobody you did this ever or you will be disappeared
they get the new log of traffic correlate various IDs in it with the old (browser IDs ; crypto secrets derived from your device MAC address, processor IDs embedded in message padding by software maintained by placemen etc.) and then they have everything.
Just think about the fact you don't know when they started monitoring. They ask you a series of questions like: did you, on the fifth of November, connect to dodgysite.com you of course say "no". Now they show you a video from your own bedroom with you at the keyboard and remind you that lying to an officer is a crime. Now you are basically forced to confess to each of the series which gives them a link across the time when their official monitoring started.
The only way to deal with this is open political. There really are needs for proper security against spies from Totalitarian regimes. It needs to be a serious criminal offence (order of 20 years in prison) to use those mechanisms against civilians of democratic countries. And if you think it's okay to just protect Americans then remember that their were definite rumors that the UK was charged by your own government with spying on you in order to work around such protections in the old days when they used to exist.
See if the new person is self motivated and willing to learn.
And; if this does turn out to be true; something completely rare; he's probably completely wasted on this company so either hire him yourself or recommend him to your friends. Wait, of course, until you have completely trained him so you get to spend maximum consulting time on it.
Earth's core... the Sun... the surface of Jupiter... the massive black hole at the center of the galaxy... I'd like to see any scenario where these are hacked.
I think what you are looking for is this hacking article from Wired. Given sufficient resources and determination almost nothing short of a supermassive blackhole is likely to be impossible to disrupt. Even about that I wouldn't be sure.
After dealing with SELinux, I have decided to take my chances with the boogieman of the wild Internet. Seriously, SELinux sucks so bad that nobody I know uses it. Not in production at work. Not even for playing around.
Which distribution? When? Generally SELinux on Debian based distros has always been a bit disasterous. From about Fedora 10 / RHEL 5 second update it's always been great. Also if there is a problem and you bug report it properly you can get a fix within a couple of days. I never turn of SELinux on those distros at all.
Ubuntu never really supported SELinux so forget that. You have to use AppArmor to get similar (but weaker) protection.
So, at what point do we wake up and realize that current models of hardware and software development are fundamentally flawed in terms of having products which by their very nature introduce unacceptable security risks to store any data or information? (I was going to write data or information which can cause monetary loss or expense, but really...)
This insight is as old as the hills. Or at least the '80s. It is the fundamental driver behind the "full disclosure" movement which has, in a sense, been and gone.
Or, rather, at what point does someone wake up and develop a system that can be trusted out of the box to be secure? And consumer buys into the nature that while shopping / releasing credit card data / etc. is fun and may be necessary, but it is in the best interest to pay a little more for a (less advanced) system that does not and can not be exploited?
Start by defining "trusted". Should my local system block me from putting my Visa card number into a web site because the web site isn't safe?
If you mean "locally trusted"; top level, secure operating systems running on very secure hardware have been build. Even in military applications they have become a commercial failure because it takes too long to build a feature on such a system so they mostly don't do the things that people need of them.
So; in the end; the answer to this is that things will only get better when people are willing to sacrifice some feature development for more secure development. Ask yourself; how many of us today are posting from OpenBSD? How many of us are posting from inside an SELinux sandbox? Both of those already have all of the features needed to do so. If you aren't willing to make the small sacrifices needed to run OpenBSD or web browse from inside a proper sandbox, how can you complain about the fact that the rest of the world which is even less interested in technology won't do anything about it?
Just start giving companies selling (N.B. not programmers writing; it has to be commercial system distributors) computer systems some liability for security failures (e.g. up to a max. of 10 times the price of the product they sold) and this will become much much better. As long as nobody's willing to do that nothing will happen.
The US constitution does not rule out plea bargains of any kind. However it does rule out the current system of bargains used in the US. That is simply in there in the section which gives you the right to a "fair and speedy trial". Being threatened with 30 years, no matter how unlikely, for a breach of a web site TOS is not something that can be part of any "fair" process. Having to wait years to even know what you are charged with is nothing like "speedy". Pretty soon after you are arrested you should know what they plan to charge you with.
Slashdot Mirror
How about giving us a specific link to a faked cetificate from a specific "US" CA?
So it's hard to see any logic behind what North Korea is doing.
There is a guy with no clue how to rule in charge of a country full of ignorant crazy people. There's already been one attempt to kill him and take his place. He now needs a distraction; any distraction. He is very likely to get killed soon, so he has nothing to lose by doing all sorts of crazy stuff.
I hope this logic helps you sleep.
Look up "nonstop". if you haven't soundproofed (and actually I mean all vibrations) your basement yet then you might as well be using Windows on the open iternet. I mean, get with the plan. This is, of course, after you have already built a Faraday cage and a fully independent power supply.
Where is it going to get the energy to get hot enough to burn through the containment box? There's only so much energy in that battery. Build a box to contain that and that's it - as long as the fools who can't wire batteries correctly don't figure out a way past that.
I would assume; well actually, I know that the battery is there for a reason. In the first few thousand hours of flights we have already had several failures. What is the chance that some time soonish the batteries burn out when they are needed. How do you feel about your fly by wire plane if the servos aren't working?
This is quite apart form the fact that having a battery like this in a place with no fire extinguisher seems like bad design to me.
Facebook created an ecosystem that companies like Facebook could use to push their brands.
Just like Google.
Which is the whole point. The mobile operators want a second source of something like Android so that they can push back against Apple safely.
The mobile operators realised that Skype is Microsoft's big plan to shaft them. They will allow it in on mobiles Microsoft agrees they control whilst Microsoft will get control via people's desktops in any case. Once that happens the mobile operators will be fucked since Microsoft will control their revenue.
Some of the operators (like AT&T) are so stupid they don't realise or corrupt they don't care but most of them saw what happened to the compiler industry or the word processor industry or Netscape or Sendo or anyone else who partnered with Microsoft. They want anyone, just anyone they can use as a second Apple alternative. As long as it isn't Microsoft.
Apple can Quattruple-AES-4096 encrypt the phone and close ALL Bugs including Jailbreak, if Paris uses "1234" as PIN, it won't matter (and i firmly belive that 1234 is too complex a password for her anyways...)
And for most people it seems. Have you read: http://www.datagenetics.com/blog/september32012/ ?
Not my quote please note. It is well known that to avoid the complexity of 1234 most people switch to 1111. This makes PIN codes terrible for exposed data.
If your default locking mechanism recommends a four digit PIN code and you have no way (like a bank) of enforcing a retry limit since it is possible to do a memory clone of your device, who is to blame if the mechanism fails? The customer who used it as it seemed to be designed or the engineer who chose the mechanism? The person who just went to a shop and assumed that the system they bought was fit for being a personal mobile device or the engineer who failed to make it that way.
iPhone has a 4 digit PIN, and full pass phrase, complete with timed lockout after multiple bad passwords, and with the option of wiping the device. A six digit PIN would be nice, but would probably be birth dates too hohum.
It's typical for someone with little security experience to miss the fact that the attacker always goes for the weakest link. Having two different codes is likely to make things weaker than having one unless you are very very careful. In this particular case elcomsoft provides standard software which can use just the PIN to bypass all the other security measures. The hint that Apple got the implementation wrong is that the PIN still works after you have done a power on/off cycle. HoHumm indeed.
Samsung has come up with ideas such as facial recognition.
I thought that was cool too. But once I had fooled it with a (bad) photo of me displayed from my iPhone I decided that it was a terrible idea. I'm sure it would have problems with my habit of growing a beard and shaving it off every month or so too.
This is hardly new. The same problems apply to fingerprint readers and have been demonstrated many times. There are a number of solutions to this and it shouldn't be beyond Apple to come up with some of them. E.g. using the camera's focus make sure that the object is at the right distance for a face of its size; e.g. check for correct movement of the face and if the same movement repeats ask for a specific expression. E.g. check for three dimensionality using two separate cameras.
It would be perfectly possible to sell an RFID bracelet with the phone and unlock when within a few CM of it.
Yes, because RFID and NFC tokens can't be hacked, cloned or masqueraded as ... http://www.libnfc.org/ has a nice toolkit there.
NFC is just an energy and data transfer standard. There is nothing to stop you implementing proper security behind that (e.g. even a public key challenge response crypto system).
Those are the ideas I can come up with in three seconds of thinking each of which is better than a PIN code.
And probably why you've not got a role in the IT security industry too, I'd wager?
I agree with your assertion that short PINs are a terrible idea, but biometrics are worse. However, there's a huge gap between what a user will accept and what's accepted as good practice. Users will undoubtably choose the lazy option.
Biometrics are really crap in some situations. For example on credit cards in dangerous countries where they can jus
Apple can Quattruple-AES-4096 encrypt the phone and close ALL Bugs including Jailbreak, if Paris uses "1234" as PIN, it won't matter (and i firmly belive that 1234 is too complex a password for her anyways...)
Typical blame the victim IT security type.
If your default locking mechanism recommends a four digit PIN code and you have no way (like a bank) of enforcing a retry limit since it is possible to do a memory clone of your device, who is to blame if the mechanism fails? The customer who used it as it seemed to be designed or the engineer who chose the mechanism? The person who just went to a shop and assumed that the system they bought was fit for being a personal mobile device or the engineer who failed to make it that way.
Samsung has come up with ideas such as facial recognition. Some devices allow full passphrases by default. It would be perfectly possible to sell an RFID bracelet with the phone and unlock when within a few CM of it. Those are the ideas I can come up with in three seconds of thinking each of which is better than a PIN code. Apple's designers should be able to do better with years and gigadollars on their side.
Apple wasn't involved.
I know that failing to read the article is de rigueur. I do follow the new fashion on Slashdot of not reading the summary. However, failing to read the comment you are replying to is a new and excellent level of trolling. Well played that man. At no point in my comment did I claim Apple was involved but you just read a random sentence and then assumed I would. Cool.
Paris Hilton was a spokesperson for Danger's HipTop (Sidekick on T-Mobile). That was the phone that got hacked. And her endorsement of the phone was well known prior to the hacking. They had huge Hollywood parties and she appeared in public using the phone regularly.
Actually, it was widely publicised at the time that it the publicity campaign had been pretty much a failure up till the hack and that the hack caused a vast increase in sales. This teaches us several things
This is not Apple's fault. In fact other offenders are worse. This is the fault of (in this order) a) the general public and b) the politicians and c) Microsoft (who taught this habit over long years) d) the rest of the industry which keeps failing to point this out.
Ask yourself whether Apple allows the plans for their latest secret product to be stored on their public cloud? I think you will find out that Apple knows fine well how to do security better than it currently chooses to.
Apple needs to get serious at the moment that it's customers care or at the moment someone put's legal liability on them and not a minute earlier. Given that the effect of Paris Hilton's phone getting hacked was to vastly increase the sales of the model, I don't think that's going to happen some time soon.
waves during a storm aren't rogue. They're waves. Rogue waves are the ones that appear suddenly, without warning.
Rogue waves can happen during a storm just as at any other time. The definition is simply that the wave is exceptional compared to the current height of waves. Obviously, a wave which is more than twice the significant wave height during a storm is going to be much more dangerous than a similarly exceptional wave on a calm day.
Furthermore, most rogue waves seem to involve nonlinear effects. This means that larger waves are more likely to trigger them and means that they actually probably are more likely to happen in a storm.
You bought a Media Access Control? How much did it cost?
The problem is the IEEE only sells them in blocks of several thousand. Individually they are cheap, but if you want just one then it's gonna cost you.
It was a dynamic market, and they didn't see Smartphone Apps becoming the driving force.
There is only one diagram you need to understand (from this informative article to see that this is bullshit. When Steven Elop came into Nokia, Nokia's Smartphone market share was increasing . Nokia may have had a problem coming five years out, but at the moment they were doing fine.
The irony of this was that, if Elop had just left Symbian and Meego alone, he would probably have had a better chance of driving Windows phone to success than he has now. Just look at how current Nokia phones are a generation behind the competition in terms of weight and features and think how much better they could be if Nokia just had the purchasing power for decent components. Have a look at how the user interface of many of their phones doesn't feel like anyone ever tested using it. Think what a difference it would have made if they didn't get rid of all their UI experts who would have been able to identify and start to fix all the problems in Windows 8.
Terrorism is the act of inducing fear into a society, to the point that individuals don't feel safe anymore.
You can, online, destroy the trust of people into banks, stalling any transactions because of fear/uncertainty. Without the loss of life.
Bullshit. Terrorism specifically involves violent acts towards civilians or military groups not currently involved in a war. Normally killing them in visible and public ways such as bombings.
Cyber-terrorism can be perfectly reasonably defined; things like: taking over train control systems and inducing the trains to crash into each other; opening dam flood gates and killing people; reprogramming medical systems to kill patients etc. etc.
People losing trust in banks which get broken into is called "good commercial sense". People publicising such attacks should be seen as "public spirited" given that they could just take the money and run.
I'm lost... Why are you calling the U.S. a communist dictatorship?
He works as the CEO of a large financial institution. After the Bush/Obama bailout it felt like he was a member of the Politburo.
All you'd be doing is converting fossil fuels --> energy --> hydrogen.
Why would you do that? There are lots of other sources of energy than fossil fuels.
One big use is for Nuclear plants. Nuclear power is a very big strain on a national grid since it must produce at a more or less constant rate 24 hours /day 356 days a year. Power usage of course varies very much depending on time of day and weather conditions so if you use more than a little bit of nuclear on your grid you have to have a way to dump the excess energy Nuclear plants generate when it's not needed. Pump storage is one place you can dump energy, however once your reservoirs are full you have a problem. This has even lead to the cost of electrical energy becoming negative at some points of time in some places. Being able to generate hydrogen at those times could soak up a whole load of excess energy. If you are being paid by the nuclear power plant to do that then it's even better.
Wind power is now one of the cheapest available sources of energy (e.g. 96 USD/MWh compared to 99 to 140 for coal depending on your generating system) but it has inherently variable output depending on how the wind is blowing so if you want to achieve reliability levels equivalent to other power sources you have to overbuild heavily. Now, wind is very convenient for a grid since it is easy to ramp up and reduce output almost instantly but the fact is that that's somewhat wasteful.
Instead of slowing down your wind generator when demand reduces below output, why not dump a load of that power into generating hydrogen. Remember also that the marginal cost of just leaving a wind generator running is extremely low even compared to the existing low price. The main cost of wind generation is capital cost and the additional wear may is marginal or may actually be negative (if you can avoid speed up/slow down cycles). This means that if you can generate hydrogen fast enough in a small enough space with a low enough capital investment it would really make sense to build plants like that close to large wind farms.
Apart from supply side stabilization, there's also plenty of value in building such storage systems close to large cities where nearby pump storage is unlikely to be available. This essentially allows the pre-existing transmission grid investment to be used more efficiently, evenly and continually. The hydrogen creation runs when consumer usage is low and electricity prices are cheap. When usage is high the gas can be burned to create energy. Whilst you are losing energy in the conversion process, you are saving plenty by getting essentially free transport on unused power lines.
Nope, I'm still ignorant. I thought all it took was a DC current and saltwater, with oxygen bubbling from one lead and hydrogen from the other?
Can one of you guys enlighten me? I hate being ignorant.
You are more or less right. That does work. However, the question is not just whether you can do it, but also how fast it happens and how much energy is lost in the process. Catalysts, like the one in the article, reduce energy barriers / increase the probability of a reaction and so make the whole thing more efficient. That can take things from "theoretically interesting" to "profitable industry".
]how would NK put a nuke on a container ship (do they even have those?) and ship it to the USA?
NK has this trading partner called "China". You may not have heard of them, but turn your mouse over and you will be in for a big surprise. Put a nuke on a ship to an obscure port in China; have your agent in the port move it onto a ship to the US.
Probably there's a 20% chance the Chinese catch this. Probably they would freak if they did. Whether anyone outside would ever hear about it is a completely different question.
.... nuclear power, namely electricity when you need it, not when the clouds allow for it..
There are several posts spreading this stupidity in this discussion once again. When running Nuclear plants produce power continually at a more or less constant rate. That is not even close to "when you need it". Electricity needs vary quite quickly. For example if there is a time when many people start cooking or boiling water. This happens on a big scale also when a nuclear plant has a failure and has to scram. In the normal operating range of a Nuclear plant changing output levels takes a long time and is undesirable because it makes the plant inefficient. Once you hear the reactor core you have to keep taking power it of it or you get problems like the ones in Japan not so long ago. This slow power output control is shared with coal plants but is much worse with nuclear.
There are a number of technologies which can give you direct control over the output. Batteries, flywheels and pump storage exist precisely for this but don't generate any electricity. Hydro is great but there are limits to how much you can afford to build. Gas fired are expensive but close to hydro in convenience. Solar and wind both provide you with real generating capacity which can easily be ramped up and shut down almost instantly. Tidal and wave power could also be okay in this way.
What this means is that any future "low carbon" electricity generating system, whether based on some imaginary low cost future nuclear system or on renewables just has to be able to store more of the generated electricity. Once you do this then there is really little benefit from Nuclear so the huge costs become unjustifiable.
What is really needed are reasonably efficient large scale ways of changing electricity and atmospheric carbon dioxide into hydrocarbons or alcohols. These are easy to store and could be used to generate power when needed or to power vehicles if there is an excess.
am I missing something?
the fact that they already have all your traffic from outside the VPN logged elsewhere and that the court order they give says something like
they get the new log of traffic correlate various IDs in it with the old (browser IDs ; crypto secrets derived from your device MAC address, processor IDs embedded in message padding by software maintained by placemen etc.) and then they have everything.
Just think about the fact you don't know when they started monitoring. They ask you a series of questions like: did you, on the fifth of November, connect to dodgysite.com you of course say "no". Now they show you a video from your own bedroom with you at the keyboard and remind you that lying to an officer is a crime. Now you are basically forced to confess to each of the series which gives them a link across the time when their official monitoring started.
The only way to deal with this is open political. There really are needs for proper security against spies from Totalitarian regimes. It needs to be a serious criminal offence (order of 20 years in prison) to use those mechanisms against civilians of democratic countries. And if you think it's okay to just protect Americans then remember that their were definite rumors that the UK was charged by your own government with spying on you in order to work around such protections in the old days when they used to exist.
I love the way you neatly sidestepped the Spanish inquisition trap there :-)
See if the new person is self motivated and willing to learn.
And; if this does turn out to be true; something completely rare; he's probably completely wasted on this company so either hire him yourself or recommend him to your friends. Wait, of course, until you have completely trained him so you get to spend maximum consulting time on it.
Earth's core... the Sun... the surface of Jupiter... the massive black hole at the center of the galaxy... I'd like to see any scenario where these are hacked.
I think what you are looking for is this hacking article from Wired. Given sufficient resources and determination almost nothing short of a supermassive blackhole is likely to be impossible to disrupt. Even about that I wouldn't be sure.
After dealing with SELinux, I have decided to take my chances with the boogieman of the wild Internet. Seriously, SELinux sucks so bad that nobody I know uses it. Not in production at work. Not even for playing around.
Which distribution? When? Generally SELinux on Debian based distros has always been a bit disasterous. From about Fedora 10 / RHEL 5 second update it's always been great. Also if there is a problem and you bug report it properly you can get a fix within a couple of days. I never turn of SELinux on those distros at all.
Ubuntu never really supported SELinux so forget that. You have to use AppArmor to get similar (but weaker) protection.
So, at what point do we wake up and realize that current models of hardware and software development are fundamentally flawed in terms of having products which by their very nature introduce unacceptable security risks to store any data or information? (I was going to write data or information which can cause monetary loss or expense, but really...)
This insight is as old as the hills. Or at least the '80s. It is the fundamental driver behind the "full disclosure" movement which has, in a sense, been and gone.
Or, rather, at what point does someone wake up and develop a system that can be trusted out of the box to be secure? And consumer buys into the nature that while shopping / releasing credit card data / etc. is fun and may be necessary, but it is in the best interest to pay a little more for a (less advanced) system that does not and can not be exploited?
Start by defining "trusted". Should my local system block me from putting my Visa card number into a web site because the web site isn't safe?
If you mean "locally trusted"; top level, secure operating systems running on very secure hardware have been build. Even in military applications they have become a commercial failure because it takes too long to build a feature on such a system so they mostly don't do the things that people need of them.
So; in the end; the answer to this is that things will only get better when people are willing to sacrifice some feature development for more secure development. Ask yourself; how many of us today are posting from OpenBSD? How many of us are posting from inside an SELinux sandbox? Both of those already have all of the features needed to do so. If you aren't willing to make the small sacrifices needed to run OpenBSD or web browse from inside a proper sandbox, how can you complain about the fact that the rest of the world which is even less interested in technology won't do anything about it?
Just start giving companies selling (N.B. not programmers writing; it has to be commercial system distributors) computer systems some liability for security failures (e.g. up to a max. of 10 times the price of the product they sold) and this will become much much better. As long as nobody's willing to do that nothing will happen.
The US constitution does not rule out plea bargains of any kind. However it does rule out the current system of bargains used in the US. That is simply in there in the section which gives you the right to a "fair and speedy trial". Being threatened with 30 years, no matter how unlikely, for a breach of a web site TOS is not something that can be part of any "fair" process. Having to wait years to even know what you are charged with is nothing like "speedy". Pretty soon after you are arrested you should know what they plan to charge you with.