Or, at the fucking least, do more to rouse the driver than just "psst warning you havent touched the wheel. touch it if you feel like it. or not. psst warning you havent..." which is exactly why this driver chose to ignore it. If the autopilot warning instead decelerated to the posted speed limit, blared a "wake up for your own safety" out of the speakers, or some other sufficiently annoying thing, then you can *actually call it a warning* instead of just a legal loophole Tesla is trying to use to not be liable for this. They did NOT issue the driver 7 safety warnings, they issued 7 safety memo gentle reminders. If they were warnings in any sense of the word they would have been more annoying than actually sitting up and driving.
Other cars (like the Honda lane assist/adaptive cruise) warn you and then FORCE you to not be a fucking idiot, by turning the system off before you get the stupid idea to completely rely on it. All that this Tesla system does differently than that is... give you a nice thick layer of overconfidence until the moment that the system completely fails you and careens you into a semi. Tesla deserves every ounce of bad press from this, they designed a system that failed in just the right way as to carry a man to his death. Plenty of other car makers saw the problem with this and thats why they "lag behind" Tesla. Tesla got way too fucking close to the sun and their customer got burned. They need to pay the repercussions.
Nah it seems that about half of slashdot expects a smart car with advertised skillful self driving and safety features might be able to recognize unsafe behavior (IT DID) and also warn about it (IT DID) but never in a million years actually act on it, and instead just play a rousing version of taps after carrying its driver to his/her death.
Everyone who, over the past year or two, has balked, laughed at, or ignored at the thought of drone-based package delivery can now stare blankly into the inevitable future. Ecommerce companies saw this coming. The first one there will absolutely crush their competition.
No they will just respond by asking for info about their competitors (to lead back to BK) or something more universal like "ok google why does flame broiled taste good". Its a game that Google literally cant win.
Exploiting it would be like saying "ok google open the burger king web page and rate it five stars" or "ok google text matt, i am going to burger king want to join" (everyone knows a matt, seriously). Instead they did something designed to be completely literally harmless. Google (and the dumb dumbs who put this assistant in their home blissfully unaware of the misdeeds that its capable of) needs a wakeup call, if anything.
The google home appliance was never designed to only listen to one operator. The owners know this. It is not trained to their voice, at all. There is no unauthorized use if the appliance was specifically designed to listen to ANYONE. Would be like saying visiting "google.com" is unauthorized because you dont have direct permission from Google. Nonsense, google put it there knowing (hoping) people would come along and use it. If you think its any different with this appliance, you are sorely mistaken. There is a big different between having a trivial lock (a login with no password) and having literally no lock at all, no door, not even an entryway, just a thing sitting in the street waiting for someone to come along and look at whats there.
If you want your race car to be light, just get rid of the battery entirely. You don't need a battery to race, only to crank the engine, something you really try to avoid doing whilst already racing.
You're right that very very few people go to that effort but thats not because of any intense expertise or expense. I have a similar setup with OpenWRT routers and APs (multiple devices in different locations with different specialties) a managed switch, VLANs, etc. Its all (except the distributed APs) on a wire shelf in my basement next to my electrical panel. Super easy.
Recommendations? Take the C7 and install OpenWRT on it. Super easy to use, reliable, and capable of any firewalling you can dream up (including on IPv6). Plus then you have a nice graph to tell you how much bandwidth is in use and by which device. If you have a botnet participant in your network it will be obvious.
The icing on the cake is that several of them (notably Bruce) basically saying security by obscurity really is a thing (well at least if you're famous)
"There are some additional things I do," Spafford added, telling the reporter that "I'm not going to give details of all of them, because that doesn't help me." Bruce Schneier had a similar answer. When the reporter asked how he protected his data, Schneier wouldn't tell them, adding "I'm kind of a target..."
So... security by obscurity is apparently highly regarded by the pros. Good to know.
Last time I did a support chat with Amazon there was an option to email a transcript or not. It asks at the end of the session. Why would the scammer be choosing to send the transcript every time? He basically gave himself away immediately when he did that.
Which is great, except that wind farms tend to be in places like the middle of nowhere, Kansas, or a mile or so offshore.
These vulnerable turbines aren't even utility scale like you are picturing. These are backyard farm turbines and the like. Those turbines do use secure interfaces and protected networks. But hey lets shit on the IoT because one small time vendor screwed up.
I work for a tech company. I don't think anyone has ever been asked if they had a criminal record during job interview in the 100+ people hired over the years.
Asked? Heavens no. The background check takes care of that. They only ever ask you to fill out the "have you had any felonies" form if they know you did and want to catch you lying.
They are being really nice, up until the most recent generation the jump from 16 to 32 was $100 and the jump from 16 to 64 was $200! They are giving you half off! Jeez some people don't know how good they have it.
You want to regulate pricing, so that you have a corrupt cartel which keeps competition limited and prices high?
Because that's what we had before Uber came around.
We don't need regulated pricing, we need competition. And that's what we have with Uber and Lyft (who compete against each other). What we need is a few more services like those, and then several apps which do for them what PadMapper does for the rental market, and aggregates them and lets you quickly find out which service will give you the best combination of fare price and convenience (e.g., a cheaper fare probably isn't worth it if you have to wait an hour to get picked up).
All this whining about surge pricing is silly. The pricing is not a surprise: Uber's app tells you before you ride how much it's going to cost. If the price is too high, don't buy it. Most of the time, Uber rides are far cheaper than regular cabs, and you get to ride in a much nicer vehicle. Without surge pricing, drivers wouldn't bother driving during certain times.
It is equally about keeping demand in check as it is encouraging more supply. Without surge pricing there simply wouldn't be uber rides to be had for 90% of the interested buyers. What would a rider rather have, a low price for a ride they almost certainly won't get because there is a 4 hour wait, or a high price for a ride they can get immediately.
Disrupt is an overloaded word. In this case it's in the "disruptive technology" sense: the USD > bitcoin > ARS automation allows for a 30% increase in revenue for any business that accepts foreign bank cards. Thats enough for people to stampede to it, the only thing holding it back will be how fast the payment terminals can be set up.
IRDA is back. Hey I have an idea, why not just have an access point that, for each user, drops a little cord out of the ceiling (where all access points are, right) and you plug it in for GIGABIT SPEEEDZZZS!!!1.
No but seriously why are we doing this when channels in the 5 Ghz spectrum are easy to come by.
Slashdot Mirror
Or, at the fucking least, do more to rouse the driver than just "psst warning you havent touched the wheel. touch it if you feel like it. or not. psst warning you havent..." which is exactly why this driver chose to ignore it. If the autopilot warning instead decelerated to the posted speed limit, blared a "wake up for your own safety" out of the speakers, or some other sufficiently annoying thing, then you can *actually call it a warning* instead of just a legal loophole Tesla is trying to use to not be liable for this. They did NOT issue the driver 7 safety warnings, they issued 7 safety memo gentle reminders. If they were warnings in any sense of the word they would have been more annoying than actually sitting up and driving.
Other cars (like the Honda lane assist/adaptive cruise) warn you and then FORCE you to not be a fucking idiot, by turning the system off before you get the stupid idea to completely rely on it. All that this Tesla system does differently than that is... give you a nice thick layer of overconfidence until the moment that the system completely fails you and careens you into a semi. Tesla deserves every ounce of bad press from this, they designed a system that failed in just the right way as to carry a man to his death. Plenty of other car makers saw the problem with this and thats why they "lag behind" Tesla. Tesla got way too fucking close to the sun and their customer got burned. They need to pay the repercussions.
Nah it seems that about half of slashdot expects a smart car with advertised skillful self driving and safety features might be able to recognize unsafe behavior (IT DID) and also warn about it (IT DID) but never in a million years actually act on it, and instead just play a rousing version of taps after carrying its driver to his/her death.
Everyone who, over the past year or two, has balked, laughed at, or ignored at the thought of drone-based package delivery can now stare blankly into the inevitable future. Ecommerce companies saw this coming. The first one there will absolutely crush their competition.
You mean to tell me that
A company was looking to sell bitcoin mining equipment for a huge profit
and instead of eschewing the tenets of bitcoins' distributed, robust design and egalitarian virtues
they baked in a kill switch, an INSECURE kill switch that could easily dismantle everyones equipment?
god, what will happen next?
No they will just respond by asking for info about their competitors (to lead back to BK) or something more universal like "ok google why does flame broiled taste good". Its a game that Google literally cant win.
Exploiting it would be like saying "ok google open the burger king web page and rate it five stars" or "ok google text matt, i am going to burger king want to join" (everyone knows a matt, seriously). Instead they did something designed to be completely literally harmless. Google (and the dumb dumbs who put this assistant in their home blissfully unaware of the misdeeds that its capable of) needs a wakeup call, if anything.
The google home appliance was never designed to only listen to one operator. The owners know this. It is not trained to their voice, at all. There is no unauthorized use if the appliance was specifically designed to listen to ANYONE. Would be like saying visiting "google.com" is unauthorized because you dont have direct permission from Google. Nonsense, google put it there knowing (hoping) people would come along and use it. If you think its any different with this appliance, you are sorely mistaken. There is a big different between having a trivial lock (a login with no password) and having literally no lock at all, no door, not even an entryway, just a thing sitting in the street waiting for someone to come along and look at whats there.
If you want your race car to be light, just get rid of the battery entirely. You don't need a battery to race, only to crank the engine, something you really try to avoid doing whilst already racing.
goddamnit that pun needs to end
I love how the three most battered/worn keys are "R" "U" and "N"
You're right that very very few people go to that effort but thats not because of any intense expertise or expense. I have a similar setup with OpenWRT routers and APs (multiple devices in different locations with different specialties) a managed switch, VLANs, etc. Its all (except the distributed APs) on a wire shelf in my basement next to my electrical panel. Super easy.
Recommendations? Take the C7 and install OpenWRT on it. Super easy to use, reliable, and capable of any firewalling you can dream up (including on IPv6). Plus then you have a nice graph to tell you how much bandwidth is in use and by which device. If you have a botnet participant in your network it will be obvious.
How will they know who is infected? Release a botnet of their own that finds exploited handsets and phones home to flag them?
The icing on the cake is that several of them (notably Bruce) basically saying security by obscurity really is a thing (well at least if you're famous)
"There are some additional things I do," Spafford added, telling the reporter that "I'm not going to give details of all of them, because that doesn't help me."
Bruce Schneier had a similar answer. When the reporter asked how he protected his data, Schneier wouldn't tell them, adding "I'm kind of a target..."
So... security by obscurity is apparently highly regarded by the pros. Good to know.
Last time I did a support chat with Amazon there was an option to email a transcript or not. It asks at the end of the session. Why would the scammer be choosing to send the transcript every time? He basically gave himself away immediately when he did that.
Which is great, except that wind farms tend to be in places like the middle of nowhere, Kansas, or a mile or so offshore.
These vulnerable turbines aren't even utility scale like you are picturing. These are backyard farm turbines and the like. Those turbines do use secure interfaces and protected networks. But hey lets shit on the IoT because one small time vendor screwed up.
Tagged itsnotits which clearly means the article has no tits at all. Skipping.
I work for a tech company. I don't think anyone has ever been asked if they had a criminal record during job interview in the 100+ people hired over the years.
Asked? Heavens no. The background check takes care of that. They only ever ask you to fill out the "have you had any felonies" form if they know you did and want to catch you lying.
They are being really nice, up until the most recent generation the jump from 16 to 32 was $100 and the jump from 16 to 64 was $200! They are giving you half off! Jeez some people don't know how good they have it.
You want to regulate pricing, so that you have a corrupt cartel which keeps competition limited and prices high?
Because that's what we had before Uber came around.
We don't need regulated pricing, we need competition. And that's what we have with Uber and Lyft (who compete against each other). What we need is a few more services like those, and then several apps which do for them what PadMapper does for the rental market, and aggregates them and lets you quickly find out which service will give you the best combination of fare price and convenience (e.g., a cheaper fare probably isn't worth it if you have to wait an hour to get picked up).
All this whining about surge pricing is silly. The pricing is not a surprise: Uber's app tells you before you ride how much it's going to cost. If the price is too high, don't buy it. Most of the time, Uber rides are far cheaper than regular cabs, and you get to ride in a much nicer vehicle. Without surge pricing, drivers wouldn't bother driving during certain times.
It is equally about keeping demand in check as it is encouraging more supply. Without surge pricing there simply wouldn't be uber rides to be had for 90% of the interested buyers. What would a rider rather have, a low price for a ride they almost certainly won't get because there is a 4 hour wait, or a high price for a ride they can get immediately.
Disrupt is an overloaded word. In this case it's in the "disruptive technology" sense: the USD > bitcoin > ARS automation allows for a 30% increase in revenue for any business that accepts foreign bank cards. Thats enough for people to stampede to it, the only thing holding it back will be how fast the payment terminals can be set up.
Here's to hoping they don't find any oil there, given the earthquakes it's caused in OK.
The magma is so close to the surface that there won't be the usual layer after deeper layer of hydrocarbons to go after.
Better yet: Here's hoping they find oil near the surface, extract it, and then turn the oil deposit wells into geothermal loops.
What an opportunity! We can extract high quality geothermal energy from the site AND cool the rock near the surface to prevent an eruption.
Disclaimer: I am not a geologist so this probably makes no sense at all
IRDA is back. Hey I have an idea, why not just have an access point that, for each user, drops a little cord out of the ceiling (where all access points are, right) and you plug it in for GIGABIT SPEEEDZZZS!!!1.
No but seriously why are we doing this when channels in the 5 Ghz spectrum are easy to come by.