Yeah, never mind the historical significance of Cousteau, whose interest was peaceful research in a static underwater environment rather than driving around in an underwater penis to determine the best place to start Armageddon.
Fucking French don't even have a word for entrepreneur!
In case this is intended to be particularly critical of the French, they do indeed have 4 ballistic missile submarines and 6 attack submarines in their navy, all of which routinely spend more than 30 days underwater at a time.
Ballistic missile submarines regularly spend 80+ days underwater, even during peacetime. How is 30 days a record?
They _still_ don't use Twitter, Skype, etc (even though it has been technologically possible for over a decade) whereas for some reason that is of particular interest to him. Maybe he wants to set a record for deepest depths a human has traveled into the depths of his own narcissism? I am interested to see how his Facebook wall holds up.
I'm sure gather heat and wind information is the top priority of citizens who live in the murder capital of America.
In case there was any doubt: here is your ongoing proof that Fox is "fair and balanced" (/sarcasm). The headline reads: "FBI: Chicago officially America's murder capital" but did the FBI report contain anything suggesting the term "Murder Capital" was appropriate? Let's see... nope. OK, maybe the report particularly damns Chicago's poor attempts to reduce gun violence? Hmm, nope it doesn't say anything specific about Chicago at all. Where is the fine print at? Oh, ok, there it is! Chicago is, per capita, safer than almost all the other large cities in the US (NYC and LA as notable exceptions). So, in case you were wondering, the "Murder Capital" race is a toss up between Detroit (54 murders per 100k), and New Orleans (53 murders per 100k).
No math, algorithm, software, firmware, chemicals found in nature, intangible idea or process or conceptual tangible goods that have not actually been made should be eligible for patent protection.
You will die exactly once (barring a zombie apocalypse, in the event of which I am going to disavow any credit for this post) so why reinvent the wheel if it's only going to get one turn anyway? Hire a reputable family lawyer, set up a will detailing your important documents (and whatever else you are giving away), name an executor, choose a safe place (in meatspace) for the documents to live in the meantime, and then enjoy your retirement.
If your excuse for what happened is this, that it is pure incompetence, that alone should cause a high level concern regarding a very powerful arm of government (IRS) being run in an incompetent way. The problem is we treat incompetence better than nefariousness, when they should be treated exactly the same way. Because if you cannot tell the difference in the results, they are the same.
And actually, if you ask me, incompetence is worse, because it allows the Nefarious to use it as an excuse to get away with high crimes and misdemeanors.
Gross incompetence should be crime, akin to willful negligence, just to stop it from being used as an excuse for nefarious acts.
As many others have pointed out, there is no obligation for the IRS to retain email records for longer than 6 months. So what you call incompetence is really your own inability to understand the requirements. No one told anyone else to "keep these emails sacred, back them up in 3 places, never let more than 2 of the backups get within 100mi of each other, etc" so no, there is not any appropriate punishment here unless you can demonstrate that the emails would have been retained (perhaps by some ultra-vigilant employee) but were not, as a result of a higher up specifically ordering their destruction.
It truly baffles me to no end when people use the wrongs of the past to somehow justify the wrongs of today.
So I guess we just say F' it and let our elected officials get away with whatever they want. Justice was overrated anyways.
No need to be baffled. You are seeing his statement backward. He is not saying this case is excusable because it happened before, he is asking why this case is being treated with such fervor while the previous one wasn't. After all, this thread is metanews about the reaction to the scandal, not any reflection on the actual happenings at the IRS/Treasury.
"We've been informed that the hard drive has been thrown away," - Sen. Orrin Hatch:Finance Committee
What exactly prompted you to attempt that lame non-sequitor to Fox News? How exactly does it support any position that this did not happen, which was your obvious attempt to imply?
OK, here you go: The hard drive containing her emails "crashed" (it was unusable and could not be recovered by the IRS IT staff) and as a result, it was recycled/destroyed and replaced with a new one. The actual source was a Politico story which, besides conjecture, contained only this brief line of concrete information:
“We’ve been informed that the hard drive has been thrown away,” Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah, the top Republican on the Finance Committee, said in a brief hallway interview.
So, unless there is some compelling reason to think that the drive was corrupted purposefully, or the recovery was disingenuous, then all you have here is SOP for any IT department (fix what's broke). Yet the only thing we see on Foxnews.com is a story painted to look exactly like the uncovering of a conspiracy (see all the other rants about impeachment for an example of how severely people are overreacting to this.)
time warner cable in NYC will rent the cable card and adapter for $2.50 a month compared to $10 or more for the cable box
Nevermind that you have to go seriously out of your way to find a TV that even has a cablecard slot in it... TV makers are racing to cram more Apps in, ethernet and wifi ports, USB, and all that, but ignore cablecard completely. First world problems...
If you've got a better way to toast a cheese sandwich while watching tv, I'd like to hear it.
If it doesn't involve lasers, flamethrowers or nuclear reactors, it's not a good was to toast a cheese sandwich.
Didn't you read the stub? Four nuclear reactors!
Speaking of which, I think that means cable boxes are carbon neutral, since they are apparently powered by four giant nuclear reactors. So, I can finally stop buying carbon credits for my cable box carbon footprint! Hooray.
Site uses the Ikea logo and colors and contains no disclaimer. I can see how people could mistake it for an "official" site.
There's a right way and a wrong way to do this. Sounds like they have chosen the wrong way.
Because a C&D is somehow damaging to the "IkeaHackers.net" brand beyond the obviously untenable position regarding their name? If IkeaHackers is serious about operating in good faith they will choose a similar but un-infringing name and go on with their lives. The wrong way would be a C&D followed the next day by a court order and the day after by a subpoena and lawsuit.
Unless there is some sort of "yeah, it's just DSL speeds, but we do something really clever upstream to make it as hard to DDOS as a connection a million times as fast" service, that might actually be how Amazon, Azure, or any other web-services-oriented rental service could manipulate the bitcoin scene:
I believe (but am not an expert) that the mining pool concept is what accounts for this. The pool (one main server assigning jobs) runs on a nice fat, multi-homed system with plenty of bandwidth in every direction. Then, the ASIC-based miners sign on to the pool and do the crunching for it. This has the effect of both allowing the pool to maintain constant operations, and to hide the ASIC miners from public view.
I wonder what happens if someone with more than enough CPU power to get 99% of the mining jumps in one night. What kind of Damage could they do in a short interval before people notice? What if their goals were not to steal bitcoins but rather to snatch all the coins from, say, Kim Jong Un, or Al Queda. E.g. for example the NSA or Samsung or Saudi arabia. They would not care about the loss of value in their stolen coins, the point is to deprive an adversaries use of them.
Does the Amazon or Azure networks have enough rentable time to pull this off?
Custom made ASICs are so much more powerful than GP CPUs that no, I doubt all the rentable cloud capacity currently in existence (if you could manage to muster it) would compare to the mining capacity in use via ASICs.
Mining pools and custom hardware do make it possible for a large enough group to get over 50%, especially as the need for mining hardware crowds CPU and GPU miners out of the game. We'll see whether they decide it's more useful to stay over 50% and cheat, stay over 50% and not cheat, or split the pool into two or more pieces to keep the value of their Bitcoins higher than they would be if the market abandons Bitcoin because of perceptions of cheating.
Postulate 3 (split the pool up) raises a very interesting question: if the operators are anonymous, can the pool ever be split in such a way that we are sure the same group doesn't control both pools? With clandestine collaboration, two pools totalling over 50% of the total could perform the same treachery that a single pool would. Since we don't know who controls it, how do we know who *doesn't* control it, or does it matter?
I can get 8 core systems sub $1k. It depends on the type of hardware really which it doesn't specify; 20+ cores in a single machine has been available since at least the turn of the century they always cost an arm and a leg though because of the complexities of integrating that many CPUs in a single machine. A combination of boxes amounting to the same amount of CPU, RAM etc has always been cheaper but also larger and harder to use.
The less you spend per core (by having them less concentrated) the more you will spend on interconnecting them in a way befitting a supercomputer (i.e. massive parallelism). A pile of machines totaling 600 cores on a gigabit switch is of very little use compared to a few mega-core machines on a better, smaller network. And you don't want to know how much all the fabric would cost to properly integrate all of those 8 core systems.
under 1 hour... so let's assume half an hour... that is still like $250 a day for a cluster like that could be built for under $10,000... break even is within 2 months of use including electricity, so really those prices are still pretty high, it's just that most people only need that kind of power for short bursts of time.
the great Google App Engine vs. Amazon Elastic Beanstalk wars are coming.
$10,000 barely gets you ONE modern well-equipped 20 core server system (I am thinking in particular of the Dell R820/R920 platforms) so no, while you could probably heap together 100 or so ARM cores for $10/core and get something to run on it, a supercomputer it is not.
You average GOP voter strongly values privacy and will not look kindly at this kind of targeted approach.
Your average [either party] voter is already mined and targeted at _every_ election, whether they know/like it or not. And somehow there hasn't been a revolt. The difference in this particular effort is really just the story's presence on Slashdot.
What legislation forced the ISPs to connect to the unprofitable areas, without compensation that was vastly more than the cost. Shoot I would just like to know the legislation that forced this at all....
Ah but the assertion was not about ISPs at all, was it? Try reading.
If I were personally going to use one of Tesla's patents in my business, I'd want a signed zero-cost GPL-like license agreement with Tesla. For example, Musk's good will is nice, but what if someone else were to acquire Tesla's IP?
To that end, "good faith" doesn't have a history in patent law; he could take anyone who was using the patents to seriously compete or encroach on Tesla's existing market share as lacking it, and there would be no recourse.
This happens all the time amongst competitors. It doesn't mean they want to reverse engineer or violate patents; it is usually so you can educate yourself as to what your competitors are up to and make sure that you're staying competitive.
Rather, aside from maintaining competitive positioning, they are probably looking for anything novel that hasn't been patented yet, so they can copy it (and perhaps patent it themselves). Not every invention is patented or even patent worthy but it still could be valuable.
What about pre-release/beta products that aren't commercially available and haven't started shipping yet?
Even better! Really if that's true then the VAR was clearly given too much trust in who it decides to sell pre-release products to. They should go to established customers with a good history of cooperation, not just anyone who asks. All I can say about this story is "and I bet Juniper is doing the same thing".
That's not the case with commercial car sharing because they only get to tag along. I would not go to their destination if I wasn't going there anyway.
That's an assertion so dubious it's hard to know where to start. I suppose that it would be fair for lawmakers to mandate a lie detector feature in your car when you are driving for Uber, to ascertain if you are really driving of your own direct will, or acting based on the guy in the back seat who just agreed to pay you by the minute.
ACM seems like a reputable publication so I was going in to it thinking I was about to read some interesting stuff, and then this happened:
Even the time of day can be exploited. In 2013 a network attack known as NTP Amplification used Network Time Protocol servers across the Internet in a distributed denial-of-service attack. By spoofing the IP address of a requester, an ever-larger stream of packets could be aimed at a target, swamping the target's ability to respond to TCP/IP requests.
lolwut. The time of day was not exploited, not even a little. The boneheaded "Feature" of having a command to recall a large chunk of data via unauthenticated UDP was exploited. They go on to explain a basic denial of service attack and finish it off by misusing a term as basic as TCP/IP (it doesn't matter what protocol you are using when you are the target of a DDOS, your pipe is blocked period). I will go ahead and stop reading now.
Nah. An app could ask for your firstborn and plenty of people will still click through install it. Nigerian 419 scams don't work for no reason.
You are _still_ missing the point. This has nothing to do with user behavior. The apps are being designed, by the software developers, to touch fewer pieces of "sensitive data". Presumably (though there is no hard evidence to support it) this is done because developers prefer to have a cleaner permissions sheet, since in Android it is seen by every user at install time. So given two equally oblivious users, one with an iOS device and one with an Android device, if they fire up the same app the Android user is less likely to leak sensitive information in some way because the app itself is better behaved. Of course there are plenty of other vectors for it to happen (on both platforms) but in the context of the study in question, this is a data-supported fact.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, never mind the historical significance of Cousteau, whose interest was peaceful research in a static underwater environment rather than driving around in an underwater penis to determine the best place to start Armageddon.
Fucking French don't even have a word for entrepreneur!
In case this is intended to be particularly critical of the French, they do indeed have 4 ballistic missile submarines and 6 attack submarines in their navy, all of which routinely spend more than 30 days underwater at a time.
Ballistic missile submarines regularly spend 80+ days underwater, even during peacetime. How is 30 days a record?
They _still_ don't use Twitter, Skype, etc (even though it has been technologically possible for over a decade) whereas for some reason that is of particular interest to him. Maybe he wants to set a record for deepest depths a human has traveled into the depths of his own narcissism? I am interested to see how his Facebook wall holds up.
I'm sure gather heat and wind information is the top priority of citizens who live in the murder capital of America.
In case there was any doubt: here is your ongoing proof that Fox is "fair and balanced" (/sarcasm). The headline reads: "FBI: Chicago officially America's murder capital" but did the FBI report contain anything suggesting the term "Murder Capital" was appropriate? Let's see... nope. OK, maybe the report particularly damns Chicago's poor attempts to reduce gun violence? Hmm, nope it doesn't say anything specific about Chicago at all. Where is the fine print at? Oh, ok, there it is! Chicago is, per capita, safer than almost all the other large cities in the US (NYC and LA as notable exceptions). So, in case you were wondering, the "Murder Capital" race is a toss up between Detroit (54 murders per 100k), and New Orleans (53 murders per 100k).
No math, algorithm, software, firmware, chemicals found in nature, intangible idea or process or conceptual tangible goods that have not actually been made should be eligible for patent protection.
Where do you stand on rounded corners?
You will die exactly once (barring a zombie apocalypse, in the event of which I am going to disavow any credit for this post) so why reinvent the wheel if it's only going to get one turn anyway? Hire a reputable family lawyer, set up a will detailing your important documents (and whatever else you are giving away), name an executor, choose a safe place (in meatspace) for the documents to live in the meantime, and then enjoy your retirement.
If your excuse for what happened is this, that it is pure incompetence, that alone should cause a high level concern regarding a very powerful arm of government (IRS) being run in an incompetent way. The problem is we treat incompetence better than nefariousness, when they should be treated exactly the same way. Because if you cannot tell the difference in the results, they are the same.
And actually, if you ask me, incompetence is worse, because it allows the Nefarious to use it as an excuse to get away with high crimes and misdemeanors.
Gross incompetence should be crime, akin to willful negligence, just to stop it from being used as an excuse for nefarious acts.
As many others have pointed out, there is no obligation for the IRS to retain email records for longer than 6 months. So what you call incompetence is really your own inability to understand the requirements. No one told anyone else to "keep these emails sacred, back them up in 3 places, never let more than 2 of the backups get within 100mi of each other, etc" so no, there is not any appropriate punishment here unless you can demonstrate that the emails would have been retained (perhaps by some ultra-vigilant employee) but were not, as a result of a higher up specifically ordering their destruction.
It truly baffles me to no end when people use the wrongs of the past to somehow justify the wrongs of today.
So I guess we just say F' it and let our elected officials get away with whatever they want. Justice was overrated anyways.
No need to be baffled. You are seeing his statement backward. He is not saying this case is excusable because it happened before, he is asking why this case is being treated with such fervor while the previous one wasn't. After all, this thread is metanews about the reaction to the scandal, not any reflection on the actual happenings at the IRS/Treasury.
"We've been informed that the hard drive has been thrown away," - Sen. Orrin Hatch:Finance Committee
What exactly prompted you to attempt that lame non-sequitor to Fox News? How exactly does it support any position that this did not happen, which was your obvious attempt to imply?
OK, here you go: The hard drive containing her emails "crashed" (it was unusable and could not be recovered by the IRS IT staff) and as a result, it was recycled/destroyed and replaced with a new one. The actual source was a Politico story which, besides conjecture, contained only this brief line of concrete information:
“We’ve been informed that the hard drive has been thrown away,” Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah, the top Republican on the Finance Committee, said in a brief hallway interview.
So, unless there is some compelling reason to think that the drive was corrupted purposefully, or the recovery was disingenuous, then all you have here is SOP for any IT department (fix what's broke). Yet the only thing we see on Foxnews.com is a story painted to look exactly like the uncovering of a conspiracy (see all the other rants about impeachment for an example of how severely people are overreacting to this.)
Anything else I can help with?
time warner cable in NYC will rent the cable card and adapter for $2.50 a month compared to $10 or more for the cable box
Nevermind that you have to go seriously out of your way to find a TV that even has a cablecard slot in it... TV makers are racing to cram more Apps in, ethernet and wifi ports, USB, and all that, but ignore cablecard completely. First world problems...
If you've got a better way to toast a cheese sandwich while watching tv, I'd like to hear it.
If it doesn't involve lasers, flamethrowers or nuclear reactors, it's not a good was to toast a cheese sandwich.
Didn't you read the stub? Four nuclear reactors!
Speaking of which, I think that means cable boxes are carbon neutral, since they are apparently powered by four giant nuclear reactors. So, I can finally stop buying carbon credits for my cable box carbon footprint! Hooray.
Site uses the Ikea logo and colors and contains no disclaimer. I can see how people could mistake it for an "official" site.
There's a right way and a wrong way to do this. Sounds like they have chosen the wrong way.
Because a C&D is somehow damaging to the "IkeaHackers.net" brand beyond the obviously untenable position regarding their name? If IkeaHackers is serious about operating in good faith they will choose a similar but un-infringing name and go on with their lives. The wrong way would be a C&D followed the next day by a court order and the day after by a subpoena and lawsuit.
Unless there is some sort of "yeah, it's just DSL speeds, but we do something really clever upstream to make it as hard to DDOS as a connection a million times as fast" service, that might actually be how Amazon, Azure, or any other web-services-oriented rental service could manipulate the bitcoin scene:
I believe (but am not an expert) that the mining pool concept is what accounts for this. The pool (one main server assigning jobs) runs on a nice fat, multi-homed system with plenty of bandwidth in every direction. Then, the ASIC-based miners sign on to the pool and do the crunching for it. This has the effect of both allowing the pool to maintain constant operations, and to hide the ASIC miners from public view.
I wonder what happens if someone with more than enough CPU power to get 99% of the mining jumps in one night. What kind of Damage could they do in a short interval before people notice? What if their goals were not to steal bitcoins but rather to snatch all the coins from, say, Kim Jong Un, or Al Queda. E.g. for example the NSA or Samsung or Saudi arabia. They would not care about the loss of value in their stolen coins, the point is to deprive an adversaries use of them.
Does the Amazon or Azure networks have enough rentable time to pull this off?
Custom made ASICs are so much more powerful than GP CPUs that no, I doubt all the rentable cloud capacity currently in existence (if you could manage to muster it) would compare to the mining capacity in use via ASICs.
Mining pools and custom hardware do make it possible for a large enough group to get over 50%, especially as the need for mining hardware crowds CPU and GPU miners out of the game. We'll see whether they decide it's more useful to stay over 50% and cheat, stay over 50% and not cheat, or split the pool into two or more pieces to keep the value of their Bitcoins higher than they would be if the market abandons Bitcoin because of perceptions of cheating.
Postulate 3 (split the pool up) raises a very interesting question: if the operators are anonymous, can the pool ever be split in such a way that we are sure the same group doesn't control both pools? With clandestine collaboration, two pools totalling over 50% of the total could perform the same treachery that a single pool would. Since we don't know who controls it, how do we know who *doesn't* control it, or does it matter?
I can get 8 core systems sub $1k. It depends on the type of hardware really which it doesn't specify; 20+ cores in a single machine has been available since at least the turn of the century they always cost an arm and a leg though because of the complexities of integrating that many CPUs in a single machine. A combination of boxes amounting to the same amount of CPU, RAM etc has always been cheaper but also larger and harder to use.
The less you spend per core (by having them less concentrated) the more you will spend on interconnecting them in a way befitting a supercomputer (i.e. massive parallelism). A pile of machines totaling 600 cores on a gigabit switch is of very little use compared to a few mega-core machines on a better, smaller network. And you don't want to know how much all the fabric would cost to properly integrate all of those 8 core systems.
under 1 hour... so let's assume half an hour... that is still like $250 a day for a cluster like that could be built for under $10,000... break even is within 2 months of use including electricity, so really those prices are still pretty high, it's just that most people only need that kind of power for short bursts of time.
the great Google App Engine vs. Amazon Elastic Beanstalk wars are coming.
$10,000 barely gets you ONE modern well-equipped 20 core server system (I am thinking in particular of the Dell R820/R920 platforms) so no, while you could probably heap together 100 or so ARM cores for $10/core and get something to run on it, a supercomputer it is not.
You average GOP voter strongly values privacy and will not look kindly at this kind of targeted approach.
Your average [either party] voter is already mined and targeted at _every_ election, whether they know/like it or not. And somehow there hasn't been a revolt. The difference in this particular effort is really just the story's presence on Slashdot.
What legislation forced the ISPs to connect to the unprofitable areas, without compensation that was vastly more than the cost. Shoot I would just like to know the legislation that forced this at all....
Ah but the assertion was not about ISPs at all, was it? Try reading.
You were forced by legislation to provide connectivity to many places where it was unprofitable, so you lose to cherry pickers like Google. Now STFU.
FTFY.
If I were personally going to use one of Tesla's patents in my business, I'd want a signed zero-cost GPL-like license agreement with Tesla. For example, Musk's good will is nice, but what if someone else were to acquire Tesla's IP?
To that end, "good faith" doesn't have a history in patent law; he could take anyone who was using the patents to seriously compete or encroach on Tesla's existing market share as lacking it, and there would be no recourse.
This happens all the time amongst competitors. It doesn't mean they want to reverse engineer or violate patents; it is usually so you can educate yourself as to what your competitors are up to and make sure that you're staying competitive.
Rather, aside from maintaining competitive positioning, they are probably looking for anything novel that hasn't been patented yet, so they can copy it (and perhaps patent it themselves). Not every invention is patented or even patent worthy but it still could be valuable.
What about pre-release/beta products that aren't commercially available and haven't started shipping yet?
Even better! Really if that's true then the VAR was clearly given too much trust in who it decides to sell pre-release products to. They should go to established customers with a good history of cooperation, not just anyone who asks. All I can say about this story is "and I bet Juniper is doing the same thing".
That's not the case with commercial car sharing because they only get to tag along. I would not go to their destination if I wasn't going there anyway.
That's an assertion so dubious it's hard to know where to start. I suppose that it would be fair for lawmakers to mandate a lie detector feature in your car when you are driving for Uber, to ascertain if you are really driving of your own direct will, or acting based on the guy in the back seat who just agreed to pay you by the minute.
ACM seems like a reputable publication so I was going in to it thinking I was about to read some interesting stuff, and then this happened:
Even the time of day can be exploited. In 2013 a network attack known as NTP Amplification used Network Time Protocol servers across the Internet in a distributed denial-of-service attack. By spoofing the IP address of a requester, an ever-larger stream of packets could be aimed at a target, swamping the target's ability to respond to TCP/IP requests.
lolwut. The time of day was not exploited, not even a little. The boneheaded "Feature" of having a command to recall a large chunk of data via unauthenticated UDP was exploited. They go on to explain a basic denial of service attack and finish it off by misusing a term as basic as TCP/IP (it doesn't matter what protocol you are using when you are the target of a DDOS, your pipe is blocked period). I will go ahead and stop reading now.
Nah. An app could ask for your firstborn and plenty of people will still click through install it. Nigerian 419 scams don't work for no reason.
You are _still_ missing the point. This has nothing to do with user behavior. The apps are being designed, by the software developers, to touch fewer pieces of "sensitive data". Presumably (though there is no hard evidence to support it) this is done because developers prefer to have a cleaner permissions sheet, since in Android it is seen by every user at install time. So given two equally oblivious users, one with an iOS device and one with an Android device, if they fire up the same app the Android user is less likely to leak sensitive information in some way because the app itself is better behaved. Of course there are plenty of other vectors for it to happen (on both platforms) but in the context of the study in question, this is a data-supported fact.