I think there's a slight flaw in your theory: nobody, not even his supporters, would call Trump "nuanced". Trustworthy is debatable (though his trustworthiness is eroding at a fairly alarming rate).
This implies performing the decryption over every encrypted stream, since it's the only way to know whether the encrypted stream is a legal weak encryption or an illegal strong one. This means every single ISP would have to collectively spend billions building up huge compute infrastructure to be able to do that in real time on all data being transmitted transparently, and that the decryption key would be available to virtually anyone rather than a select few. A weak encryption world is already unlikely, but your scenario is outright fantasy.
Moreover, there's also another issue these politicians don't seem to take into account: non-backdoored encryption is already out there. Do they really think terrorists or criminals will sheepishly move to backdoored encryption when you can whip up something now that authorities can't break? They'll just end up with even less visible software, more obscure channels, and communication will still happen. They'll resort to sharing the software by mailing USB keys if need be, but they'll do it.
All of this is essentially wishful thinking. Figure out another way to get information, it's too late for this one.
The worst is that I don't think your point is correct. I think there's probably an awful lot of people for whom the $120 is extremely expensive, but they take it anyway because they think it's worth it in the long run. Maybe they even use that in place of proper medication/medical care. All of these people are praying upon the poorly educated (which is generally the poor, but also definitely include some rich people).
Some languages, namely Java, don't natively support unsigned types, so this might not even be a choice here. There's always kludges available, but they're rarely pretty. At that point, you'd be better off redesigning for 64-bit IDs and moving on.
1. Terrorist attack.
2. Call for increased surveillance, overreach.
3. Learn more about the terrorists, but don't arrest the right ones in time.
4. Rinse, repeat.
This is almost starting to feel staged at this point. Every single country does this, and it always turns us more towards 1984. The terrorists are winning.
Support education, support ways of reducing poverty, support lowering income disparity. It's readily obvious that this would be the most straightforward way of cutting down on worldwide population without implementing draconian reproduction control, killing people, or even more barbaric means.
Your comment is completely untrue. Don't try to pull the "they're both the same!" card, it hasn't worked in quite some time. The Democrats are essentially unanimously in favor of the Paris accord and acknowledge AGW. The Republicans do not. You don't need a third party candidate here or anything like that.
You can actually even make an argument that a CO2 tax (or similar measure) is a way of allowing market economics to correctly optimize for it. By putting a direct cost on it that must be shouldered by the corporation, CO2 suddenly just becomes an expense like any other. Some corporations may still decide to just pay the tax and keep emitting, but then at least they'd be directly funding research and development to try to alleviate that, and the cost will be a deterrent to many.
Err, if there's one thing that wasn't affected by the Russians, it's Hillary's nomination. The party was 100% behind her, they didn't want Sanders. No Russian interference was needed there. In contrast, Trump's victory definitely hinged on Hillary's bad reputation which largely stemmed from carefully engineered stories (and the email dump).
Wait, are you talking about Evangelical Christians here? I know the bible belt isn't exactly a popular tourism destination, but glassing sounds a bit harsh.
The author of that study, Jan Willem Storm van Leeuwen, is a known anti-nuclear figurehead. The study you cite has been widely panned by scientists, as can be seen with even just a cursory look at Wikipedia.
Yes, take the Germans as an example. It's not like they're still massively reliant on coal, phasing out nuclear in favor of importing power from France (guess how they produce it?), and are really unlikely to hit their 2022 phase out goal. Germany shows that a hard turn towards renewables is not effective or realistic.
Psychological problems are far more than a bunch of chemicals gone awry, that's a very reductionist and shortsighted perspective. Outside factors will have an impact on your mental state which can quite significantly worsen your condition.
LSD has been known to cause permanent psychological ailments for which we have no cure. I wouldn't call it "some of the safest drugs imaginable" by any stretch of the imagination.
A much healthier choice, if you want your fruits, veggies and other similar things in liquid form, is a good old blender. The modern, more expensive stuff can turn fruits into a very fine paste. Add water or milk and you have a fresh, healthy and quick beverage. All the fibers remain in the drink, all the nutrients are preserved, but you get to make the mixes you want too.
"Troll" lost all meaning, much like "hacker", though I don't know that the former ever had as clear a definition. The funny jab troll is quite a rare creature, it's way too easy to fall into mean-spirited attacks or puerile, worthless "humor". Even in the 90s, most trolls sucked at being funny or at teaching everyone not to take themselves too seriously.
So fucking own up that your ancestors did something horrible, accept it, and get over it. Would people be fine with Germany denying the holocaust openly?
You're the first commenter who appears to understand that none of the voice assistants, be it Google's, Amazon's or Apple's, are always listening, they're just locally looking for a specific keyword. Once that keyword has been given, they take the rest of the sentence and send that over. Attempting to listen to everything within earshot would not only generate petabytes of largely useless data, it'd also open them up to serious spying charges as soon as someone opens up Wireshark.
Coincidentally, this is also why you can't change the keyword: the recognition feature tends to be built into the hardware or firmware of the DSP so that it doesn't drain a lot of power to recognize it.
I think a pickup would actually be a great use case for a Volt-like hybrid: electric with a diesel engine backup for when you need the range. Since pickups should normally be work vehicles, they might need more range than what an all-electric could currently do (though they do have a lot more space for batteries).
Slashdot Mirror
Oh I know, but his supporters may not necessarily, whereas even they agree he's not nuanced (and they like it).
I think there's a slight flaw in your theory: nobody, not even his supporters, would call Trump "nuanced". Trustworthy is debatable (though his trustworthiness is eroding at a fairly alarming rate).
This implies performing the decryption over every encrypted stream, since it's the only way to know whether the encrypted stream is a legal weak encryption or an illegal strong one. This means every single ISP would have to collectively spend billions building up huge compute infrastructure to be able to do that in real time on all data being transmitted transparently, and that the decryption key would be available to virtually anyone rather than a select few. A weak encryption world is already unlikely, but your scenario is outright fantasy.
Moreover, there's also another issue these politicians don't seem to take into account: non-backdoored encryption is already out there. Do they really think terrorists or criminals will sheepishly move to backdoored encryption when you can whip up something now that authorities can't break? They'll just end up with even less visible software, more obscure channels, and communication will still happen. They'll resort to sharing the software by mailing USB keys if need be, but they'll do it.
All of this is essentially wishful thinking. Figure out another way to get information, it's too late for this one.
The worst is that I don't think your point is correct. I think there's probably an awful lot of people for whom the $120 is extremely expensive, but they take it anyway because they think it's worth it in the long run. Maybe they even use that in place of proper medication/medical care. All of these people are praying upon the poorly educated (which is generally the poor, but also definitely include some rich people).
Some languages, namely Java, don't natively support unsigned types, so this might not even be a choice here. There's always kludges available, but they're rarely pretty. At that point, you'd be better off redesigning for 64-bit IDs and moving on.
Apple owns Beats now, so just connect the dots.
1. Terrorist attack.
2. Call for increased surveillance, overreach.
3. Learn more about the terrorists, but don't arrest the right ones in time.
4. Rinse, repeat.
This is almost starting to feel staged at this point. Every single country does this, and it always turns us more towards 1984. The terrorists are winning.
Support education, support ways of reducing poverty, support lowering income disparity. It's readily obvious that this would be the most straightforward way of cutting down on worldwide population without implementing draconian reproduction control, killing people, or even more barbaric means.
Your comment is completely untrue. Don't try to pull the "they're both the same!" card, it hasn't worked in quite some time. The Democrats are essentially unanimously in favor of the Paris accord and acknowledge AGW. The Republicans do not. You don't need a third party candidate here or anything like that.
You can actually even make an argument that a CO2 tax (or similar measure) is a way of allowing market economics to correctly optimize for it. By putting a direct cost on it that must be shouldered by the corporation, CO2 suddenly just becomes an expense like any other. Some corporations may still decide to just pay the tax and keep emitting, but then at least they'd be directly funding research and development to try to alleviate that, and the cost will be a deterrent to many.
Err, if there's one thing that wasn't affected by the Russians, it's Hillary's nomination. The party was 100% behind her, they didn't want Sanders. No Russian interference was needed there. In contrast, Trump's victory definitely hinged on Hillary's bad reputation which largely stemmed from carefully engineered stories (and the email dump).
You can't exactly blame them with Slashdot's shoddy support of Unicode. Half the places you'd expect to see extended characters fuck up even today.
Wait, are you talking about Evangelical Christians here? I know the bible belt isn't exactly a popular tourism destination, but glassing sounds a bit harsh.
The author of that study, Jan Willem Storm van Leeuwen, is a known anti-nuclear figurehead. The study you cite has been widely panned by scientists, as can be seen with even just a cursory look at Wikipedia.
Yes, take the Germans as an example. It's not like they're still massively reliant on coal, phasing out nuclear in favor of importing power from France (guess how they produce it?), and are really unlikely to hit their 2022 phase out goal. Germany shows that a hard turn towards renewables is not effective or realistic.
Psychological problems are far more than a bunch of chemicals gone awry, that's a very reductionist and shortsighted perspective. Outside factors will have an impact on your mental state which can quite significantly worsen your condition.
LSD has been known to cause permanent psychological ailments for which we have no cure. I wouldn't call it "some of the safest drugs imaginable" by any stretch of the imagination.
A much healthier choice, if you want your fruits, veggies and other similar things in liquid form, is a good old blender. The modern, more expensive stuff can turn fruits into a very fine paste. Add water or milk and you have a fresh, healthy and quick beverage. All the fibers remain in the drink, all the nutrients are preserved, but you get to make the mixes you want too.
Project Scorpio is so far ahead on VR that they haven't made a compatible VR headset yet!
"Troll" lost all meaning, much like "hacker", though I don't know that the former ever had as clear a definition. The funny jab troll is quite a rare creature, it's way too easy to fall into mean-spirited attacks or puerile, worthless "humor". Even in the 90s, most trolls sucked at being funny or at teaching everyone not to take themselves too seriously.
So fucking own up that your ancestors did something horrible, accept it, and get over it. Would people be fine with Germany denying the holocaust openly?
So what you're saying is, you were in your rebellious angsty teenager phase?
You're the first commenter who appears to understand that none of the voice assistants, be it Google's, Amazon's or Apple's, are always listening, they're just locally looking for a specific keyword. Once that keyword has been given, they take the rest of the sentence and send that over. Attempting to listen to everything within earshot would not only generate petabytes of largely useless data, it'd also open them up to serious spying charges as soon as someone opens up Wireshark.
Coincidentally, this is also why you can't change the keyword: the recognition feature tends to be built into the hardware or firmware of the DSP so that it doesn't drain a lot of power to recognize it.
I think a pickup would actually be a great use case for a Volt-like hybrid: electric with a diesel engine backup for when you need the range. Since pickups should normally be work vehicles, they might need more range than what an all-electric could currently do (though they do have a lot more space for batteries).