Not all people are prone to aggressive negativity, but I assure you (as such a person), there's no need to withdraw from such people unless they either lack self-insight/control, or also lack morals. Besides adrenaline rushes making it difficult to think clearly, and the slight strain and distraction from not showing violent/destructive impulses on the outside, there's not much impact on my "nerdiness".
...Open the nExt."
Although if that where to happen, I'd probably wind up more like poor Mika-chan than Lain....Just keep the plumbing going during the transition Moot, we don't want a spillage. "The other side is overcrowded. The dead will have nowhere to go.", indeed.
Because they are trusted. You have to keep in mind that the reasoning behind all this is that teenage sex is a problem, and that the best solution is just to remove all physical intimacy between the "kids". Nude pictures are a perversion, and if they're on the intertubes, who knows where they'l wind up? In this worldview, good trusted people and pillars of the community would certainly never consciously entertain inappropriate sexual thoughts.
Why do people tie themselves and others down with such rough-hewn principles? Of course, you need principles, as the human mind can't analyze every detail of every situation and thing all the time, but is that really the limits of their psyches? People around me, normal seemingly functional people that aren't considered mentally challenged by society in any way, burden themselves with crude approximations, in situations where i just improvise a detailed solution on a whim, without any effort whatsoever. It feels like hubris to think that it's a matter of "intelligence", maybe some people just have a psychological need to think and live like that? Reflexively, I find out that many many people think that I'm some sort of ultra-principled saint/boring rules-submissive stiff... when in fact, I'm quite the opposite. So do they then feel they would be crazed hellraisers, or at least incapable of functioning, if they approached problems like I do?
"Damn this free will. It's so hard to make things up to keep them occupied. Who knew they'd take their silly "mathematics" so far... but if I didn't dole out power through repeatable observable physical phenomena instead of burning bushes and inexplicable amounts of fish, I'd have to prove I exist, and thus make faith in Me, and free will itself, meaningless."
Or obnoxious visual field jamming on police demand, like OnStar or that "Webtech Plus" thingie. Or on computer bastard demand, if the auth key is stolen/exfiltrated.
You could simply put in sanity checks for the number of highlighted entities/on-screen information density. Each type of displayed object having a priority and a weight, based on screen area covered, distance to other objects, and such...
Would it be somehow physically possible to have the information visible only from the inside? Doesn't matter much for ordinary data, of course, but if you're going to rig it up to a car computer...
This *is* hacking, in any other worldview other than a comp techies. I'm a geek heavily into comp sec, and that's one of the words I'd use to describe it to a non-tech. Or perhaps "cracked", but that still carries the risk of not being understood.
We're all concerned and cautious, but where would we be in science and technology without enthusiasm and dreaming? Nobody's just going to start toggling DNA markers and associated cell machinery in humans without lots of testing on lower lifeforms - unless, of course, the human subject has nothing to lose.
Mod parent up - this suggestion, together with "tech-savy", sounds absolutely retarded when you're used to european instant wire transfers. Who runs the US banking system, stuffy 200-year old vampires?
The only reason I can see for a digital ID, is something like this wired into our governmental bureaucracy. The Swedish gov. is trying to bootstrap such a system, and people seems to be liking it, generally. In fact, my ID card has a digital ID chip - it doesn't do anything at the moment, though.
From WP and newsposts it looks like China has expanded it's internal railway infrastructure quite a bit in the past decade or so, and relies a lot on it, which would clearly give them the manpower/technical resources to do something like this.
Anything that makes it easier to move products, people and materials from one point on the globe to another can't be bad. Just as long as they keep corruption in check and don't crack too many eggs to make the omelette. As a westerner, it certainly looks like most of the problems of this type is tied to perverted intent and selfishness down the chain of command (with regional officials by necessity having to have quite a bit of power due to chinas sheer size). Any mainlanders/expatriates able to comment on how things like this usually winds up?
"The head of the Department of Post-Mortem Communications shrugged and sighed. ‘Look,’ he said, as if weary of having to explain so often, and sighed again. ‘I am supposed to be the bad person as defined by university statute, right? I am supposed to listen at doors. Supposed to dabble in the black arts. I’ve got the skull ring. I’ve got the staff with the silver skull on it—’
‘And a joke-shop mask?’ said Glenda.
‘Quite serviceable as a matter of fact,’ said Hix, haughtily. ‘Rather more frightening than the original thing and washable, which is always a consideration in this department. Anyway, the Archchancellor was down here weeks ago, after the same stuff you are, I very much imagine.’"
The basic principle of botnet herding obviously involves spamming botnet trojans through whatever vectors available, but it's the utilization of these resources that is discussed. Imagine what havoc a dedicated person could cause through, let's say, insider trading?
Look, I hate to break it to you - "security researchers" are basically crackers with morals who, for obvious reasons, would like to live in civilized society without being ostracized. A lot of "them" go "a tad bit" neurotic because of the inherent contradictions in this, but that's how it is. And if you're incapable of feeling more than one emotion towards a thing, concept or person, you're severely emotionally underdeveloped.
I find your moral reasoning lacking. What, you think that he'l "turn to the dark side"? That professional mercenary botnet/malware distributors actually care about "professional admiration" and will up their ante because of it? What is it that makes fascination with evil/amoral people inherently "wrong"?
Slashdot Mirror
Not all people are prone to aggressive negativity, but I assure you (as such a person), there's no need to withdraw from such people unless they either lack self-insight/control, or also lack morals. Besides adrenaline rushes making it difficult to think clearly, and the slight strain and distraction from not showing violent/destructive impulses on the outside, there's not much impact on my "nerdiness".
...Open the nExt." ...Just keep the plumbing going during the transition Moot, we don't want a spillage.
Although if that where to happen, I'd probably wind up more like poor Mika-chan than Lain.
"The other side is overcrowded. The dead will have nowhere to go.", indeed.
One method is to write the number on different parts of the object containing the answer.
...Psychohistory?
Because they are trusted. You have to keep in mind that the reasoning behind all this is that teenage sex is a problem, and that the best solution is just to remove all physical intimacy between the "kids". Nude pictures are a perversion, and if they're on the intertubes, who knows where they'l wind up? In this worldview, good trusted people and pillars of the community would certainly never consciously entertain inappropriate sexual thoughts.
Why do people tie themselves and others down with such rough-hewn principles? Of course, you need principles, as the human mind can't analyze every detail of every situation and thing all the time, but is that really the limits of their psyches? People around me, normal seemingly functional people that aren't considered mentally challenged by society in any way, burden themselves with crude approximations, in situations where i just improvise a detailed solution on a whim, without any effort whatsoever. It feels like hubris to think that it's a matter of "intelligence", maybe some people just have a psychological need to think and live like that? Reflexively, I find out that many many people think that I'm some sort of ultra-principled saint/boring rules-submissive stiff... when in fact, I'm quite the opposite. So do they then feel they would be crazed hellraisers, or at least incapable of functioning, if they approached problems like I do?
"Damn this free will. It's so hard to make things up to keep them occupied. Who knew they'd take their silly "mathematics" so far... but if I didn't dole out power through repeatable observable physical phenomena instead of burning bushes and inexplicable amounts of fish, I'd have to prove I exist, and thus make faith in Me, and free will itself, meaningless."
We are all educated stupid! O_O *dissolves in a mass of n-dimensional tentacles, and gets eaten by a passing Mi-go*
Or obnoxious visual field jamming on police demand, like OnStar or that "Webtech Plus" thingie. Or on computer bastard demand, if the auth key is stolen/exfiltrated.
You could simply put in sanity checks for the number of highlighted entities/on-screen information density. Each type of displayed object having a priority and a weight, based on screen area covered, distance to other objects, and such...
Could perhaps make for a nice base structure for radio/cellphone towers, if they're situated correctly?
Would it be somehow physically possible to have the information visible only from the inside? Doesn't matter much for ordinary data, of course, but if you're going to rig it up to a car computer...
Processed corpse... *drool*
This *is* hacking, in any other worldview other than a comp techies. I'm a geek heavily into comp sec, and that's one of the words I'd use to describe it to a non-tech. Or perhaps "cracked", but that still carries the risk of not being understood.
We're all concerned and cautious, but where would we be in science and technology without enthusiasm and dreaming? Nobody's just going to start toggling DNA markers and associated cell machinery in humans without lots of testing on lower lifeforms - unless, of course, the human subject has nothing to lose.
Mod parent up - this suggestion, together with "tech-savy", sounds absolutely retarded when you're used to european instant wire transfers. Who runs the US banking system, stuffy 200-year old vampires?
The only reason I can see for a digital ID, is something like this wired into our governmental bureaucracy. The Swedish gov. is trying to bootstrap such a system, and people seems to be liking it, generally. In fact, my ID card has a digital ID chip - it doesn't do anything at the moment, though.
Her keyser euch hilft nicht das swert
Czeptir vnd crone sint hy nicht wert
Ich habe euch bey der hand genomen
Ir must an meynen reyen komen
Emperor, your sword won’t help you out
Sceptre and crown are worthless here
I’ve taken you by the hand
For you must come to my dance.
From WP and newsposts it looks like China has expanded it's internal railway infrastructure quite a bit in the past decade or so, and relies a lot on it, which would clearly give them the manpower/technical resources to do something like this.
Anything that makes it easier to move products, people and materials from one point on the globe to another can't be bad. Just as long as they keep corruption in check and don't crack too many eggs to make the omelette. As a westerner, it certainly looks like most of the problems of this type is tied to perverted intent and selfishness down the chain of command (with regional officials by necessity having to have quite a bit of power due to chinas sheer size). Any mainlanders/expatriates able to comment on how things like this usually winds up?
"The head of the Department of Post-Mortem Communications shrugged and sighed. ‘Look,’ he said, as if weary of having to explain so often, and sighed again. ‘I am supposed to be the bad person as defined by university statute, right? I am supposed to listen at doors. Supposed to dabble in the black arts. I’ve got the skull ring. I’ve got the staff with the silver skull on it—’ ‘And a joke-shop mask?’ said Glenda. ‘Quite serviceable as a matter of fact,’ said Hix, haughtily. ‘Rather more frightening than the original thing and washable, which is always a consideration in this department. Anyway, the Archchancellor was down here weeks ago, after the same stuff you are, I very much imagine.’"
The basic principle of botnet herding obviously involves spamming botnet trojans through whatever vectors available, but it's the utilization of these resources that is discussed. Imagine what havoc a dedicated person could cause through, let's say, insider trading?
Look, I hate to break it to you - "security researchers" are basically crackers with morals who, for obvious reasons, would like to live in civilized society without being ostracized. A lot of "them" go "a tad bit" neurotic because of the inherent contradictions in this, but that's how it is. And if you're incapable of feeling more than one emotion towards a thing, concept or person, you're severely emotionally underdeveloped.
I find your moral reasoning lacking. What, you think that he'l "turn to the dark side"? That professional mercenary botnet/malware distributors actually care about "professional admiration" and will up their ante because of it? What is it that makes fascination with evil/amoral people inherently "wrong"?
My CS undergrad program has UI design as an obligatory second year course.