I was answering someone who thought this meant that Zuckerberg was 'good' and that Facebook was 'good'. Just correcting the misinterpretation that's all.
Can you ascertain from this article if Zuckerberg did anything at all? Possibly went to a meeting and instructed people to reallocate the money in a way that it wouldn't affect him in the end.
Explain how a person hacks a car remotely if it is not network connected please. There is a world of difference between being present at the vehicle and not.
That's true, but I didn't even mean that. All I mean to say is, don't act like they open their wallets and take 3 billion out and give it away. Instead, give more credit to all the people our there who make $20K a year and do give $50 out of their wallets. These people have accountants who know how to balance it out in the end, possibly even making a net profit. My kudos go to people who actually make sacrifices for what they believe in.
What do people have to gain by dropping rocks off of overpasses? A lot of people just like the thrill of it. Also hackers like the challenge. If my house gets broken into, as much it would suck, my house insurance covers it and they are just things. If a car gets hacked and kills people, they aren't coming back so it is a bit more important for a car to be totally secure.
This is a big reason why I think most people will not get their hands on automated vehicles. They will be expensive from the factory, and junk by the time they would be sold used. Every vehicle I have had in the last 20 years has had some sort of electrical glitch. Electronics and weather cycles just don't mix.
Lots of reasons. Map updates, traffic updates, relaying location, weather updates, infotainment, concierge services, updates to car features, etc. The list is almost endless if one thinks about it.
So lets not put any of those things in a car. That's what tablets and phones are for.
Here's the problem.. What if these experts tell Tesla what they should, that the only secure way of doing it is to connect physically? Tesla is just gong to send them away because they know customers will complain about that, and Autopilot probably doesn't work at all without it.
This goes directly against the whole Autopilot philosophy. In your example, people are expected to be capable of using poison properly and responsibly. If you spread it around and someone doesn't use it properly, well, it's not your fault. Didn't you read the small sign in the corner of the yard? What makes it more interesting is that automation is being pushed on the premise that humans aren't perfect, yet expect perfection from them in other ways? It's a strange way of thinking.
The problem with that is, if Tesla can send you patches so can hackers. I'm pretty sure you wouldn't want hackers sending you patches. Security is inconvenient by necessity.
Slashdot Mirror
You don't think it would be the same here if we didn't have regulations on everything?
No source that I would be able to find again.. but I saw three similar separate kinds of comments with 10-15K being the general cutoff point.
Yet I've read if you go much past $10K/year you might as well have your own servers. Especially if you can do your own administration.
I was answering someone who thought this meant that Zuckerberg was 'good' and that Facebook was 'good'. Just correcting the misinterpretation that's all.
Doesn't matter. What matters is that it makes it not newsworthy.
And that is far from what they did. They get something for that money, somehow. It's not unconditional.
Can you ascertain from this article if Zuckerberg did anything at all? Possibly went to a meeting and instructed people to reallocate the money in a way that it wouldn't affect him in the end.
Why "instead"? Can't we give credit to all donors?
I can't recall seeing an article on slashdot about such donors, so apparently not.
Explain how a person hacks a car remotely if it is not network connected please. There is a world of difference between being present at the vehicle and not.
Aw crap.. downloading Ubuntu for my wife right now.
That's true, but I didn't even mean that. All I mean to say is, don't act like they open their wallets and take 3 billion out and give it away. Instead, give more credit to all the people our there who make $20K a year and do give $50 out of their wallets. These people have accountants who know how to balance it out in the end, possibly even making a net profit. My kudos go to people who actually make sacrifices for what they believe in.
This works out in their favor somehow. Almost guaranteed.
Shouldn't Microsoft actually cure computer viruses before they go on to use the same method for cancer? Just sayin..
What do people have to gain by dropping rocks off of overpasses? A lot of people just like the thrill of it. Also hackers like the challenge. If my house gets broken into, as much it would suck, my house insurance covers it and they are just things. If a car gets hacked and kills people, they aren't coming back so it is a bit more important for a car to be totally secure.
If you didn't like the way the car worked, you shouldn't have bought it.
Yes, because encryption never breaks.
This is a big reason why I think most people will not get their hands on automated vehicles. They will be expensive from the factory, and junk by the time they would be sold used. Every vehicle I have had in the last 20 years has had some sort of electrical glitch. Electronics and weather cycles just don't mix.
Lots of reasons. Map updates, traffic updates, relaying location, weather updates, infotainment, concierge services, updates to car features, etc. The list is almost endless if one thinks about it.
So lets not put any of those things in a car. That's what tablets and phones are for.
Here's the problem.. What if these experts tell Tesla what they should, that the only secure way of doing it is to connect physically? Tesla is just gong to send them away because they know customers will complain about that, and Autopilot probably doesn't work at all without it.
This goes directly against the whole Autopilot philosophy. In your example, people are expected to be capable of using poison properly and responsibly. If you spread it around and someone doesn't use it properly, well, it's not your fault. Didn't you read the small sign in the corner of the yard? What makes it more interesting is that automation is being pushed on the premise that humans aren't perfect, yet expect perfection from them in other ways? It's a strange way of thinking.
Even worse, if someone does do it properly customers will complain that it is inconvenient and probably not buy it.
If your car isn't connected to anything and it is working properly, why would you need patches?
There are probably hackers reading about this and thinking, "Challenge accepted!".
You're just adding fuel to my fire, considering I've long been arguing that automation isn't mature enough to use yet.
The problem with that is, if Tesla can send you patches so can hackers. I'm pretty sure you wouldn't want hackers sending you patches. Security is inconvenient by necessity.