Sadly Unix's 'file' utility is not sufficient for security purposes. Generally, file only checks for magic numbers near the beginning of the file. Many file formats remain valid, even with prepended data. For example, Python programs with several source files can be archived into a single zip file and still be executed, but you can stick a shebang onto the beginning, and still have Python (or most zip programs) recognise the archive as a zip file.
There's a good video on youtube about this kind of thing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
tl;dr: This is security. It goes wrong in amusing and unobvious ways.
As an alternative (particularly if a DIY type), the OP could write a blog that is presented using only static HTML. I have a fairly simple set of Python scripts that compile a set of pages into a (if you can forgive my lack of visual design skills) presentablely formatted website: http://techmeology.co.uk/ This would avoid the potential for security vulnerabilites that might come from using a dynamically generated CMS like Wordpress.
It seems to me that the "recognise itself" part could be done entirely with traditional computer vision techniques.
Step 1) Flip the image vertically to undo the transformation implied by the mirror
Step 2) Use a computer vision algorithm to identify the robot (just as it might be used to identify a coffee cup, or a picture of the Enterprise)
Step 3) (This being the most specific part) allow the robot to move, and to associate changes in the image with this movement
This is not "self awareness" as most of us would understand the concept; we would not consider it to be self awareness if we could recognise a puppet under our control.
I think the title is slightly misleading in that respect. It seems to me that the hard part is in having a computer vision algorithm that understands the concept of a mirror. A robot that recognises itself in a mirror is a very natural extension to that.
Fuel economy issues aside, how do they plan to find these islands of plastic if they're in the middle of the ocean? A quick peak at Google Earth would suggest that the overwhelming majority of ocean is... well.... water, and it clearly isn't practical to meander around an entire ocean looking for something without a clue as to its location.
You're absolutely right! The Raspberry Pi foundation is interested in a lot more than simply making a (very cool) machine available. The general thought is that a lot of parents are anxious about the notion of allowing their children to experiment on an expensive home PC (being able to experiment with root access, while not mandatory to learn to program, is useful to get to understand how the computer works) - that's part of the reason why the foundation developed the computer. The foundation is also working to create a library of educational materials that are intended to help children learn to program and find out about their machine, as well as promote and encourage changes to the teaching of IT/Computing/Computer Science.
Unfortunately, most complete hardware systems tend to come paired with software (i.e. the OS). The only people who get to choose their OS are people who build their own PCs. If this becomes too common, the only way will be if it's possible to build your own (much as people do with x86 PCs today). Of course, that still sucks for anyone who wants a mobile device, or who has old (eventually) equipment, doesn't want to build them selves, etc.
Unfortunately, most consumer hardware (at least when it comes to complete systems) comes somewhat paired with software (such as the OS). Have you ever tried buying a laptop without an OS installed (or with Linux as that OS)? How about a tablet without either Android (and no official way of installing your own distro) or Windows?
"Please pirate our game! Please please please! We promise to make our DRM so annoying you're sure to have lots and lots of grateful people loving your clearly superior version!"
The parent poster does make a good point. Let's suppose for the sake of argument that Google does do this. I doubt a general purpose machine (which, ultimately, it'd have to be in order to run the Linux kernel) could be locked well enough to prevent someone installing another operating system (Linux or possibly even otherwise) on their free netbook (it's the same problem DRM faces). Google'd have to stop giving them away sooner or later.
Pirates can work together. Suppose you have ten pirates. They each download a copy of the book. They then compare their copies with each other - crosschecking them (after, of course, stripping the DRM). Nine of the ten books use "to be or not to be", and one uses "to exist or not to exist", and similarly for other words. They may then produce a more accurate copy of the book. So now, instead of pirate versions being technically superior (due to the lack of DRM), they're also more accurate! Well done, Amazon, you've patented a wonderful scheme to ensure people don't trust genuine products! Normally I am very anti-intellectual property. On this occasion, however, I do hope Amazon is granted it and enforces it. Perhaps it would some day prevent someone else doing the same.
DRM DRM DRM DRM DRM DRM DRM.
This is to updates as DRM is to using stuff. It's all a big commercialistic manipulation attempt. People don't like to be manipulated. Thus it fails miserably. There's also that warm fuzzy feeling when the hacked version solves bugs too:D Bonus "learn your lesson" points if they have to replace the bricked consoles (which, under most consumer law, they should).
1) CMX will be used to facilitate DRM
2) CMX will be used to facilitate unwanted bundling (i.e. without offering singles)
3) CMX will be patent riddled
4) CMX will be designed to exclude FOSS
I too have expertise in the field of anti-censorship. Normally, I'd recommend a good old encrypted VPN, but in this case, I'd recommend some nice thick black curtains.
bool IsDoingSomethingIllegal(IpAddress dest)
{
if (dest == TBP_ADDRESS){//make a law against using services like TPB's VPN
return true;
}
else {
return false;
}
}
Or in other words, if the government isn't happy, they just make using TPB's VPN illegal (I'm sure they could come up with an anti-terrorism excuse).
My golden rule of censorships is this:
"Until one effectively blocks all but that which appears on the whitelist, one will not obtain perfect censorship."
Slashdot Mirror
"This video is not available. Sorry about that." If I'm right, and this is geofencing, WHY?!
I'd change the locked down nature of many consumer devices to that root access can be obtained without relying on vulnerabilities.
Sadly Unix's 'file' utility is not sufficient for security purposes. Generally, file only checks for magic numbers near the beginning of the file. Many file formats remain valid, even with prepended data. For example, Python programs with several source files can be archived into a single zip file and still be executed, but you can stick a shebang onto the beginning, and still have Python (or most zip programs) recognise the archive as a zip file. There's a good video on youtube about this kind of thing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... tl;dr: This is security. It goes wrong in amusing and unobvious ways.
As an alternative (particularly if a DIY type), the OP could write a blog that is presented using only static HTML. I have a fairly simple set of Python scripts that compile a set of pages into a (if you can forgive my lack of visual design skills) presentablely formatted website: http://techmeology.co.uk/ This would avoid the potential for security vulnerabilites that might come from using a dynamically generated CMS like Wordpress.
Must have been knocked off by the Briori tractor beam.[1]
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T...
So where are the free upgrades to Windows 7?
That guy likes setting that record:p
Law of unexpected consequences: Perhaps people are worried that Samsung devices will become unavailable?
It seems to me that the "recognise itself" part could be done entirely with traditional computer vision techniques.
Step 1) Flip the image vertically to undo the transformation implied by the mirror
Step 2) Use a computer vision algorithm to identify the robot (just as it might be used to identify a coffee cup, or a picture of the Enterprise)
Step 3) (This being the most specific part) allow the robot to move, and to associate changes in the image with this movement
This is not "self awareness" as most of us would understand the concept; we would not consider it to be self awareness if we could recognise a puppet under our control.
I think the title is slightly misleading in that respect. It seems to me that the hard part is in having a computer vision algorithm that understands the concept of a mirror. A robot that recognises itself in a mirror is a very natural extension to that.
Fuel economy issues aside, how do they plan to find these islands of plastic if they're in the middle of the ocean? A quick peak at Google Earth would suggest that the overwhelming majority of ocean is... well.... water, and it clearly isn't practical to meander around an entire ocean looking for something without a clue as to its location.
You're absolutely right! The Raspberry Pi foundation is interested in a lot more than simply making a (very cool) machine available. The general thought is that a lot of parents are anxious about the notion of allowing their children to experiment on an expensive home PC (being able to experiment with root access, while not mandatory to learn to program, is useful to get to understand how the computer works) - that's part of the reason why the foundation developed the computer. The foundation is also working to create a library of educational materials that are intended to help children learn to program and find out about their machine, as well as promote and encourage changes to the teaching of IT/Computing/Computer Science.
Unfortunately, most complete hardware systems tend to come paired with software (i.e. the OS). The only people who get to choose their OS are people who build their own PCs. If this becomes too common, the only way will be if it's possible to build your own (much as people do with x86 PCs today). Of course, that still sucks for anyone who wants a mobile device, or who has old (eventually) equipment, doesn't want to build them selves, etc.
Unfortunately, most consumer hardware (at least when it comes to complete systems) comes somewhat paired with software (such as the OS). Have you ever tried buying a laptop without an OS installed (or with Linux as that OS)? How about a tablet without either Android (and no official way of installing your own distro) or Windows?
Look after the cents and the dollars will look after them selves.
"Please pirate our game! Please please please! We promise to make our DRM so annoying you're sure to have lots and lots of grateful people loving your clearly superior version!"
firstname@insertyourowndomainhere
The parent poster does make a good point. Let's suppose for the sake of argument that Google does do this. I doubt a general purpose machine (which, ultimately, it'd have to be in order to run the Linux kernel) could be locked well enough to prevent someone installing another operating system (Linux or possibly even otherwise) on their free netbook (it's the same problem DRM faces). Google'd have to stop giving them away sooner or later.
Pirates can work together. Suppose you have ten pirates. They each download a copy of the book. They then compare their copies with each other - crosschecking them (after, of course, stripping the DRM). Nine of the ten books use "to be or not to be", and one uses "to exist or not to exist", and similarly for other words. They may then produce a more accurate copy of the book. So now, instead of pirate versions being technically superior (due to the lack of DRM), they're also more accurate! Well done, Amazon, you've patented a wonderful scheme to ensure people don't trust genuine products! Normally I am very anti-intellectual property. On this occasion, however, I do hope Amazon is granted it and enforces it. Perhaps it would some day prevent someone else doing the same.
It's legal because the same people who invented the DMCA invented other laws too.
DRM DRM DRM DRM DRM DRM DRM.
This is to updates as DRM is to using stuff. It's all a big commercialistic manipulation attempt. People don't like to be manipulated. Thus it fails miserably. There's also that warm fuzzy feeling when the hacked version solves bugs too:D Bonus "learn your lesson" points if they have to replace the bricked consoles (which, under most consumer law, they should).
1) CMX will be used to facilitate DRM
2) CMX will be used to facilitate unwanted bundling (i.e. without offering singles)
3) CMX will be patent riddled
4) CMX will be designed to exclude FOSS
I too have expertise in the field of anti-censorship. Normally, I'd recommend a good old encrypted VPN, but in this case, I'd recommend some nice thick black curtains.
Change abolishment of copyright to abolishment of copyright for personal use and you're there.
bool IsDoingSomethingIllegal(IpAddress dest) //make a law against using services like TPB's VPN
{
if (dest == TBP_ADDRESS){
return true;
}
else {
return false;
}
}
Or in other words, if the government isn't happy, they just make using TPB's VPN illegal (I'm sure they could come up with an anti-terrorism excuse).
My golden rule of censorships is this: "Until one effectively blocks all but that which appears on the whitelist, one will not obtain perfect censorship."