I know of their technical strength in the low-power scene, and the MIPS/Watt race, ARM still leads by a mile, but ARM could also really stand to have some standards for naming the variants in a semi-consistent way so that the merely technically proficient have a chance of keeping up. And, (dare I say it?) this is what trademarks are for and why they exist.
Note the modifier "business data".... Not videos, not apple pie recipes sent by Aunt Bertha... If you are talking about strategically stored data and not user home folders, the signal/noise ratio is significantly better.
I've found that there's a sweet spot to balancing system security and job security: recommend better practices than currently in place without becoming adamant about it.
If you get the attention of a caring boss, you'll get your implementations, so make sure it's really a good idea and will work well before recommending it. But, more importantly, if they decide not to do it, then you are basically off the hook for responsibility for *any* breaches that occur afterwards. "I recommended a two-factor authentication to prevent data breaches over two years ago, and every quarterly IT review ever since!"
What's odd for me as a developer is how many times I've talked to a tech guy who really "needs" us to add security feature X in our software, and we send over the information to turn it on after we write it, and they *still don't do it* even after they paid for the modification.
There are a few minor tweaks that significantly increase entropy will still not being hard to remember:
1) Don't capitalize the first letter in a word used in a passphrase. Instead, capitalize something in the middle.
2) When adding numbers, add somewhere in the middle of a word rather than between words.
3) If security is really important, spell one longish word backwards before apply 1 and 2.
4) Another trick I've used many times (as a touch typist) is to type words with your fingers slid over one key, left, right, or upleft/upright. Thus a simple, common word like "login" becomes ";phom", "kifub", "o9t8h", or "p0y9j" .
Use of these tricks add tremendous amounts of entropy to otherwise crappy passwords while still being very easy to remember.
This is most likely the biggest one. Being too close to more than one star means higher range of fluctuation.
As a point of reference, a significant number of solar systems are binary systems, making them subsequently less likely to support life.
6. Planet needs to have a core preferably iron to deflect electromagnetic radiation.
Or life exists in gas giants which have thick atmospheres, or beneath the crust.
Although it's tough to consider the possibility of structured life existing at 10,000 atmospheres and 2,000 degrees F, I would imagine it being possible. But, such a life form is *far* less likely to be reaching out into space than we would, as the problem of keeping a "livable environment" in a space ship is at least 10,000 times more difficult. Are there even solid elements at 2,000 degrees F and 10,000 atmospheres?
Maybe I just avoid horrible "battery saver" apps but I've never seen any particular tendency to have them actually further drain the battery. What kind of horrible "battery apps" do you torture yourself with?
I'd like to re-emphasize the GP post: the rate of drain is what a battery app should be focusing on, not battery life remaining.
The FAA is all about protecting the commercial use of the air.
It's so one-sided that pilots don't even have a consistent right to appeal punitive actions, and the rules around "non commercial" (private) flight are so ridiculous that merely sharing the cost of a ride in a small plane with a buddy can be considered a commercial flight, if your buddy does anything work related at all. It is truly just silly.
As soon as the drones have progressed technologically to the point where they are reasonably safe *and* profitable, the FAA would be all over that. Their biggest concern is making sure everybody knows that *they* regulate it.
The truth of this statement really comes down to the definition of "mutate".
People don't exist in "bare form". We have a complex and growing plethora of decidedly human artifacts like clothing, houses, governments, and technology. Subsequently, people have evolved to respond very quickly and intelligently to a myriad of environmental threats, ranging from viruses and disease to climate change. That these responses are exobiological doesn't mitigate the fact that they function as evolution of the human collective presence.
I would argue that this collection of exobiological factors are as much a part of evolution for mankind as a purely biological evolution. By this definition, a quarantine is every bit as relevant as a new gene.
Assume for a second, that you have a pond. And a new type of algae has been introduced into the pond. Algae grows quickly, so let's assume a doubling time of a day. 24 hours. The concern is that this new algae is gross and smells bad and nobody wants to have a pond full of this disgusting algae. Unfortunately, treating the algae is expensive and nobody wants to treat the entire pond.
The question is: One week before the pond is entirely covered in algae, would enough have appeared that you would even notice? At a "gut instinct" level, we'd guess that perhaps a quarter or a third or at least a tenth of the pond would be covered in algae, but that gut level instinct would be completely wrong. Just 1.56% of the pond would be covered - right about the point where it becomes noticeable at all.
The point is this: information processing capabilities, globally, aren't just growing exponentially: the rate of growth is itself also growing exponentially. Just about exactly at the time where we notice actual, verifiable intelligence of any kind is just about exactly the time where we have to assume it's ubiquity.
Previous discussions talk about the number of cross connects and how far away we are from the mark without commenting that the Internet itself allows for an infinite number of cross connects - my laptop can connect directly to billions of resources immediately with an average 10-25ms delay. Now, it's very likely that what is meant by "cross connects" in the context of AI is substantially different than the "cross connect" capability that global networking enables, but it's equally true that people generally fail at understanding exponential growth. It's why 401ks are so universally underutilized, why credit cards are such big business, and why the concept of the "singularity" seems like such hocus pocus at the gut level.
See, anybody who has a CS degree will be motivated to HATE boot camp guys. Employers who want more (cheaper) labor will be motivated to LOVE any force that lets them hire more people at less cost.
As a self-taught programmer myself managing a 10+ year project that's highly profitable, you'll probably guess which side of that divide you'll tend to see me on.
Your later comments about ignoring RAID controller warnings for a *year* strike me as callous. But we all have our standards, and standards vary greatly from place to place as the needs the drive the standards also vary greatly. (financial institutions care much more about transactional correctness than reddit)
After months of testing, our organization has wholeheartedly adopted ZFS and have been finding that not only is it technically far superior to other storage technologies, it's significantly faster in many contexts, it's actually more stable than even EXT4 under continuous heavy read/write loads, and brings capabilities to the table that even expensive, hardware RAID controllers have a tough time matching. Best of all, since it actually runs off JBOD, the cost is somewhere between insignificant and irrelevant.
I was wondering if you had investigated ZFS at all, and if so, why you aren't using it?
Large scale internal combustion engines are extremely efficient and can run on just about anything burnable: vegetable oil, powdered coal, agricultural dust, wood gas from trees, dried leaves, etc. Yes, you can literally run an engine on banana peels. The trick is to get the carburetor to get the balance right.
From the perspective of a generator for a hospital, it would be relatively straightforward to design a generator running an engine like this with whatever renewable fuel is most convenient and readily available locally. Large scale wood gas installations typically work with fuel pre-processed into pellets.
You make it sound like it was paradise in the 80s. It had it's suckiness, just like we do today.
1) There was constant threats of terrorism in the media in the 80s. Take a look at the "Libyans" in "Back to the Future".
2) Helicopter parents were definitely a thing in the 80s.
3) There were plenty of poor example adults in the 80s.
4) I'll 100% grant that entry level jobs are *much* harder to find now.
5) NSA and FBI watched us in the 80s. Ma Bell logged every call ever made. What was that you were saying on the CB Radio, back when the FCC actually gave a damn?
6) Granted Massive student debt, partially offset by the relative ease of getting into school. Yes, debt is a problem, especially when you pick a lame degree. It was always a problem, more so now.
7) There was no "online", so no posting stupid stuff online, and no online bullying. Bullying back then wasn't some insult posted in a chat root, it was a broken jaw. I remember well facing my bully with a stick in my hand, and being knocked flat repeatedly by a kid with 30 pounds on me, while I cursed defiantly and got up to face him again.
8) Education system was "declining" then too.
9) I'd argue that the cold war and the constant threat of total, global annihilation far outweighs a few school shootings. Or did you forget that little detail?
The only reason he airline industry is not a natural monopoly is because of the massive public infrastructure provided by the US Government FAA in public use airports and related flight control infrastructure. In every meaningful sense, an airport solves the "last mile problem" for airplanes. Why wouldn't we expect a similar investment in the "last mile problem" for Internet Service?
SouthWest doesn't own the Oakland Airport; they merely lease a terminal. Can you imagine what would have happened if Delta had owned the airports too?
I've seen this lame list for 10 years, pretty much trolling bait. But based on this, I wonder if you even know how DKIM works?
(X ) It will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it
Pretty touch to crack legitimate encryption.
(X ) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once
Not at all. You can use it, or not. If you don't use it, you essentially give permission for black hats to spoof your identity. Also, if you are an admin, you can choose what you do with DKIM.
(X ) Many email users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers
How is being able to protect your account from being spoofed going to affect business?
(X ) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email
Why would you need one? DKIM is done via DNS and is under the control of the record holder.
(X) Asshats (X ) Huge existing software investment in SMTP (X ) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes (X ) Eternal arms race involved in all filtering approaches
Do you actually know how DKIM works? Each of these points are either effectively made better with DKIM or are irrelevant.
(X ) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever been shown practical
Care to name one?
(X ) Whitelists suck (X ) Countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks (X ) Why should we have to trust you and your servers? (X ) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough
How is DKIM a whitelist? You really have no idea how this works, do you? Did you just fill in some boxes at random?
I'll address a single point on here, to show how DKIM works rather well even in the worst of the points:
(X ) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected
One of the products my company provides for schools is a "mailing list reflector" that in practice works very much like your average mailing list. In order to ensure delivery, all outbound email is signed with DKIM, even though we're really just forwarding the original message to the mailing list recipients.
How is this done? Well, we use a dummy address for the "From" field like "originaluser@gmail.com " and then set the reply-to field to match the original sender. Thus, DKIM passes as we provide keys for mycompany.com, the user is "From" mycompany.com, and the end user is able to reply to get a message back to the sender without involving our mail server at all.
It's a compromise, but it works well and we've had virtually no complaints.
Voters worry about irrelevant issues like abortion, gay marriage, inequality, and racism, while not worrying enough about the stuff that matters, like banking regulation, tax policy, nepotism, and crony capitalism.
And, in my opinion, that's largely because of the Centrally Controlled Media in the United States. And if you think "Main Stream Media" doesn't include Faux[sp?] News, you're also a victim of this control.
... to the masses of sarcastic "I though Open Source was more secure!" crowd: in an Open Source forum, when vulnerabilities are found, they are patched. Since it's a public forum, the vulnerabilities are disclosed, and patches / updates made available. The poor, sorry state of the first cut gets rapidly and openly improved.
With closed source, the vulnerabilities merely stay hidden and undisclosed, and you have no ability to know about it, or fix it yourself. the poor, sorry state of the first cut never improves. Yes, there are some cultures that take security seriously. You have no way of knowing.
This, right here, is what "more secure" looks like: public notification of the vulnerabilities and patches to distribute.
Linux is free because it is open source, but that can have its own associated restrictions (associated with the time input required to it to a certain level of functionality, depending on your Linux expertise.)
I guess you haven't set up recent Linux distros? Using Fedora, I can have a workstation up and running, fully updated in 30 minutes. Compare with Windows with the update/reboot/install for a day. At the very least, let's talk about the current state of Linux, and not its state as of 2001, OK?
With today's 4-8 TB drives, it's easy to keep billions of of files on a single disk, so you could potentially keep data for many thousands of customers on a single disk. But if you do that, you quickly run into an entirely new type of constraint: IOPS.
The dirty secret of the HD industry is that while disks have become far bigger, they haven't really become any faster. 7200 RPM is still par for the course for a "high performance" desktop or NAS drive, and you can only queue up about 150 requests per second at 7200 RPM. Simple physics takes over.
Spinning disks are already a non-starter for many scenarios, and this is a trend that will only accelerate as HDDs basically become the modern equivalent of tape backup.
Slashdot Mirror
My outrage only applies to people richer than me.
So, the cheapest TV stick imaginable has a Cortex A9 processor, so reading about the A9 processor in development by Apple is something that doesn't inspire much in the way of excitement up front for me. But it looks like Apple's A5 is more / less the Cortex A9 with some tweaks, so now we literally have two similar products with the same name that are generations apart.
I know of their technical strength in the low-power scene, and the MIPS/Watt race, ARM still leads by a mile, but ARM could also really stand to have some standards for naming the variants in a semi-consistent way so that the merely technically proficient have a chance of keeping up. And, (dare I say it?) this is what trademarks are for and why they exist.
Buses do nothing when they're stuck in the same traffic everyone else is.
I would take exception to this!
1) Time spent on a bus is time not spent concentrating on traffic. Relax, read a book, maybe do some work.
2) Every person on a bus is a car not on the road, and that results in sharply lighter traffic.
I honestly have no idea why buses aren't free. Putting a bit of economics behind the problem can make a dramatic difference, even eliminating traffic jams completely.
Note the modifier "business data".... Not videos, not apple pie recipes sent by Aunt Bertha... If you are talking about strategically stored data and not user home folders, the signal/noise ratio is significantly better.
I've found that there's a sweet spot to balancing system security and job security: recommend better practices than currently in place without becoming adamant about it.
If you get the attention of a caring boss, you'll get your implementations, so make sure it's really a good idea and will work well before recommending it. But, more importantly, if they decide not to do it, then you are basically off the hook for responsibility for *any* breaches that occur afterwards. "I recommended a two-factor authentication to prevent data breaches over two years ago, and every quarterly IT review ever since!"
What's odd for me as a developer is how many times I've talked to a tech guy who really "needs" us to add security feature X in our software, and we send over the information to turn it on after we write it, and they *still don't do it* even after they paid for the modification.
There are a few minor tweaks that significantly increase entropy will still not being hard to remember:
1) Don't capitalize the first letter in a word used in a passphrase. Instead, capitalize something in the middle.
2) When adding numbers, add somewhere in the middle of a word rather than between words.
3) If security is really important, spell one longish word backwards before apply 1 and 2.
4) Another trick I've used many times (as a touch typist) is to type words with your fingers slid over one key, left, right, or upleft/upright. Thus a simple, common word like "login" becomes ";phom", "kifub", "o9t8h", or "p0y9j" .
Use of these tricks add tremendous amounts of entropy to otherwise crappy passwords while still being very easy to remember.
Folks, this is 100 TERABYTES of data. At an organizational level, this could represent nearly all business data that makes Sony relevant as a company.
At my company, we have in the neighborhood of 50 million documents stored and, after compression, it still doesn't pass 10 TB of data.
Planets can't be too close to other stars
This is most likely the biggest one. Being too close to more than one star means higher range of fluctuation.
As a point of reference, a significant number of solar systems are binary systems, making them subsequently less likely to support life.
6. Planet needs to have a core preferably iron to deflect electromagnetic radiation.
Or life exists in gas giants which have thick atmospheres, or beneath the crust.
Although it's tough to consider the possibility of structured life existing at 10,000 atmospheres and 2,000 degrees F, I would imagine it being possible. But, such a life form is *far* less likely to be reaching out into space than we would, as the problem of keeping a "livable environment" in a space ship is at least 10,000 times more difficult. Are there even solid elements at 2,000 degrees F and 10,000 atmospheres?
Maybe I just avoid horrible "battery saver" apps but I've never seen any particular tendency to have them actually further drain the battery. What kind of horrible "battery apps" do you torture yourself with?
I'd like to re-emphasize the GP post: the rate of drain is what a battery app should be focusing on, not battery life remaining.
The FAA is all about protecting the commercial use of the air.
It's so one-sided that pilots don't even have a consistent right to appeal punitive actions, and the rules around "non commercial" (private) flight are so ridiculous that merely sharing the cost of a ride in a small plane with a buddy can be considered a commercial flight, if your buddy does anything work related at all. It is truly just silly.
As soon as the drones have progressed technologically to the point where they are reasonably safe *and* profitable, the FAA would be all over that. Their biggest concern is making sure everybody knows that *they* regulate it.
Viruses mutate much faster than humans.
The truth of this statement really comes down to the definition of "mutate".
People don't exist in "bare form". We have a complex and growing plethora of decidedly human artifacts like clothing, houses, governments, and technology. Subsequently, people have evolved to respond very quickly and intelligently to a myriad of environmental threats, ranging from viruses and disease to climate change. That these responses are exobiological doesn't mitigate the fact that they function as evolution of the human collective presence.
I would argue that this collection of exobiological factors are as much a part of evolution for mankind as a purely biological evolution. By this definition, a quarantine is every bit as relevant as a new gene.
The answer is as old and timeless as humanity.
Assume for a second, that you have a pond. And a new type of algae has been introduced into the pond. Algae grows quickly, so let's assume a doubling time of a day. 24 hours. The concern is that this new algae is gross and smells bad and nobody wants to have a pond full of this disgusting algae. Unfortunately, treating the algae is expensive and nobody wants to treat the entire pond.
The question is: One week before the pond is entirely covered in algae, would enough have appeared that you would even notice? At a "gut instinct" level, we'd guess that perhaps a quarter or a third or at least a tenth of the pond would be covered in algae, but that gut level instinct would be completely wrong. Just 1.56% of the pond would be covered - right about the point where it becomes noticeable at all.
The point is this: information processing capabilities, globally, aren't just growing exponentially: the rate of growth is itself also growing exponentially. Just about exactly at the time where we notice actual, verifiable intelligence of any kind is just about exactly the time where we have to assume it's ubiquity.
Previous discussions talk about the number of cross connects and how far away we are from the mark without commenting that the Internet itself allows for an infinite number of cross connects - my laptop can connect directly to billions of resources immediately with an average 10-25ms delay. Now, it's very likely that what is meant by "cross connects" in the context of AI is substantially different than the "cross connect" capability that global networking enables, but it's equally true that people generally fail at understanding exponential growth. It's why 401ks are so universally underutilized, why credit cards are such big business, and why the concept of the "singularity" seems like such hocus pocus at the gut level.
See, anybody who has a CS degree will be motivated to HATE boot camp guys. Employers who want more (cheaper) labor will be motivated to LOVE any force that lets them hire more people at less cost.
As a self-taught programmer myself managing a 10+ year project that's highly profitable, you'll probably guess which side of that divide you'll tend to see me on.
Your later comments about ignoring RAID controller warnings for a *year* strike me as callous. But we all have our standards, and standards vary greatly from place to place as the needs the drive the standards also vary greatly. (financial institutions care much more about transactional correctness than reddit)
After months of testing, our organization has wholeheartedly adopted ZFS and have been finding that not only is it technically far superior to other storage technologies, it's significantly faster in many contexts, it's actually more stable than even EXT4 under continuous heavy read/write loads, and brings capabilities to the table that even expensive, hardware RAID controllers have a tough time matching. Best of all, since it actually runs off JBOD, the cost is somewhere between insignificant and irrelevant.
I was wondering if you had investigated ZFS at all, and if so, why you aren't using it?
Large scale internal combustion engines are extremely efficient and can run on just about anything burnable: vegetable oil, powdered coal, agricultural dust, wood gas from trees, dried leaves, etc. Yes, you can literally run an engine on banana peels. The trick is to get the carburetor to get the balance right.
From the perspective of a generator for a hospital, it would be relatively straightforward to design a generator running an engine like this with whatever renewable fuel is most convenient and readily available locally. Large scale wood gas installations typically work with fuel pre-processed into pellets.
You make it sound like it was paradise in the 80s. It had it's suckiness, just like we do today.
1) There was constant threats of terrorism in the media in the 80s. Take a look at the "Libyans" in "Back to the Future".
2) Helicopter parents were definitely a thing in the 80s.
3) There were plenty of poor example adults in the 80s.
4) I'll 100% grant that entry level jobs are *much* harder to find now.
5) NSA and FBI watched us in the 80s. Ma Bell logged every call ever made. What was that you were saying on the CB Radio, back when the FCC actually gave a damn?
6) Granted Massive student debt, partially offset by the relative ease of getting into school. Yes, debt is a problem, especially when you pick a lame degree. It was always a problem, more so now.
7) There was no "online", so no posting stupid stuff online, and no online bullying. Bullying back then wasn't some insult posted in a chat root, it was a broken jaw. I remember well facing my bully with a stick in my hand, and being knocked flat repeatedly by a kid with 30 pounds on me, while I cursed defiantly and got up to face him again.
8) Education system was "declining" then too.
9) I'd argue that the cold war and the constant threat of total, global annihilation far outweighs a few school shootings. Or did you forget that little detail?
The only reason he airline industry is not a natural monopoly is because of the massive public infrastructure provided by the US Government FAA in public use airports and related flight control infrastructure. In every meaningful sense, an airport solves the "last mile problem" for airplanes. Why wouldn't we expect a similar investment in the "last mile problem" for Internet Service?
SouthWest doesn't own the Oakland Airport; they merely lease a terminal. Can you imagine what would have happened if Delta had owned the airports too?
I've seen this lame list for 10 years, pretty much trolling bait. But based on this, I wonder if you even know how DKIM works?
(X ) It will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it
Pretty touch to crack legitimate encryption.
(X ) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once
Not at all. You can use it, or not. If you don't use it, you essentially give permission for black hats to spoof your identity. Also, if you are an admin, you can choose what you do with DKIM.
(X ) Many email users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers
How is being able to protect your account from being spoofed going to affect business?
(X ) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email
Why would you need one? DKIM is done via DNS and is under the control of the record holder.
(X) Asshats
(X ) Huge existing software investment in SMTP
(X ) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes
(X ) Eternal arms race involved in all filtering approaches
Do you actually know how DKIM works? Each of these points are either effectively made better with DKIM or are irrelevant.
(X ) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever
been shown practical
Care to name one?
(X ) Whitelists suck
(X ) Countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks
(X ) Why should we have to trust you and your servers?
(X ) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough
How is DKIM a whitelist? You really have no idea how this works, do you? Did you just fill in some boxes at random?
I'll address a single point on here, to show how DKIM works rather well even in the worst of the points:
(X ) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected
One of the products my company provides for schools is a "mailing list reflector" that in practice works very much like your average mailing list. In order to ensure delivery, all outbound email is signed with DKIM, even though we're really just forwarding the original message to the mailing list recipients.
How is this done? Well, we use a dummy address for the "From" field like "originaluser@gmail.com " and then set the reply-to field to match the original sender. Thus, DKIM passes as we provide keys for mycompany.com, the user is "From" mycompany.com, and the end user is able to reply to get a message back to the sender without involving our mail server at all.
It's a compromise, but it works well and we've had virtually no complaints.
Voters worry about irrelevant issues like abortion, gay marriage, inequality, and racism, while not worrying enough about the stuff that matters, like banking regulation, tax policy, nepotism, and crony capitalism.
And, in my opinion, that's largely because of the Centrally Controlled Media in the United States. And if you think "Main Stream Media" doesn't include Faux[sp?] News, you're also a victim of this control.
... to the masses of sarcastic "I though Open Source was more secure!" crowd: in an Open Source forum, when vulnerabilities are found, they are patched. Since it's a public forum, the vulnerabilities are disclosed, and patches / updates made available. The poor, sorry state of the first cut gets rapidly and openly improved.
With closed source, the vulnerabilities merely stay hidden and undisclosed, and you have no ability to know about it, or fix it yourself. the poor, sorry state of the first cut never improves. Yes, there are some cultures that take security seriously. You have no way of knowing.
This, right here, is what "more secure" looks like: public notification of the vulnerabilities and patches to distribute.
I haven't worn a watch in well over a decade. Why should I start wearing one now?
Linux is free because it is open source, but that can have its own associated restrictions (associated with the time input required to it to a certain level of functionality, depending on your Linux expertise.)
I guess you haven't set up recent Linux distros? Using Fedora, I can have a workstation up and running, fully updated in 30 minutes. Compare with Windows with the update/reboot/install for a day. At the very least, let's talk about the current state of Linux, and not its state as of 2001, OK?
Happy MetroPCS customer here. Seriously, they rock. Coverage isn't fabulous but isn't bad either.
With today's 4-8 TB drives, it's easy to keep billions of of files on a single disk, so you could potentially keep data for many thousands of customers on a single disk. But if you do that, you quickly run into an entirely new type of constraint: IOPS.
The dirty secret of the HD industry is that while disks have become far bigger, they haven't really become any faster. 7200 RPM is still par for the course for a "high performance" desktop or NAS drive, and you can only queue up about 150 requests per second at 7200 RPM. Simple physics takes over.
Spinning disks are already a non-starter for many scenarios, and this is a trend that will only accelerate as HDDs basically become the modern equivalent of tape backup.