Well yeah.... essentially you would be whitelisting what types of devices could be plugged into the ports, but in the case where you expect to be plugging in something like headphones, that is *EXACTLY* what you'd want to be doing for the port that you plug your headphones into.
Of course, at that point there is no real advantage to using a general purpose port in the first place.
Please note that I did qualify the firewall as being "properly secured". This is possible to do while still having connectivity such that only physical access can bypass the security. Worst case scenario: issue "deny all" on incoming connection requests.
Or you could just put your regular home computers behind a properly secured hardware firewall. What self-respecting computer knowledgeable person does not already do this?
It might be allowed by the courts, but that doesn't mean that a person has to allow it to happen to their own computer.... this law does not appear to forbid people from securing their own home networks against intrusion from anyone they did not authorize.
How do they define "concealed"? Serious question... because if the definition is overbroad, it would include computers that are simply hidden from view, or even computers on wifi or wireless connnections because there are no cables that can be traced to where the device physically might be.
Sure... but if all you are expecting is to insert a hard drive, any appearance that the device has as a keyboard can be ignored by the operating system. Just turn plug and play off.
But that liability is only if the software is found to be "at fault". What if the software was not at fault? How do they know that falling back to human control could not have possibly made a difference? Humans can think outside of the box, and sometimes come up with solutions that no preprogrammed system ever could unless it was also designed to actually imitate every aspect of human intelligence. We are decades away from that level of AI.
computers are sophisticated enough that they can evaluate your state of mind, and decryption would not only not be possible if you were not the one to decrypt it, but it would further not be possible if you were trying to decrypt it under any kind of duress, so it becomes literally impossible to comply with a court order mandating that you decrypt it for them?
They are so confident in their system that Volvo itself is taking on the liability of their system; if it fails to get you to safety or causes damage, Volvo is responsible, not you.
I realize that is effectively what they are implying, but the fact that they don't actually say this in as many words suggests that they don't genuinely mean that, or at the very least, are hoping that people don't actually realize that is what they are implying, because the possible costs to the company could be incalculable otherwise after the first accident occurs, especially if there is a fatality.
What more could it possibly do? If it does not relinquish control, then the manufacturer necessarily assumes all responsibility for the consequences, which may include loss of life, and it remains only conjecture that relinquishing control would not have made a difference. Maybe it would have, maybe it wouldn't have... but the argument against the manufacturer after an accident that was outside of the software's ability to manage remains that because they never gave the human being a chance, nobody will ever know for sure, so the manufacturer is 100% liable.
If the driver is late, the rider can cancel the fare... the driver is given incentive to be there on time because they risk not getting paid otherwise.
Right... but the driver doesn't need to receive any of that. If the driver doesn't want to wait, they don't get the fare at all, so the driver is given incentive to give the rider time to arrive by virtue of not collecting a fare while the rider is given incentive to be ready for the ride (so the driver won't have to wait) by virtue of having to pay more money if they are not. Compensating the driver for their time like this is treating the drivers *WAAAY* too much like employees.
I'm no Trump fan by any means, but I would think that the only legislation required would be that companies with a domestic presence which manufacture goods that they import into the country from somewhere else would pay a heavy tax on such importing. There's nothing preventing them from continuing to do so, however.. and if the company wants to, they can just raise their prices for consumers to cover the extra expense. That this might also negatively affect the company's bottom line as fewer consumers purchase their products is still not really *forcing* them to do anything in particular.
Poorly worded? Actually, it's downright completely grammatically incorrect if that was the intended meaning:
The Arduino platform consists of open-source hardware, open-source software, and microcontroller-based kits, making it easy to (re)program the processors, and develop software for hardware applications using a java-clone and an easy-to-learn IDE
In fact, if they had honestly meant to be talking about what language the IDE had been written in, then they would not have called it a java "clone" at all, since "The Arduino IDE is written in Java...".
So while I'm inclined to think that some people might actually genuinely believe what you sarcastically suggested. the fact remains that it is wholly disinformation, and it should not be perpetuated.
What fords doing is also reducing their patent liability in the event --the likely event -- they come out with an electric car as well.
Simply saying it's "likely" is an understatement, since Ford started making at least one model of fully electric car that is still in their current lineup some time ago.
... someone I know configured their computer to get US netflix up here by apparently simply changing the IP addresses it used for DNS from dynamically received from the uplink DHCP server to certain static IP's. I'm pretty sure that's not using VPN.
Slashdot Mirror
And I don't think you understand what "properly secured" means if you think that a back door would still be there.
Well yeah.... essentially you would be whitelisting what types of devices could be plugged into the ports, but in the case where you expect to be plugging in something like headphones, that is *EXACTLY* what you'd want to be doing for the port that you plug your headphones into.
Of course, at that point there is no real advantage to using a general purpose port in the first place.
Please note that I did qualify the firewall as being "properly secured". This is possible to do while still having connectivity such that only physical access can bypass the security. Worst case scenario: issue "deny all" on incoming connection requests.
Or you could just put your regular home computers behind a properly secured hardware firewall. What self-respecting computer knowledgeable person does not already do this?
It might be allowed by the courts, but that doesn't mean that a person has to allow it to happen to their own computer.... this law does not appear to forbid people from securing their own home networks against intrusion from anyone they did not authorize.
How do they define "concealed"? Serious question... because if the definition is overbroad, it would include computers that are simply hidden from view, or even computers on wifi or wireless connnections because there are no cables that can be traced to where the device physically might be.
Sure... but if all you are expecting is to insert a hard drive, any appearance that the device has as a keyboard can be ignored by the operating system. Just turn plug and play off.
.... so that if they were to actually try and do anything that actually posed a danger, nobody would take it seriously until it was too late?
But that liability is only if the software is found to be "at fault". What if the software was not at fault? How do they know that falling back to human control could not have possibly made a difference? Humans can think outside of the box, and sometimes come up with solutions that no preprogrammed system ever could unless it was also designed to actually imitate every aspect of human intelligence. We are decades away from that level of AI.
computers are sophisticated enough that they can evaluate your state of mind, and decryption would not only not be possible if you were not the one to decrypt it, but it would further not be possible if you were trying to decrypt it under any kind of duress, so it becomes literally impossible to comply with a court order mandating that you decrypt it for them?
I realize that is effectively what they are implying, but the fact that they don't actually say this in as many words suggests that they don't genuinely mean that, or at the very least, are hoping that people don't actually realize that is what they are implying, because the possible costs to the company could be incalculable otherwise after the first accident occurs, especially if there is a fatality.
What more could it possibly do? If it does not relinquish control, then the manufacturer necessarily assumes all responsibility for the consequences, which may include loss of life, and it remains only conjecture that relinquishing control would not have made a difference. Maybe it would have, maybe it wouldn't have... but the argument against the manufacturer after an accident that was outside of the software's ability to manage remains that because they never gave the human being a chance, nobody will ever know for sure, so the manufacturer is 100% liable.
Only if your hardware or operating system is set up to to execute code that happens to be on the device.
If the driver is late, the rider can cancel the fare... the driver is given incentive to be there on time because they risk not getting paid otherwise.
Right... but the driver doesn't need to receive any of that. If the driver doesn't want to wait, they don't get the fare at all, so the driver is given incentive to give the rider time to arrive by virtue of not collecting a fare while the rider is given incentive to be ready for the ride (so the driver won't have to wait) by virtue of having to pay more money if they are not. Compensating the driver for their time like this is treating the drivers *WAAAY* too much like employees.
As lithium is nearly 50% more common in the earth's crust than lead, I don't think it's availability is really a limiting factor.
How about beating humans at something like Cards Against Humanity? Or Werewolf?
the tariff would not be on other nations, it would be on the American companies that manufacture overseas and then import them back.
No ... That is but one notion of intelligent design. Intelligent design does not require a deity, it only requires a designer.
Even if it were true, it amounts to the same thing as intelligent design, which is supposed to be off limits for any self respecting scientist, right?
I'm no Trump fan by any means, but I would think that the only legislation required would be that companies with a domestic presence which manufacture goods that they import into the country from somewhere else would pay a heavy tax on such importing. There's nothing preventing them from continuing to do so, however.. and if the company wants to, they can just raise their prices for consumers to cover the extra expense. That this might also negatively affect the company's bottom line as fewer consumers purchase their products is still not really *forcing* them to do anything in particular.
In fact, if they had honestly meant to be talking about what language the IDE had been written in, then they would not have called it a java "clone" at all, since "The Arduino IDE is written in Java...".
So while I'm inclined to think that some people might actually genuinely believe what you sarcastically suggested. the fact remains that it is wholly disinformation, and it should not be perpetuated.
I thought that the arduino was typically programmed in a language more like c, or c++.
Simply saying it's "likely" is an understatement, since Ford started making at least one model of fully electric car that is still in their current lineup some time ago.
... someone I know configured their computer to get US netflix up here by apparently simply changing the IP addresses it used for DNS from dynamically received from the uplink DHCP server to certain static IP's. I'm pretty sure that's not using VPN.