I guess that's the problem with trying to say something online that sounds so colossally stupid that you'd never think someone would take you seriously..... some people do.
I'm not disagreeing with you, but I'm noting that even if you *COULD* give the government the benefit of the doubt (which I'm not alleging you can in the first place), there's no possible way for them to keep the backdoor keys forever out of the hands of the bad guys that law enforcement is supposed to try and stop, and once they have them, law enforcement would have *MORE* work to do because of it, not less.
Companies that want their teleconferences protected from everyone else, don't give a shit about the US government snooping on them.
Anyone with even just a vague understanding of how computers work will realize that these two concepts are inherently contradictory. If the US government can eavesdrop, then so can anyone else, with the right know how. Encryption techniques exist, however, where no amount of know-how will actually make it any easier to decrypt... and these are the so-called unbreakable encryptions that law enforcement bitches about every so often, suggesting that they are thwarting law enforcement, and painting companies that utilize such techniques as deliberately working against them.
The thing that these people fail to realize is that those unbreakable encryptions are also thwarting untold numbers of would-be criminals that would be all too happy to snoop on people's personal and private data if they could... and use it to their advantage, and probably cause measurable harm to innocent parties.
Even *IF* the government could supposedly be trusted to not actually abuse such backdoors, there's no possible way to keep the bad guys from getting their hands on them, and doing incalculable levels of harm.
Income tax in the lower tax brackets is comparable to the USA, but at higher levels, the tax can get much higher than the USA. I think at the highest level a person can be giving up 40% of their income just in income tax.
Also, Canadian employees have to pay their own EI premiums and pension (comparable to social security in the USA), which is deducted from their gross pay, rather than being paid by the employer as it is in the USA. The net result, even where the income tax level itself is comparable, is that Canadians have a lower level of take-home pay than those in the US.
And you think *YOU* have it bad for gas? The cheapest place to buy gasoline in all of Canada is in the province of Alberta, where it is currently sitting at about $1cdn per liter, which works out to $3.50 usd/gallon. Where I live, the price is over $5 usd/gallon.
If supporting this bill would cause someone to not get re-elected then how do you explain all the Senators and Reps still in office after repeatedly supporting the reauthorization of this horrendous Section previously?
It's my understanding that this would be because the people that it previously impacted weren't people who had any say in the outcome of an election, and there are a very large number of people who will only care about an issue when something bad may or wll happen to them personally as a result of it
Just speculating here... but the reason I can imagine that he might veto it is because it directly impacts Americans. At the very least, it would probably preclude him from getting re-elected for a second term in 2020.
Trump's actions so far have been largely xenophobic in nature, and have appealed to the voters who are like-minded.
In the case of something like McDonalds, what happens is that automated kiosks, for instance, is that it allows them to service more customers per hour, to such a point that the existing staff minus the people that the kiosks effectively replaced would not actually be able to keep up, which would provide no net benefit to the business if the company did nothing else. An interim solution is to actually keep the staff on that they would otherwise replace (or in some cases temporarily hire even more people) so they can better handle the increase in volume of work per unit of time, although such additional staff are usually only part time, specifically for handling the times of the day when the demands are at their peak. In the long run what they do to permanently address the matter is they actually open additional restaurants, also with automated kiosks, to take some of that pressure off of the existing ones, and allow all of their restaurants to function at the higher efficiency without putting undue pressure on the support staff that is needed to keep up with that demand. Opening additional restaurants also means hiring for higher paid positions such as managers for these restaurants.
There's no need. For every worker they replace with a machine, efficiency is improved by such a degree that they ultimately have to hire more workers in the end just to keep up with the increased volume of business they are now able to do.
Because a parent can only take so much of a child not calling home and using the lack of a cell phone as an excuse when he doesn't come straight home from school and leaves parents worried sick about him, before they decide to take the easier path.
Oh, you can try grounding them.... but all they'll do then is make your life a living hell as they constantly bitch about being bored, and start breaking shit they shouldn't be touching in the first place (although not actually maliciously) just because they have nothing better to do.
Leaving aside completely whether or not law enforcement officials can be trusted to have access to our personal information in the first place, people who spout this kind of rhetoric:
The inability of law enforcement authorities to access data from electronic devices due to powerful encryption is an "urgent public safety issue,"
... fail to understand that the inability that they have to access such data is the *EXACT SAME THING* that prevents people with possibly far more nefarious intentions from accessing people's personal and private information as well.
If legislation is introduced that makes it easier for law enforcement to access such data, then they will also make it correspondingly easier for the bad guys to do likewise, and that will result in an *INCREASE* in law enforcement efforts, not a decrease, as law enforcement would then have to work that much harder to protect innocent people from being exploited by those that access people's private information without authorization.... not to mention that such efforts are unlikely to be 100% successful anyways, so more innocent people will get hurt.
The bad guys, meanwhile, who aren't going to be interested in following the law in the first place with regards to only using authorized encryption, are going to continue to get away with stuff because you can't necessarily identify a communications packet that has been encrypted using a known mechanism and one that has not unless you already know what the unencrypted packet actually contains in the first place (and in fact, it is completely trivial to invent a custom encrypted communications protocol that can be mathematically proven to guarantee such results).
If you'd say not, then I'd agree with you... at least insomuch as you seem to have a different definition of intelligence from most of humanity.
If intelligence is real, however, then why can't AI be? AI is, by definition, intelligence that is simply artificial, rather than natural. Short of attributing it to magic, there is no reason that AI cannot exist.
And just as there can be different levels of natural intelligence, it only stands to reason that there can be different levels of artificial intelligence as well. We might very well say that the state of AI is such that one might be embarrassed to associate the term "intelligence" with it, but that's a subjective notion... not any kind of objective metric.
Yes, but that is user-selectable. Plus, thereâ(TM)s always the mains switch in the back, attached to the power supply, if the situation gets really dire. Unless you were in the middle of a large disk-write when cutting power, windows will generally recover from it at next bootup quite handily
Slashdot Mirror
Hawaiian pizza is actually pretty popular in Canada.
Me too... although there are usually more expletives on my end.
I guess that's the problem with trying to say something online that sounds so colossally stupid that you'd never think someone would take you seriously..... some people do.
I'm not disagreeing with you, but I'm noting that even if you *COULD* give the government the benefit of the doubt (which I'm not alleging you can in the first place), there's no possible way for them to keep the backdoor keys forever out of the hands of the bad guys that law enforcement is supposed to try and stop, and once they have them, law enforcement would have *MORE* work to do because of it, not less.
Anyone with even just a vague understanding of how computers work will realize that these two concepts are inherently contradictory. If the US government can eavesdrop, then so can anyone else, with the right know how. Encryption techniques exist, however, where no amount of know-how will actually make it any easier to decrypt... and these are the so-called unbreakable encryptions that law enforcement bitches about every so often, suggesting that they are thwarting law enforcement, and painting companies that utilize such techniques as deliberately working against them.
The thing that these people fail to realize is that those unbreakable encryptions are also thwarting untold numbers of would-be criminals that would be all too happy to snoop on people's personal and private data if they could... and use it to their advantage, and probably cause measurable harm to innocent parties.
Even *IF* the government could supposedly be trusted to not actually abuse such backdoors, there's no possible way to keep the bad guys from getting their hands on them, and doing incalculable levels of harm.
I'm not in anything resembling a remote location, actually. I live in the third largest city in Canada.
Income tax in the lower tax brackets is comparable to the USA, but at higher levels, the tax can get much higher than the USA. I think at the highest level a person can be giving up 40% of their income just in income tax.
Also, Canadian employees have to pay their own EI premiums and pension (comparable to social security in the USA), which is deducted from their gross pay, rather than being paid by the employer as it is in the USA. The net result, even where the income tax level itself is comparable, is that Canadians have a lower level of take-home pay than those in the US.
And you think *YOU* have it bad for gas? The cheapest place to buy gasoline in all of Canada is in the province of Alberta, where it is currently sitting at about $1cdn per liter, which works out to $3.50 usd/gallon. Where I live, the price is over $5 usd/gallon.
How *DARE* you interject real science into this?!?!
Yeah.... isn't that what FM stands for? "Fake, Mostly"? It's right there in the name...
How cute, you think Americans are heavily taxed.
Look immediately to the north for an example of a country that taxes its citizenry substantially more heavily.
I was half joking... Actually Cortana is available in Canada now, but it wasn't for quite a while.
We even just got Amazon's Alexa recently.
The point remains though... not every place where these so-called ubiquitous home assistants can be found is actually serviced by them.
So Canada's a 3rd world country now?
Good to know.
It's my understanding that this would be because the people that it previously impacted weren't people who had any say in the outcome of an election, and there are a very large number of people who will only care about an issue when something bad may or wll happen to them personally as a result of it
Are you suggesting that there are some Americans who *want* warrantless surveillance on them?
Just speculating here... but the reason I can imagine that he might veto it is because it directly impacts Americans. At the very least, it would probably preclude him from getting re-elected for a second term in 2020.
Trump's actions so far have been largely xenophobic in nature, and have appealed to the voters who are like-minded.
In the case of something like McDonalds, what happens is that automated kiosks, for instance, is that it allows them to service more customers per hour, to such a point that the existing staff minus the people that the kiosks effectively replaced would not actually be able to keep up, which would provide no net benefit to the business if the company did nothing else. An interim solution is to actually keep the staff on that they would otherwise replace (or in some cases temporarily hire even more people) so they can better handle the increase in volume of work per unit of time, although such additional staff are usually only part time, specifically for handling the times of the day when the demands are at their peak. In the long run what they do to permanently address the matter is they actually open additional restaurants, also with automated kiosks, to take some of that pressure off of the existing ones, and allow all of their restaurants to function at the higher efficiency without putting undue pressure on the support staff that is needed to keep up with that demand. Opening additional restaurants also means hiring for higher paid positions such as managers for these restaurants.
There's no need. For every worker they replace with a machine, efficiency is improved by such a degree that they ultimately have to hire more workers in the end just to keep up with the increased volume of business they are now able to do.
Because a parent can only take so much of a child not calling home and using the lack of a cell phone as an excuse when he doesn't come straight home from school and leaves parents worried sick about him, before they decide to take the easier path.
Oh, you can try grounding them.... but all they'll do then is make your life a living hell as they constantly bitch about being bored, and start breaking shit they shouldn't be touching in the first place (although not actually maliciously) just because they have nothing better to do.
Leaving aside completely whether or not law enforcement officials can be trusted to have access to our personal information in the first place, people who spout this kind of rhetoric:
If legislation is introduced that makes it easier for law enforcement to access such data, then they will also make it correspondingly easier for the bad guys to do likewise, and that will result in an *INCREASE* in law enforcement efforts, not a decrease, as law enforcement would then have to work that much harder to protect innocent people from being exploited by those that access people's private information without authorization.... not to mention that such efforts are unlikely to be 100% successful anyways, so more innocent people will get hurt.
The bad guys, meanwhile, who aren't going to be interested in following the law in the first place with regards to only using authorized encryption, are going to continue to get away with stuff because you can't necessarily identify a communications packet that has been encrypted using a known mechanism and one that has not unless you already know what the unencrypted packet actually contains in the first place (and in fact, it is completely trivial to invent a custom encrypted communications protocol that can be mathematically proven to guarantee such results).
Not sure if you are trying to be funny or if you misread, but this is about NAS drives, which has nothing to do with the NSA
Is intelligence real?
If you'd say not, then I'd agree with you... at least insomuch as you seem to have a different definition of intelligence from most of humanity.
If intelligence is real, however, then why can't AI be? AI is, by definition, intelligence that is simply artificial, rather than natural. Short of attributing it to magic, there is no reason that AI cannot exist.
And just as there can be different levels of natural intelligence, it only stands to reason that there can be different levels of artificial intelligence as well. We might very well say that the state of AI is such that one might be embarrassed to associate the term "intelligence" with it, but that's a subjective notion... not any kind of objective metric.
Yes, but that is user-selectable. Plus, thereâ(TM)s always the mains switch in the back, attached to the power supply, if the situation gets really dire. Unless you were in the middle of a large disk-write when cutting power, windows will generally recover from it at next bootup quite handily
The power button, perhaps? Windows 10 is a desktop OS, after all.
Heck no.... this is slashdot. :)