Indeed, times are changing. It's really cheap to buy a lot of potentially dangerous technology. Personally I don't care if my data is collected as long as it's not used to influence me. That's the difference between read only and write access to your mind. I'd hate to see an all unified system of Internet data, which outputs exactly the song you are supposed to listen to based on your preferences, exactly the conversation you're supposed to hear, until you buy a Diet Coke. It becomes a system for enforcing negative and positive tagged influences, ya know like cattle prodding sheep. As far as I'm concerned nobody who hasn't directly authenticated themselves to me (said hello, and is within my field of vision) should know anything more than how I sound and what I'm wearing. But I have a feeling we'll have a Mecha-Hitler first, before it becomes bad enough for change.
Some FBI agents deserve it though. From reading this story, I think I'm happy that both parties shat in each others cheerios. Nobody likes to be harassed and most law enforcement agencies make no apologies for the emotional damage (they tend to see your average person as sheep), so I'd say it's fair. Egos checked, world's better off one tiny drop. I do feel bad for the guy's research though, I hope he backed up to the cloud:P
Screw reasons, I've talked to people who simply want any personal information so that they could visit their house with an axe. Not cool doom hamster (Wikileaks), not cool.
Money? I mean look at how much attention to detail goes to hacking Casino machines, couldn't we have half the code review which goes into that into voting machines as well? Suuuure, but who will fund it?
Okay, so you have an accident, who's to blame? The programmer or the driver? Perhaps a hacker steered your car to the right just a little for you to hit a tree, and all the equipment burst into flames, will there be a network trace to recover? So the code review will be one which determines the balance between life and death for the driver for accidental bugs in steering or breaking systems, but are you willing to trust a car company who could possibly get away with murdering you (steer your car into a tree, delete the server side records, on car devices already destroyed)? Creepy thoughts, but an actual possibility. So now we're talking airplane technology, every car will need an indestructible black box recording unit, which can be authenticated without any room for failure.
The point here is if you want a transportation mechanism that's aware of you and itself, get a horse.
Actually the genocide was committed by the Ottoman Empire government. It's a lot like the new company being stuck with the bankruptcy of the previous company. Simply put, war is hell, but at the end of this bloody venture, an empire went down, and from the remains (what could be defended by an extremely skilled General by the name of Attaturk) came modern day Turkey. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... Turks may feel a racial obligation (much like how white people in the US are pressured for slavery) should they want to (personally I don't see how any one person can feel good or bad about something prior to their life time) but the country Turkey did not exist when the genocide was ordered. It was indeed an order to kill all Armenians, but I don't think it worked out so well for the Ottomans.
Don't look for a job from an employer who requires you to sell/provide your personal information to a third party company. Aaaaand that pretty much sums it up. Can an employer force you to do a garage sale? Same logic applies here.
O_O People or robots, you're never met or seen have plans for you. And they effect you, everyday, sometimes within, sometimes without the scope of logic. Poor you, blind and faithful. Go back to sleep.
Okay for the millionth time, we DO NOT NEED NEW LAWS FOR "CYBER" ANYTHING! You know what, I won't win that uphill battle, I'm just going to assume there should be a whole new set of laws on using phones, we can call them telephony incidents!
Take a look at few AI examples out today on binary processing, like (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BINA48) It's almost comprehensible because the truth is, we don't even have the computing power to calculate all possible chess moves on that game alone today. So if I was to try and process what you might say next before you saying based on all available data about you, I still wouldn't have the processing power to make sense of all of it. You can have a human being venture a guess, and even they would have a few mistakes, which brings me to the point. If fourier processing can indeed calculate exponentially faster, it has the potential to surpass even the human brain, which wastes a lot of cycles on things like staying alive. This is very scary because a global leader could simply force decisions on people based on their data and none would be the wiser. You can argue with a human, and they'll get tired, a computer won't. It would be the most disruptive technology of the era if indeed it can be realized and improved. Seeing as how IBM and the like are calling for the end of the silicon era, this will be a sight to see.
Well, I think you should complain to your local government about your government spying on you... So yea... I personally believe Abraham Lincoln had a great quote when he said, "You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time." That is the post-Snowden era. But the million dollar question is, "Who can do what about it?" and the answer is obvious, it's here to stay because no one person can do anything about it. The technical reason is one of liability. When something bad happens, you don't want to hear, "Sorry, the data was encrypted.", or "We didn't collect everything because of privacy or constitutional reasons." A technical person told me, "We don't care about what porn you watch, it's just not what we do." But it is also interesting that a person out there does know what type of porn you watch, and again if one was to specifically categorize porn DNS not to be monitored, that's what all the hackers would use knowing it's not being monitored, that's the argument there. Another thing is, there is no monetary incentive on the side of privacy it would seem. There is a ton of money to be made from data of people. So that's where the world stands right now. Government's argument would be, "We've been watching you this whole time, it's just that you didn't know it, so shut up, forget about it, and we can go back to way things were." Concerned citizen argument is, "The authors of the government promised that it would work to make it impossible to have a system in which all your actions are recorded without your knowledge." It's pretty similar to stalking. Only time will tell.
Or Duke Nuke'm (although that one truly sucked), this I think is a similar phenomenon to reading a book, and waiting for the movie to come out, and almost always hating the movie. Your imagination will never be less cool than someone else's I suppose:)
If I could have the data of just the blood pressure and/or body temperature of all living things in an area, I could get a pretty good idea of who's scared, who's calm, real-time. The entirety of data Google owns is enough to replay a collective personality just by the relation of data structures. Training unique characteristics of images with associated words for example gives way to Google image recognition. What does it take to transcribe audio? We already have that in just about every car now. Information + Processing + Communication = Profit.
TL;DR Everyone who conducts mass surveillance, profits. It's Facebook when Zuckerberg does it, Google when Schmidt, I suppose mass surveillance when the goverment does it. Price ranges, required consent, justification and equipment vary.
The guy who released the statement probably is still working for the XXX agencies. They'll surely send an insider if the systems cannot be accessed remotely.
If yes, then really there are no problems. Worst case scenario, some guy gets super drunk and drives, and runs somebody over. Is he/or-anyone going to blame the robot for continuing to serve this person drinks? They would be retarded because that's like blaming the bottle opener for the reason why you're drunk.
If no, then we probably should also make sure the audio is clipped, and the car of the person automatically gets out of the drive thru line, if a morbidly obese person orders at McDonald's.
Slashdot Mirror
Indeed, times are changing. It's really cheap to buy a lot of potentially dangerous technology. Personally I don't care if my data is collected as long as it's not used to influence me. That's the difference between read only and write access to your mind. I'd hate to see an all unified system of Internet data, which outputs exactly the song you are supposed to listen to based on your preferences, exactly the conversation you're supposed to hear, until you buy a Diet Coke. It becomes a system for enforcing negative and positive tagged influences, ya know like cattle prodding sheep. As far as I'm concerned nobody who hasn't directly authenticated themselves to me (said hello, and is within my field of vision) should know anything more than how I sound and what I'm wearing. But I have a feeling we'll have a Mecha-Hitler first, before it becomes bad enough for change.
Some FBI agents deserve it though. From reading this story, I think I'm happy that both parties shat in each others cheerios. Nobody likes to be harassed and most law enforcement agencies make no apologies for the emotional damage (they tend to see your average person as sheep), so I'd say it's fair. Egos checked, world's better off one tiny drop. I do feel bad for the guy's research though, I hope he backed up to the cloud :P
Screw reasons, I've talked to people who simply want any personal information so that they could visit their house with an axe. Not cool doom hamster (Wikileaks), not cool.
*some dude flies a drone over D.C.* Wasn't this story in the Bible?
Oh they'll grope more than just the nuts. I think mandatory prostate exams are on the list.
Money? I mean look at how much attention to detail goes to hacking Casino machines, couldn't we have half the code review which goes into that into voting machines as well? Suuuure, but who will fund it?
Okay, so you have an accident, who's to blame? The programmer or the driver? Perhaps a hacker steered your car to the right just a little for you to hit a tree, and all the equipment burst into flames, will there be a network trace to recover? So the code review will be one which determines the balance between life and death for the driver for accidental bugs in steering or breaking systems, but are you willing to trust a car company who could possibly get away with murdering you (steer your car into a tree, delete the server side records, on car devices already destroyed)? Creepy thoughts, but an actual possibility. So now we're talking airplane technology, every car will need an indestructible black box recording unit, which can be authenticated without any room for failure.
The point here is if you want a transportation mechanism that's aware of you and itself, get a horse.
The Internet is a utility. That is all.
Actually the genocide was committed by the Ottoman Empire government. It's a lot like the new company being stuck with the bankruptcy of the previous company. Simply put, war is hell, but at the end of this bloody venture, an empire went down, and from the remains (what could be defended by an extremely skilled General by the name of Attaturk) came modern day Turkey. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... Turks may feel a racial obligation (much like how white people in the US are pressured for slavery) should they want to (personally I don't see how any one person can feel good or bad about something prior to their life time) but the country Turkey did not exist when the genocide was ordered. It was indeed an order to kill all Armenians, but I don't think it worked out so well for the Ottomans.
Don't look for a job from an employer who requires you to sell/provide your personal information to a third party company. Aaaaand that pretty much sums it up. Can an employer force you to do a garage sale? Same logic applies here.
Perhaps it wasn't meant for you? :)
O_O People or robots, you're never met or seen have plans for you. And they effect you, everyday, sometimes within, sometimes without the scope of logic. Poor you, blind and faithful. Go back to sleep.
Reminds me of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Okay for the millionth time, we DO NOT NEED NEW LAWS FOR "CYBER" ANYTHING! You know what, I won't win that uphill battle, I'm just going to assume there should be a whole new set of laws on using phones, we can call them telephony incidents!
Gravitational waves ;)
Heat, light, ... whether electromagnetic or mechanical, you got waves, we'll talk.
Take a look at few AI examples out today on binary processing, like (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BINA48) It's almost comprehensible because the truth is, we don't even have the computing power to calculate all possible chess moves on that game alone today. So if I was to try and process what you might say next before you saying based on all available data about you, I still wouldn't have the processing power to make sense of all of it. You can have a human being venture a guess, and even they would have a few mistakes, which brings me to the point. If fourier processing can indeed calculate exponentially faster, it has the potential to surpass even the human brain, which wastes a lot of cycles on things like staying alive. This is very scary because a global leader could simply force decisions on people based on their data and none would be the wiser. You can argue with a human, and they'll get tired, a computer won't. It would be the most disruptive technology of the era if indeed it can be realized and improved. Seeing as how IBM and the like are calling for the end of the silicon era, this will be a sight to see.
Omniscience can be quite a tease.
Well, I think you should complain to your local government about your government spying on you... So yea... I personally believe Abraham Lincoln had a great quote when he said, "You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time." That is the post-Snowden era. But the million dollar question is, "Who can do what about it?" and the answer is obvious, it's here to stay because no one person can do anything about it. The technical reason is one of liability. When something bad happens, you don't want to hear, "Sorry, the data was encrypted.", or "We didn't collect everything because of privacy or constitutional reasons." A technical person told me, "We don't care about what porn you watch, it's just not what we do." But it is also interesting that a person out there does know what type of porn you watch, and again if one was to specifically categorize porn DNS not to be monitored, that's what all the hackers would use knowing it's not being monitored, that's the argument there. Another thing is, there is no monetary incentive on the side of privacy it would seem. There is a ton of money to be made from data of people. So that's where the world stands right now. Government's argument would be, "We've been watching you this whole time, it's just that you didn't know it, so shut up, forget about it, and we can go back to way things were." Concerned citizen argument is, "The authors of the government promised that it would work to make it impossible to have a system in which all your actions are recorded without your knowledge." It's pretty similar to stalking. Only time will tell.
Or Duke Nuke'm (although that one truly sucked), this I think is a similar phenomenon to reading a book, and waiting for the movie to come out, and almost always hating the movie. Your imagination will never be less cool than someone else's I suppose :)
Good point :)
If I could have the data of just the blood pressure and/or body temperature of all living things in an area, I could get a pretty good idea of who's scared, who's calm, real-time. The entirety of data Google owns is enough to replay a collective personality just by the relation of data structures. Training unique characteristics of images with associated words for example gives way to Google image recognition. What does it take to transcribe audio? We already have that in just about every car now. Information + Processing + Communication = Profit.
TL;DR Everyone who conducts mass surveillance, profits. It's Facebook when Zuckerberg does it, Google when Schmidt, I suppose mass surveillance when the goverment does it. Price ranges, required consent, justification and equipment vary.
I think the "Russian" part complicates the issue here.
The guy who released the statement probably is still working for the XXX agencies. They'll surely send an insider if the systems cannot be accessed remotely.
If yes, then really there are no problems. Worst case scenario, some guy gets super drunk and drives, and runs somebody over. Is he/or-anyone going to blame the robot for continuing to serve this person drinks? They would be retarded because that's like blaming the bottle opener for the reason why you're drunk.
If no, then we probably should also make sure the audio is clipped, and the car of the person automatically gets out of the drive thru line, if a morbidly obese person orders at McDonald's.
We can make the world safer!