Something like Google Cardbox is really cheap, so a lot of people end up having it, being able to use it and if they like it and see the possibilities they want more.
This will become easier with more and more content becoming available.
If it's any good, I think there are certain applications which can get adopted quickly when they are available: - trying on clothes in online shops. - if the emergence is good and better than video, online meetings might be adopted more - less travelling.
Both probably depends on having an avatar.
So all together, maybe still a couple of years to go for large scale adoption.
The timeline in the article is really fast about some of the adoption of technologies.
But you know what they say about predictions: most people are short term much to optimistic and long term to pessimistic.
If they can fix the sickness problems for basically everyone, which need very low latency hardware and probably some tricks, then maybe adoption is going to be high. Before that, I think it's not going to play out in the timeline the article mentioned.
A lot more negative way to look at it is this: companies that fear to not be the winner will help build standards to prevent other companies to be the winner.
A company like VMware might be afraid Docker could be the winner because of the network effect of Docker, a company like Microsoft might be afraid Google could be the winner. CoreOS might be afraid Docker could kill their business. Who knows. Maybe I'm wrong.
But whatever the motive of the companies or the individuals, they are making standards and even open source code: https://runc.io/
I personally prefer winner-takes-all standards over that over winner-takes-all companies.
The market can deal with the rest of the problem: making products and services around standards.
That is why standards are so useful and we need to keep making them.
When winner-takes-all happens, it's better to have the standard be the winner. Not some company.
Because when winner-takes-all happens with companies you get a monopoly and abuse of that monopoly (possibly from the pressure of the stock market demanding better and better numbers).
If you watch the presentation, they broke 2 protocols.
One applies to at least both mag-strape and chip&pin systems. That protocol is the protocol used between the terminal the cashier uses and the payment terminal, supposedly newer models use a standard network connection (can be wireless) instead of the old serial protocols.
They made architectural mistakes. In theory chip&pin could be more secure.
To me the most important difference between the US and Europe is that the new rules in the US from a couple of years ago is that the shop can be made responsible for fraud with payment terminals.
At least in Europe as far was I know this isn't the case, so this is a problem for the banks to solve and shouldn't impact the shops or customers as much.
There are a lot of payment terminals that use existing DSL-connections which are also used to provided to Internet access. The traffic is separated by IP-address handled by the DSL-router on the subscriber side. I assume the payment terminal uses TLS (similar to HTTPS) to make a connection over the separate network. Hopefully they give each terminal it's own SSL client certificate or similar.
So I wouldn't be surprised that some access to the network might be possible.
Why did they need to 'fix' V8 Math.random () function which everyone knows is not meant for such things ? It even says so in for example the Mozilla documentation (the organisation that created Javascript in the first place): "Note: Math.random() does not provide cryptographically secure random numbers. Do not use them for anything related to security." https://developer.mozilla.org/...
I think a large part of the problem is: in most countries with strict gun laws people didn't already have guns.
When you change the laws in a country where a lot of people have guns, it's not going to be as effective.
While I'm for the gun laws, I do think it will take a very long time in a country like the US to have much of an effect.
Looking at the presidential candidates and how the US as a country is developing they might even need their guns (not that they could fight the army at all).;-)
"What do you mean? Millions more people own guns now than they did 30 years ago, and violence crimes of all kinds, including those involving guns, have been going steadily down, and are down 46% since the 1990's. So, more honest people own legal guns, and we have much, much less violent crime."
Euh, just like any other western country.
What makes US 'special' is the US still has the highest numbers for violence and murder of any western country.
Anyway, I think the whole discussion is moot. There are so many guns in the US, it would be really hard to get rid of them now.
Also I think technology will always empower humans more and more, this means this whole terrorist and gun stuff is going to be childsplay in a couple of decades.
Slashdot Mirror
As I understand it, this ransomware is only the part that handles all the encryption and uploading the key, etc.
So this depends on an exploit, the Windows exploit will probably be different from the Mac or Linux version.
Windows desktops have a larger marketshare so that is why they are targeting that platform first ?
I can see how this time might be different.
Something like Google Cardbox is really cheap, so a lot of people end up having it, being able to use it and if they like it and see the possibilities they want more.
This will become easier with more and more content becoming available.
If it's any good, I think there are certain applications which can get adopted quickly when they are available:
- trying on clothes in online shops.
- if the emergence is good and better than video, online meetings might be adopted more - less travelling.
Both probably depends on having an avatar.
So all together, maybe still a couple of years to go for large scale adoption.
The timeline in the article is really fast about some of the adoption of technologies.
But you know what they say about predictions:
most people are short term much to optimistic and long term to pessimistic.
If they can fix the sickness problems for basically everyone, which need very low latency hardware and probably some tricks, then maybe adoption is going to be high. Before that, I think it's not going to play out in the timeline the article mentioned.
That is already available and sounds like it could be fun(ny):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
It's better to do it now than 5 years ago. Because it's easier to so now.
Also for mailservers like Postfix they now support the use of DNSSEC+DANE-TLS-certificates:
http://www.postfix.org/TLS_REA...
This means: encrypted SMTP connections between mailservers and man-in-the-middle is not possible.
Standards tend to only happen in markets where there are multiple parties ganging up on a dominant player by following a standard.
Agreed, you need to make the standards early enough to prevent the winner-takes-all.
But. But. But.
The Free Market doesn't WORK THAT WAY!
Does it? Does it?
A lot more negative way to look at it is this: companies that fear to not be the winner will help build standards to prevent other companies to be the winner.
Look at this:
https://www.opencontainers.org...
A company like VMware might be afraid Docker could be the winner because of the network effect of Docker, a company like Microsoft might be afraid Google could be the winner. CoreOS might be afraid Docker could kill their business. Who knows. Maybe I'm wrong.
But whatever the motive of the companies or the individuals, they are making standards and even open source code: https://runc.io/
I personally prefer winner-takes-all standards over that over winner-takes-all companies.
The market can deal with the rest of the problem: making products and services around standards.
That is why standards are so useful and we need to keep making them.
When winner-takes-all happens, it's better to have the standard be the winner. Not some company.
Because when winner-takes-all happens with companies you get a monopoly and abuse of that monopoly (possibly from the pressure of the stock market demanding better and better numbers).
If you watch the presentation, they broke 2 protocols.
One applies to at least both mag-strape and chip&pin systems. That protocol is the protocol used between the terminal the cashier uses and the payment terminal, supposedly newer models use a standard network connection (can be wireless) instead of the old serial protocols.
The presentation:
https://media.ccc.de/v/32c3-73...
On the download tab you can download the english-only video of the talk.
When the banks in the UK implemented chip&pin they messed up in many ways:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
They made architectural mistakes. In theory chip&pin could be more secure.
To me the most important difference between the US and Europe is that the new rules in the US from a couple of years ago is that the shop can be made responsible for fraud with payment terminals.
At least in Europe as far was I know this isn't the case, so this is a problem for the banks to solve and shouldn't impact the shops or customers as much.
There are a lot of payment terminals that use existing DSL-connections which are also used to provided to Internet access. The traffic is separated by IP-address handled by the DSL-router on the subscriber side. I assume the payment terminal uses TLS (similar to HTTPS) to make a connection over the separate network. Hopefully they give each terminal it's own SSL client certificate or similar.
So I wouldn't be surprised that some access to the network might be possible.
I mostly agree.
But for now the rich are still doing fine.
This is probably because of improvements of technology and most of the money is just circulating in the finance sector instead of the real economy:
http://andrewmcafee.org/2012/1...
My guess is, the reason the economy is in a slum is exactly because of the medium incomes aren't doing well.
He was using node.js (which using V8 Javascript engine)
And he was using it for some security related function (in this case generating id's of sessions).
Maybe he should have been using a cryptographically strong pseudo-random generator:
https://nodejs.org/api/crypto....
Why did they need to 'fix' V8 Math.random () function which everyone knows is not meant for such things ? It even says so in for example the Mozilla documentation (the organisation that created Javascript in the first place):
"Note: Math.random() does not provide cryptographically secure random numbers. Do not use them for anything related to security."
https://developer.mozilla.org/...
This makes no sense to me.
The Zen master says: "We'll see."
That is the architecture of the Internet:
Dumb 'pipes' (routers) with any application you can think of and build at the edges (hosts).
The article did feel like an advertisement.
They offer a VM with lots of a disk space, is that really that special ?
I know of at least one that offers something similar:
https://www.vultr.com/pricing/...
I guess not at the same scale and with a bandwidth limit.
What I think is kind of funny is how people are surprised that ZFS works well for VM-images.
rsync is meant/optimized for transfering files, not blocks.
ZFS is meant for transfering filesystem blocks, VM-images are blocks too.
So ZFS works better than rsync for that. That isn't so surprising.
Anyway the whole VM thing has been a big distraction, containers/zones were already in wide spread use before we VMs were in wide spread use.
I'm glad containers are getting more attention now. Partly because of things like storage. Who wants to deal with VM-images if you can have files ?
I think a large part of the problem is: in most countries with strict gun laws people didn't already have guns.
When you change the laws in a country where a lot of people have guns, it's not going to be as effective.
While I'm for the gun laws, I do think it will take a very long time in a country like the US to have much of an effect.
Looking at the presidential candidates and how the US as a country is developing they might even need their guns (not that they could fight the army at all). ;-)
"What do you mean? Millions more people own guns now than they did 30 years ago, and violence crimes of all kinds, including those involving guns, have been going steadily down, and are down 46% since the 1990's. So, more honest people own legal guns, and we have much, much less violent crime."
Euh, just like any other western country.
What makes US 'special' is the US still has the highest numbers for violence and murder of any western country.
Anyway, I think the whole discussion is moot. There are so many guns in the US, it would be really hard to get rid of them now.
Also I think technology will always empower humans more and more, this means this whole terrorist and gun stuff is going to be childsplay in a couple of decades.
I'm not a US citizen, I won't be voting in any US elections.
But my guess is what is really needed is what Lawrence Lessig proposed: reform of the election system.
I really doubt voting has a lot of effect when the candidates are in the pockets of companies that clearly don't represent what the people want.
Just one other candidate remains: Donald Trump, he has his own money.
Which I would also not vote for he's a populist and probably even a fascist.
Yes, maybe they didn't get rid of them.
Maybe they added/embedded them into the team to write the tests.
The summary sucks, read the article:
They got rid of the QA team and made the programmers create more unit-tests (this is key).
Because the computers made less mistakes than the QA team.
Just because it's called EULA means you don't own the software.
EULA means: you have a license to use it.
Again: It's not your software, companies like Microsoft, Oracle and Apple owns their software.
If you don't want that the only solutions are: Linux, BSD, etc.
As I understand it most carbon fiber is not graphene.
This is sparta... I mean slashdot. We don't read articles here. Are you new here ? ;-)
I actually don't think Google.com home page is all that bad really.
All you need to do is paste the HTML-/JS-source in http://jsbeautifier.org/
After that it's a lot more readable.