"Voting cheaters off the island" is also an attack vector. If you can somehow, even temporarily, vote off a large chunk of the collective, 51% of a smaller collective scales down.
He's trying to create am anti-discrimination law, so he needs to tie it to some discrimination against a group legally protected from discrimination. While it is illegal to discriminate based or race, it is not illegal to discriminate based on someone's account balance or lack thereof. Welcome to politics and lawmaking.
"...build a search engine for China that would censor broad categories of information about human rights, democracy, and peaceful protest. "
Did they really hard code it to the above? Or did they simply build tools that allow censorship, whether "how to build a home made bomb" or "how to peacefully protest", the tool doesn't care. Reporters often like sensationalizing things, so why not write about what the tool could sensor which will get most clicks.
FIOS terminates ethernet at my house and offers static IP. No equipment rental required, I use my own routers. The only time my bill ever went up was when I switched to higher bandwidth plans, other than that same bill every month. Have been with them for over a decade now.
So according to you, they should be taxed at 120% and applies equally to businesses and individuals (to be fair, as per your own comment). Wow! Imagine all the money the government would make from welfare and other government subsidies alone! I think you just solved the government deficit problem! Genius.
High latency and low bandwidth may seem like disadvantages, but at the same time it slows down and limits the discovery scope. The problem with the low latency, high bandwidth methods is that once you hack one, you can hack the rest by running a script (or a google search). This is what happened here. The low tech, old methods are also susceptible to high tech discovery methods (high tech digital surveillance, data mining, etc), but their main advantage was that if you compromise one dead drop, you didn't compromise all of CIA's dead drops around the world.
The problem is that people could understand low tech easier, so when there was only low tech for secret communications and low tech for detection, it worked and people understood why. With high tech, low tech methods are easier to crack too. Unfortunately, a lot of people in high ranking positions think that if they can't think of a way to hack something, or simply don't understand it (try to explain specter vulnerability to career bureaucrat) they consider it secure, and make decisions accordingly - "it's secure, it's working, so no need to spend any resources to change it". They fall for things like "who cares if the RNG seed is hardcoded and the same on every device, it looks so long and random that nobody could guess it, so it must be secure".
Come on, Google as a tool was about as important as they fact that they used the internet developed by US own DARPA. Oh, and they likely used Intel or AMD CPUs, and probably US made Windows or Linux, paired Chrome or Edge or Firefox too.Or maybe they used an iPad, so let's change the headline to using Apple.
The article makes it sounds like Google was the weakness here. If it wasn't for Google search, they would have used other tools with the same result. While interesting news, the headline on Slashdot is just sensationalism - notice the linked article does not have Google in the headline, or any other splashy company names.
Tesla recently removed the full-self-driving as an option for new cars. People who bought it 2 years ago still have absolutely nothing, zip, to show for it. But I bet Elon fired a lot of people for it not being ready when he said it would (end of 2017 was supposed be a coast-to-coast demo), hence the revolving door. From what I read and heard, nobody tells Elon something cannot be done or cannot be done within the time he said it can be done, unless they are looking to be fired. This is probably how horrible brain farts of Elon like "I don't need no stinking BSM radars like all the other cars, I can do it with PARKING SENSORS!" get put into the product (it works about as well as a PARKING sensor iwould be expected to work at NON-PARKING speeds, which is not well at all, but Tesla will not admit to it, they scraped their website of this feature being available int past and in recent hardware cars they just released camera based blind spot monitoring). I think a great example of how Elon delivers is AutoPilot 1 Summon, where Elon promised it would "find you anywhere on private property". What was delivered (final version as this is now discontinued hardware) is a feature where the car can drive up to 40ft in a straight line while someone is holding a dead-man-switch to make sure the car doesn't hit anything. That pretty much describes Elon's pattern for the last 5 years. He used to achieve great things, now he's just blowing a lot of hot air.
I avoid Comcast like the plague. Cut the cord years ago. Even back then there was a line of people returning equipment. Lucky for me I have an internet provider alternative. Comcast business model is based on raising prices without offering anything new. Their expertise is in inventing new fees or claiming taxes have doubled or even tripled month to month and calling customers cheap - "it's less than a $1, what's the big deal?". My cable bill always increased between $0.10 to $1.99 per month every month (using online bill pay provides great history information). You can call and threaten to cancel you can get it reduced but that is time consuming, annoying and doesn't last since the increases keep on coming anyways. They count on people being to lazy to find an alternative if they only see pennies increase each month (most people sadly don't put it together that over time it adds up). Whenever they come to try to sign me up again, I always ask whether they can give me any guarantees that my "fixed price plan" will not go up for the 2 years they are offering it to me, but their answer is always "the plan is fixed, but fees and taxes may change".
With 5G deployments coming soon, they will have even more customers fleeing as that that will give many customers an alternative for internet where Comcast was the only choice before.
This is a standard trick in the government revenue generation handbook - utilize voter ignorance. New taxes need voter support, so target a small group of targets for a small tax, while making sure nothing in the bill says anything about caps, or voters having to approve any increases or changes. It works even better if the targets are somewhat unsympathetic, like "big evil tech companies". Vote it in. Change at will. I recently watched a similar move pulled in Washington state - vote in $10 tax on electric vehicles ("only fair since they got EV incentives"). A year later, tax is $100, 2 years later $150. Funny thing, I called it when it was on the ballot at $10, but even I didn't think it would go 10x in just one year.
The highest responding age group was 20 year olds, and largest number of respondents (close to 40% respondents) fell into the $0-$5,000 annual income bracket, so people not with means to purchase a self-driving car, hence responding to the questions from "what others should do" perspective, not "what I would do". No surprise, people are usually very altruistic when asked what others should do. If the question was "what should your car do" or "what should your loved one's car do", the answers would be different.
In such split second decisions humans react on instinct. Unless specially trained, that instinct will be self-preservation or panic paralysis. Think someone punching a person, most people will just try cover themselves or do freeze "like a deer in the headlights". People trained in hand-to-hand combat will get out of the way, block, redirect the punch or even use it to attack back. The question at hand is, should cars react like exactly like humans, and if so, which humans? If not, how should the cars react? As a side note, reacting exactly like humans may be bad too - while people can empathize with someone freezing up in a moment of terror and not making the "optimal" decision (whatever that is), a computer which freezes in the same situation will be subject to massive public outrage and calls for banning it, huge financial penalties to manufacturer, etc.
Self driving is in its infancy (no pun intended) - too early to use school children as test subjects. NHTSA probably doesn't want headlines which some politicians and social outrage leaders could use to stir up public paranoia to get votes for fear-driven legislature in the name of "think of the children!".
The real issue was that the name was a poor choice. People put far too much confidence in it. Maybe that was going to happen no matter what since people are lazy, stupid fools, but the name probably exacerbated this greatly. Call it “Driver Assist” or something like that. It’s not supposed to drive you around or be flawless, but to react to a dangerous situation before you can when it’s capable of that.
You obviously never read the feature description for Full Self Driving feature (FSD) described here. It was not a poor choice of a name, it was actually named very accurately for what it was supposed to. Here are some quotes of the said description which appeared when ordering it: "All you will need to do is get in and tell the car where to go." "Your Tesla will figure out the optimal route, navigate urban streets (even without lane markings), manage complex intersections with traffic lights, stop signs and roundabouts, and handle densly packed freeways with cars moving at high speed. When you arrive at your destination, simply step out at the entrance and your car will enter park seek mode, automatically search for a spot and park itself. A tap on your phone summons it back to you." "Please note that using a self-driving Tesla for car sharing and ride hailing for friends and family is fine,"
Then Elon added tweets saying how you will be able to sleep on the back seat while the car drives you, or how you will be able to summon your car from across the country.
I would not call the ability for my car to drive by itself from Boston to L.A. a "driver assist".
Horses blinders have been around for ages now. I saw a Dilbert cartoon years ago with people wearing mini-cubes on their shoulders (probably where Panasonic got their idea). Unfortunately this does nothing about the noise all around, because people can't find open conference rooms to meet or phone rooms to take phone calls in. It also doesn't stop coworkers from interrupting you every few minutes, which is often shorter than it takes to context switch back to work.If the idea is to signal people that you don't want to be disturbed, just wear a "Do Not Disturb" flashing light on your head.
Since bonus is tied to accepting a new job, take the job and quit right after the bonus pays out. It will also give them a few months to secure a new job.
Yea, took reading this for me to find it. I dismissed it because it was loud and annoying, quick scan looking for it after so I can read it didn't yield in any usual place.
Slashdot Mirror
"Voting cheaters off the island" is also an attack vector. If you can somehow, even temporarily, vote off a large chunk of the collective, 51% of a smaller collective scales down.
He's trying to create am anti-discrimination law, so he needs to tie it to some discrimination against a group legally protected from discrimination. While it is illegal to discriminate based or race, it is not illegal to discriminate based on someone's account balance or lack thereof. Welcome to politics and lawmaking.
"...build a search engine for China that would censor broad categories of information about human rights, democracy, and peaceful protest. "
Did they really hard code it to the above? Or did they simply build tools that allow censorship, whether "how to build a home made bomb" or "how to peacefully protest", the tool doesn't care. Reporters often like sensationalizing things, so why not write about what the tool could sensor which will get most clicks.
FIOS terminates ethernet at my house and offers static IP. No equipment rental required, I use my own routers. The only time my bill ever went up was when I switched to higher bandwidth plans, other than that same bill every month. Have been with them for over a decade now.
It is. It's launching Google assistant.
It's only logical.
Unless Facebook employees don't use Facebook, since they know first hand all the data they'd be handing over.
So according to you, they should be taxed at 120% and applies equally to businesses and individuals (to be fair, as per your own comment). Wow! Imagine all the money the government would make from welfare and other government subsidies alone! I think you just solved the government deficit problem! Genius.
High latency and low bandwidth may seem like disadvantages, but at the same time it slows down and limits the discovery scope. The problem with the low latency, high bandwidth methods is that once you hack one, you can hack the rest by running a script (or a google search). This is what happened here. The low tech, old methods are also susceptible to high tech discovery methods (high tech digital surveillance, data mining, etc), but their main advantage was that if you compromise one dead drop, you didn't compromise all of CIA's dead drops around the world.
The problem is that people could understand low tech easier, so when there was only low tech for secret communications and low tech for detection, it worked and people understood why. With high tech, low tech methods are easier to crack too. Unfortunately, a lot of people in high ranking positions think that if they can't think of a way to hack something, or simply don't understand it (try to explain specter vulnerability to career bureaucrat) they consider it secure, and make decisions accordingly - "it's secure, it's working, so no need to spend any resources to change it". They fall for things like "who cares if the RNG seed is hardcoded and the same on every device, it looks so long and random that nobody could guess it, so it must be secure".
Come on, Google as a tool was about as important as they fact that they used the internet developed by US own DARPA. Oh, and they likely used Intel or AMD CPUs, and probably US made Windows or Linux, paired Chrome or Edge or Firefox too.Or maybe they used an iPad, so let's change the headline to using Apple.
The article makes it sounds like Google was the weakness here. If it wasn't for Google search, they would have used other tools with the same result. While interesting news, the headline on Slashdot is just sensationalism - notice the linked article does not have Google in the headline, or any other splashy company names.
I'm outbidding you by 50%, offering $3...;-)
Tesla recently removed the full-self-driving as an option for new cars. People who bought it 2 years ago still have absolutely nothing, zip, to show for it. But I bet Elon fired a lot of people for it not being ready when he said it would (end of 2017 was supposed be a coast-to-coast demo), hence the revolving door. From what I read and heard, nobody tells Elon something cannot be done or cannot be done within the time he said it can be done, unless they are looking to be fired. This is probably how horrible brain farts of Elon like "I don't need no stinking BSM radars like all the other cars, I can do it with PARKING SENSORS!" get put into the product (it works about as well as a PARKING sensor iwould be expected to work at NON-PARKING speeds, which is not well at all, but Tesla will not admit to it, they scraped their website of this feature being available int past and in recent hardware cars they just released camera based blind spot monitoring). I think a great example of how Elon delivers is AutoPilot 1 Summon, where Elon promised it would "find you anywhere on private property". What was delivered (final version as this is now discontinued hardware) is a feature where the car can drive up to 40ft in a straight line while someone is holding a dead-man-switch to make sure the car doesn't hit anything. That pretty much describes Elon's pattern for the last 5 years. He used to achieve great things, now he's just blowing a lot of hot air.
I avoid Comcast like the plague. Cut the cord years ago. Even back then there was a line of people returning equipment. Lucky for me I have an internet provider alternative. Comcast business model is based on raising prices without offering anything new. Their expertise is in inventing new fees or claiming taxes have doubled or even tripled month to month and calling customers cheap - "it's less than a $1, what's the big deal?". My cable bill always increased between $0.10 to $1.99 per month every month (using online bill pay provides great history information). You can call and threaten to cancel you can get it reduced but that is time consuming, annoying and doesn't last since the increases keep on coming anyways. They count on people being to lazy to find an alternative if they only see pennies increase each month (most people sadly don't put it together that over time it adds up). Whenever they come to try to sign me up again, I always ask whether they can give me any guarantees that my "fixed price plan" will not go up for the 2 years they are offering it to me, but their answer is always "the plan is fixed, but fees and taxes may change".
With 5G deployments coming soon, they will have even more customers fleeing as that that will give many customers an alternative for internet where Comcast was the only choice before.
This is a standard trick in the government revenue generation handbook - utilize voter ignorance. New taxes need voter support, so target a small group of targets for a small tax, while making sure nothing in the bill says anything about caps, or voters having to approve any increases or changes. It works even better if the targets are somewhat unsympathetic, like "big evil tech companies". Vote it in. Change at will. I recently watched a similar move pulled in Washington state - vote in $10 tax on electric vehicles ("only fair since they got EV incentives"). A year later, tax is $100, 2 years later $150. Funny thing, I called it when it was on the ballot at $10, but even I didn't think it would go 10x in just one year.
Not at all. Just pointing out that the results are skewed, as in "5 wolves and 1 sheep are all voting what's for dinner".
The highest responding age group was 20 year olds, and largest number of respondents (close to 40% respondents) fell into the $0-$5,000 annual income bracket, so people not with means to purchase a self-driving car, hence responding to the questions from "what others should do" perspective, not "what I would do". No surprise, people are usually very altruistic when asked what others should do. If the question was "what should your car do" or "what should your loved one's car do", the answers would be different.
In such split second decisions humans react on instinct. Unless specially trained, that instinct will be self-preservation or panic paralysis. Think someone punching a person, most people will just try cover themselves or do freeze "like a deer in the headlights". People trained in hand-to-hand combat will get out of the way, block, redirect the punch or even use it to attack back. The question at hand is, should cars react like exactly like humans, and if so, which humans? If not, how should the cars react? As a side note, reacting exactly like humans may be bad too - while people can empathize with someone freezing up in a moment of terror and not making the "optimal" decision (whatever that is), a computer which freezes in the same situation will be subject to massive public outrage and calls for banning it, huge financial penalties to manufacturer, etc.
Self driving is in its infancy (no pun intended) - too early to use school children as test subjects. NHTSA probably doesn't want headlines which some politicians and social outrage leaders could use to stir up public paranoia to get votes for fear-driven legislature in the name of "think of the children!".
The real issue was that the name was a poor choice. People put far too much confidence in it. Maybe that was going to happen no matter what since people are lazy, stupid fools, but the name probably exacerbated this greatly. Call it “Driver Assist” or something like that. It’s not supposed to drive you around or be flawless, but to react to a dangerous situation before you can when it’s capable of that.
You obviously never read the feature description for Full Self Driving feature (FSD) described here. It was not a poor choice of a name, it was actually named very accurately for what it was supposed to. Here are some quotes of the said description which appeared when ordering it:
"All you will need to do is get in and tell the car where to go."
"Your Tesla will figure out the optimal route, navigate urban streets (even without lane markings), manage complex intersections with traffic lights, stop signs and roundabouts, and handle densly packed freeways with cars moving at high speed. When you arrive at your destination, simply step out at the entrance and your car will enter park seek mode, automatically search for a spot and park itself. A tap on your phone summons it back to you."
"Please note that using a self-driving Tesla for car sharing and ride hailing for friends and family is fine,"
Then Elon added tweets saying how you will be able to sleep on the back seat while the car drives you, or how you will be able to summon your car from across the country.
I would not call the ability for my car to drive by itself from Boston to L.A. a "driver assist".
Horses blinders have been around for ages now. I saw a Dilbert cartoon years ago with people wearing mini-cubes on their shoulders (probably where Panasonic got their idea). Unfortunately this does nothing about the noise all around, because people can't find open conference rooms to meet or phone rooms to take phone calls in. It also doesn't stop coworkers from interrupting you every few minutes, which is often shorter than it takes to context switch back to work.If the idea is to signal people that you don't want to be disturbed, just wear a "Do Not Disturb" flashing light on your head.
What is there was a bomb in the artwork?
Since bonus is tied to accepting a new job, take the job and quit right after the bonus pays out. It will also give them a few months to secure a new job.
Out of 153K global employees, they lose 44K managers. How many managers are left out of the 109K global employees?
Yea, took reading this for me to find it. I dismissed it because it was loud and annoying, quick scan looking for it after so I can read it didn't yield in any usual place.