You are correct about the nature of the problem, so one option is a heuristic. If government is self-replacing, it never lasts long enough to corrupt.
A second option is to have no common vector. Have the second house be chosen at random from a meritocracy or a noocracy. Hybrids are stronger than pure systems. Fixed, single terms from a random population of achievers and thinkers mean all the attack vectors for a democracy don't work. There are new attack vectors, but they don't work on a democracy.
First, with aren't they using smart cards with passwords on the keys?
Second, why did the software permit weak choices? Manual be damned.
Third, why are infosec officers not replacing those pages in the manual, training users in proper procedures, rejecting the products at user acceptance or running tools for weak password detection?
This is a failure of the entire procurement procedure, start to finish.
The more neurons you have on a core, the less processing time you have per neuron since you're running them as time-shared rather than concurrent.
The main problem is in the synapses. Up to 3000 per neuron, self-modifying not only in terms of end-points but also in terms of amplifying signals. If you've done network simulation, you'll know that's going to eat into the clock cycles.
40 minutes to simulate one second is not good. So if you want to run the simulation faster, you need to split up the tasks into smaller chunks and run them on independent cores. That's the calculation I was using. How far can you possibly subdivide the work in order to get a reasonable simulation speed?
You don't need to observe strings, any prediction will do. Supersymmetry, for example, or supergravity. Falsify either and strings must be false. If either is true, strings must be true.
In all honesty, I doubt it'll go much beyond the 250,000 neuron mark. Brain simulators tend to also be very slow, the ones I could find on Google could take a few hours to simulate a second of activity.
Based on the core count versus simulation speed versus neurons, a simulator that could handle the whole brain at one second per second would be five miles in diameter and 1,500 feet high.
That doesn't mean this simulator is unimportant. Simulating fractions of the brain in extended time will let neurologists see the effects of medical interventions. That, and not HAL, is the objective of such projects, after all.
Copyright and IP is a product of government, so those advocating less government should support China on this whether anything was stolen or not. Indeed, property in general is a government thing, it doesn't exist in societies without government t.
If information wants to be free, then IP would have no validity, whatever the view on government.
The argument of open hardware is that everyone - including originator - benefits from unrestricted sharing. I tend to support that view.
But all this means that the arch-nemesis of America has to be innocent, whether it did anything or not. And I just don't see that going down at all well. No, the majority of people who advocate precisely this for themselves will react badly.
Individuals may well be consistent and stay firmly in the philosophy they hold. Good for them. They will be in the minority.
Unixtime should not ever be modified. Same reason it should not ever follow daylight savings. Unixtime is absolute. It has to work on all planets and in space.
Leap seconds are local to planet of origin, so you want a layer between unixtime and local time that handles leap seconds.
The Earth doesn't rotate once in 24 hours, vertically, perfectly on the plane of the solar system. Nor is the solar system a two body system.
You must change either the definition of a day or the definition of a second. And even then, there are natural variations for which you'll need corrections.
The universe is messy. The corrections may need to fit a better design, no problems with that, but you will need them.
If I'm correct that this is an automatic data purge for rollbacks and testing that was left enabled, then flying to the west coast would trigger the deletion of those records.
All of those points are valid. I'd probably add that coding standards are for pretty printing, not software integrity, in many places.
Education is a core problem, since you can't get bad managers if they are well-educated. Health is another core problem. On these two pillars, almost all else rests, which is why I've burned many brain cycles trying to figure them out.
1-4 are a lack of proper specification and an assumption that you can design on the fly. I can, but I hate it.
6-7, 9 are why I abandoned America.
8 should be made a criminal offence. Company directors and line managers should face automatic life for inappropriate attitudes to security.
This is precisely why the waterfall method explicitly split requirements gathering, specification and design. Subject-matter experts are great for understanding how to be an expert, but case study after case study showed they only partially understood the logic behind it.
The specification should not be drawn up by an expert in the subject or an expert in designing, but by someone who can communicate with both and who understands how to describe what the subject expert said in terms the design expert can work with. They're your universal translator.
The design expert should never interact with, or know anything about, the subject or its expert. Sanity-checking is in the specification. The designer designs from the specification.
In modern programming, the test engineer should develop tests from the specification as well. The programmer should code to the tests from the design.
This doesn't change much with Agile and stories. You just need far more modular specifications, so that there's a one-to-one between mini spec and story.
You really have to reach sub-microsecond for anyone to notice. These days, you have to get to nanosecond accuracy before the complexity starts to show, and that's only because the timestamps can be funky at that level.
Why should they? Where's the profit motive? They're on lowest bid, they're paying the code monkeys in peanuts, there's no meaningful penalty for getting it wrong - only for getting it late.
Patients can't use the vendors and hospitals have no incentive. It only kills a few people each year, far fewer than the synthetic opium they hand out.
Software of any kind, except maybe Ada Lovelace's, postdates daylight savings. Most US health software I've seen (or written) is Windows-based, XP or later, so is this millennium. There have never been excuses to use wall clock time rather than GMT time. All operating systems have used GMT since the 1970s. Even the military use GMT (Zulu time).
Even that doesn't explain deletion. If you used the timestamp alone as a key field, you're an idiot who should be forced to watch reruns of BBC's Eldorado, but it's almost impossible to have two consecutive hours where entries are made to within a microsecond of each other. Even to the nearest second is improbable.
So overwriting is unlikely. We're therefore talking about active database scrubbing if the time rolls back. Obviously part of a testing or restore from backup routine that is permanently enabled.
That's not an "old code" issue the way Y2K was, that's gross negligence. Eldorado, followed by Fingerbobs.
I've had contempt in the other direction, managers providing incomplete specifications and placing quality last on the list of priorities. Security and robustness weren't on said lists. Mind you, I've had no less contempt for fellow programmers for not bothering. I've seriously considered quitting the profession and becoming a Buddhist monk. It's all nonsense, but at least I would no longer have to live with the constant pain of being around such incompetence.
It's much easier for outsiders to hate nations that are abusive, criminal and far-right. Suggest you might want to look into the possibility of not making it so easy.
It's also interesting to observe what the far-right gammons regard as people hating them. They're more fragile than the alleged snowflakes. If saying "the database deletes an hour of records" is to be taken as equivalent to hating baseball, malls and live sex strip joints, it's not the outsiders who have the issues.
Slashdot Mirror
You are correct about the nature of the problem, so one option is a heuristic. If government is self-replacing, it never lasts long enough to corrupt.
A second option is to have no common vector. Have the second house be chosen at random from a meritocracy or a noocracy. Hybrids are stronger than pure systems. Fixed, single terms from a random population of achievers and thinkers mean all the attack vectors for a democracy don't work. There are new attack vectors, but they don't work on a democracy.
Few obvious questions.
First, with aren't they using smart cards with passwords on the keys?
Second, why did the software permit weak choices? Manual be damned.
Third, why are infosec officers not replacing those pages in the manual, training users in proper procedures, rejecting the products at user acceptance or running tools for weak password detection?
This is a failure of the entire procurement procedure, start to finish.
Bitlocker has known issues. That's not a judgement on how serious they are, but it does disqualify it from being called good.
https://www.schneier.com/blog/...
https://www.digitaltrends.com/...
If smartphones used native apps rather than simulated computers, they'd probably retain power for longer.
Removing autoincorrect might help.
Add to that the discovery that neurons have differering genomes. They're modified via retrotransposons.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p...
https://www.scientificamerican...
http://epilepsygenetics.net/20...
So we've a genetic algorithm inside each neuron in the neural network, on top of everything you mentioned.
The more neurons you have on a core, the less processing time you have per neuron since you're running them as time-shared rather than concurrent.
The main problem is in the synapses. Up to 3000 per neuron, self-modifying not only in terms of end-points but also in terms of amplifying signals. If you've done network simulation, you'll know that's going to eat into the clock cycles.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/te...
40 minutes to simulate one second is not good. So if you want to run the simulation faster, you need to split up the tasks into smaller chunks and run them on independent cores. That's the calculation I was using. How far can you possibly subdivide the work in order to get a reasonable simulation speed?
Correlation is worthless.
Is the gene for bitterness preference one of those linked to psychopathy?
You don't need to observe strings, any prediction will do. Supersymmetry, for example, or supergravity. Falsify either and strings must be false. If either is true, strings must be true.
String theory and higher dimensions form predictions that can be tested experimentally. They may be wrong, but they are science.
Not really. It'll be simulating a few neurons in the brain at one millionth speed. These things are for medical research, not AI.
In all honesty, I doubt it'll go much beyond the 250,000 neuron mark. Brain simulators tend to also be very slow, the ones I could find on Google could take a few hours to simulate a second of activity.
Based on the core count versus simulation speed versus neurons, a simulator that could handle the whole brain at one second per second would be five miles in diameter and 1,500 feet high.
That doesn't mean this simulator is unimportant. Simulating fractions of the brain in extended time will let neurologists see the effects of medical interventions. That, and not HAL, is the objective of such projects, after all.
Copyright and IP is a product of government, so those advocating less government should support China on this whether anything was stolen or not. Indeed, property in general is a government thing, it doesn't exist in societies without government t.
If information wants to be free, then IP would have no validity, whatever the view on government.
The argument of open hardware is that everyone - including originator - benefits from unrestricted sharing. I tend to support that view.
But all this means that the arch-nemesis of America has to be innocent, whether it did anything or not. And I just don't see that going down at all well. No, the majority of people who advocate precisely this for themselves will react badly.
Individuals may well be consistent and stay firmly in the philosophy they hold. Good for them. They will be in the minority.
Early bird is now linked with health problems and shortened lives. Just as with smoking in the 1700s, being accepted doesn't equate to being smart.
Unixtime should not ever be modified. Same reason it should not ever follow daylight savings. Unixtime is absolute. It has to work on all planets and in space.
Leap seconds are local to planet of origin, so you want a layer between unixtime and local time that handles leap seconds.
It's not acceptable to have something defective by design.
We learned with Y2K that the other person never does their job until they need to panic.
Do it once, do it right. Leap seconds are not even remotely hard, ignoring them is simply incompetent programming.
The Earth doesn't rotate once in 24 hours, vertically, perfectly on the plane of the solar system. Nor is the solar system a two body system.
You must change either the definition of a day or the definition of a second. And even then, there are natural variations for which you'll need corrections.
The universe is messy. The corrections may need to fit a better design, no problems with that, but you will need them.
If I'm correct that this is an automatic data purge for rollbacks and testing that was left enabled, then flying to the west coast would trigger the deletion of those records.
All of those points are valid. I'd probably add that coding standards are for pretty printing, not software integrity, in many places.
Education is a core problem, since you can't get bad managers if they are well-educated. Health is another core problem. On these two pillars, almost all else rests, which is why I've burned many brain cycles trying to figure them out.
1-4 are a lack of proper specification and an assumption that you can design on the fly. I can, but I hate it.
6-7, 9 are why I abandoned America.
8 should be made a criminal offence. Company directors and line managers should face automatic life for inappropriate attitudes to security.
This is precisely why the waterfall method explicitly split requirements gathering, specification and design. Subject-matter experts are great for understanding how to be an expert, but case study after case study showed they only partially understood the logic behind it.
The specification should not be drawn up by an expert in the subject or an expert in designing, but by someone who can communicate with both and who understands how to describe what the subject expert said in terms the design expert can work with. They're your universal translator.
The design expert should never interact with, or know anything about, the subject or its expert. Sanity-checking is in the specification. The designer designs from the specification.
In modern programming, the test engineer should develop tests from the specification as well. The programmer should code to the tests from the design.
This doesn't change much with Agile and stories. You just need far more modular specifications, so that there's a one-to-one between mini spec and story.
You really have to reach sub-microsecond for anyone to notice. These days, you have to get to nanosecond accuracy before the complexity starts to show, and that's only because the timestamps can be funky at that level.
Why should they? Where's the profit motive? They're on lowest bid, they're paying the code monkeys in peanuts, there's no meaningful penalty for getting it wrong - only for getting it late.
Patients can't use the vendors and hospitals have no incentive. It only kills a few people each year, far fewer than the synthetic opium they hand out.
Software of any kind, except maybe Ada Lovelace's, postdates daylight savings. Most US health software I've seen (or written) is Windows-based, XP or later, so is this millennium. There have never been excuses to use wall clock time rather than GMT time. All operating systems have used GMT since the 1970s. Even the military use GMT (Zulu time).
Even that doesn't explain deletion. If you used the timestamp alone as a key field, you're an idiot who should be forced to watch reruns of BBC's Eldorado, but it's almost impossible to have two consecutive hours where entries are made to within a microsecond of each other. Even to the nearest second is improbable.
So overwriting is unlikely. We're therefore talking about active database scrubbing if the time rolls back. Obviously part of a testing or restore from backup routine that is permanently enabled.
That's not an "old code" issue the way Y2K was, that's gross negligence. Eldorado, followed by Fingerbobs.
I'm one of those who do care. I share your disgust of those who don't. It's not necessary or helpful.
I've had contempt in the other direction, managers providing incomplete specifications and placing quality last on the list of priorities. Security and robustness weren't on said lists. Mind you, I've had no less contempt for fellow programmers for not bothering. I've seriously considered quitting the profession and becoming a Buddhist monk. It's all nonsense, but at least I would no longer have to live with the constant pain of being around such incompetence.
It's much easier for outsiders to hate nations that are abusive, criminal and far-right. Suggest you might want to look into the possibility of not making it so easy.
It's also interesting to observe what the far-right gammons regard as people hating them. They're more fragile than the alleged snowflakes. If saying "the database deletes an hour of records" is to be taken as equivalent to hating baseball, malls and live sex strip joints, it's not the outsiders who have the issues.