Unless you can produce 1.2 million court cases, it's reasonably certain that that never happened. I doubt the IRS really claims it, either. But don't let racism, xenophobia and an inability to learn foreign languages from deterring you.
Ever tried to read a doctor's handwriting? There's no better cryptography. Nobody is allowed to stand near taking notes, anyway, and even if they did they'd be on CCTV.
Thing with computers and data, a billion copies can be made as easily as one, by a million different people, all in different parts of the world, with absolutely nothing to stop them or identify them.
Slight difference in accountability, access control and scale.
So, aside from being utterly wrong in every respect... you're wrong. Nice to know computer literacy is so high. It's almost measurable.
King John wanted a fiscal wall. Ruined his country trying. The barons stepped in and forced him to allow merchants, traders and other workers to cross the border freely except in times of war, and to never deprive a worker of the tools of their trade.
Easy to improve countries to the south. Want a step by step guide?
1) Don't finance or operate death squads there
2) Hold businesses responsible for crimes overseas, as permitted by US law
3) Don't overthrow elected governments
4) Don't supply them with weapons
5) Ensure the NRA is clear that gun running will not be tolerated
6) Legalize all drugs but allow refusal of coverage or care (other than psych) for habitual users of anything addictive
It wasn't even devised by Obama, it was devised by Mitt Romney. Obama notably refused to offer suggestions and asked Congress to devise their own proposals. Romney's, with Republican amendments, was the one accepted.
The issue isn't a week. The issue is that there was a serious defect resulting in personally identifying information (PII) being exposed, showing inadequate testing, and that identification of the flaw took however many years the service has been online.
This is mission-critical software in which failures could potentially cause tens of millions of dollars damage. There are certain Federal requirements for such software, including ISO 900x. It is also running via the Federal government, which imposes FIPS, the NSA secure server guidelines, Common Criteria, and those elements of the Rainbow Series dealing with data not obsoleted by later NIST standards.
I know the sorts of contractors involved, I used to do contract work for the Federal government myself. I am not impressed. The maxim is that if builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, the first woodpecker th at came along would destroy civilization. In Federal circles, that's pretty accurate.
Sure, they're doing better than Yahoo! or Sony. So did Genghis Khan. It's not a difficult standard to reach. Given the Federal government mandates better, should we not be using the mandated standard as the one to judge by?
You do understand that whilst different cars have different performance characteristics making them suitable for different conditions, there's really only one treatment for a broken leg, one treatment for any given bacterial infection, one sort of x-ray, one design of ambulance.
Not really a situation that applies to cars, toothbrushes or music.
There's no reason for it to be the world we live in. We make it cheaper for companies to be failures than successes, but that's a choice and not every country makes the same choices.
All we need are the well-regulated markets advocated by Adam Smith, where regulations protect personal information, mandate minimum standards of operation and require a warranty for fitness of purpose in software.
Yes, and it takes tens of thousands of years to produce a global four degree shift. That's quite a difference from a single century, don't you think? It's the gradient that matters. However, even with absolute values, there are very very few species that are around today that were around 450 million years ago, simply because the climate was too different for them to survive.
We also have less global data with ice cores alone. With the points up to 10,000 years ago, we can get a detailed picture of the climate across the entire globe. We can therefore test our ability to predict based on historic data and an understanding of historic outcomes. However, we do have some data points for 1.5 million years, as you say. Glad we're in agreement that temperatures are known for more than just the past century.
First, the firewall is set to block all incoming connections. Makes it impossible to break into, since you can't connect to it.
Second, security labeling means even if you got into the firewall, the firewall can't generate any packets the machine would accept.
Third, because incoming connections are blocked, there are no credentials to intercept.
It doesn't matter what you can get around, it matters only if there's a vector that runs from where you start to where you want to end. No complete path, no luck. No matter what you can work around.
You don't know if your frameworks are secure? You've never looked at, oh, validating the code? Give you some suggestions.
First, look up CERT Secure Programming. Then look up NASA's Power of Ten. If you're using interacting threads, learn about Pi calculus. Splint is not terribly good, better static checkers are out there - some built into LLVM. You won't use all of these, but that's unimportant.
If you code is: 1) Easy to read 2) Free of defective underlying functions 3) Free of known standard coding errors 4) An implementation of a validated state machine 5) Properly tested at unit and integrated levels 6) Tested against linguistic anomalies (such as injectable escape codes and terminators)
Then you can be confident that the defect density is very low indeed. If you choose not to be, that's your problem.
If you want to increase confidence further, you want to make sure: A) Test harnesses are developed prior to implementation B) Additional theorems are developed about how the code operates C) Everything is properly encapsulated and isolated under minimum privilege doctrine D) One module does one thing and does it well (UNIX doctrine)
The point of C is that even if a bug exists, it simply doesn't matter. Either it can't be reached or you can't get anywhere from it. You cannot prove a program 100% correct, but you don't have to. You only have to prove that any remaining defects are disjoint.
No reason why it would cost that, but blanket statements don't come with an implicit upper bound. If you want claim "for all", you'd best either state range or be damn sure I can't provide an existence proof for an exception.
Linux does support version 1.0 of the kernel. Linux is 100% backwards compatible. Windows can run DOS environments. Your point?
I'd hardly call 111tbps obsolete technology. (The article says "or better" and I'd say that's better.) Find me a wireless link with equal bandwidth and comparable latency (fixed lines will support 2ns latency per hop.)
You can't? Then it's not obsolete technology.
Copper can't do it? So what, it states "or better", says nothing about requiring copper. Wireless is intrinsically inferior, which is why Internet Tier 1 doesn't use it.
That's just it. We the people was a big con. Government works for itself, not you. That's why it needs all the immunity and protections against the public.
America has always been based on the idea that the public and government are mortal enemies that survive by crushing the other. It's so central to the mythos that even though 2A never refers to that and in fact states the exact opposite, in the debates on 2A the focus was on who crushes who.
You cannot fire anyone in government. You cannot recall the president (you don't even elect him), you cannot sack any civil servant, you are powerless. By design. That is the way the founding fathers wanted it.
Ideally Democrats work for the betterment of society. I suspect many believe they do and that a decent percentage actually do.
I'd love to see the Democratic party improve on that and genuinely work for the betterment of all. It means kicking out Ayn Rand supporters, plus Neocons/Reaganites in Democrat clothing. It means recognizing Sanders is considered right-wing in Europe and looking at whether those European ideals would help or harm Americans.
But for now, Democrats do not meet their ideals to the degree anyone would like. They swung to the right, in response to the Tea Party goons, and are now the party of Reagan.
The dynamics are a bit more complex, but the poster was not lying.
Access to abortion actually does reduce abortion rates. It also increases the safety of them.
Abortion rates have gone up dramatically in States that have reduced access to nearly zero. One can argue that that's because contraception access is also nearly zero, as is sex education. That's fair. However, the three are linked. The attitudes restricting one restrict them all.
Not really. There's no competition. And even if there were, those who have died due to a lack of service won't be signing up to it, and people tend to prefer what they know over the new.
Given that Liberals are amongst the first to censor and restrict, whereas Leftists are the ones who introduce laws that improve freedom, you might want to swap those around.
Instead, chances are I'll get trolled or modded, because censorship is after all what Liberals and Libertarians do best.
Also, net neutrality doesn't mean video streaming is as important as emergency communications. It means that emergency traffic cannot be displaced by video games because you're guaranteed the pipe you bought.
Should the market drive the response. The corporations have defined the market, not the consumer. The theory of market-driven response is predicated on consumers having a choice.
Where you have de-facto local monopolies or duopolies due to arrangements between telecos, the consumer has no choice. Likewise when information is so limited that choice does not exist.
Does anyone seriously believe most of those affected had a free choice from a diverse market, with full information on choices? If they do, they need to take a serious look at what they consider diverse or information.
Wireless is not better any of the time, merely more convenient a little of the time. It's inherently limited in bandwidth, for a start. (Optic to the home will do 50gbps, but a single high-end fibre will do 111tbps.) It's also much harder to sniff traffic on a physically private network than on a broadcast network.
But don't expect the aficionados to recognize these details or your disaster scenario, they're determined they are right and won't let facts get in the way.
Except in places where it's all gig economy and abusive management.
A lot of people on the ASD want to work, and are geeks equal to RMS or Linus Torvalds, but can't because in America only the conformists get the jobs.
What good is it to make it easier for them to go nowhere?
Until the ADA is properly enforceable (which means eliminating gig and hire-at-will entirely), all you do is create a smoke and mirrors remedy that chokes and confuses. Until Americans learn to embrace different, things will remain the same.
Slashdot Mirror
Unless you can produce 1.2 million court cases, it's reasonably certain that that never happened. I doubt the IRS really claims it, either. But don't let racism, xenophobia and an inability to learn foreign languages from deterring you.
Ever tried to read a doctor's handwriting? There's no better cryptography. Nobody is allowed to stand near taking notes, anyway, and even if they did they'd be on CCTV.
Thing with computers and data, a billion copies can be made as easily as one, by a million different people, all in different parts of the world, with absolutely nothing to stop them or identify them.
Slight difference in accountability, access control and scale.
So, aside from being utterly wrong in every respect... you're wrong. Nice to know computer literacy is so high. It's almost measurable.
King John wanted a fiscal wall. Ruined his country trying. The barons stepped in and forced him to allow merchants, traders and other workers to cross the border freely except in times of war, and to never deprive a worker of the tools of their trade.
Easy to improve countries to the south. Want a step by step guide?
1) Don't finance or operate death squads there
2) Hold businesses responsible for crimes overseas, as permitted by US law
3) Don't overthrow elected governments
4) Don't supply them with weapons
5) Ensure the NRA is clear that gun running will not be tolerated
6) Legalize all drugs but allow refusal of coverage or care (other than psych) for habitual users of anything addictive
It wasn't even devised by Obama, it was devised by Mitt Romney. Obama notably refused to offer suggestions and asked Congress to devise their own proposals. Romney's, with Republican amendments, was the one accepted.
The issue isn't a week. The issue is that there was a serious defect resulting in personally identifying information (PII) being exposed, showing inadequate testing, and that identification of the flaw took however many years the service has been online.
This is mission-critical software in which failures could potentially cause tens of millions of dollars damage. There are certain Federal requirements for such software, including ISO 900x. It is also running via the Federal government, which imposes FIPS, the NSA secure server guidelines, Common Criteria, and those elements of the Rainbow Series dealing with data not obsoleted by later NIST standards.
I know the sorts of contractors involved, I used to do contract work for the Federal government myself. I am not impressed. The maxim is that if builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, the first woodpecker th at came along would destroy civilization. In Federal circles, that's pretty accurate.
Sure, they're doing better than Yahoo! or Sony. So did Genghis Khan. It's not a difficult standard to reach. Given the Federal government mandates better, should we not be using the mandated standard as the one to judge by?
You do understand that whilst different cars have different performance characteristics making them suitable for different conditions, there's really only one treatment for a broken leg, one treatment for any given bacterial infection, one sort of x-ray, one design of ambulance.
Not really a situation that applies to cars, toothbrushes or music.
There's no reason for it to be the world we live in. We make it cheaper for companies to be failures than successes, but that's a choice and not every country makes the same choices.
All we need are the well-regulated markets advocated by Adam Smith, where regulations protect personal information, mandate minimum standards of operation and require a warranty for fitness of purpose in software.
Figs. One metre of lateral motion when crushed by one Pascal of pressure is one fig. The energy so created is thus measured in fig newtons.
Yes, and it takes tens of thousands of years to produce a global four degree shift. That's quite a difference from a single century, don't you think? It's the gradient that matters. However, even with absolute values, there are very very few species that are around today that were around 450 million years ago, simply because the climate was too different for them to survive.
We also have less global data with ice cores alone. With the points up to 10,000 years ago, we can get a detailed picture of the climate across the entire globe. We can therefore test our ability to predict based on historic data and an understanding of historic outcomes. However, we do have some data points for 1.5 million years, as you say. Glad we're in agreement that temperatures are known for more than just the past century.
My point precisely.
Won't work.
First, the firewall is set to block all incoming connections. Makes it impossible to break into, since you can't connect to it.
Second, security labeling means even if you got into the firewall, the firewall can't generate any packets the machine would accept.
Third, because incoming connections are blocked, there are no credentials to intercept.
It doesn't matter what you can get around, it matters only if there's a vector that runs from where you start to where you want to end. No complete path, no luck. No matter what you can work around.
You don't know if your frameworks are secure? You've never looked at, oh, validating the code? Give you some suggestions.
First, look up CERT Secure Programming. Then look up NASA's Power of Ten. If you're using interacting threads, learn about Pi calculus. Splint is not terribly good, better static checkers are out there - some built into LLVM. You won't use all of these, but that's unimportant.
If you code is:
1) Easy to read
2) Free of defective underlying functions
3) Free of known standard coding errors
4) An implementation of a validated state machine
5) Properly tested at unit and integrated levels
6) Tested against linguistic anomalies (such as injectable escape codes and terminators)
Then you can be confident that the defect density is very low indeed. If you choose not to be, that's your problem.
If you want to increase confidence further, you want to make sure:
A) Test harnesses are developed prior to implementation
B) Additional theorems are developed about how the code operates
C) Everything is properly encapsulated and isolated under minimum privilege doctrine
D) One module does one thing and does it well (UNIX doctrine)
The point of C is that even if a bug exists, it simply doesn't matter. Either it can't be reached or you can't get anywhere from it. You cannot prove a program 100% correct, but you don't have to. You only have to prove that any remaining defects are disjoint.
No reason why it would cost that, but blanket statements don't come with an implicit upper bound. If you want claim "for all", you'd best either state range or be damn sure I can't provide an existence proof for an exception.
Linux does support version 1.0 of the kernel. Linux is 100% backwards compatible. Windows can run DOS environments. Your point?
I'd hardly call 111tbps obsolete technology. (The article says "or better" and I'd say that's better.) Find me a wireless link with equal bandwidth and comparable latency (fixed lines will support 2ns latency per hop.)
You can't? Then it's not obsolete technology.
Copper can't do it? So what, it states "or better", says nothing about requiring copper. Wireless is intrinsically inferior, which is why Internet Tier 1 doesn't use it.
That's just it. We the people was a big con. Government works for itself, not you. That's why it needs all the immunity and protections against the public.
America has always been based on the idea that the public and government are mortal enemies that survive by crushing the other. It's so central to the mythos that even though 2A never refers to that and in fact states the exact opposite, in the debates on 2A the focus was on who crushes who.
You cannot fire anyone in government. You cannot recall the president (you don't even elect him), you cannot sack any civil servant, you are powerless. By design. That is the way the founding fathers wanted it.
Ideally Democrats work for the betterment of society. I suspect many believe they do and that a decent percentage actually do.
I'd love to see the Democratic party improve on that and genuinely work for the betterment of all. It means kicking out Ayn Rand supporters, plus Neocons/Reaganites in Democrat clothing. It means recognizing Sanders is considered right-wing in Europe and looking at whether those European ideals would help or harm Americans.
But for now, Democrats do not meet their ideals to the degree anyone would like. They swung to the right, in response to the Tea Party goons, and are now the party of Reagan.
The dynamics are a bit more complex, but the poster was not lying.
Access to abortion actually does reduce abortion rates. It also increases the safety of them.
Abortion rates have gone up dramatically in States that have reduced access to nearly zero. One can argue that that's because contraception access is also nearly zero, as is sex education. That's fair. However, the three are linked. The attitudes restricting one restrict them all.
Not really. There's no competition. And even if there were, those who have died due to a lack of service won't be signing up to it, and people tend to prefer what they know over the new.
Given that Liberals are amongst the first to censor and restrict, whereas Leftists are the ones who introduce laws that improve freedom, you might want to swap those around.
Instead, chances are I'll get trolled or modded, because censorship is after all what Liberals and Libertarians do best.
Also, net neutrality doesn't mean video streaming is as important as emergency communications. It means that emergency traffic cannot be displaced by video games because you're guaranteed the pipe you bought.
I'd love to know how a hurricane could take out adequately buried cable. The wind speed at that depth must be pretty close to.... oh, zero?
Should the market drive the response. The corporations have defined the market, not the consumer. The theory of market-driven response is predicated on consumers having a choice.
Where you have de-facto local monopolies or duopolies due to arrangements between telecos, the consumer has no choice. Likewise when information is so limited that choice does not exist.
Does anyone seriously believe most of those affected had a free choice from a diverse market, with full information on choices? If they do, they need to take a serious look at what they consider diverse or information.
Wireless is not better any of the time, merely more convenient a little of the time. It's inherently limited in bandwidth, for a start. (Optic to the home will do 50gbps, but a single high-end fibre will do 111tbps.) It's also much harder to sniff traffic on a physically private network than on a broadcast network.
But don't expect the aficionados to recognize these details or your disaster scenario, they're determined they are right and won't let facts get in the way.
In aircraft manufacture, or medical appliances, if you don't meet standards you can't sell the product.
Why should this be different? People die when communications fail, after all.
Except in places where it's all gig economy and abusive management.
A lot of people on the ASD want to work, and are geeks equal to RMS or Linus Torvalds, but can't because in America only the conformists get the jobs.
What good is it to make it easier for them to go nowhere?
Until the ADA is properly enforceable (which means eliminating gig and hire-at-will entirely), all you do is create a smoke and mirrors remedy that chokes and confuses. Until Americans learn to embrace different, things will remain the same.
There are no "free phones", somebody pays in the end.
There are cost-effective phones, ones whose benefit exceeds the cost and thus have long-term negative cost.
A land line can last a hundred years without needing replacing, if it's built right.
A cell phone tower is unlikely to survive the next storm, no matter how well you built it.
That's a lot of cell phone towers you have to rebuild to be equal to one land line.