Humans need vitamin D. Full spectrum lighting isn't too bad and one quarter sunlight makes outside useless. That means your chief obstacle is energy. You'd need to build a fission or fusion generator. Fission we know how to do, fusion will require a lot of money thrown at it over a decade before we know if it's even doable. Either would give you the energy needed. You need the extra heat generated anyway as Mars is cold.
Are in a position to shop between implants, and there's obviously millions of vendors.
And, of course, stores carry an entire department of wireless routers, not just three boxes between two near-identical vendors who offer no information and have secrecy clauses on everything.
Find any good OpenBSD-based thermostats on Amazon? Thought not.
That's why you want real standards. DO-178C doesn't have backdoors. If FIPS has a backdoor, the U.S. military would love to know. CERT's secure programming guidelines are decent.
I don't think we have to rely on archaic notions of what is secure. I don't think we need to suffer with medieval concepts of what was reliable.
It's perfectly reasonable to expect IoT technology to strictly exceed the standards taught in the 1980s, simply because those standards are 40-odd years old. We've learned how to build things better since then.
The law can reasonably enforce certain standards. There are standards out there, for coding and security. Some, like MISRA, are regarded as correct only in places. But they are published and are used by real people for real projects.
The obvious solution is to commission the NSF to draw up some core standards, using the existing ones as templates:
One set of rules for all I/O, probably based on CERT's secure programming and FIPS.
One set for low-criticality systems, I'd argue 5N reliability is all you need for that.
One set for high-criticality (medical implants, for example), probably using only vital, universal, elements from MISRA, JSF+ and DO-178C. Emphasis on vital, universal. You don't want rules here that are frivolous or domain-specific.
One set for split role devices. I'd probably use ideas that are still relevant from the Rainbow Series.
Such a group may decide that a given set is the empty set. That's fine. That means regulations don't make any sense at that level and that's worth knowing.
The rules should be minimal, no group should have more than ten rules. I don't think anyone can seriously object to ten rules programmers came up with in the first place.
By using existing, established, rules, most can be checked automatically, making it a cinch to validate and certify.
Is it enough? Probably not, but that's not the point. The point is to create a starting point and enforce minimal standards superior to what is currently used but trivial enough to not impose an excessive overhead.
That's different. If specific vendors are making false claims and contaminating their product, count me in on the next protest. I have no problems you condemning that and support you every step of the way.
There's plenty of evidence that ingested bacteria get to the gut, but there's no evidence in any specific case and very little evidence for specific bacteria being healthy.
I'm happy to demand vendors produce the evidence or pay researchers to find out the reality. Should have been done by now.
They didn't oppose increased productivity. If they stayed employed and were paid as much, they'd have been fine.
The problem was the misuse and misapplication of technology, not the technology itself. We see that from where there were few to no problems - mills that merged in technology rationally.
Remember, I live in mill country, the land of Arkwright, Robert Owen and Samuel Oldknow. I know who burned down what, and it was mostly mill owners against rivals with blame put on the Luddites.
No geek supports the misuse of their craft and many support rational thinking. I know of few who advocate torching rivals after failing to compete. At least, few who aren't McAffee.
I'll agree it's many years away. If you choose an optimal path, it will take 15 years to build a complete self-sustaining environment. It won't be cheap, but if you spend what it takes, that's what it will take.
That's arguably many.
Fixing the Earth requires fossil fuels to be abandoned by 2030 at the latest and around 1960s level by the end of this decade. Otherwise, even with geoengineering, it can't be done.
It also requires that, by 2050, the global population is down to 1 billion on the surface (and no more than an additional 3 billion subsurface). Again, if you can't do that, it doesn't matter what you engineer.
On Mars, you'd build a Biosphere II in a cave system and have whatever you like grow there. Seed it with all kinds of plants and animals. With aroubd ten thousand square miles to play with, you've room.
We know that researchers who visit Africa for a week suddenly develop gut flora that is extremely rare and healthy, but try identifying a specific cause.
Of the 1,500+ species of bacteria found in the gut, most show up as "rare, unstudied", so we've no idea whether they're beneficial or not. I'd rather researchers find that out first, given nobody will change their diet anyway.
If there's bacteria in real yoghurt......it's probably not there for the advertising. It's there because that's how yoghurt is made. Same with cheese. How did you think they were made?
Sony's security was indeed below standards. And if Congress got its act together, it would be a criminal offence for those responsible, with a revocation of the business license on the third offence.
I have no problems with that. Criminal acts should be prosecuted and substandard security should be a criminal act. Banks aren't allowed to store your money in shoe boxes on the open street, this is no different.
Sony's reporting was slow and dishonest. These should be two distinct criminal offenses and should be part of the three strikes. Rootkits and viruses in products that could spark retaliatory strikes should also be criminal offenses.
Sony really would not be doing any better than the hackers, if I got to make the rules. Maybe worse.
My prior concern is that the U.S. is a nation of laws. There are police, investigative bureaus and prosecutorial departments for a reason and that reason isn't for amusement.
In this case, the attackers committed an indisputable offence against US criminal code and they should be pursued on those merits through proper investigation and then through the courts in a way designed to ensure justice - as opposed to revenge - is done.
What does that matter? The US has a responsibility for its citizens on any soil and for events on its soil regardless of the citizenship of those affected.
It was an attack on a server on US soil, in violation of US law. The DoJ is supposed to take attacks on US soil seriously, it's kinda in their job description. Who was attacked is irrelevant. US law applies on US soil, whether or not the victim was American, British, Japanese or a small blue furry creature from Alpha Centauri.
They're suggesting that Trump hasn't bothered to listen to anything the DoJ have said (they would have briefed him over the past few days). They're implying that the DoJ's announcement will cause diplomatic headaches for Trump, as it will hurt his credibility at home and with the North Korean government.
However, rather more importantly, they're stating that there is a relationship in time between two otherwise unconnected events.
Even solar is ultimately nuclear power. So is wind power. So is geothermal, as the heat from the core is from radioactive isotopes.
Fusion is better than fission, but even fission can be improved upon - yes, waste is highly radioactive, which means there's energy that you're not tapping. Besides which, the temperature you run the core and the isotopes you subject to fission (and how pure they are - nuclear fuel is 95-98% stuff that you don't want in there and which becomes the seriously problematic waste) will determine what waste you get. You have total control over these parameters. It's not the fault of the underlying technology that industry chooses to use stupid values for these parameters.
Coal, gas and oil are always stupid. There's nothing you can do to improve on them.
Ideally, we'd switch to fusion as that doesn't involve dumping toxic sludge across the planet in an effort to get rare earths. Fusion is entirely possible, but we've spent less money in the last 50 years on developing it than we've spent on subsidies for coal in just the last year alone.
Put those subsidies into fusion instead, THEN tell me in 10 years time that it can't be done. As long as people prefer to dump crap over the environment with coal, and to give trillions in subsidies to coal bosses for their new luxury car fleet, you won't see fusion working. As soon as they're willing to spend the money on the work, it'll happen.
I know you're trying to write satirically (you need practice, btw) but it's worth pointing out that the tsunami is ultimately the cause of both disasters. That if the TEPCO officials responsible for securing the coastline had done a proper job, then there would have been no deaths from the tsunami (although possibly the earthquake) and no nuclear accident.
There is only one disaster here, not two, and it has nothing to do with either nuclear power or the tsunami. It has to do with a defective sea defense.
There will always be problems, but if you put in the proper safeguards, those problems need never be anything more than minor inconveniences. If there is ever a problem that is not a minor inconvenience, it is because those responsible for setting up the safeguards were a bunch of useless bloody loonies. B Ark material.
Support nuclear power, or support nuclear power done right?
Anyone can do something incompetently, and TEPCO, BNFL and a few others are about as incompetent as you can get.
I do not see a valid argument there against nuclear power done right.
Now, you can argue that it can't be done right, but I expect you to prove that and you can't use the incompetence of Japan, Britain or America as proof. There are an infinite number of solutions to x+y that aren't 7, but that doesn't mean I can't find a solution where x+y=7. Find me a non-existence proof, or accept that you can't.
Slashdot Mirror
Humans need vitamin D. Full spectrum lighting isn't too bad and one quarter sunlight makes outside useless. That means your chief obstacle is energy. You'd need to build a fission or fusion generator. Fission we know how to do, fusion will require a lot of money thrown at it over a decade before we know if it's even doable. Either would give you the energy needed. You need the extra heat generated anyway as Mars is cold.
Are in a position to shop between implants, and there's obviously millions of vendors.
And, of course, stores carry an entire department of wireless routers, not just three boxes between two near-identical vendors who offer no information and have secrecy clauses on everything.
Find any good OpenBSD-based thermostats on Amazon? Thought not.
Cars are also forced to follow standards, as are aircraft. MISRA and DO-178C + JSF respectively.
That's part of why they can be forced to recall. There's something to measure against.
That's why you want real standards. DO-178C doesn't have backdoors. If FIPS has a backdoor, the U.S. military would love to know. CERT's secure programming guidelines are decent.
If anyone adds backdoor clauses, you ignore them.
I don't think we have to rely on archaic notions of what is secure. I don't think we need to suffer with medieval concepts of what was reliable.
It's perfectly reasonable to expect IoT technology to strictly exceed the standards taught in the 1980s, simply because those standards are 40-odd years old. We've learned how to build things better since then.
The law can reasonably enforce certain standards. There are standards out there, for coding and security. Some, like MISRA, are regarded as correct only in places. But they are published and are used by real people for real projects.
The obvious solution is to commission the NSF to draw up some core standards, using the existing ones as templates:
One set of rules for all I/O, probably based on CERT's secure programming and FIPS.
One set for low-criticality systems, I'd argue 5N reliability is all you need for that.
One set for high-criticality (medical implants, for example), probably using only vital, universal, elements from MISRA, JSF+ and DO-178C. Emphasis on vital, universal. You don't want rules here that are frivolous or domain-specific.
One set for split role devices. I'd probably use ideas that are still relevant from the Rainbow Series.
Such a group may decide that a given set is the empty set. That's fine. That means regulations don't make any sense at that level and that's worth knowing.
The rules should be minimal, no group should have more than ten rules. I don't think anyone can seriously object to ten rules programmers came up with in the first place.
By using existing, established, rules, most can be checked automatically, making it a cinch to validate and certify.
Is it enough? Probably not, but that's not the point. The point is to create a starting point and enforce minimal standards superior to what is currently used but trivial enough to not impose an excessive overhead.
That's different. If specific vendors are making false claims and contaminating their product, count me in on the next protest. I have no problems you condemning that and support you every step of the way.
There's plenty of evidence that ingested bacteria get to the gut, but there's no evidence in any specific case and very little evidence for specific bacteria being healthy.
I'm happy to demand vendors produce the evidence or pay researchers to find out the reality. Should have been done by now.
They didn't oppose increased productivity. If they stayed employed and were paid as much, they'd have been fine.
The problem was the misuse and misapplication of technology, not the technology itself. We see that from where there were few to no problems - mills that merged in technology rationally.
Remember, I live in mill country, the land of Arkwright, Robert Owen and Samuel Oldknow. I know who burned down what, and it was mostly mill owners against rivals with blame put on the Luddites.
No geek supports the misuse of their craft and many support rational thinking. I know of few who advocate torching rivals after failing to compete. At least, few who aren't McAffee.
Obviously plants and blue-green algae turn co2 into sugar. Just not very quickly.
We can extract, modify and synthesize DNA, so we can modify cyanobacteria to be faster, more efficient, rapidly multiplying sugar producers.
Then it's just a matter of not reading A For Andromeda.
With respect to 2, if you double the distance from the source then you quarter the energy you get from it.
So if Mars is twice as far from the sun, it gets a quarter the solar radiation.
I'll agree it's many years away. If you choose an optimal path, it will take 15 years to build a complete self-sustaining environment. It won't be cheap, but if you spend what it takes, that's what it will take.
That's arguably many.
Fixing the Earth requires fossil fuels to be abandoned by 2030 at the latest and around 1960s level by the end of this decade. Otherwise, even with geoengineering, it can't be done.
It also requires that, by 2050, the global population is down to 1 billion on the surface (and no more than an additional 3 billion subsurface). Again, if you can't do that, it doesn't matter what you engineer.
I don't think these constraints will be met.
On Mars, you'd build a Biosphere II in a cave system and have whatever you like grow there. Seed it with all kinds of plants and animals. With aroubd ten thousand square miles to play with, you've room.
No potato phase unless you count fish and chips.
They abandoned their CFD bugfix challenge because too many applied. That doesn't give me confidence in their crowdsourcing ability.
If you put a bloody great cell tower on a tiny island, EVERYONE gets it whether they have a phone or not.
Oh, and the Luddites campaigned for responsible use of technology that preserved rather than replaced jobs. Real geeks support the Luddites.
Conclusion: Privately funded research replaces the academic biome with a pathogenic strain.
Very little works as expected in isolation.
We know that researchers who visit Africa for a week suddenly develop gut flora that is extremely rare and healthy, but try identifying a specific cause.
Of the 1,500+ species of bacteria found in the gut, most show up as "rare, unstudied", so we've no idea whether they're beneficial or not. I'd rather researchers find that out first, given nobody will change their diet anyway.
If there's bacteria in real yoghurt... ...it's probably not there for the advertising. It's there because that's how yoghurt is made. Same with cheese. How did you think they were made?
Sony's security was indeed below standards. And if Congress got its act together, it would be a criminal offence for those responsible, with a revocation of the business license on the third offence.
I have no problems with that. Criminal acts should be prosecuted and substandard security should be a criminal act. Banks aren't allowed to store your money in shoe boxes on the open street, this is no different.
Sony's reporting was slow and dishonest. These should be two distinct criminal offenses and should be part of the three strikes. Rootkits and viruses in products that could spark retaliatory strikes should also be criminal offenses.
Sony really would not be doing any better than the hackers, if I got to make the rules. Maybe worse.
My prior concern is that the U.S. is a nation of laws. There are police, investigative bureaus and prosecutorial departments for a reason and that reason isn't for amusement.
In this case, the attackers committed an indisputable offence against US criminal code and they should be pursued on those merits through proper investigation and then through the courts in a way designed to ensure justice - as opposed to revenge - is done.
Yes, the servers were in the U.S., that's been discussed to death.
Tufty died in a road accident as a result of distraction.
What does that matter? The US has a responsibility for its citizens on any soil and for events on its soil regardless of the citizenship of those affected.
It was an attack on a server on US soil, in violation of US law. The DoJ is supposed to take attacks on US soil seriously, it's kinda in their job description. Who was attacked is irrelevant. US law applies on US soil, whether or not the victim was American, British, Japanese or a small blue furry creature from Alpha Centauri.
They're suggesting that Trump hasn't bothered to listen to anything the DoJ have said (they would have briefed him over the past few days). They're implying that the DoJ's announcement will cause diplomatic headaches for Trump, as it will hurt his credibility at home and with the North Korean government.
However, rather more importantly, they're stating that there is a relationship in time between two otherwise unconnected events.
Even solar is ultimately nuclear power. So is wind power. So is geothermal, as the heat from the core is from radioactive isotopes.
Fusion is better than fission, but even fission can be improved upon - yes, waste is highly radioactive, which means there's energy that you're not tapping. Besides which, the temperature you run the core and the isotopes you subject to fission (and how pure they are - nuclear fuel is 95-98% stuff that you don't want in there and which becomes the seriously problematic waste) will determine what waste you get. You have total control over these parameters. It's not the fault of the underlying technology that industry chooses to use stupid values for these parameters.
Coal, gas and oil are always stupid. There's nothing you can do to improve on them.
Ideally, we'd switch to fusion as that doesn't involve dumping toxic sludge across the planet in an effort to get rare earths. Fusion is entirely possible, but we've spent less money in the last 50 years on developing it than we've spent on subsidies for coal in just the last year alone.
Put those subsidies into fusion instead, THEN tell me in 10 years time that it can't be done. As long as people prefer to dump crap over the environment with coal, and to give trillions in subsidies to coal bosses for their new luxury car fleet, you won't see fusion working. As soon as they're willing to spend the money on the work, it'll happen.
I know you're trying to write satirically (you need practice, btw) but it's worth pointing out that the tsunami is ultimately the cause of both disasters. That if the TEPCO officials responsible for securing the coastline had done a proper job, then there would have been no deaths from the tsunami (although possibly the earthquake) and no nuclear accident.
There is only one disaster here, not two, and it has nothing to do with either nuclear power or the tsunami. It has to do with a defective sea defense.
There will always be problems, but if you put in the proper safeguards, those problems need never be anything more than minor inconveniences. If there is ever a problem that is not a minor inconvenience, it is because those responsible for setting up the safeguards were a bunch of useless bloody loonies. B Ark material.
Support nuclear power, or support nuclear power done right?
Anyone can do something incompetently, and TEPCO, BNFL and a few others are about as incompetent as you can get.
I do not see a valid argument there against nuclear power done right.
Now, you can argue that it can't be done right, but I expect you to prove that and you can't use the incompetence of Japan, Britain or America as proof. There are an infinite number of solutions to x+y that aren't 7, but that doesn't mean I can't find a solution where x+y=7. Find me a non-existence proof, or accept that you can't.