US Constitution, Article 4, Section 4
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.
Most of this is probably correct, but it is worth noting that the koran was not written in english, so unless you translated it yourself you're relying on somone else's interpretation of things.
The difference is that television is one-to-many communication and fundamentally one-way. The Internet is many-to-many communication and fundamentally two-way.
But TV is also many-to-many (there are hundreds of content providers) and is (indirectly) two-way as well: if I see an ad for an appealing product, I might pick up the phone and purchase it. But note that doing so takes overt action on my part, as should any two-way actions on the web.
The people who fail to recognize the difference and the implications of that difference are simply wrong. Fundamentally wrong, if you like. The fact that assuming security doesn't matter is a sure way to get 0wned is a very strong argument against them.
Or perhaps it's a strong argument against the current, totally pathetic, state of affairs - where simply browsing to a website (even a "safe" site like CNN, if it's been hacked) can infest your computer. I don't think that telling grandma it's her own fault she got pwned by doing nothing more than clicking a hyperlink in an email
is a good use of the industry's time - better to spend that time making sure it cannot happen again.
Look, we got into this disaster innocently enough - the academic environment where the early work was done simply wasn't conducive to the sort of paranoia necessary in the real world. OK fine, no one's pointing fingers. But let's not pretend that the current situation is reasonable! Getting back to the TV analogy, it's as if switching to the wrong channel (or even the right channel, if it's been taken over by bad guys) could cause your TV to explode, embedding shrapnel in your face - and then we (the industry) have the balls to blame the viewer for not understanding the different between NTSC and PAL and why Beta was better than VHS and the fact that HDMI carries sound but DVI doesn't. Well of course your TV blew up, you ignorant moron! Anyone who watches TV without taking a couple years of electrical engineering and signal theory deserves to have shrapnel in their face! Fricken' Noobs!
I find it hilarious how us hackers imagine anti-regime rebels equipped with Freenet, GPG, trusted rings and other crypto tools when the reality is that people use facebook over plaintext http and public twitter.
Tell that to the people of Iran who are still in jail.
But doesn't that prove the GP's point? People used facebook & twitter, and now they're in jail!
I don't think the GP was saying people SHOULD use plaintext communications - clearly they shouldn't - but the objective fact is that they DO use them, despite the fact that there are semi-comprehensible alternatives readily available.
Exactly... and as long as the data stays DATA, you won't have any problems. For example, good old CALC.EXE has never had a security problem (though it's had some accuracy problems) because no combination of numbers and operations will cause it to execute the binary representation of those numbers.
If instead it delegated the calculations to a shell command (ok, pretend windows has a unix-like shell), like "dc " + num1 + "+" + num2; then you'd be in the (losing) business of trying to sanitize your inputs.
SQL has bound parameters, but only a small fraction of developers use them - leading to all sorts of attacks when the user's input is used to construct the query by string concatenation or interpolation or whatever.
HTML is also commonly put together by string concatenation/interpolation, but really ought to be done by... umm... oops, there IS no other way! That single fact is the reason that the web (at least as we know it today) will ALWAYS have rampant security problems.
I've heard that the way OPEC allocates their oil quotas is based on reserves (if country A has twice the reserves of country B, they can sell twice as much oil per month)... which seems reasonably "fair", as far as that goes. BUT it also gives EVERY (OPEC) country an incentive to overstate their reserves!
...so I bet SA isn't the only country overstating their reserves.
I don't see why getting into the movies doesn't require an extensive security check. Perfect occasion to hurt a lot of people there. Or on a bus, subway, ball game, or even a walk through Times Square. All dense concentrations of people, opportunities to kill many more people than on an airplane.
You know where else you can find a dense concentration of people (or a concentration of dense people)??? In the security line at the airport!
Clearly you should have to go through some sort of screening for weapons or bombs before you're allowed to stand in that line with all those hundreds of other people... oh, wait... ummm... never mind...
:) Gosh, I wish I would thought of it... On the same line: since the last carriage of a train is the least stable one, the obvious solution is to simply remove it:)
Similarly, I heard that most accidents happen within 10 miles of the home... so I moved!
Any time you ask Randy Cohen, the answer is questionable.
He's a total sleaze who will use lofty-sounding logic to support his whatever position he happens to prefer today, even if it completely contradicts the position he took yesterday.
If you're talking about doing something illegal that he favors (say, hiring an illegal immigrant as a maid), he'll take the "higher calling" route, and tell you that you have a moral duty to ignore bad laws. Just like the nazis should have ignored their laws.
But if it happens to be something he's opposed to, he'll tell you that following the law is the foundation of ethics. You can try to change the law, of course, but if everyone were to simply ignore laws they don't like, the result would be total anarchy and the collapse of society - so of course any action leading in that direction would be completely unethical.
Well, that's evolution for you. If all else is equal but there's a genetic factor that predisposes some people to reproduce more than others, then that phenotype will eventually dominate.
But we've been at it for a million years or more... mostly with much higher rates of belief in one or more gods than now... so why would this gene be starting to skew things now? If religiosity were genetic (and assuming it induces above-average child bearing as a side-effect), wouldn't it have dominated everyone long ago?
Oh, so that's why Microsoft invented that god-awful SmearType(tm) font-blurring technology: the original version was only mildly annoying, by making everything look blurry - but SmearType 2.0 now has gratuitous color fringes added to ensure maximum comprehension and information retention.
I can hardly wait to see what they come up with next...
Best for the Earth? What does that even mean? Does the planet itself care about any of this? If it did, it would probably be happy to get all this icky, troublesome "life" stuff off of it!
Yeah, I was wondering about that "one day left in the core" part too... I thought maybe they meant the core of a nuclear reactor (they seem to be rather prominent in such games)... but if you're looking at spending a whole day in the core, you're probably better off just getting shot and killed now instead of dying from radiation burns.
Does word still install the "quick-start" option? And didn't acrobat do something similar at one point?
It's the oldest trick in the book: make users pay at OS startup time, instead of app startup time, and they'll think the app is fast and the OS is slow... when what's really happening is they're paying for the startup at every boot, regardless of whether they ever actually use the app, and it's soaking up RAM the whole time. Win/win for everyone! (well, except the user)
We need a false advertising lawsuit against Fox "news" - propaganda is just too dangerous a weapon to let it get used unregulated. It only gets more sophisticated over time and I expect it to kill democracy and liberty someday - its already begun and most don't have a clue.
Yeah, because there's no way letting the government "regulate" the news would kill democracy or liberty.
Sure, people and news organizations shouldn't lie... but who's in charge of the "ministry of truth" that determines who's lying and who's telling the truth? Ask yourself this: would you have seriously proposed letting the government regulate the news a few years ago, when the government was solidly in the hands of Republicans?
The disease is bad, no question about it - but your cure is far worse.
Slashdot Mirror
US Constitution, Article 4, Section 4
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.
Second!
Most of this is probably correct, but it is worth noting that the koran was not written in english, so unless you translated it yourself you're relying on somone else's interpretation of things.
(Same for the bible, of course)
How many Pringles cans would we need?
I don't have any idea, but let me know when you figure it out and I'll help eat the Pringles (just doing my part for world peace)
The difference is that television is one-to-many communication and fundamentally one-way. The Internet is many-to-many communication and fundamentally two-way.
But TV is also many-to-many (there are hundreds of content providers) and is (indirectly) two-way as well: if I see an ad for an appealing product, I might pick up the phone and purchase it. But note that doing so takes overt action on my part, as should any two-way actions on the web.
The people who fail to recognize the difference and the implications of that difference are simply wrong. Fundamentally wrong, if you like. The fact that assuming security doesn't matter is a sure way to get 0wned is a very strong argument against them.
Or perhaps it's a strong argument against the current, totally pathetic, state of affairs - where simply browsing to a website (even a "safe" site like CNN, if it's been hacked) can infest your computer. I don't think that telling grandma it's her own fault she got pwned by doing nothing more than clicking a hyperlink in an email is a good use of the industry's time - better to spend that time making sure it cannot happen again.
Look, we got into this disaster innocently enough - the academic environment where the early work was done simply wasn't conducive to the sort of paranoia necessary in the real world. OK fine, no one's pointing fingers. But let's not pretend that the current situation is reasonable! Getting back to the TV analogy, it's as if switching to the wrong channel (or even the right channel, if it's been taken over by bad guys) could cause your TV to explode, embedding shrapnel in your face - and then we (the industry) have the balls to blame the viewer for not understanding the different between NTSC and PAL and why Beta was better than VHS and the fact that HDMI carries sound but DVI doesn't. Well of course your TV blew up, you ignorant moron! Anyone who watches TV without taking a couple years of electrical engineering and signal theory deserves to have shrapnel in their face! Fricken' Noobs!
If you pull in all spaceflight, including the Soviet program, I'm guessing blast-off is more dangerous.
That's because if a rocket is defective enough to fail during launch, it never gets a chance to fail during re-entry!
I find it hilarious how us hackers imagine anti-regime rebels equipped with Freenet, GPG, trusted rings and other crypto tools when the reality is that people use facebook over plaintext http and public twitter.
Tell that to the people of Iran who are still in jail.
But doesn't that prove the GP's point? People used facebook & twitter, and now they're in jail!
I don't think the GP was saying people SHOULD use plaintext communications - clearly they shouldn't - but the objective fact is that they DO use them, despite the fact that there are semi-comprehensible alternatives readily available.
Exactly... and as long as the data stays DATA, you won't have any problems. For example, good old CALC.EXE has never had a security problem (though it's had some accuracy problems) because no combination of numbers and operations will cause it to execute the binary representation of those numbers.
If instead it delegated the calculations to a shell command (ok, pretend windows has a unix-like shell), like "dc " + num1 + "+" + num2; then you'd be in the (losing) business of trying to sanitize your inputs.
SQL has bound parameters, but only a small fraction of developers use them - leading to all sorts of attacks when the user's input is used to construct the query by string concatenation or interpolation or whatever.
HTML is also commonly put together by string concatenation/interpolation, but really ought to be done by... umm... oops, there IS no other way! That single fact is the reason that the web (at least as we know it today) will ALWAYS have rampant security problems.
But convert that motion energy into electrical energy and then we can use it with our current infrastructure.
Our "current" infrastructure? Hahahahaha
Step 1: don't let your users write/modify your program (e.g. buffer overflows, SQL injection, XSS attacks, URL manipulation, etc,etc,etc)
That will cover about 90% of it right there
I've heard that the way OPEC allocates their oil quotas is based on reserves (if country A has twice the reserves of country B, they can sell twice as much oil per month)... which seems reasonably "fair", as far as that goes. BUT it also gives EVERY (OPEC) country an incentive to overstate their reserves!
...so I bet SA isn't the only country overstating their reserves.
I don't see why getting into the movies doesn't require an extensive security check. Perfect occasion to hurt a lot of people there. Or on a bus, subway, ball game, or even a walk through Times Square. All dense concentrations of people, opportunities to kill many more people than on an airplane.
You know where else you can find a dense concentration of people (or a concentration of dense people)??? In the security line at the airport!
Clearly you should have to go through some sort of screening for weapons or bombs before you're allowed to stand in that line with all those hundreds of other people... oh, wait... ummm... never mind...
:) Gosh, I wish I would thought of it... On the same line: since the last carriage of a train is the least stable one, the obvious solution is to simply remove it :)
Similarly, I heard that most accidents happen within 10 miles of the home... so I moved!
(WTF?) I think the black-boxes on the planes can benefit as well from being able to record various data after a major crash.
So here's my question: since the black boxes nearly always survive plane crashes, why don't they just build the whole plane out of that same material?
Any time you ask Randy Cohen, the answer is questionable.
He's a total sleaze who will use lofty-sounding logic to support his whatever position he happens to prefer today, even if it completely contradicts the position he took yesterday.
If you're talking about doing something illegal that he favors (say, hiring an illegal immigrant as a maid), he'll take the "higher calling" route, and tell you that you have a moral duty to ignore bad laws. Just like the nazis should have ignored their laws.
But if it happens to be something he's opposed to, he'll tell you that following the law is the foundation of ethics. You can try to change the law, of course, but if everyone were to simply ignore laws they don't like, the result would be total anarchy and the collapse of society - so of course any action leading in that direction would be completely unethical.
Well, that's evolution for you. If all else is equal but there's a genetic factor that predisposes some people to reproduce more than others, then that phenotype will eventually dominate.
But we've been at it for a million years or more... mostly with much higher rates of belief in one or more gods than now... so why would this gene be starting to skew things now? If religiosity were genetic (and assuming it induces above-average child bearing as a side-effect), wouldn't it have dominated everyone long ago?
Oh, so that's why Microsoft invented that god-awful SmearType(tm) font-blurring technology: the original version was only mildly annoying, by making everything look blurry - but SmearType 2.0 now has gratuitous color fringes added to ensure maximum comprehension and information retention.
I can hardly wait to see what they come up with next...
This is not about what is best for the Earth.
Best for the Earth? What does that even mean? Does the planet itself care about any of this? If it did, it would probably be happy to get all this icky, troublesome "life" stuff off of it!
Yeah, I was wondering about that "one day left in the core" part too... I thought maybe they meant the core of a nuclear reactor (they seem to be rather prominent in such games)... but if you're looking at spending a whole day in the core, you're probably better off just getting shot and killed now instead of dying from radiation burns.
Seems to me that "SkyNet" would be the perfect name for an airline's on-board wifi system... yet oddly no one seems to use that name!
Actuaries are people who didn't have enough personality to be accountants.
Does word still install the "quick-start" option? And didn't acrobat do something similar at one point?
It's the oldest trick in the book: make users pay at OS startup time, instead of app startup time, and they'll think the app is fast and the OS is slow... when what's really happening is they're paying for the startup at every boot, regardless of whether they ever actually use the app, and it's soaking up RAM the whole time. Win/win for everyone! (well, except the user)
In this latest tour, again in Dallas, he talked on stage about how he was no longer the withdrawn distant young man he used to be.
Well of course not - now he's a withdrawn distant old man!
We need a false advertising lawsuit against Fox "news" - propaganda is just too dangerous a weapon to let it get used unregulated. It only gets more sophisticated over time and I expect it to kill democracy and liberty someday - its already begun and most don't have a clue.
Yeah, because there's no way letting the government "regulate" the news would kill democracy or liberty. Sure, people and news organizations shouldn't lie... but who's in charge of the "ministry of truth" that determines who's lying and who's telling the truth? Ask yourself this: would you have seriously proposed letting the government regulate the news a few years ago, when the government was solidly in the hands of Republicans?
The disease is bad, no question about it - but your cure is far worse.
You guys need "Readability"... clears away all the clutter from web pages
http://lab.arc90.com/experiments/readability/