People keep saying this, but the truth is that the car is going to [be programmed to] follow the law. That means it's going to approach intersections at safe speeds, and it's going to avoid hitting pedestrians in crosswalks but will simply murderize them even if there's ten of them in your lane, and a cancer-ridden octagenarian driving a yugo in the other lane â" even if the car has enough sensors to smell cancer, it's still going to run right into those pedestrians like you've gone bowling rather than deviate from the marked lane. It's going to make a good-faith best effort to stop. But remember, it's not going to go around a blind curve at a speed at which it can't stop if there's an obstacle. It's simply going to decelerate for the curve, and then accelerate again on the other side. If someone is in the road, it won't hit them, because it's not driving for fun. It's driving to minimize risk.
Yes, and apart from the law-abiding aspect there's also the whole "is it reasonable to kill someone else to save you from your own stupidity" argument. Let's for the sake of argument say you're going 55 mph and two people drop down from an overpass smack in front of the car and the car can either run them over or slam into a concrete wall, two lives versus one since you have no passengers. Or alternatively, that you could mow down one person on the sidewalk. Sure you could save lives but I'd say it's the people "at fault" that deserve to die, not anyone else. Or deserve is too strong a word, but they don't deserve that anyone else is sacrificed to save them. It's actually harder if you say the other way around, if we could drive the car into the ditch sustaining light to no injury do we have the right to mow them down anyway. I'd say legally you'd probably not charge a human driver in that situation, even if it's not optimal just hitting the breaks is an acceptable response. And that should be enough for a computer too.
Fact is, roads and road markings aren't supposed to just pop up out of nowhere. Here in Norway every public road (and many private roads, pedestrain/bike roads, forest roads closed for general traffic and soon) is mapped out in NVDB (Norwegian Road Database), and it's supposed to be authoritative guide on speed limits, road signs, pedestrian crossings, speed bumps, bridges, tunnels, road classification including lane types and weight restrictions, railing and so on. This is all public data, I'm looking at it right now. From the looks of it, everything that needs a permit could be in this system though I'm not sure if it is today so any planned detour, lane closure etc. could be mapped out here. And they're in GPS coordinates good enough to fit on a map, they don't have the structural details in this view but they do say there's more for entrepreneurs doing work. Let's face it, road marking sucks but often people drive like they're there anyway. Like right now on the way to work they've laid new asphalt in a roundabout, there's no pedestrian signs just zebra stripes in the road, well now there's not but people walk like they're there and people drive like they're there.
I don't see this as a problem, I see it more like a double validation. You're going to have cameras scanning the road, if they don't find what's expected according to the database and/or past mapping they're going to assume the safe path like the sign says 55 mph, the database says 45 mph let's drive in 45 mph and send an "uh oh what's wrong here" message to headquarters. Maybe you have to have a human driver or a "safe mode" drive the first time but honestly I don't think that is a problem as long as the camera is in the production model. I'd be more than happy to volunteer driving to the places I want to go, upload the footage and let a Google engineer play "spot the signs and road markings" so it can drive itself next time. That would get crowdsourced real quick.
Regarding the "wrong lizard", I have been following the attempt to found a small party and for every person who had sane ideas that could become a mainstream party more than 1% of the population could vote for there were quite a few who were either utter extremists, conspiracy nuts or in other ways so far off the political map you couldn't find them. The most annoying ones though were the ones who wanted our party to champion their cause, because none of the traditional parties would pick it up even though it's at best tangential or at worse divisive with the core voters. There were so many trying to derail the politics that it got flipped around, because they didn't get their pet issue in they'd refuse everyone else's pet issue so it ended up with having absolutely no official policy on so many key issues. I did vote for them, but realized they couldn't get anywhere on that platform and there was no real path to change so instead I went back to voting for one of the bigger parties. There's a lot of loons at the fringes.
Difference is that this means you can't block it by filtering your internet connection.
So what's the failure mode here... the malware has the public key embedded, it encrypts your files with a random key, puts the key in an encrypted message (for which you don't have the private key), tries to send it and.... no. Does it say "Sorry for the inconvenience, I'll just decrypt your files and move along"? My money would be on no.
So instead of the malware actively sending the key, the victim has to send one of the encrypted files instead, big whoop. The method is the same, encrypt your files and put the key in an message encrypted for the malware author. Who does the sending is a technicality.
Why weren't ISIS able to say how they destroyed the plane if it was them, only claiming they shot it down, which has been dismissed as a possibility and the likely method was a bomb?
Actually this was identified as a mistranslation, I don't remember what it said in Arabic but the meaning was more like they "brought down" the plane, which may or may not imply shooting it down. As for whose gain it is here, take your pick. ISIS might think that Putin will bomb more indiscriminately (he will) turning more moderate Muslims to join their cause. Any western country might think he'll concentrate more on ISIS and not the other rebels threatening Assad's regime. Putin might feel he needs an excuse to justify a much larger military presence. The one who probably has most to gain is Assad, if he could pull it off but then why would ISIS try to take the credit? They don't usually do that unless they really are doing it, and it's not like they lack atrocities to actually point to.
Looking at CFront output was the best way to understand how C++ actually worked at the time, since it was all mapped to pretty straightforward C constructs. I don't think anyone around today knows what a vtable and ptable is, but back then it was how you could tell the programmers who really dug in to the language from those that didn't.
A ptable I got no idea, but a vtable is used whenever you use a virtual function and invokes an extra pointer dereferencing as opposed to a plain function. And I never learned C, but I had to learn that much to make inheritance work like I wanted in C++.
Well you can deliver a car with 1000x the performance in horsepower, but it won't go 1000x faster. Since they've been intentionally vague about exactly what metric they based that claim on, it could be anything really. Beating a top of the line enterprise NVMe drive several times over is impressive at any rate. I look forward to seeing actual product.
It's weird that a lesser ability to socialize (high AQ) is considered a condition whereas a lesser ability to see patterns and handle information (low AQ) is considered normal.
Honestly, I don't find it more surprising that a lot of people with autistic traits work in STEM than that psychopaths become CxOs or pathological liars work in marketing. The way the computer barfs on a single misplaced comma it takes a bit of OCD to write good code. Most things are fine in moderation and a problems in the extreme.
I'm inclined to say the latter is more important. If you look at the stats on wikipedia, the decline of firefox mirrors the rise in mobile devices, not the rise in chrome.
If you go to gs.statcounter.com and select just the desktop platform it's 57% Chrome, 17% Firefox, in total on all platforms it's 9.5%. At its peak in November 2009 Firefox had 32% when the mobile market was negligible. So it's about even, they've lost 45% of the desktop market share and the desktop has lost 45% of the total.market. YMMV but I switched because having Firefox running for long periods made it a slow memory hog requiring a full restart, in Chrome closing the offending tab solved things. Mozilla started project electrolysis in 2009 but six years later it's still in development. So instead of fixing the core issues they think a Chrome-like paint and social activism will turn a Ford into a Ferrari. Blaming Google is folly, Mozilla has for the most part screwed this up themselves.
Only because you arbitrarily assign one half to be the ciphertext and the other the key, you could swap them and the result would be the same. Or maybe an even better example make one input column and two output columns, toss a coin and put the bit left if it's heads and right if it's tails. Clearly you've now split half the information in each, right? Now just fill out the blanks with XOR and you have your chiphertext or pad or whatever you choose to call it. Sure, it fits the formal definition of encryption but not the practical analogy of a box with lock and key, more like a dollar bill cut in half that's not worth anything without the other half.
For the most part it's just as difficult to send both halves as one whole, the primary use case is if you can easily pass half securely up front but not later, like a nuclear submarine going out to sea. That's nice but sort of a niche use, as opposed to sending the data online or by mail and the key via PKI, over the phone or some other quasi-secure but very low bandwidth channel. Functionally it's very much like you need to get the same volume across with half the information density.
3) They were short range. You couldn't use a communicator to just "call" someone anywhere.
"Beam me up, Scotty"...it could call a space ship in orbit, wouldn't that be on par with a satellite phone with similar line of sight problems? It's not like there are cell phone towers on an alien planet.
Depends on your threat model. If your "black hat" can plug malicious devices into your machine quite many but then your security is probably badly compromised anyway.
Compared to... what, exactly? A networked Windows box with the fefault CIFS client for printing and drive access enabled publishes the entire hard disk as the hidden crive \\ipaddress\c$, *always*, it's a nightmare to turn off.
Compared to... a secure system. If someone can plug in devices they can probably install hardware keyloggers, spy cams and anything else they need to compromise your credentials the next time you log in. You can't trust a machine that's been tampered with any more than you can trust software that's been patched, whether it runs Linux or some other OS.
If I upgrade to this kernel, how many of those lines of code do I actually have to trust not to give away everything on my machine to a black hat? Hopefully less than 100k lines of code are actually critical.
Depends on your threat model. If your "black hat" can plug malicious devices into your machine quite many but then your security is probably badly compromised anyway. If he's within wireless range then a few stacks like Bluetooth, WiFi, WiDi etc. if you have them enabled, but if that's a realistic fear I'd simply use wired accessories. If he's got a local user there might be many vectors for an escalation attack, but then he's already got a foot in the door. For packets coming down the wire from the Internet, there's some as the kernel does parsing, routing, firewalling and so on. But for the most part it's userspace clients like your browser or daemons like sshd that'll contain the primary exploits. Kernel bugs are mostly to go from limited access to full access.
In any case, this isn't a poor farming community - they can afford this sort of large expenditure.
Honestly it doesn't seem the expenses were that great, it seems the primary investment is one man who did a whole lot of legwork to rent a microwave link, find relay points, install equipment, do network supervision and maintenance and so on for free. The numbers are pretty much all there, initial investment was $25k that they need to pay back in 36 months. Break-even was 25 users, subtract 25 @ $150 = $3750 in sign-up fee = $21250 / 36 = ~$600 month in down payment. Running income = 25 @ $75/mo = $1875 - $900 in microwave rental - $600 in down payments = $375/mo for running the wireless grid and misc. other expenses = ~$0 in wages. And now they're paying it down faster so they can lower prices, with 50 users / $900/mo + a slightly bigger grid it might drop to $40/mo after the investment cost is paid off in less than two years. That's not expensive, it's super cheap for rural broadband.
For comparison, we're paying ~$500 extra per household on top of of the ordinary ~$300 sign-up fee and ~$100 monthly fee for the privilege of getting a fiber rollout with Internet/TV at our cabin here in Norway. On the bright side, after the first twelve months we don't have to use it more than 4 months a year, but it's still ~$2000 for year one and ~$400/year just for the summer. And they're not planning to lower prices, they're planning to recoup the rest of the roll-out costs, pay wages and turn a nice profit over the next 20-30 years. But it's not like in the city where you can connect 100 people in an apartment building at the time, distances are huge and customers few so cost per subscriber will be far, far more expensive so I doubt that we're a cash cow. Anyway to get back on topic, what this community has that others lack is one very skilled volunteer working for free, on a commercial basis it would be way different.
In copper electricity travels at about 2/3ds of C, so it travels 10 yards in 50 nanoseconds. That's 0.00000005 seconds, if you think it'll melt away first you're sadly mistaken. Particularly since copper doesn't melt until 1100C, the plastic outside will burn quick but the cable won't break instantly.
OSS is clearly superior to closed software in this regard. There's not even a counterargument to be made.
I can think of one, with the COTS business model you get a much more direct financial feedback loop than service and support. If you release a new version and sales flop it's far more critical than a slow migration away as customers grow dissatisfied with your product, since a project to migrate away and end the support contract takes far longer than simply not buying the new version. And closed source software tend to be more monolithic with a direct chain of command, just because you have a support contract with Red Hat or Canonical they don't control Gnome, KDE, X.org, Linux and so on while Apple or Microsoft can crack the whip and say "fix this" or "don't break backwards compatibility" by direct decree. You vote with your wallet in both systems, but not all electoral systems are equally effective.
First of all, there's never any way you can prove you don't have a key. Period.
Nobody's proven that the Star Trek teleporter is impossible either, but if you were in New York and is charged with killing a man in San Francisco five minutes later you have a very strong alibi. Documented procedures that show you wouldn't be given the key and testimony saying the procedures were followed is as good as evidence gets in a court room. History can't be turned into a reproducible experiment, you only have the information that's been observed, recorded or might be gleamed from the leftovers. It's not the same standard of "proven" as science since history is obviously not reproducible, it happened once and all you have is evidence and testimony about it. Whatever information was lost, is forever lost and you can't get it back.
Even if you live self-sufficiently off the land in your remote cabin somewhere, society provided an army and legal system to protect you. In exchange for this, you are required to pay taxes. As I said before, you want to opt out then you need to get out.
Get out to where? There's no free land left where you can plant a flag and declare your own independent nation, not even in Somalia. And in any foreign country you wouldn't even be a citizen, if they'll even permit you to come. Surely the strongest claim is to your birthplace and homestead. Let's face it, every country has a strong hypocrisy when it comes to its own existence. The US seceded from the British Empire. The US refused to let the Confederation secede from the union. The only way you "get out" is with enough military force to stop those trying to keep you in. Or to use a classic analogy, it's two wolves and a sheep where the sheep wants to declare independence and create its own laws to protect it from becoming dinner. But the wolves have democratically decided the sheep can't secede. It's the tyranny of the majority, where the majority has also decided who gets to be counted.
From what I understand these trojans give you a countdown timer before they wipe the key, so I think very few would keep an encrypted system around past that date on the very unlikely chance that the keys will be found somehow. People might drag their feet while the timer is running, but afterwards I expect 99.9%+ will fix their computer wiping the encrypted drive in the process.
OMG 270 ms! How can the poor Cubans wait that long for a response from a search? Maybe they eat a sandwich during that time?
If you're a really quick eater.... seriously I know people with satellite connections with ping times like that. Inconvienient? Yes. Censorship? Hell no. If you want to do competitive FPS, you should probably find another ISP. But for generic information reception, processing and dissemination per the UN charter of human rights you're fine.
why didn't they post this in the summary? seems like a material fact.
Clickbait? My impression is that more and more headlines and summaries lack some critical fact, often one that would turn a story into a non-story in the article. After all if it said Google had a short outage during World Series opening, credits 2 days for goodwill why exactly would you bother to read the "full" story? You pretty much already got it.
Flying cars would also be disruptive, it doesn't mean it'll happen any time soon. Maybe it'll get approval to run on a few well painted, well lit, pre-approved roads in sunny California during daytime genuinely by itself, but from there to an all-road, all-condition vehicle that people can actually use as a full substitute for driving themselves will take many, many years. It's a long step from a test drive with humans that can take over to saying we're confident this can drive by itself, take the back seat and enjoy the ride. A really long step.
I have seen a lot of programmers who are totally dependent on the IDE to develop the code. They have no idea how it works or where it runs from once it deploys.
But is it part of what they need to know? A brick-layer needs to know how to use his tools to build a wall, he doesn't necessarily need to know how to make a brick or brick-laying tools from assembler. Nor is he the architect or the structural engineer who says what the wall is for or if it's thick enough to be a load bearing structure. But he does need to know enough to make a structurally sound wall. Sure, it wouldn't hurt him to know all these other things. But it might be more important for a GUI developer to understand the difference between a modal and non-modal dialog than learning all the plumbing to display a dialog. I'd say the most important part is being good enough at what you're good at, not necessarily what you're bad at. As long as you don't deploy straight to production, or rather if you do then you won't have that permission for very long.
Way back when these laws were passed, the car company was probably going to run it like the dealerships do. If it was still a matter of who would run them, I might agree with you. But these days I really don't see the need for a sales droid, you could just as easily order it online at a fixed price. What you need in addition is: a) A trade-in program, probably a profit split with used car dealer. Or just let used car dealers give you offers. b) Test drives, maybe make some deal with a rental company. Like if you buy a car of that model the rental is waived, otherwise you pay a fee. c) Warranty service and support, but this is pretty much already done with authorized service locations. I really don't want the salesperson's "help" in selling me accessories and extended warranties, that's just one of many reasons I prefer e-tail for anything that rolls off an assembly line and doesn't involve personal fit like clothes. And even then I just ordered socks and underwear online, good enough.
Slashdot Mirror
People keep saying this, but the truth is that the car is going to [be programmed to] follow the law. That means it's going to approach intersections at safe speeds, and it's going to avoid hitting pedestrians in crosswalks but will simply murderize them even if there's ten of them in your lane, and a cancer-ridden octagenarian driving a yugo in the other lane â" even if the car has enough sensors to smell cancer, it's still going to run right into those pedestrians like you've gone bowling rather than deviate from the marked lane. It's going to make a good-faith best effort to stop. But remember, it's not going to go around a blind curve at a speed at which it can't stop if there's an obstacle. It's simply going to decelerate for the curve, and then accelerate again on the other side. If someone is in the road, it won't hit them, because it's not driving for fun. It's driving to minimize risk.
Yes, and apart from the law-abiding aspect there's also the whole "is it reasonable to kill someone else to save you from your own stupidity" argument. Let's for the sake of argument say you're going 55 mph and two people drop down from an overpass smack in front of the car and the car can either run them over or slam into a concrete wall, two lives versus one since you have no passengers. Or alternatively, that you could mow down one person on the sidewalk. Sure you could save lives but I'd say it's the people "at fault" that deserve to die, not anyone else. Or deserve is too strong a word, but they don't deserve that anyone else is sacrificed to save them. It's actually harder if you say the other way around, if we could drive the car into the ditch sustaining light to no injury do we have the right to mow them down anyway. I'd say legally you'd probably not charge a human driver in that situation, even if it's not optimal just hitting the breaks is an acceptable response. And that should be enough for a computer too.
Fact is, roads and road markings aren't supposed to just pop up out of nowhere. Here in Norway every public road (and many private roads, pedestrain/bike roads, forest roads closed for general traffic and soon) is mapped out in NVDB (Norwegian Road Database), and it's supposed to be authoritative guide on speed limits, road signs, pedestrian crossings, speed bumps, bridges, tunnels, road classification including lane types and weight restrictions, railing and so on. This is all public data, I'm looking at it right now. From the looks of it, everything that needs a permit could be in this system though I'm not sure if it is today so any planned detour, lane closure etc. could be mapped out here. And they're in GPS coordinates good enough to fit on a map, they don't have the structural details in this view but they do say there's more for entrepreneurs doing work. Let's face it, road marking sucks but often people drive like they're there anyway. Like right now on the way to work they've laid new asphalt in a roundabout, there's no pedestrian signs just zebra stripes in the road, well now there's not but people walk like they're there and people drive like they're there.
I don't see this as a problem, I see it more like a double validation. You're going to have cameras scanning the road, if they don't find what's expected according to the database and/or past mapping they're going to assume the safe path like the sign says 55 mph, the database says 45 mph let's drive in 45 mph and send an "uh oh what's wrong here" message to headquarters. Maybe you have to have a human driver or a "safe mode" drive the first time but honestly I don't think that is a problem as long as the camera is in the production model. I'd be more than happy to volunteer driving to the places I want to go, upload the footage and let a Google engineer play "spot the signs and road markings" so it can drive itself next time. That would get crowdsourced real quick.
Regarding the "wrong lizard", I have been following the attempt to found a small party and for every person who had sane ideas that could become a mainstream party more than 1% of the population could vote for there were quite a few who were either utter extremists, conspiracy nuts or in other ways so far off the political map you couldn't find them. The most annoying ones though were the ones who wanted our party to champion their cause, because none of the traditional parties would pick it up even though it's at best tangential or at worse divisive with the core voters. There were so many trying to derail the politics that it got flipped around, because they didn't get their pet issue in they'd refuse everyone else's pet issue so it ended up with having absolutely no official policy on so many key issues. I did vote for them, but realized they couldn't get anywhere on that platform and there was no real path to change so instead I went back to voting for one of the bigger parties. There's a lot of loons at the fringes.
Difference is that this means you can't block it by filtering your internet connection.
So what's the failure mode here... the malware has the public key embedded, it encrypts your files with a random key, puts the key in an encrypted message (for which you don't have the private key), tries to send it and.... no. Does it say "Sorry for the inconvenience, I'll just decrypt your files and move along"? My money would be on no.
So instead of the malware actively sending the key, the victim has to send one of the encrypted files instead, big whoop. The method is the same, encrypt your files and put the key in an message encrypted for the malware author. Who does the sending is a technicality.
Why weren't ISIS able to say how they destroyed the plane if it was them, only claiming they shot it down, which has been dismissed as a possibility and the likely method was a bomb?
Actually this was identified as a mistranslation, I don't remember what it said in Arabic but the meaning was more like they "brought down" the plane, which may or may not imply shooting it down. As for whose gain it is here, take your pick. ISIS might think that Putin will bomb more indiscriminately (he will) turning more moderate Muslims to join their cause. Any western country might think he'll concentrate more on ISIS and not the other rebels threatening Assad's regime. Putin might feel he needs an excuse to justify a much larger military presence. The one who probably has most to gain is Assad, if he could pull it off but then why would ISIS try to take the credit? They don't usually do that unless they really are doing it, and it's not like they lack atrocities to actually point to.
Looking at CFront output was the best way to understand how C++ actually worked at the time, since it was all mapped to pretty straightforward C constructs. I don't think anyone around today knows what a vtable and ptable is, but back then it was how you could tell the programmers who really dug in to the language from those that didn't.
A ptable I got no idea, but a vtable is used whenever you use a virtual function and invokes an extra pointer dereferencing as opposed to a plain function. And I never learned C, but I had to learn that much to make inheritance work like I wanted in C++.
Well you can deliver a car with 1000x the performance in horsepower, but it won't go 1000x faster. Since they've been intentionally vague about exactly what metric they based that claim on, it could be anything really. Beating a top of the line enterprise NVMe drive several times over is impressive at any rate. I look forward to seeing actual product.
It's weird that a lesser ability to socialize (high AQ) is considered a condition whereas a lesser ability to see patterns and handle information (low AQ) is considered normal.
Honestly, I don't find it more surprising that a lot of people with autistic traits work in STEM than that psychopaths become CxOs or pathological liars work in marketing. The way the computer barfs on a single misplaced comma it takes a bit of OCD to write good code. Most things are fine in moderation and a problems in the extreme.
I'm inclined to say the latter is more important. If you look at the stats on wikipedia, the decline of firefox mirrors the rise in mobile devices, not the rise in chrome.
If you go to gs.statcounter.com and select just the desktop platform it's 57% Chrome, 17% Firefox, in total on all platforms it's 9.5%. At its peak in November 2009 Firefox had 32% when the mobile market was negligible. So it's about even, they've lost 45% of the desktop market share and the desktop has lost 45% of the total.market. YMMV but I switched because having Firefox running for long periods made it a slow memory hog requiring a full restart, in Chrome closing the offending tab solved things. Mozilla started project electrolysis in 2009 but six years later it's still in development. So instead of fixing the core issues they think a Chrome-like paint and social activism will turn a Ford into a Ferrari. Blaming Google is folly, Mozilla has for the most part screwed this up themselves.
Only because you arbitrarily assign one half to be the ciphertext and the other the key, you could swap them and the result would be the same. Or maybe an even better example make one input column and two output columns, toss a coin and put the bit left if it's heads and right if it's tails. Clearly you've now split half the information in each, right? Now just fill out the blanks with XOR and you have your chiphertext or pad or whatever you choose to call it. Sure, it fits the formal definition of encryption but not the practical analogy of a box with lock and key, more like a dollar bill cut in half that's not worth anything without the other half.
For the most part it's just as difficult to send both halves as one whole, the primary use case is if you can easily pass half securely up front but not later, like a nuclear submarine going out to sea. That's nice but sort of a niche use, as opposed to sending the data online or by mail and the key via PKI, over the phone or some other quasi-secure but very low bandwidth channel. Functionally it's very much like you need to get the same volume across with half the information density.
3) They were short range. You couldn't use a communicator to just "call" someone anywhere.
"Beam me up, Scotty" ...it could call a space ship in orbit, wouldn't that be on par with a satellite phone with similar line of sight problems? It's not like there are cell phone towers on an alien planet.
Depends on your threat model. If your "black hat" can plug malicious devices into your machine quite many but then your security is probably badly compromised anyway.
Compared to... what, exactly? A networked Windows box with the fefault CIFS client for printing and drive access enabled publishes the entire hard disk as the hidden crive \\ipaddress\c$, *always*, it's a nightmare to turn off.
Compared to... a secure system. If someone can plug in devices they can probably install hardware keyloggers, spy cams and anything else they need to compromise your credentials the next time you log in. You can't trust a machine that's been tampered with any more than you can trust software that's been patched, whether it runs Linux or some other OS.
If I upgrade to this kernel, how many of those lines of code do I actually have to trust not to give away everything on my machine to a black hat? Hopefully less than 100k lines of code are actually critical.
Depends on your threat model. If your "black hat" can plug malicious devices into your machine quite many but then your security is probably badly compromised anyway. If he's within wireless range then a few stacks like Bluetooth, WiFi, WiDi etc. if you have them enabled, but if that's a realistic fear I'd simply use wired accessories. If he's got a local user there might be many vectors for an escalation attack, but then he's already got a foot in the door. For packets coming down the wire from the Internet, there's some as the kernel does parsing, routing, firewalling and so on. But for the most part it's userspace clients like your browser or daemons like sshd that'll contain the primary exploits. Kernel bugs are mostly to go from limited access to full access.
In any case, this isn't a poor farming community - they can afford this sort of large expenditure.
Honestly it doesn't seem the expenses were that great, it seems the primary investment is one man who did a whole lot of legwork to rent a microwave link, find relay points, install equipment, do network supervision and maintenance and so on for free. The numbers are pretty much all there, initial investment was $25k that they need to pay back in 36 months. Break-even was 25 users, subtract 25 @ $150 = $3750 in sign-up fee = $21250 / 36 = ~$600 month in down payment. Running income = 25 @ $75/mo = $1875 - $900 in microwave rental - $600 in down payments = $375/mo for running the wireless grid and misc. other expenses = ~$0 in wages. And now they're paying it down faster so they can lower prices, with 50 users / $900/mo + a slightly bigger grid it might drop to $40/mo after the investment cost is paid off in less than two years. That's not expensive, it's super cheap for rural broadband.
For comparison, we're paying ~$500 extra per household on top of of the ordinary ~$300 sign-up fee and ~$100 monthly fee for the privilege of getting a fiber rollout with Internet/TV at our cabin here in Norway. On the bright side, after the first twelve months we don't have to use it more than 4 months a year, but it's still ~$2000 for year one and ~$400/year just for the summer. And they're not planning to lower prices, they're planning to recoup the rest of the roll-out costs, pay wages and turn a nice profit over the next 20-30 years. But it's not like in the city where you can connect 100 people in an apartment building at the time, distances are huge and customers few so cost per subscriber will be far, far more expensive so I doubt that we're a cash cow. Anyway to get back on topic, what this community has that others lack is one very skilled volunteer working for free, on a commercial basis it would be way different.
In copper electricity travels at about 2/3ds of C, so it travels 10 yards in 50 nanoseconds. That's 0.00000005 seconds, if you think it'll melt away first you're sadly mistaken. Particularly since copper doesn't melt until 1100C, the plastic outside will burn quick but the cable won't break instantly.
OSS is clearly superior to closed software in this regard. There's not even a counterargument to be made.
I can think of one, with the COTS business model you get a much more direct financial feedback loop than service and support. If you release a new version and sales flop it's far more critical than a slow migration away as customers grow dissatisfied with your product, since a project to migrate away and end the support contract takes far longer than simply not buying the new version. And closed source software tend to be more monolithic with a direct chain of command, just because you have a support contract with Red Hat or Canonical they don't control Gnome, KDE, X.org, Linux and so on while Apple or Microsoft can crack the whip and say "fix this" or "don't break backwards compatibility" by direct decree. You vote with your wallet in both systems, but not all electoral systems are equally effective.
First of all, there's never any way you can prove you don't have a key. Period.
Nobody's proven that the Star Trek teleporter is impossible either, but if you were in New York and is charged with killing a man in San Francisco five minutes later you have a very strong alibi. Documented procedures that show you wouldn't be given the key and testimony saying the procedures were followed is as good as evidence gets in a court room. History can't be turned into a reproducible experiment, you only have the information that's been observed, recorded or might be gleamed from the leftovers. It's not the same standard of "proven" as science since history is obviously not reproducible, it happened once and all you have is evidence and testimony about it. Whatever information was lost, is forever lost and you can't get it back.
Even if you live self-sufficiently off the land in your remote cabin somewhere, society provided an army and legal system to protect you. In exchange for this, you are required to pay taxes. As I said before, you want to opt out then you need to get out.
Get out to where? There's no free land left where you can plant a flag and declare your own independent nation, not even in Somalia. And in any foreign country you wouldn't even be a citizen, if they'll even permit you to come. Surely the strongest claim is to your birthplace and homestead. Let's face it, every country has a strong hypocrisy when it comes to its own existence. The US seceded from the British Empire. The US refused to let the Confederation secede from the union. The only way you "get out" is with enough military force to stop those trying to keep you in. Or to use a classic analogy, it's two wolves and a sheep where the sheep wants to declare independence and create its own laws to protect it from becoming dinner. But the wolves have democratically decided the sheep can't secede. It's the tyranny of the majority, where the majority has also decided who gets to be counted.
From what I understand these trojans give you a countdown timer before they wipe the key, so I think very few would keep an encrypted system around past that date on the very unlikely chance that the keys will be found somehow. People might drag their feet while the timer is running, but afterwards I expect 99.9%+ will fix their computer wiping the encrypted drive in the process.
OMG 270 ms! How can the poor Cubans wait that long for a response from a search? Maybe they eat a sandwich during that time?
If you're a really quick eater.... seriously I know people with satellite connections with ping times like that. Inconvienient? Yes. Censorship? Hell no. If you want to do competitive FPS, you should probably find another ISP. But for generic information reception, processing and dissemination per the UN charter of human rights you're fine.
why didn't they post this in the summary? seems like a material fact.
Clickbait? My impression is that more and more headlines and summaries lack some critical fact, often one that would turn a story into a non-story in the article. After all if it said Google had a short outage during World Series opening, credits 2 days for goodwill why exactly would you bother to read the "full" story? You pretty much already got it.
Flying cars would also be disruptive, it doesn't mean it'll happen any time soon. Maybe it'll get approval to run on a few well painted, well lit, pre-approved roads in sunny California during daytime genuinely by itself, but from there to an all-road, all-condition vehicle that people can actually use as a full substitute for driving themselves will take many, many years. It's a long step from a test drive with humans that can take over to saying we're confident this can drive by itself, take the back seat and enjoy the ride. A really long step.
I have seen a lot of programmers who are totally dependent on the IDE to develop the code. They have no idea how it works or where it runs from once it deploys.
But is it part of what they need to know? A brick-layer needs to know how to use his tools to build a wall, he doesn't necessarily need to know how to make a brick or brick-laying tools from assembler. Nor is he the architect or the structural engineer who says what the wall is for or if it's thick enough to be a load bearing structure. But he does need to know enough to make a structurally sound wall. Sure, it wouldn't hurt him to know all these other things. But it might be more important for a GUI developer to understand the difference between a modal and non-modal dialog than learning all the plumbing to display a dialog. I'd say the most important part is being good enough at what you're good at, not necessarily what you're bad at. As long as you don't deploy straight to production, or rather if you do then you won't have that permission for very long.
Way back when these laws were passed, the car company was probably going to run it like the dealerships do. If it was still a matter of who would run them, I might agree with you. But these days I really don't see the need for a sales droid, you could just as easily order it online at a fixed price. What you need in addition is:
a) A trade-in program, probably a profit split with used car dealer. Or just let used car dealers give you offers.
b) Test drives, maybe make some deal with a rental company. Like if you buy a car of that model the rental is waived, otherwise you pay a fee.
c) Warranty service and support, but this is pretty much already done with authorized service locations.
I really don't want the salesperson's "help" in selling me accessories and extended warranties, that's just one of many reasons I prefer e-tail for anything that rolls off an assembly line and doesn't involve personal fit like clothes. And even then I just ordered socks and underwear online, good enough.