So you're saying the creation of the Department of Homeland Security and the Transportation Security Administration weren't politicized? Ok the latter can't be called an intelligence service.
I tried but all I got back was a form letter saying how once the nasty 'network neutrality' and Title 2 are reversed internet caps and speeds will double; Netflix prices will be subsidized by Comcast; trolls, crackers, and spammers will recede to the dark web; there will no longer be a need for internet surveillance or privacy invasions; wisdom and freedom of information will reign supreme; and it will be the land of milk and honey for everyone.
Two copyright incidents and they shut off your internet? I've only ever heard of '3 strikes', which was later changed to '7 strikes', and in both cases you wouldn't actually get your internet access permanently shut down even after the max number of strikes. ISPs have been loathe to actually disconnect their internet customers because they're then choosing to NOT take your money, usually copyright enforcers have to take the ISP to court to try and get them to actually disconnect anyone. Maybe they talked down to you and treated you like the enemy because they got a nastygram about you, and you were too inept to figure out how to stop sharing that stuff?
They increased it from 500GB to 1TB for the tiny number of people affected by the trial of cable internet caps. For everyone else, it went from unlimited to 1TB. My friend's family hits the cap sometimes just from sharing Hulu.
Remember the story a few months back on Slashdot about the girl who was held hostage in a hospital, and separated from her parents, because they said she was being given the wrong treatment by her parents due to a misdiagnosis? It'd be pretty difficult for an AI to one-up the evils intentionally committed by humans in the medical industry. Sure it might've been incompetence at first (child abuse is more likely than a super-rare disease) but after a point it was all CYA. Medical malpractice happens all the time, and there are tons of cases of "small-town doctor misdiagnoses rare affliction he'd never seen, patient suffers for it" that never hit the news, yet an AI might never make that mistake. This is why assistants following a flowchart are less likely to misdiagnose than a doctor; we're just replacing the "human reading a flowchart" with a computer program that speeds up the process.
Reading the article, it seems Google buys data from 3rd parties to get anonymized data on credit/debit card use at stores; they only get how much was spent rather than an itemized list of what was purchased. If someone spent $1 at McDonalds, what did they buy? Something off the dollar menu, but more specifically, who knows. Someone spent $10 at a dollar store; what did they buy? Could've been anything. Unless items are priced uniquely, you're not going to have much luck guessing what they bought if the shopper purchases more than a couple items. More to the point, retailers who might care about this data already have it, and it's much more granular. If McDonalds wants to know how many $1 coffees were sold at a specific McDonalds store yesterday morning, they can bring up a precise number, including cash transactions. What's novel is that Google can correlate this to ad viewing, without necessarily telling a retailer how many times a specific person viewed an ad for a given thing (and letting the retailer do the correlation). It'd be more effective if the retailer were given the raw data and allowed to do the correlation, but then Google would have less control (and wouldn't be able to ensure anonymization). Hypothetically, retailers could give Google their raw data, and I expect such a thing to be an option in the future. Then they'll be able to realize what this alarmist article is warning about, which is... I dunno, figuring out how easily specific people are swayed by advertising? Does that really introduce a problem not already caused by pervasive advertising?
An easy hit Sony could make is to willingly throw away their obsession with DRM and control. Remember that much of the appeal of tape players (and the Walkman by extension) was mixtapes; not just 'a custom mix of stuff I like' but 'stuff I like that I didn't necessarily buy.' They've never had another consumer electronics win on the level of the Walkman because they locked it all down as much as possible, since it conflicted with their film/music production divisions. Looking at the numbers today, the music industry makes more money from streaming than from sales; if you want to get music without buying it (or even paying for it) there are countless options, not all of which even require internet access (the entire Billboard top 200 for each year since I was born can fit on a $10 flash drive.) Encourage music remixing won't significantly impact their sales.
Mixing video clips is a bit more involved (due to DRM and more complex tools) but still possible. This is something Sony could pounce on, hard. Between their vast film library, the Sony Vegas video editing tools, and a full line of consumer electronics that can be used to view and edit films, they could embrace video remixes. These are popular on youtube, and free video editing tools are low-quality compared to what Vegas can do already; all they need to do is simplify the UI and make it more robust when working with sketchy/pirated videos. It's easy to market: "our movies are DRM-free, use our free software to make a video remix and upload it to Youtube". Those who watch "let's play" videos, Pewdiepie, and are obsessed with Minecraft are the target audience. Their brand differentiation can be "if you buy our stuff, you can do whatever you want with it!" The same can be done with digital music, as well.
It's clear that, for national security reasons, this technology should be trained and deployed to assist with foreign relations. Particularly, since it should theoretically be a master of game theory, it should be trained on a set of prior foreign relations incidents. In order to deal with North Korea and other rogue nations, it must be taught brinksmanship. In order for this to be effective and to prevent the enemy from calling our bluff, it must be given direct control of our nuclear arsenal. The only question left is whether to call it 'Joshua' or 'Skynet'./s
I saw a headline on some entertainment website, that there are like 150 remakes/reboots in the works at Hollywood, along with a further ~250 sequels. That's not including adaptations of old comics/tv series. I'm just waiting for a reboot of the old film where a train comes toward the viewer, and then cinema can call it a day. Even indie films seem to be running out of ideas, all the well-rated ones I've seen recently are pretty similar to what has come before and usually fit neatly into an established genre. Or else they're (seemingly intentionally) incomprehensible. Perhaps the gaps inbetween genres were filled in and no new genres can exist. The 'found footage' subgenre is essentially a retread of the 'mockumentary' subgenre, now that I think of it.
That's right. If you have 3 kids in the backseat, 2 in baby seats, watching a DVD on the entertainment console, munching crackers and getting crumbs everywhere, ridesharers won't be very willing to accomodate that. And by 'ridesharing' I mean 'Johnny Cab', it'll go autonomous faster than the semi-truck hauling sector.
I imagine there's lots of old leadership at Ford who insist that there's be a smooth orderly transition to autonomous cars that they'll be all over. However, if things go more like how Lyft expects, they could be in trouble. Their best-selling vehicle (and the USA's best-selling vehicle, for over a decade straight, last I heard) is the F150 pickup truck. 95% of the time I see someone in an F150, it has 1 passenger and isn't hauling anything that wouldn't fit in the back of a Prius (fold down the back seat, and quite a bit can fit in a Prius.) Once people no longer own their own vehicle, and simply call for an autonomous ride to pick them up, how often are they going to be calling a pickup because they need to haul something serious? Not bloody often. Meaning autonomous ridesharing companies are going to buy very few of them. Meaning pickup sales are going to fall off a cliff. Meaning Ford is fucked. I suspect that soccer moms will keep the SUV, and rideshare to replace their sedan when they drive themselves around, so sedan sales will mostly go to autonomous ridesharing companies. Coupes/sports cars will still be purchased as luxury status symbols. If the Mustang is their new F150, Ford's sales are going to be... not so good.
Ninety percent of coding is taking some business specs and translating them into computer logic. That's really ripe for machine learning and low-end AI.
For some reason this made me think of a homeless person on a sidewalk with a cardboard sign that reads "A.I. took my job". Also relevant: "I'm a people-person dammit! I'm good at working with people!"
While I agree with your sentiment, let's not forget that these were stolen NSA exploits. Even if the security bar were raised substantially, the NSA will still be willing to throw billions in taxpayer dollars at finding exploits and creating complex implants. If those expensive top-shelf exploits are released into the wild by crackers who stole them, other malware authors will happily use them for random mundane stuff like ransomware. Just wait until ransomware starts flashing itself into device firmware so it can't be easily removed. "This monitor I found in a parking lot infected my desktop, and I started having keyboard problems, it'd randomly type 'hacked by Chinese' and the '4' key was disabled. I plugged the keyboard into my laptop to see if it'd work fine there, and it infected my laptop."
Less than one in a thousand is a typical 'success' rate for any scam. Given that this is a worm, the cost of propagating to those 300k devices was almost nil after it was done being coded. Considering the attack used publicly-released exploits, pretty much every other component could've been sitting in a drawer using 95% reused code chunks.
It's not like Silicon Valley contractors were paid to code this thing, some 3rd-world hacker (possibly unemployed) threw it together; the cost of creation is way under $94k, I suspect. The NSA probably paid 10x that to find the exploits, and who knows if they ever got to use them.
Just add verbiage to the clickwrap saying "we're not legally liable. also, binding arbitration." Oh wait the clickwrap already says that. You mean a new law that mandates liability? Simple, contracts say "you agree to keep this machine airgapped" in a 'crumple-zone' clause that everyone expects to be violated yet is designed to not affect the rest of the contract when it is. Ok MS agreed to provide a secure product... but only those who violated the contract were infected and could be party to a class-action suit, opening the door for them to be countersued. Make it VERY public and clear that anyone who sues them for infection liability WILL be countersued for every penny by a larger team of higher-paid lawyers.
This makes me think of the eye's 'blind spot', which is actually where the nerves pass through the retina. Perhaps the cold spot is where energy passes through our universe into another, although that would suggest more energy is flowing from this one to that one.
Slashdot Mirror
So you're saying the creation of the Department of Homeland Security and the Transportation Security Administration weren't politicized? Ok the latter can't be called an intelligence service.
Perhaps it's Russian tech.
I tried but all I got back was a form letter saying how once the nasty 'network neutrality' and Title 2 are reversed internet caps and speeds will double; Netflix prices will be subsidized by Comcast; trolls, crackers, and spammers will recede to the dark web; there will no longer be a need for internet surveillance or privacy invasions; wisdom and freedom of information will reign supreme; and it will be the land of milk and honey for everyone.
If you are steaming, you should probably get that looked at. Or else leave the sauna, the steam is likely to harm your electronic device.
Two copyright incidents and they shut off your internet? I've only ever heard of '3 strikes', which was later changed to '7 strikes', and in both cases you wouldn't actually get your internet access permanently shut down even after the max number of strikes. ISPs have been loathe to actually disconnect their internet customers because they're then choosing to NOT take your money, usually copyright enforcers have to take the ISP to court to try and get them to actually disconnect anyone.
Maybe they talked down to you and treated you like the enemy because they got a nastygram about you, and you were too inept to figure out how to stop sharing that stuff?
L.O.L. That is nothing I am whey a head of you. I cut the chord on my SCREEN.
This post composited by Alexa.
They increased it from 500GB to 1TB for the tiny number of people affected by the trial of cable internet caps. For everyone else, it went from unlimited to 1TB. My friend's family hits the cap sometimes just from sharing Hulu.
Megid Broadcast Study drops a Meteo on the cable industry.
Oh, Magid. Carry on...
Remember the story a few months back on Slashdot about the girl who was held hostage in a hospital, and separated from her parents, because they said she was being given the wrong treatment by her parents due to a misdiagnosis? It'd be pretty difficult for an AI to one-up the evils intentionally committed by humans in the medical industry. Sure it might've been incompetence at first (child abuse is more likely than a super-rare disease) but after a point it was all CYA. Medical malpractice happens all the time, and there are tons of cases of "small-town doctor misdiagnoses rare affliction he'd never seen, patient suffers for it" that never hit the news, yet an AI might never make that mistake. This is why assistants following a flowchart are less likely to misdiagnose than a doctor; we're just replacing the "human reading a flowchart" with a computer program that speeds up the process.
Reading the article, it seems Google buys data from 3rd parties to get anonymized data on credit/debit card use at stores; they only get how much was spent rather than an itemized list of what was purchased. If someone spent $1 at McDonalds, what did they buy? Something off the dollar menu, but more specifically, who knows. Someone spent $10 at a dollar store; what did they buy? Could've been anything. Unless items are priced uniquely, you're not going to have much luck guessing what they bought if the shopper purchases more than a couple items. More to the point, retailers who might care about this data already have it, and it's much more granular. If McDonalds wants to know how many $1 coffees were sold at a specific McDonalds store yesterday morning, they can bring up a precise number, including cash transactions. What's novel is that Google can correlate this to ad viewing, without necessarily telling a retailer how many times a specific person viewed an ad for a given thing (and letting the retailer do the correlation). It'd be more effective if the retailer were given the raw data and allowed to do the correlation, but then Google would have less control (and wouldn't be able to ensure anonymization). Hypothetically, retailers could give Google their raw data, and I expect such a thing to be an option in the future. Then they'll be able to realize what this alarmist article is warning about, which is... I dunno, figuring out how easily specific people are swayed by advertising? Does that really introduce a problem not already caused by pervasive advertising?
An easy hit Sony could make is to willingly throw away their obsession with DRM and control. Remember that much of the appeal of tape players (and the Walkman by extension) was mixtapes; not just 'a custom mix of stuff I like' but 'stuff I like that I didn't necessarily buy.' They've never had another consumer electronics win on the level of the Walkman because they locked it all down as much as possible, since it conflicted with their film/music production divisions. Looking at the numbers today, the music industry makes more money from streaming than from sales; if you want to get music without buying it (or even paying for it) there are countless options, not all of which even require internet access (the entire Billboard top 200 for each year since I was born can fit on a $10 flash drive.) Encourage music remixing won't significantly impact their sales.
Mixing video clips is a bit more involved (due to DRM and more complex tools) but still possible. This is something Sony could pounce on, hard. Between their vast film library, the Sony Vegas video editing tools, and a full line of consumer electronics that can be used to view and edit films, they could embrace video remixes. These are popular on youtube, and free video editing tools are low-quality compared to what Vegas can do already; all they need to do is simplify the UI and make it more robust when working with sketchy/pirated videos. It's easy to market: "our movies are DRM-free, use our free software to make a video remix and upload it to Youtube". Those who watch "let's play" videos, Pewdiepie, and are obsessed with Minecraft are the target audience. Their brand differentiation can be "if you buy our stuff, you can do whatever you want with it!" The same can be done with digital music, as well.
It's clear that, for national security reasons, this technology should be trained and deployed to assist with foreign relations. Particularly, since it should theoretically be a master of game theory, it should be trained on a set of prior foreign relations incidents. In order to deal with North Korea and other rogue nations, it must be taught brinksmanship. In order for this to be effective and to prevent the enemy from calling our bluff, it must be given direct control of our nuclear arsenal. The only question left is whether to call it 'Joshua' or 'Skynet'. /s
I saw a headline on some entertainment website, that there are like 150 remakes/reboots in the works at Hollywood, along with a further ~250 sequels. That's not including adaptations of old comics/tv series. I'm just waiting for a reboot of the old film where a train comes toward the viewer, and then cinema can call it a day.
Even indie films seem to be running out of ideas, all the well-rated ones I've seen recently are pretty similar to what has come before and usually fit neatly into an established genre. Or else they're (seemingly intentionally) incomprehensible. Perhaps the gaps inbetween genres were filled in and no new genres can exist. The 'found footage' subgenre is essentially a retread of the 'mockumentary' subgenre, now that I think of it.
That's right. If you have 3 kids in the backseat, 2 in baby seats, watching a DVD on the entertainment console, munching crackers and getting crumbs everywhere, ridesharers won't be very willing to accomodate that. And by 'ridesharing' I mean 'Johnny Cab', it'll go autonomous faster than the semi-truck hauling sector.
I imagine there's lots of old leadership at Ford who insist that there's be a smooth orderly transition to autonomous cars that they'll be all over. However, if things go more like how Lyft expects, they could be in trouble. Their best-selling vehicle (and the USA's best-selling vehicle, for over a decade straight, last I heard) is the F150 pickup truck. 95% of the time I see someone in an F150, it has 1 passenger and isn't hauling anything that wouldn't fit in the back of a Prius (fold down the back seat, and quite a bit can fit in a Prius.) Once people no longer own their own vehicle, and simply call for an autonomous ride to pick them up, how often are they going to be calling a pickup because they need to haul something serious? Not bloody often. Meaning autonomous ridesharing companies are going to buy very few of them. Meaning pickup sales are going to fall off a cliff. Meaning Ford is fucked. I suspect that soccer moms will keep the SUV, and rideshare to replace their sedan when they drive themselves around, so sedan sales will mostly go to autonomous ridesharing companies. Coupes/sports cars will still be purchased as luxury status symbols. If the Mustang is their new F150, Ford's sales are going to be... not so good.
more than 50 million roubles
You know what they say: more roubles, more troubles.
Not to worry, 20-30 years from now we'll finally have Fusion power. And Half Life 3!
Well, one of the two at least.
Hope they enjoy the taste of crow.
Ninety percent of coding is taking some business specs and translating them into computer logic. That's really ripe for machine learning and low-end AI.
For some reason this made me think of a homeless person on a sidewalk with a cardboard sign that reads "A.I. took my job". Also relevant: "I'm a people-person dammit! I'm good at working with people!"
We need some basics done right in software,
While I agree with your sentiment, let's not forget that these were stolen NSA exploits. Even if the security bar were raised substantially, the NSA will still be willing to throw billions in taxpayer dollars at finding exploits and creating complex implants. If those expensive top-shelf exploits are released into the wild by crackers who stole them, other malware authors will happily use them for random mundane stuff like ransomware. Just wait until ransomware starts flashing itself into device firmware so it can't be easily removed. "This monitor I found in a parking lot infected my desktop, and I started having keyboard problems, it'd randomly type 'hacked by Chinese' and the '4' key was disabled. I plugged the keyboard into my laptop to see if it'd work fine there, and it infected my laptop."
Less than one in a thousand is a typical 'success' rate for any scam. Given that this is a worm, the cost of propagating to those 300k devices was almost nil after it was done being coded. Considering the attack used publicly-released exploits, pretty much every other component could've been sitting in a drawer using 95% reused code chunks.
It's not like Silicon Valley contractors were paid to code this thing, some 3rd-world hacker (possibly unemployed) threw it together; the cost of creation is way under $94k, I suspect. The NSA probably paid 10x that to find the exploits, and who knows if they ever got to use them.
Someone else was drinking, and mistook the plasma TV for a gong.
Just add verbiage to the clickwrap saying "we're not legally liable. also, binding arbitration." Oh wait the clickwrap already says that. You mean a new law that mandates liability? Simple, contracts say "you agree to keep this machine airgapped" in a 'crumple-zone' clause that everyone expects to be violated yet is designed to not affect the rest of the contract when it is. Ok MS agreed to provide a secure product... but only those who violated the contract were infected and could be party to a class-action suit, opening the door for them to be countersued. Make it VERY public and clear that anyone who sues them for infection liability WILL be countersued for every penny by a larger team of higher-paid lawyers.
The size of the cold spot is hypothesized to be precisely as large as a noodly appendage. Coincidence?
This makes me think of the eye's 'blind spot', which is actually where the nerves pass through the retina. Perhaps the cold spot is where energy passes through our universe into another, although that would suggest more energy is flowing from this one to that one.