I know I'm feeding a troll, but systemd is quite likable, and I like it better than launchd. I'm looking into getting rid of launchd on my OS X box and adding a launchd-compatibility layer into systemd so that the rest of the system would be happy in its ignorance about not talking to a real launchd...
Don't be so obstinate. To sue someone, as it is commonly used, is independent of the presumed outcome. The very filing of a suit places possibly undue burden on the defendant.
This assumes that there are no sidechannel attacks against this storage, and that it's protected against power fluctuations. IOW: A very professional professional with a $1E6+ budget would probably be able to do something more with it than just stare at it with dismay:)
That's only true given an assumption of there being no JTAG chain on an iPhone - I seriously doubt that. This gives you debug access to all the chips, and all you need to do is to pull the case apart and cradle the phone in a very modest bed of nails. This is sufficient to dump the flash, but not encryption keys. Unless there's a backdoor in the chip that carries the key - one can't be sure without reverse-engineering the relevant chip.
For all I know, Apple could have sneaked in JTAG access even through the lightning interface, so an encrypted dump of the flash could be done using a specialized JTAG-over-lightning bridge, without opening the phone.
I think that such adaptations go even on a much shorter timescale. I don't eat between breakfast and dinner, and it used to be that I had a sugar low around 1-2pm. Right now it's the opposite: if I eat anything during the work hours, I get sleepy because there's an insulin low that starts after noon or so. And I did actually sample the insulin levels at hourly intervals for a month to make sure I'm not imagining things. These days, going out for an occasional lunch with coworkers is a surefire way to waste the rest of the day, falling asleep at the keyboard.
The best day for me is to get a bit of lactose from coffee with milk in the morning, not have anything else to eat, drink water, and then have a nice dinner. If I'm planning to do any work at night, the dinner must be under 1200 kcal.
And that's why, in 2000 years or so, the evolutionary processes will likely fix it. Of course we'll be all in a big doodoo if, for whatever reason, we'd be faced with going back to a hunter-gatherer lifestyle - not only due to population crash, but also due to a then-maladaptation to circumstances that wouldn't exist anymore.
There's no easy way to avoid "making" of your own glucose -- it's simply the digestion of carbohydrates that you eat. If you're not living on a carbohydrate-free diet, there's glucose absorbed in your small intestine, continuously, and it has nothing to do with whether you eat sugary snacks or not. If you eat anything with flour in it, you're absorbing glucose in the gut:)
"Does HFCS count as a sugar substitute" Fuck, not that idiocy again. It's nothing else but sugar in its very chemical essence. Fructose can be absorbed directly into the bloodstream and all of our cells that live on sugar can metabolize it.
Shit people, the Oncier experiment with the Klikiss torch was the beginning of a fucking mess with the Hydrogues. Some race or two, somewhere, are gonna get annihilated over that.
Just look inside of Dragon 2 and tell me, with straight face, that we'll be seeing anything remotely contemporary from Boeing within the next decade or two (by which time they'd be 2 decades behind times). I don't see that happening. I'm fairly happy to see that at least one aerospace company out there recognizes the value of industrial design, and of using modern UIs in the aerospace context. Their interior design is at least something to look forward to spending the trip in. Maybe to everyone here it's just form without substance, but I think it's important.
Let's not forget that at the end of the day, it's all done for us -- humans. The most hardcore astronauts out there can recognize the a beautiful design just as well as us "mere mortals" can. I'm frankly said tired of aerospace man-machine interfaces looking like if the 80s called. With the right team, they at least work on developing something that feels contemporary and seems like would be a joy to work on (as in: fly/ maneouvre/dock etc.).
I think that this is really the "famous last words", if there were any. Those "people who know more" have seemingly been wrong for more than a decade now. See the dot-com bubble, the housing bubble, the mortgage securitization fiasco, etc. All done by people who "know more". I'm almost inclined to start shorting MS.
The hard part is that the car must absolutely be able to read the horizontal markings on the pavement. This is not a trivial problem at all, since those markings are often of poor legibility in ideal circumstances even to a human, never mind a machine. I'm talking about the U.S., Western Europe is probably much better in that respect.
The only slight problem with that is that in order to react at all in time, you must be paying the same amount of attention as you would if there was no autonomous drive system at all. This is otherwise known as the human being in the loop. Removing the human from the loop in aircraft automation has been a source of unending problems, and only recently one could say that it's a reasonably well understood problem - if not quite solved just yet. Don't forget we're talking about trained professional pilots here.
So, when faced with a self-driving car, the relatively untrained non-professional driver will always be so far out of the loop, that there's no way for him to overtake control safely in real time.
Of course, the solution for that is simple: the car's control transfer must, by default, happen in a fail-safe state - with the car stopped, with emergency blinkers on, etc. Only if the control transfer is explicitly acknowledged in a preset time, would the fail-safe be bypassed.
I hope that any reasonably modern transmission/transaxle electronic control software prevents that sort of behavior. Sure as heck my 14 year old Volvo behaves appropriately and prolongs the upshift interval when driving uphill. Eventually it seems that you need to be driving at no more than 30% power for at least 15 seconds for it to decide to upshift, unless the revs at below WOT go above 4.5kRPM or thereabouts. It seems to deal with mountain driving OK. There's initial hunting, but after 2-3 minutes it subsides as the control loops back off from the aggressive stance.
I think it is disingenuous to use the term "IP spoofing" to mean taking control over a part of the networking stack of another machine somewhere on the network. Because that's what a tor exit node software does. I think the real issue is that an IP address is not a personal identity, and can't be used a such.
I think the biggest issue is that Microsoft doesn't really have a simple symbolic logo for itself as a corporation. There's a perhaps widely-recognized Windows logo, and that's about it. The people at the marketing helm at MS are really asleep, and have been for ages. They can't even keep from fucking with their Windows logo. Say what you will about Apple, but they essentially had only two logo designs, and both are instantly recognizable. They had the foresight to design them for the long run. MS seems to think quarter-to-quarter.
My brakes actually can overpower my engine under all circumstances, and they do so admirably enough that I the braking distance difference between emergency braking with no accelerator input vs. emergency braking with the accelerator depressed all the way to the floor is 5% on dry surface. The ABS activates when I emergency brake, and does so whether the accelerator is floored or not, so obviously the brakes are working to their full potential. It's actually a rather simple test for adequacy of brakes: first test them on dry pavement, the ABS must come on. Then do the same with the accelerator floored. The ABS still must come on.
I also don't buy that in an emergency stop I'd floor the accelerator. What for? Why? Maybe that's a common "twitch" in some people, but I've just not observed it. Not that I emergency brake with any regularity - it only happened a few times outside of the track.
Slashdot Mirror
I know I'm feeding a troll, but systemd is quite likable, and I like it better than launchd. I'm looking into getting rid of launchd on my OS X box and adding a launchd-compatibility layer into systemd so that the rest of the system would be happy in its ignorance about not talking to a real launchd...
Interestingly enough, it's only one keystroke more on a mac: Cmd-Space, ter, Enter.
Don't be so obstinate. To sue someone, as it is commonly used, is independent of the presumed outcome. The very filing of a suit places possibly undue burden on the defendant.
This assumes that there are no sidechannel attacks against this storage, and that it's protected against power fluctuations. IOW: A very professional professional with a $1E6+ budget would probably be able to do something more with it than just stare at it with dismay :)
That's only true given an assumption of there being no JTAG chain on an iPhone - I seriously doubt that. This gives you debug access to all the chips, and all you need to do is to pull the case apart and cradle the phone in a very modest bed of nails. This is sufficient to dump the flash, but not encryption keys. Unless there's a backdoor in the chip that carries the key - one can't be sure without reverse-engineering the relevant chip.
For all I know, Apple could have sneaked in JTAG access even through the lightning interface, so an encrypted dump of the flash could be done using a specialized JTAG-over-lightning bridge, without opening the phone.
I think that such adaptations go even on a much shorter timescale. I don't eat between breakfast and dinner, and it used to be that I had a sugar low around 1-2pm. Right now it's the opposite: if I eat anything during the work hours, I get sleepy because there's an insulin low that starts after noon or so. And I did actually sample the insulin levels at hourly intervals for a month to make sure I'm not imagining things. These days, going out for an occasional lunch with coworkers is a surefire way to waste the rest of the day, falling asleep at the keyboard.
The best day for me is to get a bit of lactose from coffee with milk in the morning, not have anything else to eat, drink water, and then have a nice dinner. If I'm planning to do any work at night, the dinner must be under 1200 kcal.
And that's why, in 2000 years or so, the evolutionary processes will likely fix it. Of course we'll be all in a big doodoo if, for whatever reason, we'd be faced with going back to a hunter-gatherer lifestyle - not only due to population crash, but also due to a then-maladaptation to circumstances that wouldn't exist anymore.
Ada was quite painful before widescreen monitors became the norm...
"a lot of Genetically Modified foods show tumor acceleration in rats and infertility in three generations" Um, no, Just no. Stop it.
There's no easy way to avoid "making" of your own glucose -- it's simply the digestion of carbohydrates that you eat. If you're not living on a carbohydrate-free diet, there's glucose absorbed in your small intestine, continuously, and it has nothing to do with whether you eat sugary snacks or not. If you eat anything with flour in it, you're absorbing glucose in the gut :)
Evolutionarily, there are quite good reasons for that. Fruits are seasonal.
"Does HFCS count as a sugar substitute" Fuck, not that idiocy again. It's nothing else but sugar in its very chemical essence. Fructose can be absorbed directly into the bloodstream and all of our cells that live on sugar can metabolize it.
Shit people, the Oncier experiment with the Klikiss torch was the beginning of a fucking mess with the Hydrogues. Some race or two, somewhere, are gonna get annihilated over that.
SpaceX got a nice chunk of the award :)
Just look inside of Dragon 2 and tell me, with straight face, that we'll be seeing anything remotely contemporary from Boeing within the next decade or two (by which time they'd be 2 decades behind times). I don't see that happening. I'm fairly happy to see that at least one aerospace company out there recognizes the value of industrial design, and of using modern UIs in the aerospace context. Their interior design is at least something to look forward to spending the trip in. Maybe to everyone here it's just form without substance, but I think it's important.
Let's not forget that at the end of the day, it's all done for us -- humans. The most hardcore astronauts out there can recognize the a beautiful design just as well as us "mere mortals" can. I'm frankly said tired of aerospace man-machine interfaces looking like if the 80s called. With the right team, they at least work on developing something that feels contemporary and seems like would be a joy to work on (as in: fly/ maneouvre/dock etc.).
I think that this is really the "famous last words", if there were any. Those "people who know more" have seemingly been wrong for more than a decade now. See the dot-com bubble, the housing bubble, the mortgage securitization fiasco, etc. All done by people who "know more". I'm almost inclined to start shorting MS.
And that's what's needed. My point still stands in all its irrelevant glory :)
The hard part is that the car must absolutely be able to read the horizontal markings on the pavement. This is not a trivial problem at all, since those markings are often of poor legibility in ideal circumstances even to a human, never mind a machine. I'm talking about the U.S., Western Europe is probably much better in that respect.
The only slight problem with that is that in order to react at all in time, you must be paying the same amount of attention as you would if there was no autonomous drive system at all. This is otherwise known as the human being in the loop. Removing the human from the loop in aircraft automation has been a source of unending problems, and only recently one could say that it's a reasonably well understood problem - if not quite solved just yet. Don't forget we're talking about trained professional pilots here.
So, when faced with a self-driving car, the relatively untrained non-professional driver will always be so far out of the loop, that there's no way for him to overtake control safely in real time.
Of course, the solution for that is simple: the car's control transfer must, by default, happen in a fail-safe state - with the car stopped, with emergency blinkers on, etc. Only if the control transfer is explicitly acknowledged in a preset time, would the fail-safe be bypassed.
s/revs at below WOT/revs at idle/
I hope that any reasonably modern transmission/transaxle electronic control software prevents that sort of behavior. Sure as heck my 14 year old Volvo behaves appropriately and prolongs the upshift interval when driving uphill. Eventually it seems that you need to be driving at no more than 30% power for at least 15 seconds for it to decide to upshift, unless the revs at below WOT go above 4.5kRPM or thereabouts. It seems to deal with mountain driving OK. There's initial hunting, but after 2-3 minutes it subsides as the control loops back off from the aggressive stance.
I think it is disingenuous to use the term "IP spoofing" to mean taking control over a part of the networking stack of another machine somewhere on the network. Because that's what a tor exit node software does. I think the real issue is that an IP address is not a personal identity, and can't be used a such.
You're just arguing with some obnoxious troll. I think by now we can all tell the troll, and we all know what the truth is...
I think the biggest issue is that Microsoft doesn't really have a simple symbolic logo for itself as a corporation. There's a perhaps widely-recognized Windows logo, and that's about it. The people at the marketing helm at MS are really asleep, and have been for ages. They can't even keep from fucking with their Windows logo. Say what you will about Apple, but they essentially had only two logo designs, and both are instantly recognizable. They had the foresight to design them for the long run. MS seems to think quarter-to-quarter.
My brakes actually can overpower my engine under all circumstances, and they do so admirably enough that I the braking distance difference between emergency braking with no accelerator input vs. emergency braking with the accelerator depressed all the way to the floor is 5% on dry surface. The ABS activates when I emergency brake, and does so whether the accelerator is floored or not, so obviously the brakes are working to their full potential. It's actually a rather simple test for adequacy of brakes: first test them on dry pavement, the ABS must come on. Then do the same with the accelerator floored. The ABS still must come on.
I also don't buy that in an emergency stop I'd floor the accelerator. What for? Why? Maybe that's a common "twitch" in some people, but I've just not observed it. Not that I emergency brake with any regularity - it only happened a few times outside of the track.