Destruction of evidence is a crime (current political figures aside) which will get you sent to jail.
May I suggest that it's a stupid idea to knowingly destroy evidence if you are the subject of a criminal investigation (or a civil lawsuit for that matter)? Now I guess if you know you are guilty, it might be worth the risk to you, but in general it's going to be a bad idea..
But you are under no obligation to indicate which finger correctly unlocks the phone. As long as you comply with the court order "place index finger on fingerprint sensor", you don't have to tell them that doing so will erase the phone.
Believe it or not, de facto standardization of medical records to meet government/medicare rules is a big benefit to healthcare providers. For a while, every insurance company had different forms that had to be filled out, often by the patient, in order to get reimbursed. Better doctors/hospitals employed people whose only job was to learn the differences between Blue Cross and Cigna forms and language and to either fill out or help their patients fill out those forms. Spend your 15 minutes in the exam room, then go spend 30 minutes with the billing specialist.
This article is talking about the tyranny of EMR data entry, not standardized claim submission. I worked at a medium/largish practice management vendor who also ran a medical claim clearinghouse for most of the HIPAA implementation era (1997-2012). HIPAA gave CMS the power to mandate the interchange format for electronic claim form submission and other ancillary transactions.
This was a huge boon for the IT departments as they got some of their budget back from having to maintain dozens of different proprietary interfaces to the various commercial insurances. However, this did nothing to elide the necessity to have billing and coding specialists on hand who knew how to navigate the various carriers' rule sets. In fact our main value add as a clearinghouse was that we saw so many claims that we were able to develop heuristics for all the carriers we supported and were able to identify claims that were likely to be flagged by the carrier before sending them on. That way the customer could send on an amended claim before the carrier even responded with a status notification or remit.
None of this affects how a doc would document encounters except to whatever extent an organization made procedural changes to comply with HIPAA. Other than that, the claim standardization piece primarily affected billers and IT folks.
The trend to micromanaging everything through the EMR has more to do with several more recent phenomena such as increasing consolidation of PCP practices into hospital networks, the availability of government grants to create RHIOs/HIEs through EMR incentive programs to demonstrate "meaningful use" of shared electronic records, and the increased reporting burdens placed on providers through the implementation of ACOs.
Nowhere that I am aware of is there are particular legally mandated format for EMR records like there are for EDI (ASC X12). However HL7v3/CDA is a de facto industry standard for HIEs.
What exactly is minimum wage if not for UBI on poor workers that we mandate that companies pay? Yeah, you won't see that figure on any government balance sheet, but it's a very real cost to the economy nonetheless.
If we have a UBI, we can do away with minimum wage. Go ahead and offer $2/hr, and see if you get any takers.You might get a few HS students who don't qualify for UBI.
Logical Increments is also great. They split everything out into builds that are graded on price/performance with a selection of parts under each category that have been tested to work together.
and in many instances encryption keys for encrypted information simply don't exist
Ahh keyless encryption: for when you really don't care to ever get the data back.
Many keys are ephemeral. Once the information has been received and acknowledged, both parties discard their keys. If you intercept one of these messages, no one will ever have a way of decrypting it. The only way to get the information is to double back and beat it out of one of them.
Fourthly it hands control back to a pilot in an unexpected or uncontrollable scenario... just like an aircraft autopilot.
When an aircraft autopilot detects a problem at cruising altitude, the pilot usually has at least several 10s of seconds if not minutes to assess the situation and correct the issue. When a "problem" occurs on the ground, traveling 65mph, with obstacles all around you, you have fractions of a second to react. If an autonomous system hands control over to you in that situation, you are fucked.
Sorry, but no. It does NOT matter what "everyone" thinks something means. If they're too stupid or lazy to look it up, it's THEIR fault, not the one using the term correctly.
That's small solace to me if I'm killed by one of these clowns. It's fine to say it's on you for not knowing doing your homework when it is something that only affects the individual, but these are public roads where other people can be maimed or killed. It's irresponsible for Tesla to call it autopilot when the average person, absent any specialized industry knowledge, understands autopilot in aviation to mean "the plane flies by itself". Of course when that term is applied to an automobile, they will assume it means "the car drives by itself".
Tesla should have just called it some flavor of "driver assist" just like everybody else. Naming this feature "autopilot" was clearly a dumb marketing ploy to brand Tesla as more advanced.
Security guards are not just a deterrent, they are something that can go after a threat with the full force of the law on an active basis.
I would think that the last thing a company wants is for its rent-a-cops to go after a threat "with the full force of the law". That sounds like a huge liability issue. If the sight of a flashlight and a shout of "hey you" doesn't cause the intruder to surrender or flee, it's better to have the security guard trip the alarm, stand down, and wait for the real cops to show up.
If you are protecting something really valuable or dangerous, then yeah, maybe a more active response is merited, but for protecting a corporate campus or parking lot, a robot seems like a pretty good force multiplier, allowing a couple of humans to effectively cover more ground.
Humans doing less dangerous and menial jobs is a good thing, not a bad thing.
That's dogmatic, and not necessarily true.
I would think that humans doing dangerous things for which there are rewards[*] helps provide an evolutionary pressure against those not doing dangerous things, and those failing at them.
There are not enough people flying combat missions to make any sort of difference evolution-wise. If anything the type of person who would sign up for such a thing is going to get selected against in modern society. Fighter pilots are much less likely to survive long enough to breed than the guy who stays home and gets his kicks playing a combat video game.
You say that like an Air Force Puke, I suppose you also think the F35 can replace the A10 too! Truth is the fight we are most likely to be forced into is more like another Afganistan than a WW III get used to it.
But the GP wasn't talking about CAS, he was talking about replacing strike fighters. Sure, keep the A10s and the people that fly them to support humans on the ground. But instead of sending in a bunch AI-controled fighters in with AGMs or to support a bunch of AI-bombers, why not ditch the air frames altogether? The $billions you spend developing, procuring, and supporting those aircraft can buy a whole lot of theater-wide cruise missiles. Put your gee-whiz AI on the missile instead: it doesn't care that it won't survive the mission.
It seems like more and more our fighter program is just political cover to give the air force an excuse to have something to spend their budget on. Current automation seems especially suited to controlling aircraft. You eliminate many of the problems around visual object recognition because there aren't any obstacles to avoid. If you replace the aircraft with a missile, then you don't need to worry about landing either.
I really hate this whole line of AI driver philosophy, because it seems to me to be largely pointless blather about nothing. We live in a world where gigahertz processors are cheap and plentyful. To a computer, that can take data samples thousands of times per second, a 60 mph car is traveling at a glacial speed. What kind of crazy, concocted scenario are you coming up with where the AI controlling the car has to make a Boolean decision that kills people?
There are plenty of AI algorithms, particularly in the class of inference decision problems where you have to pick the most optimal outcome from among based on many confounding factors, that can take minutes or hours to run, even on multiple gigahertz processors. It's a hard problem that we are still groping towards an efficient solution for. For now, the optimal behavior is probably just stop the car, fast without trying to make a bunch of moral trade offs that we don't know how to model both effectively and efficiently.
18 U.S. Code  798 - Disclosure of classified information: (a) Whoever knowingly and willfully communicates... prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States or for the benefit of any foreign government to the detriment of the United States any classified informationâ" (1) concerning the nature, preparation, or use of any code, cipher, or cryptographic system of the United States or any foreign government;
You would have to know that it is a government secret.
Note nothing it in the statute says that removing the classification label makes it okay. If you know it is secret and you willfully communicate it to an authorized person, that's a felony.
798 is concerned with intercepting and decoding encrypted communications -- i.e. deliberate acts of espionage. 793 is the chapter more broadly concerned with deliberately disclosing classified information to the detriment of national security interests. However, this mostly only applies to individuals that have obtained a clearance. When you are granted a clearance you essentially sign an NDA that has not just civil, but criminal penalties bound to it, and 793 provides most of the teeth. See SF-312 for a more exhaustive list.
In general, if you are a non-cleared average citizen, and are not deliberately gathering privileged information and conveying it to a foreign government, you are probably not breaking the law if you disclose any classified information that lands in your lap. This is why reporters don't usually go to jail for printing classified documents. This doesn't mean that the government might not try to make your life difficult, and you could still end up in contempt of court for refusing to cooperate with an investigation or prosecution subsequent to the leak. The courts are usually reluctant to go there in the case of reporters protecting their sources, but see the Valery Plame case.
If you independently discover something that is classified, you are almost certainly not in any trouble. There are certain circumstances where the government might have the power to gag you. For example, the DoD has the power to retroactively classify patents that duplicate military secrets. In those cases they may also issue a gag order to the applicant.
So, to the GP's point, were you to duplicate the FBIs exploit, unless you had privileged knowledge of what exactly it was, you are not under any obligation to keep their secrets for them.
As you point out, the "lost" codes actually cost them almost nothing since it's likely just an automated back-end and key generation server.
There's some cost because some percentage of the customers that bought keys through G2A would have been willing to pay the higher cost on Steam if there weren't keys being dumped at artificially lower prices financed by credit card fraud. That number is probably not the full $450k, because some number of those customers don't value the game at the full retail price, but it's probably nowhere near $0 either.
If you've hired people who need management into that situation, you've hired the wrong people. You need smart people with good time management skills who are not assholes and can work together like grownups without any oversight despite whatever personal differences they may have. They should also be humble enough to ask their peers for help when they are in over their head on something.
AMD is the one that came up with x86-64 which Intel subsequently copied. Has anyone ever used an Itanium?
Someone at HP or Intel must have financed a pretty great bender for our operations team in the early 2000s, because we bought in huge to the HP-UX Superdome on Itanium architecture. All we wanted was a platform to host our Tomcat web farm. We ended up supporting our application on that steaming propriety cow pie for about 5 years before we moved to cheap Intel Linux servers.
As a backbone tech it's good. But home networks are perfectly served by Class C v4, and large corps by Class A/B
Carrier grade NAT sucks balls. I've seen ISP's where every time I click on a link, the 'click' is coming from a different IP address, sometimes from different blocks. Things would be so much nicer and tidier with v6 and screw the NAT.
This kind of crap is why I opted for a "business grade" plan with a static IP. It seems like the only way to get a reliable home connection now is to pay twice as much.
Instead, let peers reward each other. Promote positive interactive and not crisis management. Incentivize working together as a company and getting things done instead of constant fussing, fighting, and crisis management. Empower the people!
GE had this, at least in in my division (Healthcare IT). I forget the exact name of the program, but any employee could write up a short 1-paragraph commendation for someone who went above and beyond to help them out and they would get a $50, $100, or $200 gift card, depending on the size of the solid. I'm pretty sure the thing went through some sort of managerial oversight to prevent abuse, but overall it was a nice little program. It felt good to be able to say "thanks" to someone in a tangible way, especially if they were on the other side of the country and you couldn't buy them a beer.
Somewhere there's an article about why that method is insecure. If an attacker generates passwords using common dictionary words, suddenly your password is only 4 "characters" long (for the example in the comic) and is very easy to guess. For that reason it's best not to use common substrings in passwords.
Yeah, but each word is hopefully drawn from a much larger pool of possible symbols than a single character. Say you are randomly pulling words from the list of the 1000 most common english words of length >= 4. That means each symbol in the password represents ~10 bits (9.96) of entropy. So while 5 totally random characters would have more entropy than "horse", the word is much more easily remembered.
So, "favorite leisure killing customs hosts" is about as secure as "Xc&V4S[Wan", assuming that the attacker knew the exact parameters you used to generate both passwords. Granted, 50 bits isn't the best password in this day and age, but it is better than most people's.
Also, if all the attacker has is your hash with no knowledge of how you picked your password, it's much more likely they have a rainbow table of all 8 character random passwords than one extending out to 39 characters. If a thief has a database of tens of thousands of passwords, they are not going to spend days of compute time cracking your password: they're going to crack all the shitty ones and move on to exploiting them. If you are a high-enough value target to warrant individual attention from a sophisticated attacker, then hopefully you are using something better than pure passwords anyway. For the rest of us, between 50-80 bits is probably enough.
It's great Google won and all, but fair use doesn't really protect the average developer. Fair use is an affirmative defense. In order to assert fair use, you have to get sued, refuse to settle, and then prove that your use is a fair use in a court of law. That will almost always get prohibitively expensive very quickly as this case has shown.
The real solutions is to make APIs not covered by copyright at all, like a directory listing or mathematical formula. I think Oracle should be able to copyright the implementation of Java, and obviously they have the right to restrict the use of the Java trademark, but the APIs should just be public domain.
I would be fine with independent consumer safety testing being required as in automobiles and toys. After all, who is to say we can trust the Chinese companies producing the atomizers and heating elements used in these devices not to be deviating from the specifications and using dangerous chemicals that aren't properly cleaned in the their manufacture. But this kind of regulation is going to make the irrational and uninformed fear mongering being spread now a self-fulfilling prophecy.
We don't necessarily know what the long term effect of inhaling the odorants and flavorings contained in these vape juices are. See "Popcorn Lung" for an example of the potential unanticipated side effects of chronic inhalation of a food grade flavor compound.
I think it makes sense to regulate these products in such a way that sale of tobacco-containing products is age restricted. Also safety testing should be conducted to be sure that: 1) The compounds are relatively harmless not only when taken orally, but when aspirated, 2) the chemicals don't break down into something more dangerous when heated, and 3) the various compounds don't combine in the presence of heat to form new dangerous compounds.
Yes, your local mom and pop vape shop may not be up for doing the chemical engineering necessary to perform these kinds of tests, but maybe that is a signal they shouldn't have been in the business of compounding drugs in the first place.
I would be fine with independent consumer safety testing being required as in automobiles and toys. After all, who is to say we can trust the Chinese companies producing the atomizers and heating elements used in these devices not to be deviating from the specifications and using dangerous chemicals that aren't properly cleaned in the their manufacture. But this kind of regulation is going to make the irrational and uninformed fear mongering being spread now a self-fulfilling prophecy.
We don't necessarily know what the long term effect of inhaling the odorants and flavorings contained in these vape juices are. See "Popcorn Lung" for an example of the potential unanticipated side effects of chronic inhalation of a food grade flavor compound.
I think it makes sense to regulate these products in such a way that sale of tobacco-containing products is age restricted. Also safety testing should be conducted to be sure that: 1) The compounds are relatively harmless not only when taken orally, but when aspirated, 2) the chemicals don't break down into something more dangerous when heated, and 3) the various compounds don't combine in the presence of heat to form new dangerous compounds.
Yes, your local mom and pop vape shop may not be up for doing the chemical engineering necessary to perform these kinds of tests, but maybe that is a signal they shouldn't have been in the business of compounding drugs in the first place.
So, the FBI and NSA both went beyond the scope of the court's instructions and may have violated the law. "Extremely concerned?" yeah there's nothing wrong here.
And yet I am sure that the court will continue to rubber stamp 99.9% of all the monitoring requests it gets.
Jobless claims is a deceiving statistic because it doesn't count people whose unemployment insurance expired without them finding new jobs or people who have dropped out of the labor market altogether (e.g. underemployed recent grads who move back into their parents because they can't find a job).
The actual labor market participation rate is 63.0, which, outside of last year, is the lowest it's been since the late 70's. See Labor Force Participation Rate from Dept. of Labor. I couldn't save a URL that pointed to the full series, but just adjust the start date back to 1976 to see the graph.
What's really happening is that capital is doing great, but the recovery from the financial crisis of 2007/8 has been largely jobless.
Slashdot Mirror
Destruction of evidence is a crime (current political figures aside) which will get you sent to jail.
May I suggest that it's a stupid idea to knowingly destroy evidence if you are the subject of a criminal investigation (or a civil lawsuit for that matter)? Now I guess if you know you are guilty, it might be worth the risk to you, but in general it's going to be a bad idea..
But you are under no obligation to indicate which finger correctly unlocks the phone. As long as you comply with the court order "place index finger on fingerprint sensor", you don't have to tell them that doing so will erase the phone.
Believe it or not, de facto standardization of medical records to meet government/medicare rules is a big benefit to healthcare providers. For a while, every insurance company had different forms that had to be filled out, often by the patient, in order to get reimbursed. Better doctors/hospitals employed people whose only job was to learn the differences between Blue Cross and Cigna forms and language and to either fill out or help their patients fill out those forms. Spend your 15 minutes in the exam room, then go spend 30 minutes with the billing specialist.
This article is talking about the tyranny of EMR data entry, not standardized claim submission. I worked at a medium/largish practice management vendor who also ran a medical claim clearinghouse for most of the HIPAA implementation era (1997-2012). HIPAA gave CMS the power to mandate the interchange format for electronic claim form submission and other ancillary transactions.
This was a huge boon for the IT departments as they got some of their budget back from having to maintain dozens of different proprietary interfaces to the various commercial insurances. However, this did nothing to elide the necessity to have billing and coding specialists on hand who knew how to navigate the various carriers' rule sets. In fact our main value add as a clearinghouse was that we saw so many claims that we were able to develop heuristics for all the carriers we supported and were able to identify claims that were likely to be flagged by the carrier before sending them on. That way the customer could send on an amended claim before the carrier even responded with a status notification or remit.
None of this affects how a doc would document encounters except to whatever extent an organization made procedural changes to comply with HIPAA. Other than that, the claim standardization piece primarily affected billers and IT folks.
The trend to micromanaging everything through the EMR has more to do with several more recent phenomena such as increasing consolidation of PCP practices into hospital networks, the availability of government grants to create RHIOs/HIEs through EMR incentive programs to demonstrate "meaningful use" of shared electronic records, and the increased reporting burdens placed on providers through the implementation of ACOs.
Nowhere that I am aware of is there are particular legally mandated format for EMR records like there are for EDI (ASC X12). However HL7v3/CDA is a de facto industry standard for HIEs.
What exactly is minimum wage if not for UBI on poor workers that we mandate that companies pay? Yeah, you won't see that figure on any government balance sheet, but it's a very real cost to the economy nonetheless.
If we have a UBI, we can do away with minimum wage. Go ahead and offer $2/hr, and see if you get any takers.You might get a few HS students who don't qualify for UBI.
Even 486's were full of ISA slots.
PCI wasn't standard until the Pentium came out
And I was still using my 3c509 ISA NIC well into the pentium era.
Logical Increments is also great. They split everything out into builds that are graded on price/performance with a selection of parts under each category that have been tested to work together.
and in many instances encryption keys for encrypted information simply don't exist
Ahh keyless encryption: for when you really don't care to ever get the data back.
Many keys are ephemeral. Once the information has been received and acknowledged, both parties discard their keys. If you intercept one of these messages, no one will ever have a way of decrypting it. The only way to get the information is to double back and beat it out of one of them.
Fourthly it hands control back to a pilot in an unexpected or uncontrollable scenario ... just like an aircraft autopilot.
When an aircraft autopilot detects a problem at cruising altitude, the pilot usually has at least several 10s of seconds if not minutes to assess the situation and correct the issue. When a "problem" occurs on the ground, traveling 65mph, with obstacles all around you, you have fractions of a second to react. If an autonomous system hands control over to you in that situation, you are fucked.
Sorry, but no. It does NOT matter what "everyone" thinks something means. If they're too stupid or lazy to look it up, it's THEIR fault, not the one using the term correctly.
That's small solace to me if I'm killed by one of these clowns. It's fine to say it's on you for not knowing doing your homework when it is something that only affects the individual, but these are public roads where other people can be maimed or killed. It's irresponsible for Tesla to call it autopilot when the average person, absent any specialized industry knowledge, understands autopilot in aviation to mean "the plane flies by itself". Of course when that term is applied to an automobile, they will assume it means "the car drives by itself".
Tesla should have just called it some flavor of "driver assist" just like everybody else. Naming this feature "autopilot" was clearly a dumb marketing ploy to brand Tesla as more advanced.
Security guards are not just a deterrent, they are something that can go after a threat with the full force of the law on an active basis.
I would think that the last thing a company wants is for its rent-a-cops to go after a threat "with the full force of the law". That sounds like a huge liability issue. If the sight of a flashlight and a shout of "hey you" doesn't cause the intruder to surrender or flee, it's better to have the security guard trip the alarm, stand down, and wait for the real cops to show up.
If you are protecting something really valuable or dangerous, then yeah, maybe a more active response is merited, but for protecting a corporate campus or parking lot, a robot seems like a pretty good force multiplier, allowing a couple of humans to effectively cover more ground.
Humans doing less dangerous and menial jobs is a good thing, not a bad thing.
That's dogmatic, and not necessarily true.
I would think that humans doing dangerous things for which there are rewards[*] helps provide an evolutionary pressure against those not doing dangerous things, and those failing at them.
There are not enough people flying combat missions to make any sort of difference evolution-wise. If anything the type of person who would sign up for such a thing is going to get selected against in modern society. Fighter pilots are much less likely to survive long enough to breed than the guy who stays home and gets his kicks playing a combat video game.
You say that like an Air Force Puke, I suppose you also think the F35 can replace the A10 too! Truth is the fight we are most likely to be forced into is more like another Afganistan than a WW III get used to it.
But the GP wasn't talking about CAS, he was talking about replacing strike fighters. Sure, keep the A10s and the people that fly them to support humans on the ground. But instead of sending in a bunch AI-controled fighters in with AGMs or to support a bunch of AI-bombers, why not ditch the air frames altogether? The $billions you spend developing, procuring, and supporting those aircraft can buy a whole lot of theater-wide cruise missiles. Put your gee-whiz AI on the missile instead: it doesn't care that it won't survive the mission.
It seems like more and more our fighter program is just political cover to give the air force an excuse to have something to spend their budget on. Current automation seems especially suited to controlling aircraft. You eliminate many of the problems around visual object recognition because there aren't any obstacles to avoid. If you replace the aircraft with a missile, then you don't need to worry about landing either.
I really hate this whole line of AI driver philosophy, because it seems to me to be largely pointless blather about nothing. We live in a world where gigahertz processors are cheap and plentyful. To a computer, that can take data samples thousands of times per second, a 60 mph car is traveling at a glacial speed. What kind of crazy, concocted scenario are you coming up with where the AI controlling the car has to make a Boolean decision that kills people?
There are plenty of AI algorithms, particularly in the class of inference decision problems where you have to pick the most optimal outcome from among based on many confounding factors, that can take minutes or hours to run, even on multiple gigahertz processors. It's a hard problem that we are still groping towards an efficient solution for. For now, the optimal behavior is probably just stop the car, fast without trying to make a bunch of moral trade offs that we don't know how to model both effectively and efficiently.
18 U.S. Code  798 - Disclosure of classified information: ...
(a) Whoever knowingly and willfully communicates
prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States or for the benefit of any foreign government to the detriment of the United States any classified informationâ"
(1) concerning the nature, preparation, or use of any code, cipher, or cryptographic system of the United States or any foreign government;
You would have to know that it is a government secret.
Note nothing it in the statute says that removing the classification label makes it okay. If you know it is secret and you willfully communicate it to an authorized person, that's a felony.
798 is concerned with intercepting and decoding encrypted communications -- i.e. deliberate acts of espionage. 793 is the chapter more broadly concerned with deliberately disclosing classified information to the detriment of national security interests. However, this mostly only applies to individuals that have obtained a clearance. When you are granted a clearance you essentially sign an NDA that has not just civil, but criminal penalties bound to it, and 793 provides most of the teeth. See SF-312 for a more exhaustive list.
In general, if you are a non-cleared average citizen, and are not deliberately gathering privileged information and conveying it to a foreign government, you are probably not breaking the law if you disclose any classified information that lands in your lap. This is why reporters don't usually go to jail for printing classified documents. This doesn't mean that the government might not try to make your life difficult, and you could still end up in contempt of court for refusing to cooperate with an investigation or prosecution subsequent to the leak. The courts are usually reluctant to go there in the case of reporters protecting their sources, but see the Valery Plame case.
If you independently discover something that is classified, you are almost certainly not in any trouble. There are certain circumstances where the government might have the power to gag you. For example, the DoD has the power to retroactively classify patents that duplicate military secrets. In those cases they may also issue a gag order to the applicant.
So, to the GP's point, were you to duplicate the FBIs exploit, unless you had privileged knowledge of what exactly it was, you are not under any obligation to keep their secrets for them.
IANAL, etc
As you point out, the "lost" codes actually cost them almost nothing since it's likely just an automated back-end and key generation server.
There's some cost because some percentage of the customers that bought keys through G2A would have been willing to pay the higher cost on Steam if there weren't keys being dumped at artificially lower prices financed by credit card fraud. That number is probably not the full $450k, because some number of those customers don't value the game at the full retail price, but it's probably nowhere near $0 either.
If you've hired people who need management into that situation, you've hired the wrong people. You need smart people with good time management skills who are not assholes and can work together like grownups without any oversight despite whatever personal differences they may have. They should also be humble enough to ask their peers for help when they are in over their head on something.
Good luck!
AMD is the one that came up with x86-64 which Intel subsequently copied. Has anyone ever used an Itanium?
Someone at HP or Intel must have financed a pretty great bender for our operations team in the early 2000s, because we bought in huge to the HP-UX Superdome on Itanium architecture. All we wanted was a platform to host our Tomcat web farm. We ended up supporting our application on that steaming propriety cow pie for about 5 years before we moved to cheap Intel Linux servers.
Bankrupt doesn't mean going out of business. If the bankruptcy goes to plan, they can stay in business however now owe the victors a dime.
Until Thiel buys up their debt and liquidates them, I suppose.
As a backbone tech it's good. But home networks are perfectly served by Class C v4, and large corps by Class A/B
Carrier grade NAT sucks balls. I've seen ISP's where every time I click on a link, the 'click' is coming from a different IP address, sometimes from different blocks. Things would be so much nicer and tidier with v6 and screw the NAT.
This kind of crap is why I opted for a "business grade" plan with a static IP. It seems like the only way to get a reliable home connection now is to pay twice as much.
Instead, let peers reward each other. Promote positive interactive and not crisis management. Incentivize working together as a company and getting things done instead of constant fussing, fighting, and crisis management. Empower the people!
GE had this, at least in in my division (Healthcare IT). I forget the exact name of the program, but any employee could write up a short 1-paragraph commendation for someone who went above and beyond to help them out and they would get a $50, $100, or $200 gift card, depending on the size of the solid. I'm pretty sure the thing went through some sort of managerial oversight to prevent abuse, but overall it was a nice little program. It felt good to be able to say "thanks" to someone in a tangible way, especially if they were on the other side of the country and you couldn't buy them a beer.
Somewhere there's an article about why that method is insecure. If an attacker generates passwords using common dictionary words, suddenly your password is only 4 "characters" long (for the example in the comic) and is very easy to guess. For that reason it's best not to use common substrings in passwords.
Yeah, but each word is hopefully drawn from a much larger pool of possible symbols than a single character. Say you are randomly pulling words from the list of the 1000 most common english words of length >= 4. That means each symbol in the password represents ~10 bits (9.96) of entropy. So while 5 totally random characters would have more entropy than "horse", the word is much more easily remembered.
So, "favorite leisure killing customs hosts" is about as secure as "Xc&V4S[Wan", assuming that the attacker knew the exact parameters you used to generate both passwords. Granted, 50 bits isn't the best password in this day and age, but it is better than most people's.
Also, if all the attacker has is your hash with no knowledge of how you picked your password, it's much more likely they have a rainbow table of all 8 character random passwords than one extending out to 39 characters. If a thief has a database of tens of thousands of passwords, they are not going to spend days of compute time cracking your password: they're going to crack all the shitty ones and move on to exploiting them. If you are a high-enough value target to warrant individual attention from a sophisticated attacker, then hopefully you are using something better than pure passwords anyway. For the rest of us, between 50-80 bits is probably enough.
It's great Google won and all, but fair use doesn't really protect the average developer. Fair use is an affirmative defense. In order to assert fair use, you have to get sued, refuse to settle, and then prove that your use is a fair use in a court of law. That will almost always get prohibitively expensive very quickly as this case has shown.
The real solutions is to make APIs not covered by copyright at all, like a directory listing or mathematical formula. I think Oracle should be able to copyright the implementation of Java, and obviously they have the right to restrict the use of the Java trademark, but the APIs should just be public domain.
We don't necessarily know what the long term effect of inhaling the odorants and flavorings contained in these vape juices are. See "Popcorn Lung" for an example of the potential unanticipated side effects of chronic inhalation of a food grade flavor compound.
I think it makes sense to regulate these products in such a way that sale of tobacco-containing products is age restricted. Also safety testing should be conducted to be sure that: 1) The compounds are relatively harmless not only when taken orally, but when aspirated, 2) the chemicals don't break down into something more dangerous when heated, and 3) the various compounds don't combine in the presence of heat to form new dangerous compounds.
Yes, your local mom and pop vape shop may not be up for doing the chemical engineering necessary to perform these kinds of tests, but maybe that is a signal they shouldn't have been in the business of compounding drugs in the first place.
We don't necessarily know what the long term effect of inhaling the odorants and flavorings contained in these vape juices are. See "Popcorn Lung" for an example of the potential unanticipated side effects of chronic inhalation of a food grade flavor compound.
I think it makes sense to regulate these products in such a way that sale of tobacco-containing products is age restricted. Also safety testing should be conducted to be sure that: 1) The compounds are relatively harmless not only when taken orally, but when aspirated, 2) the chemicals don't break down into something more dangerous when heated, and 3) the various compounds don't combine in the presence of heat to form new dangerous compounds.
Yes, your local mom and pop vape shop may not be up for doing the chemical engineering necessary to perform these kinds of tests, but maybe that is a signal they shouldn't have been in the business of compounding drugs in the first place.
So, the FBI and NSA both went beyond the scope of the court's instructions and may have violated the law. "Extremely concerned?" yeah there's nothing wrong here.
And yet I am sure that the court will continue to rubber stamp 99.9% of all the monitoring requests it gets.
Jobless claims is a deceiving statistic because it doesn't count people whose unemployment insurance expired without them finding new jobs or people who have dropped out of the labor market altogether (e.g. underemployed recent grads who move back into their parents because they can't find a job).
The actual labor market participation rate is 63.0, which, outside of last year, is the lowest it's been since the late 70's. See Labor Force Participation Rate from Dept. of Labor. I couldn't save a URL that pointed to the full series, but just adjust the start date back to 1976 to see the graph.
What's really happening is that capital is doing great, but the recovery from the financial crisis of 2007/8 has been largely jobless.