I'd love to see an adaptation, but this isn't it. The movie is a reskin of a completely unrelated script (imho, to get name recognition); Verhoeven never even read past the first two chapters of the book.
You may be right, but I think it's going to take 60 to 80 years for viewpoints to shift from "nobody knows what I did so I have the moral high ground" to "yeah, yeah, your skeletons are out there too so get off your high horse" - basically, when the kids who are used to it all being out there have grown up and taken over.
I recall them coinciding with the baby bells being required to resell wire access in a nondiscriminatory fashion, but not being a close watcher of telecom, I could well have missed something. Which deregulation were you thinking of?
actually, he has two jobs: reading foreign data and protecting domestic data from interception. Experience shows that what he wants will pretty much gut protection of domestic data, because someone _will_ get access to whatever backdoor he wants. On the other hand, anyone who really wants to will use non-backdoored methods to encrypt, at which point reading it isn't going to happen. So yeah, I can see why he'd request it, but it's not going to achieve any of his official goals.
It is, however, relevant to the radio-vs-pandora comparison; since spotify is about 5x pandora (summary), and spotify is 16x radio (gp), then pandora should be roughly 3x radio.
No, the break in causation is that there's no way to show that the data these third parties are using against the woman _definitely came from the hospital breach_. There's other ways to get card numbers, there's other ways to get family info. Now, if they start using _medical info_ against her, it'll be a lot harder to come up with alternatives, because there's not that many places to get hold of it.
In your analogy, because the stuff Snowden is leaking isn't available elsewhere, it'd be pretty easy to show that it was Snowden's revelation that resulted in the harm. But sadly that level of direct connection just isn't provable yet for this case.
nope, the bank is not responsible. The FDIC will cover some losses because the bank bought insurance (because not having it means fewer customers), but above that you're SOL unless the thief is caught and the money is returned.
Yes, but what makes it silly is that the surveillance program is illegal, and punishment should be meted out for that regardless of harm. Getting hacked is not illegal.
Depends on how you define it. I've seen at least 3 definitions, and probably more like 7. I personally like yours, but we gotta be clear about our meanings.
at least with bitcoin the user ID is not definitively linked with a particular human. Everyone can see what transactions were performed, but knowing who was involved is not as certain. Do you think a government sponsored currency will have even that much anonymity?
I thought "unknown sources" was enough to allow third party app stores (assuming that it hasn't actually reached Google Play yet), from reading this. Am I mistaken?
Don't forget Niven's hypothesis: if time travel is possible and can actually change the future, then time travel will not be developed (because that's the only real stable state). Therefore even if FTL communication is possible, it may never happen.
true... but if it were the NIC bios, it could perhaps be OS-neutral, just pretending "yeah, the other end had this in the html that came in, honest". At least for non-https.
lots was added in 2.0, but the patents are about putting modulation information at the beginning of packets, and it seems like that's basic enough that bluetooth 1.0 might have already done that. I don't know bluetooth well enough to answer.
and of course it either has to not run on a processor without baked in encryption or it's vulnerable to emulation. (Heck, if you can emulate an encrypting processor it's still vulnerable to emulation...)
TFA mentions that JTAG can work, but assumes the tools are too pricey for pirates. (Which of course both overestimates the price of the tools and underestimates the resources of a dedicated pirate who expects to be able to actually sell the fruits of his cracking for money...)
good point; I hadn't thought of those. So this'll really be an extra layer of obfuscation (though perhaps harder to get around; I'm not sure what approaches exist for analyzing polymorphic viruses, but this is likely to block them).
Slashdot Mirror
It's not even that. It's a reskin of an unrelated script.
I'm not remembering pedophilia; would you care to elucidate?
I'd love to see an adaptation, but this isn't it. The movie is a reskin of a completely unrelated script (imho, to get name recognition); Verhoeven never even read past the first two chapters of the book.
You may be right, but I think it's going to take 60 to 80 years for viewpoints to shift from "nobody knows what I did so I have the moral high ground" to "yeah, yeah, your skeletons are out there too so get off your high horse" - basically, when the kids who are used to it all being out there have grown up and taken over.
And... where did the click-bait headline "we stopped at two bombs" come from!?
That would be... from the last two lines of TFA.
I recall them coinciding with the baby bells being required to resell wire access in a nondiscriminatory fashion, but not being a close watcher of telecom, I could well have missed something. Which deregulation were you thinking of?
actually, he has two jobs: reading foreign data and protecting domestic data from interception. Experience shows that what he wants will pretty much gut protection of domestic data, because someone _will_ get access to whatever backdoor he wants. On the other hand, anyone who really wants to will use non-backdoored methods to encrypt, at which point reading it isn't going to happen. So yeah, I can see why he'd request it, but it's not going to achieve any of his official goals.
It is, however, relevant to the radio-vs-pandora comparison; since spotify is about 5x pandora (summary), and spotify is 16x radio (gp), then pandora should be roughly 3x radio.
No, the break in causation is that there's no way to show that the data these third parties are using against the woman _definitely came from the hospital breach_. There's other ways to get card numbers, there's other ways to get family info. Now, if they start using _medical info_ against her, it'll be a lot harder to come up with alternatives, because there's not that many places to get hold of it.
In your analogy, because the stuff Snowden is leaking isn't available elsewhere, it'd be pretty easy to show that it was Snowden's revelation that resulted in the harm. But sadly that level of direct connection just isn't provable yet for this case.
nope, the bank is not responsible. The FDIC will cover some losses because the bank bought insurance (because not having it means fewer customers), but above that you're SOL unless the thief is caught and the money is returned.
the problem is that once the fraudulent purchase is reversed (which it was) it's no longer legally "harm" because you aren't out any money.
Yes, but what makes it silly is that the surveillance program is illegal, and punishment should be meted out for that regardless of harm. Getting hacked is not illegal.
Depends on how you define it. I've seen at least 3 definitions, and probably more like 7. I personally like yours, but we gotta be clear about our meanings.
I figured they would want to absorb/redirect all frequencies. I'm just not sure they would be successful. In particular, sub-1GHz radar can apparently defeat current stealth. And prior to 1940, all available radar was 300MHz and lower. So it seems plausible that some WW2 radar installations could possibly detect current stealth... if you can separate the plane from the clutter.
at least with bitcoin the user ID is not definitively linked with a particular human. Everyone can see what transactions were performed, but knowing who was involved is not as certain. Do you think a government sponsored currency will have even that much anonymity?
I thought "unknown sources" was enough to allow third party app stores (assuming that it hasn't actually reached Google Play yet), from reading this. Am I mistaken?
or if it's embedded in a stupid game app on the Google Play store.
Could WWII RADAR detect a modern Stealth Bomber?
Interesting question. Depends whether it's using frequencies that the SB was designed to avoid.
Don't forget Niven's hypothesis: if time travel is possible and can actually change the future, then time travel will not be developed (because that's the only real stable state). Therefore even if FTL communication is possible, it may never happen.
true... but if it were the NIC bios, it could perhaps be OS-neutral, just pretending "yeah, the other end had this in the html that came in, honest". At least for non-https.
lots was added in 2.0, but the patents are about putting modulation information at the beginning of packets, and it seems like that's basic enough that bluetooth 1.0 might have already done that. I don't know bluetooth well enough to answer.
sure it does. Once you're in prison, with no income, you don't have to pay taxes.
and of course it either has to not run on a processor without baked in encryption or it's vulnerable to emulation. (Heck, if you can emulate an encrypting processor it's still vulnerable to emulation...)
TFA mentions that JTAG can work, but assumes the tools are too pricey for pirates. (Which of course both overestimates the price of the tools and underestimates the resources of a dedicated pirate who expects to be able to actually sell the fruits of his cracking for money...)
good point; I hadn't thought of those. So this'll really be an extra layer of obfuscation (though perhaps harder to get around; I'm not sure what approaches exist for analyzing polymorphic viruses, but this is likely to block them).