Think how many users get to popular sites by just typing 'facebook' into the browser address bar. They don't understand that the browser is actually detecting this as not-a-URL, assuming it as a query and passing it to the default search engine. But to control where those millions of users end up? Some of those idiot-friendly one-word domains could be worth billions of dollars over a ten-year period. So yes, people can be bothered.
They wouldn't deliberatly add jitter - that would be legally problematic, and very embarassing if the policy were leaked. More likely would be a semi-official policy of 'deliberate incompetence' - under-investing in network upgrades, deliberatly continuing to use obsolete hardware long-overdue for replacement, not bothering to properly optimise the network. From a business perspective it makes perfect sense - when using price differentiation it is important not to make your low-margin, low-value product too good, otherwise it'll start to eat into the sales of your higher-margin offering.
Only low-budget movies, of course. If it comes from hollywood, it's exempt somehow. For example, Britain has a law against 'extreme pornography' which prohibits depictions of genital torture. Yet when genital torture was used to interrogate James Bond in Casino Royale, no police agency seemed particually concerned. I suspect that if exactly the same scene had been shot, word-for-word and action-for-action by a minimal-budget independant studio they'd have at least been forced to cut it to avoid a risk of prosecution.
Blaming Britain today for the unfortunate event is no different than blaming America today for their support of slavery and then segregation. Cultures change. We're really rather embarassed about it now.
It would be nice to have someone charge of the things so unimportant that no-one else claims authority over them, like checking the signage is correct, the staff room sink gets occasionally cleaned* and the supply of tea is never allowed to run dry.
*The cleaning staff at my workplace insist this is not their responsibility. I won't touch it without a hazmat suit.
Such a person is exceptionally rare. The power of the hacker comes from total dedication to their field to the point of obcession. This is why such a high proportion are diagnosed with Asperger's syndrome. They don't develop social skills, because while the normal people were out with their friends the hacker was sitting at home writing code or learning circuit design. In any field, those at the very top are always going to be barely-social eccentrics, because that is what it takes to make it to the very top.
I work in what is in a way the hacker's dream: In about a month the building gets knocked down. About a year ago management decided there was no reason to invest in infrastructure when the building is being demolished and the entire IT system replaced. So we've had a year, minimal budget, giant mountains of scrap parts, and no reason to build anything long-term maintainable. We've got vital equipment held together by chewing gum, our backup is USB2 hard drives, one wing is networked by an ethernet cable slung between two windows because the fiber link broke and several of the laptops have the CPU heatsinks held on by cable ties.
This is slashdot. Most of us have been there. It took me a couple of years to lose my youthful illusion that anything I do would be properly welcomed, and now I spend the time at work enforcing the AUP with all the enthusiasm of a Gestapo officer. One of the nice things about working at a school is being allowed to abuse your authority just a little to put the Fear of the IT God into the little brats.
There is a difference. The hacker is an expert in haste and improvisation. When the network is down due to a failure of a nonredundant fiber interface, the troubleshooter is the one who leaves everyone working on pen and paper while a 24-hour urgent delivery of a new SPF is arranged. The hacker is the one who is trailing ethernet cable out of the window on the top floor and back in on the bottom to make a quick-and-dirty workaround that'll have the network somewhat operational again in fifteen minutes.
.net is the only time I've seen 'Hello, World' take thirty meg of of memory to run - not including the shared libraries. It's great if you want to get the programming done fast and in a way that minimises the number of mistakes the programmers will make, but the expense is greatly increased CPU and memory usage. Exactly what you don't want on a portable device.
I was thinking of somewhere like, for example, Pakistan - where the public for the most part honestly believes that blasphemous or pornographic material is not just a crime but a crime against Allah and a crime against mankind, and it is the duty of the government to protect society from such corruption. They know their internet access is censored, and are to an extent proud that their country is able to maintain such a high standard of purity free of dangerous influences. There's no need to be secret about censorship there: When people see a 'blocked by the morality police' page they are just reassured that those morality police are doing their job and protecting society from the threat of dangerous writings.
An interesting theory, but with a slight flaw: The earliest manuscripts don't say 666, but 616. It's very possible that 666 was a corruption that displaced the earlier number.
Not so easy. One IP may host many, many websites. Usually the budget ones, that don't justify dedicating an entire server. So they all get to share one address, just different vhosts. Simple IP blocking would often block additional sites, not just the one targetted.
Quite a lot, actually. Censorship isn't always entirely secret. Sometimes it can actually achieve great popular support, when the population believes that it is enforcing morality. I'd guess the biggest reason for faking an error rather than admitting censorship is actually accountability - it reduces the chance of detection should one of the list-editors screw up and block something innocent. Take the Virgin Killer incident - most ISPs served up a fake 404 error for that. If it'd been just a minor site, rather than wikipedia, it might never have been noticed.
Maybe you could make chips fault tolerant. You buy a 1024-core processor. After a year, it's down to 900. After two years, 800. By three years it's performing half as well with only 500 cores not failed, and at that point you go and buy a new one.
It's not a neural network. The mathematics is far beyond my level, but from what little I understand it's a natural-language parser linked to one hell of a correlation-finder. It identifies concepts, and tries to work out how the concepts relate to other concepts. If a question contains concepts A, B and C, Watson will look through a vast database and find that A, B and C are all often mentioned in connection with D, so D might be relivent.
An effective strategy. It goes hand-in-hand with the overreaching approach of lobbying for something completly unrealistic in order to achieve a lesser but similar goal.
Talking about tax money as going somewhere specific is really meaningless, as money is perfectly interchangeable by definition. But it certainly helps to get public support!
Not quite. Your ISP still assigns you a/64 (typically) so all your requests would have to come from within that - and the other end could easily recognize this. The only real privacy implication of ipv6 is that it'd be possible for a server to tell via IP address which computer in a household a request came from, rather than just the house - so it could make different profiles for the teenage daughter to see lots of clothes and music ads while the mother gets lots of furniture and household products advertising. But even without ipv6, this is trivial anyway - it just needs to be done by cookies, which is how every major profile-building ad network does it already.
Slashdot Mirror
Think how many users get to popular sites by just typing 'facebook' into the browser address bar. They don't understand that the browser is actually detecting this as not-a-URL, assuming it as a query and passing it to the default search engine. But to control where those millions of users end up? Some of those idiot-friendly one-word domains could be worth billions of dollars over a ten-year period. So yes, people can be bothered.
1.2kbps. Just a tad slow.
They wouldn't deliberatly add jitter - that would be legally problematic, and very embarassing if the policy were leaked. More likely would be a semi-official policy of 'deliberate incompetence' - under-investing in network upgrades, deliberatly continuing to use obsolete hardware long-overdue for replacement, not bothering to properly optimise the network. From a business perspective it makes perfect sense - when using price differentiation it is important not to make your low-margin, low-value product too good, otherwise it'll start to eat into the sales of your higher-margin offering.
Only low-budget movies, of course. If it comes from hollywood, it's exempt somehow. For example, Britain has a law against 'extreme pornography' which prohibits depictions of genital torture. Yet when genital torture was used to interrogate James Bond in Casino Royale, no police agency seemed particually concerned. I suspect that if exactly the same scene had been shot, word-for-word and action-for-action by a minimal-budget independant studio they'd have at least been forced to cut it to avoid a risk of prosecution.
Blaming Britain today for the unfortunate event is no different than blaming America today for their support of slavery and then segregation. Cultures change. We're really rather embarassed about it now.
It would be nice to have someone charge of the things so unimportant that no-one else claims authority over them, like checking the signage is correct, the staff room sink gets occasionally cleaned* and the supply of tea is never allowed to run dry. *The cleaning staff at my workplace insist this is not their responsibility. I won't touch it without a hazmat suit.
Such a person is exceptionally rare. The power of the hacker comes from total dedication to their field to the point of obcession. This is why such a high proportion are diagnosed with Asperger's syndrome. They don't develop social skills, because while the normal people were out with their friends the hacker was sitting at home writing code or learning circuit design. In any field, those at the very top are always going to be barely-social eccentrics, because that is what it takes to make it to the very top.
I work in what is in a way the hacker's dream: In about a month the building gets knocked down. About a year ago management decided there was no reason to invest in infrastructure when the building is being demolished and the entire IT system replaced. So we've had a year, minimal budget, giant mountains of scrap parts, and no reason to build anything long-term maintainable. We've got vital equipment held together by chewing gum, our backup is USB2 hard drives, one wing is networked by an ethernet cable slung between two windows because the fiber link broke and several of the laptops have the CPU heatsinks held on by cable ties.
This is slashdot. Most of us have been there. It took me a couple of years to lose my youthful illusion that anything I do would be properly welcomed, and now I spend the time at work enforcing the AUP with all the enthusiasm of a Gestapo officer. One of the nice things about working at a school is being allowed to abuse your authority just a little to put the Fear of the IT God into the little brats.
Well, if the alternative is to ork your own cows...
This is why Scotty always padded his time estimates.
There is a difference. The hacker is an expert in haste and improvisation. When the network is down due to a failure of a nonredundant fiber interface, the troubleshooter is the one who leaves everyone working on pen and paper while a 24-hour urgent delivery of a new SPF is arranged. The hacker is the one who is trailing ethernet cable out of the window on the top floor and back in on the bottom to make a quick-and-dirty workaround that'll have the network somewhat operational again in fifteen minutes.
.net is the only time I've seen 'Hello, World' take thirty meg of of memory to run - not including the shared libraries. It's great if you want to get the programming done fast and in a way that minimises the number of mistakes the programmers will make, but the expense is greatly increased CPU and memory usage. Exactly what you don't want on a portable device.
I was thinking of somewhere like, for example, Pakistan - where the public for the most part honestly believes that blasphemous or pornographic material is not just a crime but a crime against Allah and a crime against mankind, and it is the duty of the government to protect society from such corruption. They know their internet access is censored, and are to an extent proud that their country is able to maintain such a high standard of purity free of dangerous influences. There's no need to be secret about censorship there: When people see a 'blocked by the morality police' page they are just reassured that those morality police are doing their job and protecting society from the threat of dangerous writings.
An interesting theory, but with a slight flaw: The earliest manuscripts don't say 666, but 616. It's very possible that 666 was a corruption that displaced the earlier number.
Not so easy. One IP may host many, many websites. Usually the budget ones, that don't justify dedicating an entire server. So they all get to share one address, just different vhosts. Simple IP blocking would often block additional sites, not just the one targetted.
Quite a lot, actually. Censorship isn't always entirely secret. Sometimes it can actually achieve great popular support, when the population believes that it is enforcing morality. I'd guess the biggest reason for faking an error rather than admitting censorship is actually accountability - it reduces the chance of detection should one of the list-editors screw up and block something innocent. Take the Virgin Killer incident - most ISPs served up a fake 404 error for that. If it'd been just a minor site, rather than wikipedia, it might never have been noticed.
Maybe you could make chips fault tolerant. You buy a 1024-core processor. After a year, it's down to 900. After two years, 800. By three years it's performing half as well with only 500 cores not failed, and at that point you go and buy a new one.
I think you just described conventional war: You hurt yourself in order to hurt your enemy more, and hope that he'll give in before you have to.
If you were to delete your account... it'd probably stay in their database. Got to have something for the advertising statistics table to refer to.
It's not a neural network. The mathematics is far beyond my level, but from what little I understand it's a natural-language parser linked to one hell of a correlation-finder. It identifies concepts, and tries to work out how the concepts relate to other concepts. If a question contains concepts A, B and C, Watson will look through a vast database and find that A, B and C are all often mentioned in connection with D, so D might be relivent.
An effective strategy. It goes hand-in-hand with the overreaching approach of lobbying for something completly unrealistic in order to achieve a lesser but similar goal.
It'd be also rather hard to oscillate with a time dilation factor of exactly zero.
Talking about tax money as going somewhere specific is really meaningless, as money is perfectly interchangeable by definition. But it certainly helps to get public support!
Not quite. Your ISP still assigns you a /64 (typically) so all your requests would have to come from within that - and the other end could easily recognize this. The only real privacy implication of ipv6 is that it'd be possible for a server to tell via IP address which computer in a household a request came from, rather than just the house - so it could make different profiles for the teenage daughter to see lots of clothes and music ads while the mother gets lots of furniture and household products advertising. But even without ipv6, this is trivial anyway - it just needs to be done by cookies, which is how every major profile-building ad network does it already.