The parts of libopenssl that OpenSSH depends on are the least likely to be problematic anyway. All it really uses are the cipher implementations. Actually, the fact that the dependency surface is so small is exactly which it could be easily replaced.
I've got 8GB on my machine, and every day or so I need to shut down Firefox to reclaim the memory it's been leaking.
Are you sure about that? Do you understand how modern OSes use RAM?
Try disabling swap, then running Firefox for a day or two, so it appears to be hogging all your RAM, then start up an app that actually does allocate, say, 6 GiB. Then check the FF usage. Do the same experiment with swap enabled. If FF is doing things right, the behavior should be the same, and in both cases you should see FF memory "consumption" drop dramatically when something else demands all the RAM.
If the other program can't actually get the memory it needs (with swap disabled), then FF actually leaks. I suspect it doesn't. (Note that I don't use FF).
Digital is a fad? In 2013? I mean, I could see someone being sufficiently out of touch to say something like that in 2005, but in 2013? That takes some serious obtuseness.
And in protecting it in the way they are, they are of course, contributing to the erosion of your rights in other quarters.
Examples? I see no reason we have to pick and choose which rights to protect.
It's sartorial nonsense as far as protecting liberty goes. After a moments thought, it's obvious why - shooting someone is illegal. If you shoot a public official, the legality of your gun and you carrying that gun is irrelevant. There is no way for you to exercise your right to a gun in a way that protects the erosion of the central liberties.
You're conflating two different uses of the right. One is defense of the lives of self and others. I carry a handgun on a daily basis, but have no intention of every shooting a public official (unless that official happens to be illegally and imminently threatening someone's life and that's the only way I can stop it -- but that would be a legally justifiable shooting). For defense against tyranny my little 9mm (or.380 pocket pistol) is useless. My rifles, however, are not.
As for the expected riposte about how semi-automatic rifles are also useless against machine guns, cannon, attack aircraft, helicopters, tanks, JDAMs and nuclear weapons other than to say that if you think rifles aren't effective against them you need to (a) study the history of guerrilla warfare and (b) think about the political aspects of armed resistance and how the members of the police and armed forces are likely to respond to being asked to fire upon their countrymen. If necessary, consult with a few policemen and soldiers to clarify any uncertainty you may have about (b).
The reason I carry a handgun is the same reason police officers carry a handgun, for self-defense. Handguns are defensive weapons. Rifles are offensive weapons, which is why they're carried by soldiers. Oh, and before you tell me I have no idea what I'm talking about, I should probably also mention I'm a former police officer and a former soldier and a current (part-time) firearms instructor.
Agree with them or not, the NRA knows what is needed to protect their favorite amendment.
The influence of industry dollars? Sorry, I don't think there are any privacy manufacturers.
In 2011, the NRA raised over $200M from individual contributors. Between 2005 and 2012, the NRA received $15M from gun manufacturers, which averages to a little over $2M per year.
This means that the industry funds approximately 1% of the NRA; the other 99% comes from its membership.
Agree with them or not, the NRA knows what is needed to protect their favorite amendment.
Obviously not, since they've accepted some amount of gun control.
Not only that, they actually helped write some of the gun control bills. But that's in the past and the NRA of the last decade or so has caught on to the ideas of eternal vigilance and incrementalism (pushing your view inch by inch, always taking as much as you can get, but not refusing just because it's not all you want).
Nah, you didn't have anything better to do. You're just a fucking idiot who has no idea what they are talking about.
The irony of your statement made me chuckle. You obviously don't know anything about who I am, what I do, or what comments I've made about OpenSSL over the years.
Sorry, that wasn't clear. What I meant to say was that I think the former -- private networks fighting government surveillance -- is more likely than the latter -- government agencies fighting government surveillance.
"It" (meaning the state of the world) cannot be incredulous (in a state of being unable to believe). What you mean to write is "I find it incredible that..." or "I find it unbelievable that..." or "I am incredulous that...".
Vocabulary quibbles aside, I agree with your point. Mostly. There's no guarantee that privately-owned networks will fight government surveillance, or that government agencies will facilitate it. But I think it is more likely. What's really needed in both cases is really strong whistleblower protection laws so that if something shady is going on someone who sees it can let us all know without having to seek asylum in Russia.
Well, if this client is as crufty and badly-written as OpenSSL (which I've been complaining about for years), then you may have a point.
Irony: Where you have the skill to completely understand that a major software program is "crufty and badly-written" but don't do anything other than complain about it "for years".
I had one or two other things to do. Still, I take your point, because everyone I know who looked at the OpenSSL source was terrified by it. Its sheer nastiness deterred people from trying to do anything to fix its nastiness, but everyone kept using it because (a) there wasn't any good alternative and (b) everyone else kept using it.
I've heard this argument since the beginning of time with regards to open source, but is there anybody on earth that could "review the source code" for an entire platform?
Of course not.
How is that relevant to reviewing the source for this markeplace client, and deciding if it's safe or malicious? Or do you think there might be hidden malicious code in your OS that is activated by running this apparently-innocuous application?
You can also throw in having the car use its Internet access to predict ahead of time when there's a potential for trouble, and ask you to make the decision then. Weather reporting these days is highly accurate when it's only looking a few hours ahead.
It should be good enough if the car's AI can say, in effect, "Listen, human, I can't take responsibility for driving in this snow storm. If you're comfortable driving in it, go ahead and take manual control. Otherwise, we're staying right here."
And if you're in the middle of some remote mountain pass, you haven't driven in ages since it handles regular conditions just fine and and the car just says "nuh uh, I'm not moving another inch" then what? It's not like staying to freeze is a real option, it's basically forcing you to take over at the worst possible time.
That's easy to solve: The car should force you to make that decision earlier. It knows where it's been told to go. It has access to weather forecasts.
"I'm sorry Dave, but there's a 30% chance of snowfall along that route, and I can't handle driving in a snowstorm. Do you want to chance having to take manual control or should I book you a nearby hotel so you can wait for the weather to clear?"
Genetic engineering allows us to side-step male fitness problems that occur with radiation sterilization of mosquitoes
Not to mention the obvious and inevitable creation of a sub-species of mutant super-mosquitoes with human-surpassing intelligence and a wide variety of super powers via the well-known Stan Lee Effect. Luckily, even if we do create such a sub-species they'll have a motivation to keep us around as food animals, but it'd be better to avoid the risk.
The moment my Nest changes my settings without me asking for it is the moment I ditch the device and go to a different brand. Yes, there's the auto-learn feature, but I have it disabled and have manually set my programs: and that better be the way it stays.
You should have bought a cheaper thermostat. The auto-learn feature is the whole point.
True, but would a siphon work in orbit where there is artificial atmospheric pressure but microgravity?
No.
Siphons work because of atmospheric pressure differentials, which exist when atmospheric pressure is created by gravity. In microgravity the artificial atmospheric pressure would be uniform.
The most important part of Nest's utility-based revenue model (which predates the Google acquisition, BTW) isn't the data that flows from Nest to the utilities, it's the command signals that flow the other direction, enabling the power company to adjust your thermostat in order to reduce the demand from peak AC utilization, in a way that isn't likely to bother you.
The basic idea is that the utility company can tell Nest that peak usage is between, say, 4 and 6 PM. Nest can then tell the thermostats to turn the AC on from 3 to 4 PM, to pre-cool your house and keep your AC from running during the peak hours. The details depend on your desired temperature ranges, what your thermostat learns about the thermal characteristics of your house, predicted external temperatures, etc. Nest can also try turning your thermostat temperature up a bit to see if maybe you are willing to put up with a little higher temperatures... and the device can learn whether or not that's the case based on whether you manually bump it back down.
Utilities are willing to pay quite a lot of money to Nest for the ability to better spread and manage their loads. That is the main reason they pay Nest, not for the usage data... and according to some articles I've read, Nest generates more profit from the utilities than it does from selling devices. Consumers generally save money by reduced overall consumption as well.
I can see Google integrating the thermostats with other information to make this even more effective. For example, suppose information about your location (from your phone) were used by your thermostat to determine when you head home from work. If you're working late and no one else is home, there's no reason to kick on the AC until you actually leave the office. They could add in information from your calendar as well, to allow thermostat to potentially predict that you won't be going home at 4 PM because you have a 5 PM meeting, even though you normally do go home at 4.
I expect integration with Google Now as well; imagine a Google Now card that tells you your home's current temperature or one that warns you when your energy usage is higher than normal, so your monthly utility bill will be higher. Perhaps you could be notified that your utility company will give you a couple of bucks if you're willing to turn your thermostat up a few degrees today, and given the opportunity to say "yes" or "no" on the spot.
(Disclaimer: I work for Google but the above speculation about what Google may do is just my personal speculation about what's possible.)
Google doesn't build infrastructure. They take advantage of existing municipal fiber.
Google takes advantage of existing fiber where available, and builds it where it's not. In KC, it's pretty much all new build. In Provo it's mostly reuse of existing, with increasing amounts of new build as they extend coverage. In Austin I think it's also pretty much all new build.
Slashdot Mirror
Does that include using it to drive the wheels? I assume the petrol/diesel stats do.
Doesn't make much difference because electric motors are very efficient, nearing 100%.
Grr.. s/exactly which/exactly why/
If only there were some way to, you know, see your post before you post it. Like a "preview" button or something.
The parts of libopenssl that OpenSSH depends on are the least likely to be problematic anyway. All it really uses are the cipher implementations. Actually, the fact that the dependency surface is so small is exactly which it could be easily replaced.
I've got 8GB on my machine, and every day or so I need to shut down Firefox to reclaim the memory it's been leaking.
Are you sure about that? Do you understand how modern OSes use RAM?
Try disabling swap, then running Firefox for a day or two, so it appears to be hogging all your RAM, then start up an app that actually does allocate, say, 6 GiB. Then check the FF usage. Do the same experiment with swap enabled. If FF is doing things right, the behavior should be the same, and in both cases you should see FF memory "consumption" drop dramatically when something else demands all the RAM.
If the other program can't actually get the memory it needs (with swap disabled), then FF actually leaks. I suspect it doesn't. (Note that I don't use FF).
Digital is a fad? In 2013? I mean, I could see someone being sufficiently out of touch to say something like that in 2005, but in 2013? That takes some serious obtuseness.
And in protecting it in the way they are, they are of course, contributing to the erosion of your rights in other quarters.
Examples? I see no reason we have to pick and choose which rights to protect.
It's sartorial nonsense as far as protecting liberty goes. After a moments thought, it's obvious why - shooting someone is illegal. If you shoot a public official, the legality of your gun and you carrying that gun is irrelevant. There is no way for you to exercise your right to a gun in a way that protects the erosion of the central liberties.
You're conflating two different uses of the right. One is defense of the lives of self and others. I carry a handgun on a daily basis, but have no intention of every shooting a public official (unless that official happens to be illegally and imminently threatening someone's life and that's the only way I can stop it -- but that would be a legally justifiable shooting). For defense against tyranny my little 9mm (or .380 pocket pistol) is useless. My rifles, however, are not.
As for the expected riposte about how semi-automatic rifles are also useless against machine guns, cannon, attack aircraft, helicopters, tanks, JDAMs and nuclear weapons other than to say that if you think rifles aren't effective against them you need to (a) study the history of guerrilla warfare and (b) think about the political aspects of armed resistance and how the members of the police and armed forces are likely to respond to being asked to fire upon their countrymen. If necessary, consult with a few policemen and soldiers to clarify any uncertainty you may have about (b).
The reason I carry a handgun is the same reason police officers carry a handgun, for self-defense. Handguns are defensive weapons. Rifles are offensive weapons, which is why they're carried by soldiers. Oh, and before you tell me I have no idea what I'm talking about, I should probably also mention I'm a former police officer and a former soldier and a current (part-time) firearms instructor.
Agree with them or not, the NRA knows what is needed to protect their favorite amendment.
The influence of industry dollars? Sorry, I don't think there are any privacy manufacturers.
In 2011, the NRA raised over $200M from individual contributors. Between 2005 and 2012, the NRA received $15M from gun manufacturers, which averages to a little over $2M per year.
This means that the industry funds approximately 1% of the NRA; the other 99% comes from its membership.
Source: Bloomberg BusinessWeek.
Agree with them or not, the NRA knows what is needed to protect their favorite amendment.
Obviously not, since they've accepted some amount of gun control.
Not only that, they actually helped write some of the gun control bills. But that's in the past and the NRA of the last decade or so has caught on to the ideas of eternal vigilance and incrementalism (pushing your view inch by inch, always taking as much as you can get, but not refusing just because it's not all you want).
Nah, you didn't have anything better to do. You're just a fucking idiot who has no idea what they are talking about.
The irony of your statement made me chuckle. You obviously don't know anything about who I am, what I do, or what comments I've made about OpenSSL over the years.
But I think it is more likely.
Sorry, that wasn't clear. What I meant to say was that I think the former -- private networks fighting government surveillance -- is more likely than the latter -- government agencies fighting government surveillance.
I find it incredulous
"It" (meaning the state of the world) cannot be incredulous (in a state of being unable to believe). What you mean to write is "I find it incredible that..." or "I find it unbelievable that..." or "I am incredulous that...".
Vocabulary quibbles aside, I agree with your point. Mostly. There's no guarantee that privately-owned networks will fight government surveillance, or that government agencies will facilitate it. But I think it is more likely. What's really needed in both cases is really strong whistleblower protection laws so that if something shady is going on someone who sees it can let us all know without having to seek asylum in Russia.
Well, if this client is as crufty and badly-written as OpenSSL (which I've been complaining about for years), then you may have a point.
Irony: Where you have the skill to completely understand that a major software program is "crufty and badly-written" but don't do anything other than complain about it "for years".
I had one or two other things to do. Still, I take your point, because everyone I know who looked at the OpenSSL source was terrified by it. Its sheer nastiness deterred people from trying to do anything to fix its nastiness, but everyone kept using it because (a) there wasn't any good alternative and (b) everyone else kept using it.
And on Saturday afternoon what did the four-hour forecast say for Saturday evening?
Heartbleed proves all of your posts moot and irrelevant. Regardless, I'll still use OSS. Just don't hold it up on such a high pedestal next time.
Well, if this client is as crufty and badly-written as OpenSSL (which I've been complaining about for years), then you may have a point.
I've heard this argument since the beginning of time with regards to open source, but is there anybody on earth that could "review the source code" for an entire platform?
Of course not.
How is that relevant to reviewing the source for this markeplace client, and deciding if it's safe or malicious? Or do you think there might be hidden malicious code in your OS that is activated by running this apparently-innocuous application?
You can also throw in having the car use its Internet access to predict ahead of time when there's a potential for trouble, and ask you to make the decision then. Weather reporting these days is highly accurate when it's only looking a few hours ahead.
It should be good enough if the car's AI can say, in effect, "Listen, human, I can't take responsibility for driving in this snow storm. If you're comfortable driving in it, go ahead and take manual control. Otherwise, we're staying right here."
And if you're in the middle of some remote mountain pass, you haven't driven in ages since it handles regular conditions just fine and and the car just says "nuh uh, I'm not moving another inch" then what? It's not like staying to freeze is a real option, it's basically forcing you to take over at the worst possible time.
That's easy to solve: The car should force you to make that decision earlier. It knows where it's been told to go. It has access to weather forecasts.
"I'm sorry Dave, but there's a 30% chance of snowfall along that route, and I can't handle driving in a snowstorm. Do you want to chance having to take manual control or should I book you a nearby hotel so you can wait for the weather to clear?"
Genetic engineering allows us to side-step male fitness problems that occur with radiation sterilization of mosquitoes
Not to mention the obvious and inevitable creation of a sub-species of mutant super-mosquitoes with human-surpassing intelligence and a wide variety of super powers via the well-known Stan Lee Effect. Luckily, even if we do create such a sub-species they'll have a motivation to keep us around as food animals, but it'd be better to avoid the risk.
We need goodwill now. Money is of no concern when you're thinking of the results of what could happen if Russia and USA blood goes bad.
So, this is danegeld.
The moment my Nest changes my settings without me asking for it is the moment I ditch the device and go to a different brand. Yes, there's the auto-learn feature, but I have it disabled and have manually set my programs: and that better be the way it stays.
You should have bought a cheaper thermostat. The auto-learn feature is the whole point.
This is precisely why the experiment was run in a hypobaric chamber to explain the absurdity of this claim.
Pressure gradients still exist inside a hyperbaric (or hypobaric) chamber, unless you remove gravity.
To demonstrate that the author would have needed to do it in microgravity. A hyperbaric chamber still has a pressure gradient.
True, but would a siphon work in orbit where there is artificial atmospheric pressure but microgravity?
No.
Siphons work because of atmospheric pressure differentials, which exist when atmospheric pressure is created by gravity. In microgravity the artificial atmospheric pressure would be uniform.
The most important part of Nest's utility-based revenue model (which predates the Google acquisition, BTW) isn't the data that flows from Nest to the utilities, it's the command signals that flow the other direction, enabling the power company to adjust your thermostat in order to reduce the demand from peak AC utilization, in a way that isn't likely to bother you.
The basic idea is that the utility company can tell Nest that peak usage is between, say, 4 and 6 PM. Nest can then tell the thermostats to turn the AC on from 3 to 4 PM, to pre-cool your house and keep your AC from running during the peak hours. The details depend on your desired temperature ranges, what your thermostat learns about the thermal characteristics of your house, predicted external temperatures, etc. Nest can also try turning your thermostat temperature up a bit to see if maybe you are willing to put up with a little higher temperatures... and the device can learn whether or not that's the case based on whether you manually bump it back down.
Utilities are willing to pay quite a lot of money to Nest for the ability to better spread and manage their loads. That is the main reason they pay Nest, not for the usage data... and according to some articles I've read, Nest generates more profit from the utilities than it does from selling devices. Consumers generally save money by reduced overall consumption as well.
http://techcrunch.com/2014/04/18/nest-uses-its-data-to-turn-electric-utilities-into-cash-cows/
I can see Google integrating the thermostats with other information to make this even more effective. For example, suppose information about your location (from your phone) were used by your thermostat to determine when you head home from work. If you're working late and no one else is home, there's no reason to kick on the AC until you actually leave the office. They could add in information from your calendar as well, to allow thermostat to potentially predict that you won't be going home at 4 PM because you have a 5 PM meeting, even though you normally do go home at 4.
I expect integration with Google Now as well; imagine a Google Now card that tells you your home's current temperature or one that warns you when your energy usage is higher than normal, so your monthly utility bill will be higher. Perhaps you could be notified that your utility company will give you a couple of bucks if you're willing to turn your thermostat up a few degrees today, and given the opportunity to say "yes" or "no" on the spot.
(Disclaimer: I work for Google but the above speculation about what Google may do is just my personal speculation about what's possible.)
Google doesn't build infrastructure. They take advantage of existing municipal fiber.
Google takes advantage of existing fiber where available, and builds it where it's not. In KC, it's pretty much all new build. In Provo it's mostly reuse of existing, with increasing amounts of new build as they extend coverage. In Austin I think it's also pretty much all new build.