I don't completely disagree, however it has to be noted that if deep knowledge of all pubic actions were ubiquitously knowable and uniformly available such misunderstandings should ideally be brief and their resolution should be as widely disseminated as any information prior to their resolution.
I know this is idealistic and probably unworkable, but all the other solutions are not absolutely possible either. As a sort of thought experiment I'm not sure such a world would be bad. Knowing what everyone is up to would seem to be likely to encourage us (as we ask for tolerance of our own quirks) to tolerate the less destructive quirks in others.
The biggest issue with the current state of things seems to me to be the massive imbalance of data collected and data available. As someone else pointed out, sit in front of any influential persons house and take copious notes 24/7 and see what happens. They are unlikely to bring you cookies.
Well, you can also get the permit and not carry. Having the permit is handy for a number of things (varies by State) besides concealed carry. In fact, I initially got mine for the ancillary reasons.
If anyone could know everything done in pubic by anyone else, would that be OK? I'm asking seriously. It seems like it's possible that this sort of ubiquitous information might force us to become more tolerant of things that are legitimately harmless. Maybe.
I suspect you nailed it in one. They probably all know how to use either Mac or Win at home, many probably can use both, but are probably not familiar with Linux and are mostly casual users who just want to hit facebook and get some light office tasks done.
I've considered the concept of expected anonymity a bit, not a lot, but I have realized the first, the anonymity people in large population centers expect is sort of an illusion, or perhaps we could say it's a sort of 'statistical anonymity', as in what are the odds of someone recognizing you or noting you. There is always a chance of this happening, always has been. Second, this is pretty recent in terms of humanity. For most of human history we lived in population groups where everyone we knew was pretty much aware of most of the things we did, excluding some minor details.
So is the issue that anonymity in certain circumstances is going away, or that the removal is asymmetrical, or is it just that our expectations should be adjusted?
If it were really symmetrical, and everyone was pretty much equally informed in the huge village, would that really be a horrible thing?
People should stop calling it privacy and call it what it is - a reasonable expectation of anonymity. There is a difference but until we could store things accurately and forever in a searchable form a degree of anonymity was never a concern, it just happened as a matter of course.
Of course in smaller communities there is very little anonymity, and I suppose that's the next discussion. What is reasonable to demand as far as a sense of being anonymous?
in the USSR the answer was that everyone according to their means contributed at very least some working effort. artists would do art, the sick would work to get healthy, and others would contribute to foster the wealth of the society as they could, be it intellectual or monetarily.
That sounds awesome, how is it working out for you?
Pretty much. I was amused that the reduced profitability of gas stations due to marginally reduced demand would create a massive gas station die off rather than just cause the existing stations to minimally all adjust their pricing to stay in business. If the price of gas was that brittle I would have thought the Prius would have put stations out of business already.
Ageing security professional, but close enough. CD is OK *IF* all the other stuff is in place but it seldom is all in place, often unit testing and CD and "ship it". For a graphic example of why unit testing isn't enough, spend 90 seconds watching the initial launch of Ariane 5 pass it's unit tests all over the place.
A coworker just tossed her copy of Merriam Websters at another coworker. While this was obviously a dictionary attack, it's not the classic dictionary attack where a hashed list of passwords and the associated user names is stolen and the passwords are reversed using a dictionary of common passwords, in the hope (or knowledge) that a user of interest will have credentials that will be revealed in this way.
A repetitive attack against a service is so easy to prevent it's not even worth talking about.
Wow I guess my 15+ years puts me on a pretty thin tail then. I've never looked at accidents, just fatalities - are humans really THAT crap as drivers that 5 years without an incident is rare?
Slashdot Mirror
Many of the IP68 models have rugged housings and extremely large batteries.
There are a lot of IP68 rated phones out there.
"The laser needs just a few seconds of continuous to set a drone aflame"
That continuous is bad news! Who knew? I wonder if Amazon sells it?
Well I have to hand it to them, I thought getting paid for not growing corn was a good business to be in but this is much better.
I don't completely disagree, however it has to be noted that if deep knowledge of all pubic actions were ubiquitously knowable and uniformly available such misunderstandings should ideally be brief and their resolution should be as widely disseminated as any information prior to their resolution.
I know this is idealistic and probably unworkable, but all the other solutions are not absolutely possible either. As a sort of thought experiment I'm not sure such a world would be bad. Knowing what everyone is up to would seem to be likely to encourage us (as we ask for tolerance of our own quirks) to tolerate the less destructive quirks in others.
The biggest issue with the current state of things seems to me to be the massive imbalance of data collected and data available. As someone else pointed out, sit in front of any influential persons house and take copious notes 24/7 and see what happens. They are unlikely to bring you cookies.
Well, you can also get the permit and not carry. Having the permit is handy for a number of things (varies by State) besides concealed carry. In fact, I initially got mine for the ancillary reasons.
I believe the TSA is actually protecting the continued revenue stream of the airline industry, but why quibble over details?
Last time I checked there was no federal proscription against owning a flamethrower, and I hear they are great for weed control.
If anyone could know everything done in pubic by anyone else, would that be OK? I'm asking seriously. It seems like it's possible that this sort of ubiquitous information might force us to become more tolerant of things that are legitimately harmless. Maybe.
I suspect you nailed it in one. They probably all know how to use either Mac or Win at home, many probably can use both, but are probably not familiar with Linux and are mostly casual users who just want to hit facebook and get some light office tasks done.
I've considered the concept of expected anonymity a bit, not a lot, but I have realized the first, the anonymity people in large population centers expect is sort of an illusion, or perhaps we could say it's a sort of 'statistical anonymity', as in what are the odds of someone recognizing you or noting you. There is always a chance of this happening, always has been. Second, this is pretty recent in terms of humanity. For most of human history we lived in population groups where everyone we knew was pretty much aware of most of the things we did, excluding some minor details.
So is the issue that anonymity in certain circumstances is going away, or that the removal is asymmetrical, or is it just that our expectations should be adjusted?
If it were really symmetrical, and everyone was pretty much equally informed in the huge village, would that really be a horrible thing?
People should stop calling it privacy and call it what it is - a reasonable expectation of anonymity. There is a difference but until we could store things accurately and forever in a searchable form a degree of anonymity was never a concern, it just happened as a matter of course.
Of course in smaller communities there is very little anonymity, and I suppose that's the next discussion. What is reasonable to demand as far as a sense of being anonymous?
in the USSR the answer was that everyone according to their means contributed at very least some working effort. artists would do art, the sick would work to get healthy, and others would contribute to foster the wealth of the society as they could, be it intellectual or monetarily.
That sounds awesome, how is it working out for you?
Google voice has trouble with people who have heavy accents, other than that it's good enough. In fact even with that, it's good enough.
Pretty much. I was amused that the reduced profitability of gas stations due to marginally reduced demand would create a massive gas station die off rather than just cause the existing stations to minimally all adjust their pricing to stay in business. If the price of gas was that brittle I would have thought the Prius would have put stations out of business already.
Ageing security professional, but close enough. CD is OK *IF* all the other stuff is in place but it seldom is all in place, often unit testing and CD and "ship it". For a graphic example of why unit testing isn't enough, spend 90 seconds watching the initial launch of Ariane 5 pass it's unit tests all over the place.
Continuous Deployment is so awesome.
Or in real life apparently. HR is counselling her now.
A coworker just tossed her copy of Merriam Websters at another coworker. While this was obviously a dictionary attack, it's not the classic dictionary attack where a hashed list of passwords and the associated user names is stolen and the passwords are reversed using a dictionary of common passwords, in the hope (or knowledge) that a user of interest will have credentials that will be revealed in this way.
A repetitive attack against a service is so easy to prevent it's not even worth talking about.
Rainbow tables is a way to optimize a dictionary attack.
The classic dictionary attack is a way of figuring out what a password is from a hash. "You keep using that word ...."
I wouldn't be shocked for that to be true in the possibly distant future.
If only we could mix a little of a common element, like say oxygen, with the aluminum, and grow transparent, super hard crystals.
A rear wheel drive with less horsepower can't hope to keep up with that. Less overall traction AND less horsepower to drive it.
Say hi to the Atom.
Wow I guess my 15+ years puts me on a pretty thin tail then. I've never looked at accidents, just fatalities - are humans really THAT crap as drivers that 5 years without an incident is rare?