Eh, "master/slave" has been controversial for some time. I worked on a team with a master/slave product, and it always made me uncomfortable. Master/servant would be better, but a dominant replacement takes hold, no one knows what you're talking about when you say master/servant.. I, personally, would like to see the terminology master/slave replaced, and I am not a politically correct person whatsoever. There is a line, and "slave" is over the line. The mainstream media isn't talking about it, but there aren't a ton of black people in high-tech either. And, American slavery was one of humanities greatest evils. "Bro" is nowhere near the line.
Your comment presupposes that managers are somehow worthy of more pay by virtue of their position. I've worked enough jobs to know that this is just not universally true. I see no reason why holacracy can't still have organizers and leaders without a permanent division between management and non-management. I've known plenty of "leadership level" people who don't contribute much and could be eliminated without pain for anyone else. Do they really deserve more than the true workhorse(s) of the team, who have difficulty getting promoted, because their shoes are hard to fill? I think not.
"But this raises the question of what purpose is served by Apple amassing more money anyhow."
Fundamental misunderstanding of how the world works.
I'm afraid the misunderstanding is yours. The point is that there is very little strategic purpose for Apple to amass more cash, especially at the expense of its (arguably more valuable) reputation.
if you disconnect the machine from the internet, or otherwise block the connection to the server that provides revocation information, will the Windows system still see an executable signed with the revoked key as valid?
How can you believe that? Krugman has a Nobel Prize. The authors of the austerity paper have nothing more than egg on their faces for cherry picking data.
What you fail to understand is that there are consequences for everyone. So, the entire middle class has to pay for a sluggish middle class because we want to teach a lesson to a flawed human? If a poor person gets $20K a year, almost all of that ends up in the economy (much of it in the local economy). If a rich personal gets $20K extra a year, that's most likely just going to buy more Phillip Morris or Comcast stock. You'd cut off your nose to spite your face!
I've been called paranoid and a conspiracy theorist for years, but even I am surprised by how directly our society seems to be headed towards feudalism.
Just from a risk perspective, I trust Google far less than a random Chinese company. But, even ignoring the risks in each and looking at it from a technical perspective: Google has more technica prowess, more brand power, more politicians on their side, and they've been repeatedly caught doing EXTREMELYsketchyshit.
I've spoken with reddit users and have heard accusations that shadow bans are being abused. What's involved in shadow banning someone?
A shadow ban is a ban that is difficult for a bot to figure out (in theory, but it doesn't seem difficult to me). The user cannot tell the difference when logged in. However, their content is not being shown to anyone else. It should be as easy as clicking a permalink to one of your comments, then logging out and viewing the same permalink. If the comment is there when logged out, you are not shadow banned. I believe you can be shadow banned on both a subreddit and sitewide basis.
I have one non-throwaway reddit account, and I keep it away from the front page or anything controversial. For front paging, I used to use throwaways. Nowadays, I pretty much try to avoid reddit. But, yes in the past, shadow bans seemed to be quite zealously applied. Sure, I've said some controversial and even borderline trolling things. You can basically get shadow banned from a subreddit for offending a moderator. In my experience, shadow banning happens usually because you merely expressed an opinion that diverges from the normative or expected normative position of userbase at reddit, the so-called hivemind. It's permanent. That account is effectively toast.
Are people being shadow banned for being involved in unpopular sub-reddits?
That I do not know. Maybe someone should do some experiments.
How can you provide complete secrecy of the voter's choice? Let's say I want to buy a vote. In the current system, the person I am paying disappears into a booth, and I actually have no idea how they voted. Better yet, the ballot does not contain their name! Not a very useful thing to try to buy votes because there is total secrecy of the voters choice. The LACK of verification is a feature, not a bug. How can we provide this very important property (unverifiability of voter's actual choice even by an extremely powerful adversary) with internet voting?
This is pretty amazing if they can actually sell those for $9. Definitely one of the better kickstarters I've seen recently, so I am glad to see its successful.
However, once you add the HDMI, it's essentially the same price as a raspberry pi model A.
Is it? I can't tell which bias he has. He's expressing a desire for more regulation, which is a left-leaning bias, but a disdain for Obama, even using his middle name, which a right-leaning bias. I think he's just showing that he's pissed at the corporate cock sucking, fascist pile of shit that is the US federal government.
I think a lot of people don't really understand how the compiler actually works. Not even at a basic level. If I make three different loop variables (int types) for three different loops which run at different times in a function (let's say this improves readability), any modern compiler worth its salt will only use the space of a single int for these three (because they are never used together). In my experience, many programmers, even mid-level, would not know that. And, this doesn't even require an understanding of how a compiler works. This is SUPER basic compiler understanding. This leads to poor attempts at "optimized" code which saves nothing (because they compiler will do the same thing to the machine code) and detracts from readability and maintainability.
I never said that the technology itself is evil. In a world with a trustworthy government and corporations which care about security, this could be an amazing technology. I am a security professional. It's not enough to merely evaluate what the product does. We have to evaluate what other things it COULD do once installed. Western governments are famous for scope creep with their technological endeavors. And, western corporations are famous for their sleaziness.
Slashdot Mirror
Eh, "master/slave" has been controversial for some time. I worked on a team with a master/slave product, and it always made me uncomfortable. Master/servant would be better, but a dominant replacement takes hold, no one knows what you're talking about when you say master/servant.. I, personally, would like to see the terminology master/slave replaced, and I am not a politically correct person whatsoever. There is a line, and "slave" is over the line. The mainstream media isn't talking about it, but there aren't a ton of black people in high-tech either. And, American slavery was one of humanities greatest evils. "Bro" is nowhere near the line.
Your comment presupposes that managers are somehow worthy of more pay by virtue of their position. I've worked enough jobs to know that this is just not universally true. I see no reason why holacracy can't still have organizers and leaders without a permanent division between management and non-management. I've known plenty of "leadership level" people who don't contribute much and could be eliminated without pain for anyone else. Do they really deserve more than the true workhorse(s) of the team, who have difficulty getting promoted, because their shoes are hard to fill? I think not.
Pst, I think it was a joke!
Duh. The industry loves that. If pesky researchers weren't poking around so much, we could all go back to the good old days!
If you are attacked with malware that encrypts your drive, the government questioning your encryption probably is the least of your concerns.
Uhhh. What?
Plus, you cannot be held responsible for things that you have no control over.
False.
"But this raises the question of what purpose is served by Apple amassing more money anyhow."
Fundamental misunderstanding of how the world works.
I'm afraid the misunderstanding is yours. The point is that there is very little strategic purpose for Apple to amass more cash, especially at the expense of its (arguably more valuable) reputation.
if you disconnect the machine from the internet, or otherwise block the connection to the server that provides revocation information, will the Windows system still see an executable signed with the revoked key as valid?
Yes, that is exactly how it works. To give an example of how weak this security control is, Google Chrome no longer even bothers, ignoring revocation lists completely.
How can you believe that? Krugman has a Nobel Prize. The authors of the austerity paper have nothing more than egg on their faces for cherry picking data.
You screw up your life, there's consequences.
What you fail to understand is that there are consequences for everyone. So, the entire middle class has to pay for a sluggish middle class because we want to teach a lesson to a flawed human? If a poor person gets $20K a year, almost all of that ends up in the economy (much of it in the local economy). If a rich personal gets $20K extra a year, that's most likely just going to buy more Phillip Morris or Comcast stock. You'd cut off your nose to spite your face!
Anyone over the age of 12 should realize nothing is free.
Well, certainly not for a prole such as you! Maybe if you were running a bank, we could talk.
How about End This Depression Now! by Nobel Price by Nobel Price winner and macroeconomist Paul Krugman? You've honestly never heard of this idea!?
Yeah, google, surely we can trust them with our data. They'd never mislead us.
It's funny how much slashdot hates javascript, yet it is still the most popular and most used language.
JavaScript isn't even close to the most used language.
I've been called paranoid and a conspiracy theorist for years, but even I am surprised by how directly our society seems to be headed towards feudalism.
Contiki has been around since well before the name "IoT" existed.
Just from a risk perspective, I trust Google far less than a random Chinese company. But, even ignoring the risks in each and looking at it from a technical perspective: Google has more technica prowess, more brand power, more politicians on their side, and they've been repeatedly caught doing EXTREMELY sketchy shit.
I've spoken with reddit users and have heard accusations that shadow bans are being abused. What's involved in shadow banning someone?
A shadow ban is a ban that is difficult for a bot to figure out (in theory, but it doesn't seem difficult to me). The user cannot tell the difference when logged in. However, their content is not being shown to anyone else. It should be as easy as clicking a permalink to one of your comments, then logging out and viewing the same permalink. If the comment is there when logged out, you are not shadow banned. I believe you can be shadow banned on both a subreddit and sitewide basis.
I have one non-throwaway reddit account, and I keep it away from the front page or anything controversial. For front paging, I used to use throwaways. Nowadays, I pretty much try to avoid reddit. But, yes in the past, shadow bans seemed to be quite zealously applied. Sure, I've said some controversial and even borderline trolling things. You can basically get shadow banned from a subreddit for offending a moderator. In my experience, shadow banning happens usually because you merely expressed an opinion that diverges from the normative or expected normative position of userbase at reddit, the so-called hivemind. It's permanent. That account is effectively toast.
Are people being shadow banned for being involved in unpopular sub-reddits?
That I do not know. Maybe someone should do some experiments.
How can you provide complete secrecy of the voter's choice? Let's say I want to buy a vote. In the current system, the person I am paying disappears into a booth, and I actually have no idea how they voted. Better yet, the ballot does not contain their name! Not a very useful thing to try to buy votes because there is total secrecy of the voters choice. The LACK of verification is a feature, not a bug. How can we provide this very important property (unverifiability of voter's actual choice even by an extremely powerful adversary) with internet voting?
No doubt these meager fines will deter such practices in the future...
Oops! I even saw that it had that wireless module on the PCB. Good catch.
This is pretty amazing if they can actually sell those for $9. Definitely one of the better kickstarters I've seen recently, so I am glad to see its successful.
However, once you add the HDMI, it's essentially the same price as a raspberry pi model A.
Is it? I can't tell which bias he has. He's expressing a desire for more regulation, which is a left-leaning bias, but a disdain for Obama, even using his middle name, which a right-leaning bias. I think he's just showing that he's pissed at the corporate cock sucking, fascist pile of shit that is the US federal government.
I think a lot of people don't really understand how the compiler actually works. Not even at a basic level. If I make three different loop variables (int types) for three different loops which run at different times in a function (let's say this improves readability), any modern compiler worth its salt will only use the space of a single int for these three (because they are never used together). In my experience, many programmers, even mid-level, would not know that. And, this doesn't even require an understanding of how a compiler works. This is SUPER basic compiler understanding. This leads to poor attempts at "optimized" code which saves nothing (because they compiler will do the same thing to the machine code) and detracts from readability and maintainability.
Eric Schmidt, you are the worst person in the world!
I never said that the technology itself is evil. In a world with a trustworthy government and corporations which care about security, this could be an amazing technology. I am a security professional. It's not enough to merely evaluate what the product does. We have to evaluate what other things it COULD do once installed. Western governments are famous for scope creep with their technological endeavors. And, western corporations are famous for their sleaziness.