Likely not *directly*. Accidental is an excuse claimed when someone shares data needed for reservations or other partner activities, and overshares. Direct and thus intentional would be 'hey, here are prospects for your tourism/rental service.' And like others have said, leaks are cheaper than plumbers right now.
Hmm, what's the delta between: > Has Been Mathematically Proven To Be Completely Secure and Free of Bugs and: > The researchers were able to prove -- in the sense that you can prove the Pythagorean theorem -- that their approach to online security is completely invulnerable to the main types of hacking attacks that have felled other programs in the past. "When we say proof, we mean we prove that our code can't suffer these kinds of attacks,"
Completely, vs narrow. The headline giveth, but the small print taketh away. Science and tech journalism pays so poorly that many practitioners don't understand enough to not make these gaffes.
Jeez, give it a break. First, it ain't like 'rolling their own' mapping application is as easy ordering chinese takeout. And despite Apple's spectacularly-better scores from security analysts on hardware encryption and privacy-impacted data collected, you declare (without evidence) that a partnership with Apple is proof of DDG engaging in a much larger sellout. That's some serious bullshitery (quotes and links below).
DDG mapping appears to give requested features, with an improved security default to rely upon (DDG + Apple maps put through DDG's ability to filter and consolidate in ways that degrade tracking and provide moderate anonymization). The enemy of Good Enough, in this case, is a false choice of Perfect or Nothing.
DDG sayeth: "Naturally, our strict privacy policy of not collecting or sharing any personal information extends to this integration. We do not send any personally identifiable information such as IP address to Apple or other third parties. For local searches, where your approximate location information is sent by your browser to us, we discard it immediately after use. You are still anonymous when you perform map and address-related searches on DuckDuckGo. You can read more about our anonymous localized results here."
The only element where DDG seems unduly optimistic is in that linked paper on anonymized-localized results, toward the bottom. They say doing what they do makes your activity 'completely anonymous'. Web bugs, clientside code, partnership-maintained tracking and/or any continuum of user activity breaches that veil. But search requests through DDG *breaks* what they can of that continuum by degrees, since they don't tokenize, save and track themselves, and they don't relay request data that helps that. So, someone might track my activity via their own trickery or partnership-maintained-tracking in the pages I visit, but the misdeeds of other websites aren't DDG's direct fault.
Let the employee advise, but don't let the choice be silly, and **ABSOLUTELY** get something with deep warranty and 3 years on an industry-leading service contract. AppleCare, Microsoft's equivalent plan for Surface Pros, Dell's business support, etc. And if employee tries to be frugal and buy a cheap laptop via a retail channel, redirect them to something business-rated for quality of build. You want her to have a phone number or support counter she takes her laptop to, to have it fixed for free and without your involvement. Otherwise, it's like a wounded guy in a platoon: you're both somewhat incapacitated because you're trying to remotely wrangle support to get her back to work.
Be willing to pay for accessories like a dock, plenty of memory, plus 1 or 2 additional screens. Eacch boost productivity vastly.
Funny thing is, it'll cost you about what a mac does. And you'll want to budget for refresh each 3 years, to keep a live service contract.
Last of all, in my experience, surface pros are flimsy compared to business laptops. I love 'em as a user, but you should expect broken screens and other nuisances. 2-in-1's have similar 'gadgety, not rugged' modes of failures: keys getting knocked off, hinges damaged, I/O elements suffering.
YMMV internationally, but in the US I budgeted $3k for hardware and software was another thousand for those 3 years.
boot speed has nothing to do with feeling like a home computer. Tell me more about built-in hardware access on apples, commodore, atari, or TRS-anything, because every one of them had various kinds of limitations including fucked up serial/parallel ports, unbuffered I/O, needed software debouncing on switches, lacked sane code elements for I/O, etc.
Python is inches away. Scrounging up keyboards or mice or HDMI screens is trivial. And WTF on 'painfully slow'? Forty years later it's still deep in my skull that Applesoft's for-next gave me about 1000 ops per second. Data rates are astronomically faster on pi, screen res is leaps better, memory limitations are gone.
I did bugbooks, wirewrapped shit, built my own joysticks, struggled my way through UARTS and killing more electronic devices via overvoltage overamperage than any kid should have been allowed. Yes, dropping straight into a single screen running BASIC and fewer things in the system/OS focused attention. But the sheer magnitude of hackability nowadays isn't lesser than the old days, it's awesome as hell. And the price?.... pshaw, a week of lunch money vs. years of paperboy pay.
nothing so nefarious. 'will serve the public interest' is a necessary condition for RF transceivers asking to use airwaves, which are (cough cough) managed in the public interest. Bumping up the radar transmit strength beyond usual legal thresholds means they need to get FCC (and maybe FAA or other) approval, and that puts them into writing a multiprong request: 'it's only a little bit more power needed, serves the public interest via ____, and doesn't impair existing uses like keeping jets from colliding.'
(sighs... meh, might as well at least fire off a couple rounds, even if I'm not willing to die on this hill): If a traded commodity is at 17000, and you're not sure if it will climb or fall, numerous contracts are possible. This guy sold X in Bitcoin (BTC), and bought Y in options. If BTC values grew above some amount, Y options would go 'kaching' far in excess of the 'unrealized gain' of X bitcoin he sold early. If BTC shrank below some amount, his X sold at 17000 look brilliant, and his profit on them is far in excess of the loss of his options. And if BTC sat idle at that position, he'd lose the $1M, not feel clever for cashing out early, not feel clever for the option, but be armed with new knowledge of BTC having endured umpteen months of relative stability.... yeah, that was never going to happen.
And let's face it, if he sold BTC anywhere from 8000 to 17000 and felt the urge to buy $1M of options, he likely cashed out more than a thousand BTC. Several million in value. Since options contracts cost pennies on the dollar, this $1M contract was likely struck so he'd have tens of millions of profit waiting if BTC had doubled again.
Bracketing like this is an everyday thing for hedge funds. A multinational agricultural company I worked in used to do so each year on fuel prices, so they knew their price of tractor and transport fuel would be between $1.75 and $2.00 per gallon. Airlines buy options when they see possibilities of fuel price shifts. Speculators in currencies set up options that either pay on high volatility, or limit their profit/loss to a narrow percentage. Quants do trades based on trends they think only they see, and sometimes get a bracket in case they're wrong.
I love poking around in gadgets and mobile devices and tablets and stuff, but the most-robust mobile phones I have are iphones, Apple's software works well, the app store is relatively benign. Other things, I hack. But my work phone needs to be drama-free. Coworkers replace their droids about 30-50% more often than I do iphones. Longer if one considers I pass along my past iphones or resell them.
Banking is just one use case. It's not remotely like cypherpunk activity. And the point of cryptography actually boils down to 3 traits: privacy, authentication, and integrity.
When is anonymity a desired feature? Off the cuff: Cyperpunks, whistleblowing, dissidents, espionage, communication between guerrilla cells, snowden, wikileaks, the pentagon papers, deep throat, the panama papers, insurrections against despots, insurrections against good rulers, affairs, snitching on affairs, snitches in general, illegal activity, disapproved activity (e.g., the new societal 'ratings' systems that China is implementing). Like I said, that's just off the cuff.
Yeah, parent's understanding of monetary systems seems to have been created by observation rather than study, academia, peer-review, etc. His rule might work for fiat currencies, but falls flat for pre-fiat currency systems (gold, gems, commodities or commodity-backed). I say **might**, because I'm not expert, nor interested in any sort of argument/research... I merely know enough to know he's full of beans.
Four - Any NFC token that can be read at a distance (to track movement of personnel in the office) lets malicious parties 'hunt' employees 24x7 out of the office. Imagine an employee being stalked for social engineering or mugged because presence of a signal. Whether SE hack or fat wallet, prox takes away the common security control of 'do not reveal your badge to outsiders'. Five - Injury or infection due to the token = lawsuit. Six - Who funds removal upon termination or the likes? Seven - GDPR / privacy implications. Eight - Silence the chip via a faraday cage for the chip. Hand in a tinffoil bag, if you will. Nine - what if scar tissue around the implant damages hand strength or dexterity?
So... new and improved human chip should: A: conduct a 3-way handshake. Have a CA concept, a trusted configuring token, and configure badges to only reply to certain NFC requesters. It'd be like a firewall dropping packets silently. B: FDA / etc approvals, policy that escrows / guarantees funding for removal. C: for item Eight, augment with cameras / audit / mantraps to catch 'hiding'. D: as for the orwellian conditions, one can imagine a pipe dream where the mechanism overlays with 'you only can see my info with my key'. Imagine crypted data held by a data warehouse, but where the implant is a required factor for unlocking this info. PII, PHI, or other regulated information. Yeah, a pipe dream. E: unlike fingerprints, retinas, etc., it's at least feasible to revoke / remove an implant and replace it.
I'm not advocating any of this. Just mulling the security pros and cons....
>It's surprising, to be honest, that universities or governments aren't looking at these sort of issues.
s/surprising, to be honest,/false to claim/g # Claim is offered without evidence, and breathtakingly wrong / stupid.
Quick googling: there are 50k water engineers in the AWWA alone. Thousands more as civil engineers, public health practitioners, etc. They're looking at process efficiency, clean and waste water, water treatment, problematic wastewater elements like hazmat or cellulose waste, testing, chemistry, and even thermal transfer. Which is regulated, incidentally. Some dumbass cooling their building via tapwater and a heat exchanger would likely break laws, since it costs more for the 'tapwater purity' filtration, plumbing upsize, and wastewater costs, than the AC cost they dodge.
What you have isn't curiosity, but prejudicial dickishness. It's evident from how boldly you talk while obviously not knowing what you're talking about.
Lederman retired to Driggs, which is the west slope of the Grand Tetons. He likely did so to enjoy what is **EASILY** one of the most spectacular and iconic mountain skylines in the world, Google "Driggs Idaho" if you doubt me. While beautiful, it's arid farmland adjacent to desert. Hot in the summer, blisteringly (subzero) cold in the winter. It's a couple thousand souls stranded an hour or two from towns with decent stores. Heck, just 5 hours each way gets you to the cultural hotzone of Salt Lake City. Still, thanks to that backdrop, some talented chefs have chosen to be here and we have some delicious restaurants. Yeah, the area's thick with Mormons, mosquitoes and mountain bikers, the unholy trinity. As an 3rd-generation local, let me be the first to agree you'd hate it here. Please: stay the fuck away.
Getting back to Leon Lederman, before and after his retirement, Lederman used to visit colleges around this area and speak. I've met him a couple times. He was part of Univ of Chicago's Physics for Poets faculty, http://articles.latimes.com/19..., a section of physics focused on helping nonscientists appreciate the immense value and beauty of Physics, in the hopes that they'd retain that love for science if/when they became politicians, administrators, executives, or anyone else able to influence how the US funds science. He was a nice guy, and passionately devoted to science. Am sorry to see news of his passing.
I couldnâ(TM)t disagree more. 13 years ago a commercial spinning-platter 158T array was nearly a million beans, and a project I was in offsited (but never expected to use) an essential 30T of that array into a small beige box cluster for about a kilo buck per terabyte.
Now I can buy 6T for $110. 30T is $500-600.
The descent is less steep than a generation ago, but the physics are harder. And youâ(TM)re nuckin futz to say pricing has been stagnant over 10 years.
Just because there are benign reasons for inspection doesn't invalidate the reasons she states. In fact, counterintelligence has uncovered plenty of evidence of Chinese penetration teams, secrets 'sent home' by foreign nationals, etc.
It's a central concept for engineering: if a competitor is making a better product, reverse engineer it, look for papers/reports about it, or (best of all) get the design documents and source code.
The only thing more disappointing than slashdot editors not noticing the staleness of this article, is that the current frickin' slashdot owners & editors aren't VISCERALLY & PERSONALLY aware that Defcon is still more than a week away.
I'm after autopilot. Electric and affordability aren't worth nearly as much to me as my time. There are many things I'd do differently for each X percent of the drive my car can conduct without me. The value of the car is literally measurable in dollars-per-hour times the hours per year I get to rearrange where and how I conduct my life. I can't afford a driver, but give me a car that lets me focus on work or lets me sleep, and a thousand unavailable desires are answered: fishing on my lunch break; going to an event that is hours away; meeting with faraway friends. Just picking a distant favorite spot to plop down and do work among redwoods or on an overlook. Shlepping things and family around. Skiing for an hour on a work day.
For business owners: Autopilot lets shipping firms negotiate 3-shift deliveries. Trucks and cabs run 24x7, as long as endpoints are willing to do odd hours in return for discounts.
Autopilot. All your stuff is already solved by a used prius.
Great post generally, and I agree that Ruby is unlikely to 'get an edge' in scientific computing. That said, the difference in the languages tickles just beyond the reach of that last phrase -- I'm pretty sure the aspects of Ruby that resemble Lisp can't be bolted onto Python. Especially the blurring of code and data (a la Lisp) -- a 'bolt a feature on' response is nigh-on-impossible expressly because that vast range of python libraries won't work lisp-like code/data ambiguity.
Python's great, and as a scientist/data geek, I love working with SciPy. As a hacker, I love working with Ruby. The synapses they tickle are so far apart, they're not even orthogonal.
I've also noted a steady growth in Lisp-mindedness. Over Lisp's 60ish years, cLisp, Clojure, Ruby etc seem to be growing mindshare. Slowly, and in fits and starts, but growing. Lisp's ability to craft parsers and DSLs have gotten us to where DSLs like like LUA are mainstream. There are skunkwork Lisp-like languages in some top tech firms. Fun stuff, fun times.
Slashdot Mirror
Likely not *directly*. Accidental is an excuse claimed when someone shares data needed for reservations or other partner activities, and overshares. Direct and thus intentional would be 'hey, here are prospects for your tourism/rental service.' And like others have said, leaks are cheaper than plumbers right now.
Hmm, what's the delta between:
> Has Been Mathematically Proven To Be Completely Secure and Free of Bugs
and:
> The researchers were able to prove -- in the sense that you can prove the Pythagorean theorem -- that their approach to online security is completely invulnerable to the main types of hacking attacks that have felled other programs in the past. "When we say proof, we mean we prove that our code can't suffer these kinds of attacks,"
Completely, vs narrow. The headline giveth, but the small print taketh away. Science and tech journalism pays so poorly that many practitioners don't understand enough to not make these gaffes.
Jeez, give it a break. First, it ain't like 'rolling their own' mapping application is as easy ordering chinese takeout. And despite Apple's spectacularly-better scores from security analysts on hardware encryption and privacy-impacted data collected, you declare (without evidence) that a partnership with Apple is proof of DDG engaging in a much larger sellout. That's some serious bullshitery (quotes and links below).
DDG mapping appears to give requested features, with an improved security default to rely upon (DDG + Apple maps put through DDG's ability to filter and consolidate in ways that degrade tracking and provide moderate anonymization). The enemy of Good Enough, in this case, is a false choice of Perfect or Nothing.
DDG sayeth: "Naturally, our strict privacy policy of not collecting or sharing any personal information extends to this integration. We do not send any personally identifiable information such as IP address to Apple or other third parties. For local searches, where your approximate location information is sent by your browser to us, we discard it immediately after use. You are still anonymous when you perform map and address-related searches on DuckDuckGo. You can read more about our anonymous localized results here."
The only element where DDG seems unduly optimistic is in that linked paper on anonymized-localized results, toward the bottom. They say doing what they do makes your activity 'completely anonymous'. Web bugs, clientside code, partnership-maintained tracking and/or any continuum of user activity breaches that veil. But search requests through DDG *breaks* what they can of that continuum by degrees, since they don't tokenize, save and track themselves, and they don't relay request data that helps that. So, someone might track my activity via their own trickery or partnership-maintained-tracking in the pages I visit, but the misdeeds of other websites aren't DDG's direct fault.
Let the employee advise, but don't let the choice be silly, and **ABSOLUTELY** get something with deep warranty and 3 years on an industry-leading service contract. AppleCare, Microsoft's equivalent plan for Surface Pros, Dell's business support, etc. And if employee tries to be frugal and buy a cheap laptop via a retail channel, redirect them to something business-rated for quality of build. You want her to have a phone number or support counter she takes her laptop to, to have it fixed for free and without your involvement. Otherwise, it's like a wounded guy in a platoon: you're both somewhat incapacitated because you're trying to remotely wrangle support to get her back to work.
Be willing to pay for accessories like a dock, plenty of memory, plus 1 or 2 additional screens. Eacch boost productivity vastly.
Funny thing is, it'll cost you about what a mac does. And you'll want to budget for refresh each 3 years, to keep a live service contract.
Last of all, in my experience, surface pros are flimsy compared to business laptops. I love 'em as a user, but you should expect broken screens and other nuisances. 2-in-1's have similar 'gadgety, not rugged' modes of failures: keys getting knocked off, hinges damaged, I/O elements suffering.
YMMV internationally, but in the US I budgeted $3k for hardware and software was another thousand for those 3 years.
boot speed has nothing to do with feeling like a home computer. Tell me more about built-in hardware access on apples, commodore, atari, or TRS-anything, because every one of them had various kinds of limitations including fucked up serial/parallel ports, unbuffered I/O, needed software debouncing on switches, lacked sane code elements for I/O, etc.
Python is inches away. Scrounging up keyboards or mice or HDMI screens is trivial. And WTF on 'painfully slow'? Forty years later it's still deep in my skull that Applesoft's for-next gave me about 1000 ops per second. Data rates are astronomically faster on pi, screen res is leaps better, memory limitations are gone.
I did bugbooks, wirewrapped shit, built my own joysticks, struggled my way through UARTS and killing more electronic devices via overvoltage overamperage than any kid should have been allowed. Yes, dropping straight into a single screen running BASIC and fewer things in the system/OS focused attention. But the sheer magnitude of hackability nowadays isn't lesser than the old days, it's awesome as hell. And the price?.... pshaw, a week of lunch money vs. years of paperboy pay.
nothing so nefarious. 'will serve the public interest' is a necessary condition for RF transceivers asking to use airwaves, which are (cough cough) managed in the public interest. Bumping up the radar transmit strength beyond usual legal thresholds means they need to get FCC (and maybe FAA or other) approval, and that puts them into writing a multiprong request: 'it's only a little bit more power needed, serves the public interest via ____, and doesn't impair existing uses like keeping jets from colliding.'
(sighs... meh, might as well at least fire off a couple rounds, even if I'm not willing to die on this hill):
If a traded commodity is at 17000, and you're not sure if it will climb or fall, numerous contracts are possible.
This guy sold X in Bitcoin (BTC), and bought Y in options.
If BTC values grew above some amount, Y options would go 'kaching' far in excess of the 'unrealized gain' of X bitcoin he sold early.
If BTC shrank below some amount, his X sold at 17000 look brilliant, and his profit on them is far in excess of the loss of his options.
And if BTC sat idle at that position, he'd lose the $1M, not feel clever for cashing out early, not feel clever for the option, but be armed with new knowledge of BTC having endured umpteen months of relative stability.... yeah, that was never going to happen.
And let's face it, if he sold BTC anywhere from 8000 to 17000 and felt the urge to buy $1M of options, he likely cashed out more than a thousand BTC. Several million in value. Since options contracts cost pennies on the dollar, this $1M contract was likely struck so he'd have tens of millions of profit waiting if BTC had doubled again.
Bracketing like this is an everyday thing for hedge funds. A multinational agricultural company I worked in used to do so each year on fuel prices, so they knew their price of tractor and transport fuel would be between $1.75 and $2.00 per gallon. Airlines buy options when they see possibilities of fuel price shifts. Speculators in currencies set up options that either pay on high volatility, or limit their profit/loss to a narrow percentage. Quants do trades based on trends they think only they see, and sometimes get a bracket in case they're wrong.
Seconded.
I love poking around in gadgets and mobile devices and tablets and stuff, but the most-robust mobile phones I have are iphones, Apple's software works well, the app store is relatively benign. Other things, I hack. But my work phone needs to be drama-free. Coworkers replace their droids about 30-50% more often than I do iphones. Longer if one considers I pass along my past iphones or resell them.
Banking is just one use case. It's not remotely like cypherpunk activity. And the point of cryptography actually boils down to 3 traits: privacy, authentication, and integrity.
When is anonymity a desired feature? Off the cuff: Cyperpunks, whistleblowing, dissidents, espionage, communication between guerrilla cells, snowden, wikileaks, the pentagon papers, deep throat, the panama papers, insurrections against despots, insurrections against good rulers, affairs, snitching on affairs, snitches in general, illegal activity, disapproved activity (e.g., the new societal 'ratings' systems that China is implementing). Like I said, that's just off the cuff.
Yeah, parent's understanding of monetary systems seems to have been created by observation rather than study, academia, peer-review, etc. His rule might work for fiat currencies, but falls flat for pre-fiat currency systems (gold, gems, commodities or commodity-backed). I say **might**, because I'm not expert, nor interested in any sort of argument/research... I merely know enough to know he's full of beans.
Four - Any NFC token that can be read at a distance (to track movement of personnel in the office) lets malicious parties 'hunt' employees 24x7 out of the office. Imagine an employee being stalked for social engineering or mugged because presence of a signal. Whether SE hack or fat wallet, prox takes away the common security control of 'do not reveal your badge to outsiders'.
Five - Injury or infection due to the token = lawsuit.
Six - Who funds removal upon termination or the likes?
Seven - GDPR / privacy implications.
Eight - Silence the chip via a faraday cage for the chip. Hand in a tinffoil bag, if you will.
Nine - what if scar tissue around the implant damages hand strength or dexterity?
So... new and improved human chip should:
A: conduct a 3-way handshake. Have a CA concept, a trusted configuring token, and configure badges to only reply to certain NFC requesters. It'd be like a firewall dropping packets silently.
B: FDA / etc approvals, policy that escrows / guarantees funding for removal.
C: for item Eight, augment with cameras / audit / mantraps to catch 'hiding'.
D: as for the orwellian conditions, one can imagine a pipe dream where the mechanism overlays with 'you only can see my info with my key'. Imagine crypted data held by a data warehouse, but where the implant is a required factor for unlocking this info. PII, PHI, or other regulated information. Yeah, a pipe dream.
E: unlike fingerprints, retinas, etc., it's at least feasible to revoke / remove an implant and replace it.
I'm not advocating any of this. Just mulling the security pros and cons....
>It's surprising, to be honest, that universities or governments aren't looking at these sort of issues.
s/surprising, to be honest,/false to claim/g # Claim is offered without evidence, and breathtakingly wrong / stupid.
Quick googling: there are 50k water engineers in the AWWA alone. Thousands more as civil engineers, public health practitioners, etc. They're looking at process efficiency, clean and waste water, water treatment, problematic wastewater elements like hazmat or cellulose waste, testing, chemistry, and even thermal transfer. Which is regulated, incidentally. Some dumbass cooling their building via tapwater and a heat exchanger would likely break laws, since it costs more for the 'tapwater purity' filtration, plumbing upsize, and wastewater costs, than the AC cost they dodge.
What you have isn't curiosity, but prejudicial dickishness. It's evident from how boldly you talk while obviously not knowing what you're talking about.
Lederman retired to Driggs, which is the west slope of the Grand Tetons. He likely did so to enjoy what is **EASILY** one of the most spectacular and iconic mountain skylines in the world, Google "Driggs Idaho" if you doubt me. While beautiful, it's arid farmland adjacent to desert. Hot in the summer, blisteringly (subzero) cold in the winter. It's a couple thousand souls stranded an hour or two from towns with decent stores. Heck, just 5 hours each way gets you to the cultural hotzone of Salt Lake City. Still, thanks to that backdrop, some talented chefs have chosen to be here and we have some delicious restaurants. Yeah, the area's thick with Mormons, mosquitoes and mountain bikers, the unholy trinity. As an 3rd-generation local, let me be the first to agree you'd hate it here. Please: stay the fuck away.
Getting back to Leon Lederman, before and after his retirement, Lederman used to visit colleges around this area and speak. I've met him a couple times. He was part of Univ of Chicago's Physics for Poets faculty, http://articles.latimes.com/19..., a section of physics focused on helping nonscientists appreciate the immense value and beauty of Physics, in the hopes that they'd retain that love for science if/when they became politicians, administrators, executives, or anyone else able to influence how the US funds science. He was a nice guy, and passionately devoted to science. Am sorry to see news of his passing.
Maybe they meant it in a "its a cookbook' or 'soylent green is people' kind of way ;-)
> I would proffer that it was a better place.
Positive props for proper 'proffer' parlance in your prose. Pure poetry. Provokes punters pausing, too.
I couldnâ(TM)t disagree more. 13 years ago a commercial spinning-platter 158T array was nearly a million beans, and a project I was in offsited (but never expected to use) an essential 30T of that array into a small beige box cluster for about a kilo buck per terabyte.
Now I can buy 6T for $110. 30T is $500-600.
The descent is less steep than a generation ago, but the physics are harder. And youâ(TM)re nuckin futz to say pricing has been stagnant over 10 years.
Just because there are benign reasons for inspection doesn't invalidate the reasons she states. In fact, counterintelligence has uncovered plenty of evidence of Chinese penetration teams, secrets 'sent home' by foreign nationals, etc.
It's a central concept for engineering: if a competitor is making a better product, reverse engineer it, look for papers/reports about it, or (best of all) get the design documents and source code.
The only thing more disappointing than slashdot editors not noticing the staleness of this article, is that the current frickin' slashdot owners & editors aren't VISCERALLY & PERSONALLY aware that Defcon is still more than a week away.
"That's just like, your opinion, man."
I'm after autopilot. Electric and affordability aren't worth nearly as much to me as my time. There are many things I'd do differently for each X percent of the drive my car can conduct without me. The value of the car is literally measurable in dollars-per-hour times the hours per year I get to rearrange where and how I conduct my life. I can't afford a driver, but give me a car that lets me focus on work or lets me sleep, and a thousand unavailable desires are answered: fishing on my lunch break; going to an event that is hours away; meeting with faraway friends. Just picking a distant favorite spot to plop down and do work among redwoods or on an overlook. Shlepping things and family around. Skiing for an hour on a work day.
For business owners: Autopilot lets shipping firms negotiate 3-shift deliveries. Trucks and cabs run 24x7, as long as endpoints are willing to do odd hours in return for discounts.
Autopilot. All your stuff is already solved by a used prius.
Seconded. Especially since grinding stuff is trivial. Heck, we figured that out with two flat rocks shortly after inventing the fulcrum.
Is this end-to-unattributed data going to have a fat, juicy exception written for fracking compounds? Asking for my grandkids.
Great post generally, and I agree that Ruby is unlikely to 'get an edge' in scientific computing. That said, the difference in the languages tickles just beyond the reach of that last phrase -- I'm pretty sure the aspects of Ruby that resemble Lisp can't be bolted onto Python. Especially the blurring of code and data (a la Lisp) -- a 'bolt a feature on' response is nigh-on-impossible expressly because that vast range of python libraries won't work lisp-like code/data ambiguity.
Python's great, and as a scientist/data geek, I love working with SciPy. As a hacker, I love working with Ruby. The synapses they tickle are so far apart, they're not even orthogonal.
I've also noted a steady growth in Lisp-mindedness. Over Lisp's 60ish years, cLisp, Clojure, Ruby etc seem to be growing mindshare. Slowly, and in fits and starts, but growing. Lisp's ability to craft parsers and DSLs have gotten us to where DSLs like like LUA are mainstream. There are skunkwork Lisp-like languages in some top tech firms. Fun stuff, fun times.
Dude, pay attention; Antarctica is the edge, so this meansSanta and the north pole are at the very centermost spot. Center of the classical universe.
.... Peter?
> ok important question:
> why do you have a $1300 electric bill!
It's to mine all those free bitcoins!! /snark