This is yet another fear based article while it carries merit to it the wording and general presence indicates that there is a vulnerability that can cause you to loose control of your vehicle. It wasn't triggered by the car driving next to you without first getting access to the vehicle physically, and it could possibly be exploited by a another vendors third party plugin.
Yet this is the same type of article that helps to fuel the auto industry in it's goal WRT the DMCA. They maintain that allowing anyone access to the ECU and the on-board networks of the vehicle creates a major security risk. This is all true but but this form of "MASS" presentation "Remotely cut the brakes!" helps to stifle the claims that the automakers are only trying to protect a future revenue stream. But gives them even more ammunition to lock odb-II and begin making it so you can access nothing in the vehicle.
you have to remember most specs have also relied on over lapping and shared channel maps. So the more networks your device can see the more impact you will suffer. At the same time the "RECEIVER" is the bigger problem, the transmitter only has limited capabilities to try and get the packets to you, it's upto the receiver to be able to decode it and put it back together. You also have to remember that in almost every case of "marketed" and or "consumer spec" the throughput is measured and tested with UDP traffic. As this becomes a calculation of raw packets per second at a specific size without scaling and takes alot of the "logic" behind cleaning up the flow out of the equation. UDP based streams are more likely in most cases to receive at a rate closer to the theory.
Same thing was once said about Gas. Your strapping a massive storage of energy to wheels and sending it off at speeds faster than most peoples reaction time. I think the one that batteries have going for it over any other source today is that they can be used and deployed without the need of specialized fueling or anything like that.
That's a hard thing to change, just look at DEF, you still have very limited supply locations if your a general consumer that isn't always going to truckstops.
Just adding, yes it's the Mom and Pops but the big guys also have the ability to generate a large amount of revenue from say a Comcast or a L3 so sometimes they will go after them. Look at the IVR patent cases that went around they started big and worked their way down. Now, where Cisco does become liable is that the "topology" aspects is often one of generally vague or generic design. Such that in many if not all cases the "examples".ppt's and SE's of Cisco land often will help customers to deploy "infringing" network topology. This is where Cisco does start to have skin in the game I would think.
Can anyone recommend a good forum for technical and interesting stories regarding the advancement of knowledge in this day and age. And not political rhetoric that's just slanted either left or right.
I want to cry when this is the type of stuff at the top of my once beloved slashdot.
Like others here I can't get the real article and as such must only comment on the summary. I to read this that an agency is being given permission to look at data that other agency's already have. And in so looking they can create a global view of the activities of those individuals and establish an action. Now, I'm not a lawyer but I assume the premise is that the information they obtained was legally done so under current law so there is nothing horrible going on. Likewise, one would assume that if such information was used and then found to not be legally obtained initially it would then be thrown out. Again from the summary I'm not seeing anything incredibly egregious here or even remotely giving me chills.
Sad part is at first read I thought nctc "NCTC (National Cable Television Cooperative)"
In one way is this not a failing of the school system but I see it in a way as a Brat bitching. Just reading the linked article and the "note" that was scanned into it they received she's not being denied an education but being said she can "go back to" her home school. On one hand this is like an employee refusing to wear the badge of their employer or uniform. If you don't like it don't go there you have that choice and can make that decision.
Maybe I am over simplifying this but yea to me this is pretty cut and dry people say "your school is your job" to kids all the time. I heard it, yes the system can be defeated but that's not the issue at hand. It is an issue that this helps to perpetuate and start even younger if you don't like a simple policy SUE!
And yea really "Mark of the Beast" it's her name... so.... I hope she never gets a drivers license, a Library card, or a Passport! I simply can't see her side.
Not be Mr negativity, but this is some of the reason why many say that NASA is becoming a failed experiment not worthy of federal funding. I don't mean to discount what they do and what they have done. But sometimes, they spend far more effort engineering than actually producing which is what makes it really hard to secure public buy-in over time.
You can re-supply a mission to the planet, you can accomplish many things but NASA's model of 6 years development for a 20 year mission isn't closing the gap fast enough to keep public interested in what they are doing. Really, do you *need* to plan a 3 year mission, no, your intentionally adding a layer of complexity to try and make everything into one bubble. NASA's hayday of accomplishment where they had massive amount of public interest was because everyday people saw the things that they were doing. They took chances (measured) and didn't engineer everything to death. They simply need to get out of their own way long enough for people to actually feel inspired by them.
Like the one person mentioned about renewing. There should be a limitation based on how long you have to file a case of infringement and that time should be relatively short. To often are we seeing patents dated from 5 years ago and people begin going after deployments that are common space 6 years later. Look the suits filed against voip providers for various things. Referencing materials thought of a long time ago been deployed now for 6 years but someone picked it up in a acquisition and decided to go after it.
Likewise you shouldn't be able to go after a company for using something that you didn't even own at the time you purchased it. For a sadly stupid example if I memory a corpse I shouldn't be able to then sue for wrongful death.
While I agree with you this is also the problem of the day we live in. To much information allows people to make non practical decisions. Several of the vaccines are known to cause severe side affects. And life altering complications for that child who was before that vaccine healthy and doing just fine, people see these "horror" stories and can't manage to take that "risk" along with their children. My wife was one of these and I had to talk and carry a long conversation with her about it needless to say the vaccines happened after we talked through it. But people often don't understand their true odds and can only focus on the "OMG" factor.
Depending on the field and where you your going you really should have it. CS covers a broad area, like many tech companies hiring an "computer guy" require a CS degree in the qualifications. The reality and they know it, that's not what they need, software companies love to say you have to have a CS degree but then you find out they are developing with perl. Really CS for a perl scripty job? Having the math base puts you at the bottom of the technology tower, that foundation where everything is put ontop of it.
A pure example, while not 100% relative, ask your "IT guy" (admittedly many not all companies consider IT your desktop support) how a CPU truely works. While they are a smart man or woman and solve many problems they very often have no idea the foundation of how things a layer bellow works. But the stronger your base is the further down that tower you go, and the farther down it you are in the future you can easily move to any place above it.
Would it be simply safe to say that the//internet// was not created by a person, a business, or a group. But it was created by *us*, us being people from around the world all giving rise to inovations, Individual's solving problems figuring out how to accomplish something. Just as easily you can give a HUGE amount of Credit to Paul M. and Paul V. for their respective works. You can give credit a large number of people but the internet even today exists in large as an//agreement// a handshake among peers of how things should work, and what we will do with it. There are stringent standards underneath but so much of it is changing so much that I don't think you can ever give credit to an individual group or organization. Doing so is more paramount to accrediting the creation of the car to that of the wheel. It started a process that evolved across several to become what it is today.
Everyone deserves credit. I don't see one person as the definitive "creator".
I disagree, I think that there is potential for things like this and we really are starting to glance the surface of what can be done when information can be readily snapped to the user without them even asking about it. In BioMed alone this form of technology can bring alot to the table. You wear a pair of//safety// glasses. as you enter a room the camera see's room number or a bar-code and snaps to your display the information on that patient without even looking. Even simple things like names or allergic reactions.
In Construction if you have a 3d blueprint you walk through the skeleton of a site and you see the plumbing that isn't yet installed on the display and an realize that 3 days earlier a cross member was installed in the wrong place. You can correct it now or advise the plumber in advance of a change keeping the project on track.
Likewise though, if you start out small then//larger// implementations become even simpler using the same technology they can easily expand to other fields having already licked the miniaturization.
hell map a large datacenter and "I need to find server XYZ, follow the yellow line!"
DIY kiddies, call a central company I'm installing X. They bring up your video feed and can football style draw circles lines and point to the part and help you through whatever has gotcha buggered.
"Seems correct. You can get people to go to a concert for anything - look at all the dubstep musicians who show up, press a few buttons on a computer, and bam. Music."
I keep seeing this said and referring to concerts and I have to say, I disagree 100%. The Concerts should *NOT* be seen as the money making revenue stream for these artists. It is but certainly not all of them there is a good reason why these are often called "Promotional Tours" they promote their album their image their style but that ticket price is serving the to pay the facility first!
Now that said, I hate concerts, I find them boring and tiring I have zero interest in going to listen to the song that I just listened to in the car. If I enjoy their music I have no problem paying for it. As a fan of $artist your saying they have no place to make money from me unless I goto a concert. That's just not correct.
Yes Copyrights might be excessive, but really you created something that others enjoy. You should be able to profit from that, just as an earlier post commented on artists of old not making money, several of them wanted to, but their talents were not appreciated till they passed. Bottom line it's a capitalistic society we live in. There is no such thing as "fair" or "even" if there were all houses would be the same, cost the same and all individual income would be capped at X. Your boss would make what you do.. you would make as much as that guy in your job who you hate because you work three times harder than he does but your paid the same. It's simple really...
xrandr.... ever since 11.04 it seems (if not even earlier) they incorporated the version of X that has broken bound checking. So use on small screens and trying to use scaling or panning is broken. I have a netbook and I had to wipe it after upgrading from LTS.. to find it broken... To upgrade to the next release... still broken.. to upgrade to the next release still broken.
Maybe I can give it a try if they got all that worked. out.
(Yes I freely admit to being to lazy to build my own X server.)
Requiring whisper net's for remote storage of the information. Allowing data retrieval and warrant collection without having to physical access to the vehicle.
Personally I'm often annoyed that I can't//easily// get access to car systems and that I'm forced to use the system in a very specific way. I'd love it if the systems on a car are far more user settable via more simple means. Yes you can get into it but I think that auto manufactures are to (and I hate to admit it rightfully) concerned about people making mistakes and causing major fatalities and the ensuing lawsuit. Enough so that access for people who have a reasonable understanding just isn't available.
He references some of the experiments that have been done on security in cars and the papers issued by a few universities in different tests. Obviously it's different and yes nothing is secure but I think automakes have simpler concerns around this same problem with opensource cars that are user configurable.
Read Jailbroken iphone with default root pw worms.
I think to a degree you are right. But there is a great deal to physics which as much imagination and wimsey as there is evidence to support it. But when you start to take the macro view and say it's the study of everything then naming becomes important. Considering the orbiting characteristics of an electron are suspected to be unknown. As mentioned in later comments the idea that you can't know where it is until you measure it and thereby change it's path making it impossible to know where it's going to be.
I don't know that I would have used "split" in this context but in an article that's also to be understood by a more broad public I would love to get access to this article outside of the paywall. But Oh well..
But being able to understand and know the orbiting characteristics of the electrons in the cloud would be fantastic. Understanding how that possible orbit affects the interaction with other particles.
(BTW please correct me if I've miss-represented something)
I mean really, you can't drive adoption with a $60 bulb. Most people at the store going I've got 3 bulbs out are going to go "hrm $15 dollars or $180" Which do you think they are going to pick?
This made me laugh for probably the wrong reason.. Companies don't know the difference either. The age old Jr web admin job posting requiring a computer science degree. An office IT LAN technician requiring a Computer science degree, I think alot of people as said all through the comments jump into computer science's not realizing what exactly it is. Because they want that IT job out of school, or because they want to be the next zero-cool.
Heck, most IT people now-a-days don't have any comprehension of how a CPU works.
Slashdot Mirror
This is yet another fear based article while it carries merit to it the wording and general presence indicates that there is a vulnerability that can cause you to loose control of your vehicle. It wasn't triggered by the car driving next to you without first getting access to the vehicle physically, and it could possibly be exploited by a another vendors third party plugin.
Yet this is the same type of article that helps to fuel the auto industry in it's goal WRT the DMCA. They maintain that allowing anyone access to the ECU and the on-board networks of the vehicle creates a major security risk. This is all true but but this form of "MASS" presentation "Remotely cut the brakes!" helps to stifle the claims that the automakers are only trying to protect a future revenue stream. But gives them even more ammunition to lock odb-II and begin making it so you can access nothing in the vehicle.
you have to remember most specs have also relied on over lapping and shared channel maps. So the more networks your device can see the more impact you will suffer. At the same time the "RECEIVER" is the bigger problem, the transmitter only has limited capabilities to try and get the packets to you, it's upto the receiver to be able to decode it and put it back together. You also have to remember that in almost every case of "marketed" and or "consumer spec" the throughput is measured and tested with UDP traffic. As this becomes a calculation of raw packets per second at a specific size without scaling and takes alot of the "logic" behind cleaning up the flow out of the equation. UDP based streams are more likely in most cases to receive at a rate closer to the theory.
Same thing was once said about Gas. Your strapping a massive storage of energy to wheels and sending it off at speeds faster than most peoples reaction time. I think the one that batteries have going for it over any other source today is that they can be used and deployed without the need of specialized fueling or anything like that.
That's a hard thing to change, just look at DEF, you still have very limited supply locations if your a general consumer that isn't always going to truckstops.
Just adding, yes it's the Mom and Pops but the big guys also have the ability to generate a large amount of revenue from say a Comcast or a L3 so sometimes they will go after them. Look at the IVR patent cases that went around they started big and worked their way down. Now, where Cisco does become liable is that the "topology" aspects is often one of generally vague or generic design. Such that in many if not all cases the "examples" .ppt's and SE's of Cisco land often will help customers to deploy "infringing" network topology. This is where Cisco does start to have skin in the game I would think.
Fair point sir.
Can anyone recommend a good forum for technical and interesting stories regarding the advancement of knowledge in this day and age. And not political rhetoric that's just slanted either left or right.
I want to cry when this is the type of stuff at the top of my once beloved slashdot.
Like others here I can't get the real article and as such must only comment on the summary. I to read this that an agency is being given permission to look at data that other agency's already have. And in so looking they can create a global view of the activities of those individuals and establish an action. Now, I'm not a lawyer but I assume the premise is that the information they obtained was legally done so under current law so there is nothing horrible going on. Likewise, one would assume that if such information was used and then found to not be legally obtained initially it would then be thrown out. Again from the summary I'm not seeing anything incredibly egregious here or even remotely giving me chills.
Sad part is at first read I thought nctc "NCTC (National Cable Television Cooperative)"
dry land is not a myth! I've seen it! :)
sorry couldn't help it
In one way is this not a failing of the school system but I see it in a way as a Brat bitching. Just reading the linked article and the "note" that was scanned into it they received she's not being denied an education but being said she can "go back to" her home school. On one hand this is like an employee refusing to wear the badge of their employer or uniform. If you don't like it don't go there you have that choice and can make that decision.
Maybe I am over simplifying this but yea to me this is pretty cut and dry people say "your school is your job" to kids all the time. I heard it, yes the system can be defeated but that's not the issue at hand. It is an issue that this helps to perpetuate and start even younger if you don't like a simple policy SUE!
And yea really "Mark of the Beast" it's her name... so.... I hope she never gets a drivers license, a Library card, or a Passport! I simply can't see her side.
yea will it run Doom!
Not be Mr negativity, but this is some of the reason why many say that NASA is becoming a failed experiment not worthy of federal funding. I don't mean to discount what they do and what they have done. But sometimes, they spend far more effort engineering than actually producing which is what makes it really hard to secure public buy-in over time.
You can re-supply a mission to the planet, you can accomplish many things but NASA's model of 6 years development for a 20 year mission isn't closing the gap fast enough to keep public interested in what they are doing. Really, do you *need* to plan a 3 year mission, no, your intentionally adding a layer of complexity to try and make everything into one bubble. NASA's hayday of accomplishment where they had massive amount of public interest was because everyday people saw the things that they were doing. They took chances (measured) and didn't engineer everything to death. They simply need to get out of their own way long enough for people to actually feel inspired by them.
Like the one person mentioned about renewing. There should be a limitation based on how long you have to file a case of infringement and that time should be relatively short. To often are we seeing patents dated from 5 years ago and people begin going after deployments that are common space 6 years later. Look the suits filed against voip providers for various things. Referencing materials thought of a long time ago been deployed now for 6 years but someone picked it up in a acquisition and decided to go after it.
Likewise you shouldn't be able to go after a company for using something that you didn't even own at the time you purchased it. For a sadly stupid example if I memory a corpse I shouldn't be able to then sue for wrongful death.
Because stupid people historically have been easier to control. It helps you to maintain your power.
While I agree with you this is also the problem of the day we live in. To much information allows people to make non practical decisions. Several of the vaccines are known to cause severe side affects. And life altering complications for that child who was before that vaccine healthy and doing just fine, people see these "horror" stories and can't manage to take that "risk" along with their children. My wife was one of these and I had to talk and carry a long conversation with her about it needless to say the vaccines happened after we talked through it. But people often don't understand their true odds and can only focus on the "OMG" factor.
Yes,
Depending on the field and where you your going you really should have it. CS covers a broad area, like many tech companies hiring an "computer guy" require a CS degree in the qualifications. The reality and they know it, that's not what they need, software companies love to say you have to have a CS degree but then you find out they are developing with perl. Really CS for a perl scripty job? Having the math base puts you at the bottom of the technology tower, that foundation where everything is put ontop of it.
A pure example, while not 100% relative, ask your "IT guy" (admittedly many not all companies consider IT your desktop support) how a CPU truely works. While they are a smart man or woman and solve many problems they very often have no idea the foundation of how things a layer bellow works. But the stronger your base is the further down that tower you go, and the farther down it you are in the future you can easily move to any place above it.
First comment I see is on caps. For second there I thought I was on dslreports.
Would it be simply safe to say that the //internet// was not created by a person, a business, or a group. But it was created by *us*, us being people from around the world all giving rise to inovations, Individual's solving problems figuring out how to accomplish something. Just as easily you can give a HUGE amount of Credit to Paul M. and Paul V. for their respective works. You can give credit a large number of people but the internet even today exists in large as an //agreement// a handshake among peers of how things should work, and what we will do with it. There are stringent standards underneath but so much of it is changing so much that I don't think you can ever give credit to an individual group or organization. Doing so is more paramount to accrediting the creation of the car to that of the wheel. It started a process that evolved across several to become what it is today.
Everyone deserves credit. I don't see one person as the definitive "creator".
Just my .02 worth
I disagree, I think that there is potential for things like this and we really are starting to glance the surface of what can be done when information can be readily snapped to the user without them even asking about it. In BioMed alone this form of technology can bring alot to the table. You wear a pair of //safety// glasses. as you enter a room the camera see's room number or a bar-code and snaps to your display the information on that patient without even looking. Even simple things like names or allergic reactions.
In Construction if you have a 3d blueprint you walk through the skeleton of a site and you see the plumbing that isn't yet installed on the display and an realize that 3 days earlier a cross member was installed in the wrong place. You can correct it now or advise the plumber in advance of a change keeping the project on track.
Likewise though, if you start out small then //larger// implementations become even simpler using the same technology they can easily expand to other fields having already licked the miniaturization.
hell map a large datacenter and "I need to find server XYZ, follow the yellow line!"
DIY kiddies, call a central company I'm installing X. They bring up your video feed and can football style draw circles lines and point to the part and help you through whatever has gotcha buggered.
"Seems correct. You can get people to go to a concert for anything - look at all the dubstep musicians who show up, press a few buttons on a computer, and bam. Music."
I keep seeing this said and referring to concerts and I have to say, I disagree 100%. The Concerts should *NOT* be seen as the money making revenue stream for these artists. It is but certainly not all of them there is a good reason why these are often called "Promotional Tours" they promote their album their image their style but that ticket price is serving the to pay the facility first!
Now that said, I hate concerts, I find them boring and tiring I have zero interest in going to listen to the song that I just listened to in the car. If I enjoy their music I have no problem paying for it. As a fan of $artist your saying they have no place to make money from me unless I goto a concert. That's just not correct.
Yes Copyrights might be excessive, but really you created something that others enjoy. You should be able to profit from that, just as an earlier post commented on artists of old not making money, several of them wanted to, but their talents were not appreciated till they passed. Bottom line it's a capitalistic society we live in. There is no such thing as "fair" or "even" if there were all houses would be the same, cost the same and all individual income would be capped at X. Your boss would make what you do.. you would make as much as that guy in your job who you hate because you work three times harder than he does but your paid the same. It's simple really...
(yes I know TLDR)
xrandr.... ever since 11.04 it seems (if not even earlier) they incorporated the version of X that has broken bound checking. So use on small screens and trying to use scaling or panning is broken. I have a netbook and I had to wipe it after upgrading from LTS.. to find it broken... To upgrade to the next release... still broken.. to upgrade to the next release still broken.
Maybe I can give it a try if they got all that worked. out.
(Yes I freely admit to being to lazy to build my own X server.)
Requiring whisper net's for remote storage of the information. Allowing data retrieval and warrant collection without having to physical access to the vehicle.
Personally I'm often annoyed that I can't //easily// get access to car systems and that I'm forced to use the system in a very specific way. I'd love it if the systems on a car are far more user settable via more simple means. Yes you can get into it but I think that auto manufactures are to (and I hate to admit it rightfully) concerned about people making mistakes and causing major fatalities and the ensuing lawsuit. Enough so that access for people who have a reasonable understanding just isn't available.
Although at the same time you start to think about people defeating aspects of the cars.
http://www.ted.com/talks/avi_rubin_all_your_devices_can_be_hacked.html
He references some of the experiments that have been done on security in cars and the papers issued by a few universities in different tests. Obviously it's different and yes nothing is secure but I think automakes have simpler concerns around this same problem with opensource cars that are user configurable.
Read Jailbroken iphone with default root pw worms.
I think to a degree you are right. But there is a great deal to physics which as much imagination and wimsey as there is evidence to support it. But when you start to take the macro view and say it's the study of everything then naming becomes important. Considering the orbiting characteristics of an electron are suspected to be unknown. As mentioned in later comments the idea that you can't know where it is until you measure it and thereby change it's path making it impossible to know where it's going to be.
I don't know that I would have used "split" in this context but in an article that's also to be understood by a more broad public I would love to get access to this article outside of the paywall. But Oh well..
But being able to understand and know the orbiting characteristics of the electrons in the cloud would be fantastic. Understanding how that possible orbit affects the interaction with other particles.
(BTW please correct me if I've miss-represented something)
I mean really, you can't drive adoption with a $60 bulb. Most people at the store going I've got 3 bulbs out are going to go "hrm $15 dollars or $180" Which do you think they are going to pick?
I'd love to know the Margins on this.
This made me laugh for probably the wrong reason.. Companies don't know the difference either. The age old Jr web admin job posting requiring a computer science degree. An office IT LAN technician requiring a Computer science degree, I think alot of people as said all through the comments jump into computer science's not realizing what exactly it is. Because they want that IT job out of school, or because they want to be the next zero-cool. Heck, most IT people now-a-days don't have any comprehension of how a CPU works.