If you pay Mr. Hacker to modify a version of the free software you use, you are depending on him to do the job correctly and securely. Nothing stops him from building in back doors that give him access to everything and having them really makes his job much easier. You have to then have a third party review his changes and make sure he didn't compromise your security, intentionally or unintentionally.
Because who says they're using what they tell uncleared opponents they are using? Maybe the wrapper is what they say they're using and underneath there's a more secure method that they have never disclosed to the public.
Personally, I'm not an absolutist. I'm a scientist. I think we should try a few systems out, maybe a few hybrid ones, in various smaller test areas. Gather some evidence as to what seems to work, and roll forward making examinations and modifications as we go along.
The rest of the world did you research for you. As it turns out, every other system of paying for health care works more efficiently than the pre-Obamacare U.S. system and 36 of those systems deliver better quality of care.
The reason we pay so much for health care is because the recipient doesn't know and/or doesn't care how much it costs, namely because they don't pay for it. Likewise, they don't shop around.
Please explain why American health care costs more than Canadian then.
If the information needs to be shared with people who can't be cleared, you're misusing the classification system. The whole point of classifying information is that you have identified it as information that is NOT to be shared outside an identified set of people that you explicitly trust. Bottom line: they're making too much information secret and setting the limits on dissemination tighter than they should be and now they want to make new rules instead of just declassifying the information that should never have been classified in the first place.
If it's partly server side, the file you download after paying can be digitally marked with your identifying information and when thousands of copies of that turn up in the hands of third parties or on a torrent, they can go after the person who paid for it for illegal file sharing.
Yeah, sure. Facebook and Google are going to leave California over the right to keep incriminating information on minors. Do you REALLY think that will happen?
Frequently. It's not supposed to be their main area of expertise and they often learn just enough to solve their immediate problem. And why should they learn more? So occasionally they make blunders like that, but a professional computer programmer wouldn't know what problem to code or what analysis needs to be done in the first place. That's what the scientists are good at.
Ph.D. dissertations require original research. However, assigned classwork for Doctor's and Master's students would be improved if it involved replication and re-analysis of recent research in the field to study methods of data collection and analysis. This would make replication and reexamination of recent research a routine part of academia. The benefits for the students would be seeing how other researchers do their work and practice at methods of analysis and occasionally the satisfaction of showing that the original work was wrong. Also, the demonstration that if they publish bad work, there's a likelihood that it will be discovered by other researchers who will refute their findings.
The US government definitely DOES NOT trust Israel and most especially not its spy agency. Otherwise, why do you think Jonathan Pollard is in prison? Why was Lawrence Franklin charged with espionage?
I'll take their word for it that they and every other sigint agency around the world ALSO do intrusion drills against their own systems to see how well they work at foiling external adversaries, such as China, Russia, France, Germany, Great Britain and the USA, and whether they can tell anything about what's hidden in the systems they can't penetrate or that they only THINK they have penetrated.
Connect to the internet through any device you own
Have any online account of any kind (includes Slashdot)
Have any children
Hire anyone
And if you're extremely cautious don't do these either
Own a home
Rent a home (under your own name)
Have a job
Cash a check
Get married
Get divorced
What I'm illustrating here is in modern society people want to have it both ways. They want to be constantly connected to everyone they know and millions of people they don't through a device they carry on their person, be able to purchase anything anywhere without carrying cash, have every convenience of modern life and communications and not be tracked by anybody.
You can have it one way or the other. You can't have it every way you want it if all those ways aren't consistent.
This is independent of the 4th amendment. If they had a court order and you had an unhackable phone, they could be legally able to throw you in the slammer for obstruction but unable to get into your phone. Conversely, they could hack your phone with or without the cooperation of Apple and/or your WSP and be breaking the law when they do it.
Slashdot Mirror
This. Every cheater knows that to stay undetected, you can't win too often.
As the article demonstrates, that's not the case. Sit up and learn.
If you pay Mr. Hacker to modify a version of the free software you use, you are depending on him to do the job correctly and securely. Nothing stops him from building in back doors that give him access to everything and having them really makes his job much easier. You have to then have a third party review his changes and make sure he didn't compromise your security, intentionally or unintentionally.
Because who says they're using what they tell uncleared opponents they are using? Maybe the wrapper is what they say they're using and underneath there's a more secure method that they have never disclosed to the public.
Because if the NSA points out a cryptographic weakness, it's there.
Personally, I'm not an absolutist. I'm a scientist. I think we should try a few systems out, maybe a few hybrid ones, in various smaller test areas. Gather some evidence as to what seems to work, and roll forward making examinations and modifications as we go along.
The rest of the world did you research for you. As it turns out, every other system of paying for health care works more efficiently than the pre-Obamacare U.S. system and 36 of those systems deliver better quality of care.
Pick any. You can't lose.
The reason we pay so much for health care is because the recipient doesn't know and/or doesn't care how much it costs, namely because they don't pay for it. Likewise, they don't shop around.
Please explain why American health care costs more than Canadian then.
As Californians see it:
http://www.delphine-ephemera.com/display/ShowImage?imageUrl=/storage/USA-Map-Infographic.jpeg?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1301444910595
Which has the side effect of potentially drawing down a world of shit on innocent third parties. Classy.
If the information needs to be shared with people who can't be cleared, you're misusing the classification system. The whole point of classifying information is that you have identified it as information that is NOT to be shared outside an identified set of people that you explicitly trust. Bottom line: they're making too much information secret and setting the limits on dissemination tighter than they should be and now they want to make new rules instead of just declassifying the information that should never have been classified in the first place.
If it's partly server side, the file you download after paying can be digitally marked with your identifying information and when thousands of copies of that turn up in the hands of third parties or on a torrent, they can go after the person who paid for it for illegal file sharing.
Yeah, sure. Facebook and Google are going to leave California over the right to keep incriminating information on minors. Do you REALLY think that will happen?
Death only becomes newsworthy when the person is (in)famous or dies in a notable way.
However the creation of a new island from an earthquake if far from an everyday occurrence.
s/(in)famous/known to them/
Frequently. It's not supposed to be their main area of expertise and they often learn just enough to solve their immediate problem. And why should they learn more? So occasionally they make blunders like that, but a professional computer programmer wouldn't know what problem to code or what analysis needs to be done in the first place. That's what the scientists are good at.
Ph.D. dissertations require original research. However, assigned classwork for Doctor's and Master's students would be improved if it involved replication and re-analysis of recent research in the field to study methods of data collection and analysis. This would make replication and reexamination of recent research a routine part of academia. The benefits for the students would be seeing how other researchers do their work and practice at methods of analysis and occasionally the satisfaction of showing that the original work was wrong. Also, the demonstration that if they publish bad work, there's a likelihood that it will be discovered by other researchers who will refute their findings.
You had the opportunity. You could have put your code and notes on how to use it and the appendix to your papers.
I don't know the actual objective ... but if the concern is "'We need to get more code out there, not improve how it looks.'" ... the objective is bad.
Wouldn't shouldn't this be about catching subtle logic / calculation flaws that lead to incorrect conclusions?
Agree ... if this is about indenting and which method of commenting ... then yeah ... bad idea.
But this has the possibility of being so much more. I would see it as free editing by qualified people. Seems like a deal.
That's one of two worthy objectives. The other is to make the code more suitable for use by other researchers.
No, but it neatly identifies which fingerprint to use.
The US government definitely DOES NOT trust Israel and most especially not its spy agency. Otherwise, why do you think Jonathan Pollard is in prison? Why was Lawrence Franklin charged with espionage?
The U.S. government cares. Every government also has an interest in controlling what other governments know about what they are doing and thinking.
I'll take their word for it that they and every other sigint agency around the world ALSO do intrusion drills against their own systems to see how well they work at foiling external adversaries, such as China, Russia, France, Germany, Great Britain and the USA, and whether they can tell anything about what's hidden in the systems they can't penetrate or that they only THINK they have penetrated.
Can you give an example of where a standard garden-variety Slashdot reader has incorrectly read privacy implications into something?
Ignore anyone who uses either the term "New World Order" or "reptilian".
So all the responders to this story http://science.slashdot.org/story/08/09/12/1456248/when-dinosaurs-battled-crurotarsans are to be ignored?
How to minimize your tracking footprint:
What I'm illustrating here is in modern society people want to have it both ways. They want to be constantly connected to everyone they know and millions of people they don't through a device they carry on their person, be able to purchase anything anywhere without carrying cash, have every convenience of modern life and communications and not be tracked by anybody.
You can have it one way or the other. You can't have it every way you want it if all those ways aren't consistent.
Surprise, surprise. Fingerprint identification is rarely secure, some implementations can even be tricked using gummy bears.
Well, sure, but gummy bears are like R2D2 made out of sugar.
Lift the fingerprint from the touch sensor of your iPhone. There's no need to have another source for the fingerprint.
This is independent of the 4th amendment. If they had a court order and you had an unhackable phone, they could be legally able to throw you in the slammer for obstruction but unable to get into your phone. Conversely, they could hack your phone with or without the cooperation of Apple and/or your WSP and be breaking the law when they do it.