Sometimes a single incorrectly spelled word can completely change the meaning of a whole sentence. Possibly it's not an attack but an attempt to ensure accuracy in communication. Bad spelling could be seen as a lack of concern or lack of importance attached to the content of the message. Obviously if you're not concenrted that the redder inturprtes thew messsge incorrectlyt why should anyon ecare abou twhat ewe haffe toe saa? Maybe you're smart enough to take seriously, but your obvious lack of care or concern prompts me to lend little weight to your arguments.
I'm sure the rovers would be completely devastated by an onrushing deluge of a little under six inches of water.
Oh, except it's not a wave... it's a tide, so "an onrushing deluge" is pushing it a little, huh? Maybe "a piddly trickle". But then, we'd need to think about rewording the "completely devastated" bit.
But you're right, if someone forgot the waterproofing, they need to be fired!
Like a lot of virus writers, this guy is a bored teenager... 50 years ago he would have been out vandalising his school. In somewhere between 20 and 50 years he'll have access to nanotechnology.
Format C: ? Overwrite every file? How about rebuild your washing machine so it suddenly appreciates the taste of "cat" and has the capability of acting out it's amorous feelings for your central heating.
What can be done to make manufacturers get their heads into the real world?
How about: Stop buying their crap?
America is no longer a consumer driver society, but rather an entertainment driven one. If something is entertaining, Americans will buy it - doesn't matter if it's really a piece of junk and doesn't do anything more than the one they bought last week, as long as it has some quality that is entertaining. Manufacturers know this and are simply supplying what the consumers demand. There is no need for quality. There is no need for ethics. As long as you are entertaining it doesn't matter.
This thing is using "static ink" - once set, the display doesn't change until some power is applied to move/rotate/modify/change/whatever the ink particles. So how quick is the change? What's the refresh rate? Can you refresh just part of the display? Can you use some external device (a "pen") to modify the the ink? If you can, is the device capable of determining what state the ink is in or is the ink "write only"?
If you had RTFA you'd know they are low power devices and once displaying something will display the same thing "forever" until actively changed - the "ink particles" stick to the substrate
There is some evidence that for whatever reason, some corporations have had enough. From the Q&A document:
What is the significance of the laches decision to Cognex's case? If Cognex is successful in arguing that Lemelson's delay in prosecuting his patent claims is a violation of the doctrine of prosecution laches, the court could find that all, or the vast majority of machine vision claims in Lemelson's patents are invalid. This would have a positive impact not just on Cognex, but also on dozens of other companies around the world being sued by Lemelson (in fact, several major lawsuits are now on hold pending the outcome of Cognex's trial.)
I suspect that it's not only going to be a useful outcome for the machine vision industry but for every industry where Lemelson has patents. Remember that this guy has hundreds of the things.
Point is though, they can't afford to tread water. They have to expand at least so much to keep up with inflation, or they're shrinking; if in addition they're not expanding enough to keep up with population expansion then they're losing market share; and so on. And if they expand only enough to account for these two factors year by year then the shareholders will be at them saying that they can do better than that, and bingo you get a new, more expansion-oriented top management. Capitalism's freaky that way.
Inflation? 4% a year. Why do most people think that a company that grows less than 30-40% a year is doing badly?
Population expansion? Give me a break. The native population of the US is shrinking. Only reason the population goes up is because of immigration. And it's no where near 30-40% a year
Maybe it's a bad analogy but as far as I know the only thing in nature that grows continually is a cancer. But then, looking at the traditionally most profitable businesses (IANAE, but that would be alcohol, cigarettes and pharma)... they all seem to make most of their money from the things that cause the most social problems. Maybe likening business to cancer isn't such a bad analogy.
If the amount is under approximately $5000 (this depends on the state you're in) or so it's handled in small claims court. Filing fee is $80 or $150 or something minimal like that (again, depending on the state you're in). You don't even need a lawyer, but you must prepare your documentation well.
I suspect it goes back further than that, it sounds like a corruption of a scene in one of E.E. Doc Smith's Lensman series (Grey Lensman? Galactic Patrol?) where Kimball Kinnison rigs a very similar "lie detector" using some coloured lights. The series was written in the '30s
Wouldn't be surprised if the origin of both these versions come from the same place (possibly E. E. Doc Smith's head)
I'm not talking about the actual product being purchased. The cost of living affects prices whereever you live. It's not news that any product, whether it's a hard product or a soft product, has different prices in different places.
So it's a music download, whoopee, this would not be news if it wasn't for the RIAA. Not to mention it being a really poorly researched article, they should have given prices for CDs as a comparison in all the countries they mentioned.
How is this news? People do realise that the price for petrol/gas is Europe is much higher than the U.S? That a reasonable dinner in a restaurant in Australia will cost you about $15US, which is really $10US or so? (But you don't get free refills)
The article doesn't even bother telling us how much a CD costs in the UK or in Canada. Without adding relevant information it's just more noise.
Your statement is wonderfully ironic. If the "statistically average" person perceives something to be louder, then the thing is louder. Just because the machines they use do not accurately reflect the opinion of the population doesn't mean it's correct.
Too bad most courts judge based on readings taken from machines.
Systems are software too. The article talks about having different levels of programmers. If you want to be working on an OS (system), you'll need a certain sort of licence to do so and you will be held accountable for any problems that occur.
Your statement "programs are only as secure as the platform they run on" may or may not be true, but if it is, wouldn't insisting that the systems are built by licensed professionals who are held accountable be preferrable?
You're mostly correct that this is all good - and I suspect Kethinov might have had trolling on the ajenda somewhere, however it goes on to say in the article how the Navy was all excited that they could [produce five or six times as many missiles].
(Yeah, I'm assuming that going from 30,000 pounds to 180,000 pounds means six times as many missiles when they also stated they would be able to use this stuff instead of nitro-glycerine for some other things... but I'm also assuming that the other things were fun "Blow Stuff Up" types of things as well)
Is how this guy is making money out of this at all. Who reads this stuff? No-one! The amount of emails sent that actually arrive, are read and then acted on has to be approaching zero. Or is he just charging advertisers $500 per million for email that no-one reads? $500 that the brain-dead advertisers keep blithely paying simply because he sends them an invoice every month?
Security patches are not the answer: parasitical code can spread many times faster than any human reaction time.
I believe the answer is that computer systems will have to evolve something similar to an immune system, based on recognising friend-or-foe, and capable of regular pseudo-sexual exchange to scramble the locks against parasitical code that has adapted. Finally, it is likely that parasitical code will eventually be co-opted (just like the bacteria in our guts) into less harmful roles.
To put this into context: the wars in your intestine started with the very first life forms and have been one of the basic engines of change in evolution for 3.5 billion years (along with climate change). I believe we're only at the very first stages of this process with the Internet, but inevitably we will follow a similar route.
Aren't security patches essentially the same thing that you describe?
In a living organism, an infection unrecognized by the system either kills it or not. Anything that lives learns to recognize it. This is essentially the same as building a security patch. Biological systems don't know something is bad for them until they are taught by experience.
Re:My personal favorite
on
Real Security?
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Your post is obviously a troll, but what the hell.
Authentication systems typically rely on three things: Something you are, something you know, something you have. Password authentication is weak in that it only uses one of these three. But when it comes down to it, who cares if the secret is the algorithm you use to pick your pass phrase instead of the pass phrase itself?
Slashdot Mirror
Sometimes a single incorrectly spelled word can completely change the meaning of a whole sentence. Possibly it's not an attack but an attempt to ensure accuracy in communication. Bad spelling could be seen as a lack of concern or lack of importance attached to the content of the message. Obviously if you're not concenrted that the redder inturprtes thew messsge incorrectlyt why should anyon ecare abou twhat ewe haffe toe saa?
Maybe you're smart enough to take seriously, but your obvious lack of care or concern prompts me to lend little weight to your arguments.
As long as we're nitpicking, can you show your working? My tax agent would really love to be able to get 2~3 from (3.8 - 3.5~3.6)
A couple of problems:
You may not be able to tell which is Mars and which is meteor after it hits.
Meteors have a tendency to break up/burn up in the atmosphere. (Yeah, Mars doesn't have much of that, but it's still there)
I'm sure the rovers would be completely devastated by an onrushing deluge of a little under six inches of water.
... it's a tide, so "an onrushing deluge" is pushing it a little, huh? Maybe "a piddly trickle". But then, we'd need to think about rewording the "completely devastated" bit.
Oh, except it's not a wave
But you're right, if someone forgot the waterproofing, they need to be fired!
Only problem with this is that you still die.
Some other guy that looks remarkably like you doesn't.
And if you're the xerox, you don't remember going sky diving... or you still need risky surgery...
Just wondering if a Nanite complex enough to survive in the wild on it's own would be too big to be a Nanite.
I think maybe I'm more worried that someone will genetically engineer some bacteria and give them machine tools.
(Of course, the bacteria must hold some vague resemblance to sharks and the tools must be lasers attached to their heads...)
Like a lot of virus writers, this guy is a bored teenager ... 50 years ago he would have been out vandalising his school. In somewhere between 20 and 50 years he'll have access to nanotechnology.
Format C: ? Overwrite every file? How about rebuild your washing machine so it suddenly appreciates the taste of "cat" and has the capability of acting out it's amorous feelings for your central heating.
Sort of a naive view of this article. They are really trying to reduce the 360 billion in damages these accidents cause.
How about: Stop buying their crap?
America is no longer a consumer driver society, but rather an entertainment driven one. If something is entertaining, Americans will buy it - doesn't matter if it's really a piece of junk and doesn't do anything more than the one they bought last week, as long as it has some quality that is entertaining. Manufacturers know this and are simply supplying what the consumers demand. There is no need for quality. There is no need for ethics. As long as you are entertaining it doesn't matter.
This thing is using "static ink" - once set, the display doesn't change until some power is applied to move/rotate/modify/change/whatever the ink particles. So how quick is the change?
What's the refresh rate? Can you refresh just part of the display? Can you use some external device (a "pen") to modify the the ink? If you can, is the device capable of determining what state the ink is in or is the ink "write only"?
From the Q&A document:
I suspect that it's not only going to be a useful outcome for the machine vision industry but for every industry where Lemelson has patents. Remember that this guy has hundreds of the things.
Inflation? 4% a year. Why do most people think that a company that grows less than 30-40% a year is doing badly?
Population expansion? Give me a break. The native population of the US is shrinking. Only reason the population goes up is because of immigration. And it's no where near 30-40% a year
Maybe it's a bad analogy but as far as I know the only thing in nature that grows continually is a cancer. But then, looking at the traditionally most profitable businesses (IANAE, but that would be alcohol, cigarettes and pharma)
If the amount is under approximately $5000 (this depends on the state you're in) or so it's handled in small claims court. Filing fee is $80 or $150 or something minimal like that (again, depending on the state you're in). You don't even need a lawyer, but you must prepare your documentation well.
I suspect it goes back further than that, it sounds like a corruption of a scene in one of E.E. Doc Smith's Lensman series (Grey Lensman? Galactic Patrol?) where Kimball Kinnison rigs a very similar "lie detector" using some coloured lights. The series was written in the '30s
Wouldn't be surprised if the origin of both these versions come from the same place (possibly E. E. Doc Smith's head)
I'm not talking about the actual product being purchased. The cost of living affects prices whereever you live. It's not news that any product, whether it's a hard product or a soft product, has different prices in different places.
So it's a music download, whoopee, this would not be news if it wasn't for the RIAA. Not to mention it being a really poorly researched article, they should have given prices for CDs as a comparison in all the countries they mentioned.
How is this news? People do realise that the price for petrol/gas is Europe is much higher than the U.S? That a reasonable dinner in a restaurant in Australia will cost you about $15US, which is really $10US or so? (But you don't get free refills)
The article doesn't even bother telling us how much a CD costs in the UK or in Canada. Without adding relevant information it's just more noise.
Here, random link with useful comparison info: some cruddy commercial store
Your statement is wonderfully ironic. If the "statistically average" person perceives something to be louder, then the thing is louder. Just because the machines they use do not accurately reflect the opinion of the population doesn't mean it's correct.
Too bad most courts judge based on readings taken from machines.
Systems are software too. The article talks about having different levels of programmers. If you want to be working on an OS (system), you'll need a certain sort of licence to do so and you will be held accountable for any problems that occur.
Your statement "programs are only as secure as the platform they run on" may or may not be true, but if it is, wouldn't insisting that the systems are built by licensed professionals who are held accountable be preferrable?
You're mostly correct that this is all good - and I suspect Kethinov might have had trolling on the ajenda somewhere, however it goes on to say in the article how the Navy was all excited that they could [produce five or six times as many missiles].
... but I'm also assuming that the other things were fun "Blow Stuff Up" types of things as well)
(Yeah, I'm assuming that going from 30,000 pounds to 180,000 pounds means six times as many missiles when they also stated they would be able to use this stuff instead of nitro-glycerine for some other things
Is how this guy is making money out of this at all. Who reads this stuff? No-one! The amount of emails sent that actually arrive, are read and then acted on has to be approaching zero. Or is he just charging advertisers $500 per million for email that no-one reads? $500 that the brain-dead advertisers keep blithely paying simply because he sends them an invoice every month?
These guys don't breathe (etc) when they are at home.
Aren't security patches essentially the same thing that you describe?
In a living organism, an infection unrecognized by the system either kills it or not. Anything that lives learns to recognize it. This is essentially the same as building a security patch. Biological systems don't know something is bad for them until they are taught by experience.
Your post is obviously a troll, but what the hell.
Authentication systems typically rely on three things: Something you are, something you know, something you have. Password authentication is weak in that it only uses one of these three. But when it comes down to it, who cares if the secret is the algorithm you use to pick your pass phrase instead of the pass phrase itself?
What do you think the raw socket access in Windows XP is?