We cyberneed to cyberallocate more cyberresources to our cyberwarriors cyberfighting these cybercriminals. Cyberwarfare is cyberserious cyberbusiness. CyberFTFcyberY.
--Cyberdude
and know your enemy's secrets and you will win a hundred battles. Or a hundred blackmails. You know what, forget about the 'thyself' bit, just know your enemy's dirty laundry.
Well according to this, the theory kinda fall flat. US would do it in a heartbeat and it's all fair game really:
“This is espionage,” said Michael Hayden, a retired Air Force general and former head of the CIA and the National Security Agency, of the OPM hacks. “I don’t blame the Chinese for this at all. If I [as head of the NSA] could have done it, I would have done it in a heartbeat. And I would have not been required to call downtown, either” to seek White House permission.
The reason why the government is sending mixed signal is probably what you mention, if the Chinese really do it, why would they be so obvious in showing the source of attack is from China?
I recently stumbled upon Humanity's headline for version 2 of its English language: "Now everyone can write stuff." My question: is this what we really need? Governments (not just America, but Europe, and some Asia countries) are encouraging kids and adults to become writers, adding to an already-troubled writing landscape. While many writers are focused only on a business's internal concerns, many others can dramatically affect other people's lives. People write stuff for the legislation; our finances are in the hands of people who write, and even the medical industry is replete with new documents these days. Poor writing here can legitimately mess up somebody's life. Compare this to other high-influence professions: can you become surgeon just because you bought a state-of-art turbo laser knife? Of course not. Back to English: the language ecosystem is already chaotic, without solid quality control and responsibility from most writers. If you want simple writeup, you'll get never-ending list of templates that will drain your paper, eat money, block your mind and disappoint you in every possible way. So, should we really be focusing on quantity, rather than quality?
Point I'm trying to make is that OP is making mountain out of molehills. Everybody can write and the pen is mightier than the sword but not everybody can write just as well to be handed the keys of the world (laws and other important documents), this applies to software as well. Scarcity of top level positions will ensure the fittest. Unfortunate or not, I leave that to you.
Does a whitelist actually block certain functionality from browser plugins? What I was thinking is to prevent the plugin that are put into the sandbox from accessing certain resources or executing certain routines. Any plugin that does that will be blocked while other plugins that do not block such resources will just be displayed as normal. This will give a more gradual migration of technology.
Is it possible for major browser vendors to implement a sandbox for obsolete technology? When a tech becomes too outdated, put them in and restrict their functionality, hence reducing the different ways of attack and slowly let them fade away gracefully, giving other people time to update their stuff.
Have you ever had thoughts that make you go, "Where the hell did that come from?" I guess it's something like that. Thoughts that appear out of nowhere and makes you confused. Or it could be like schizophrenia.
I don't really think a lie detector should be used as a judge. It should be something like an advisor. So if the detector is warning the person that he/she is lying when the person is being truthful, one should be asking why is the device indicating as such. Likewise, if I am not sure whether the person is lying or not, the detector would be my advisor, telling me to be optimistically cautious.
Besides, in a typical conversation, I would think a good 90% of the conversation is mostly harmless. When the stakes are high, I am sure the cracks are much easier to detect and see.
I know the fight will be boring and all but my inner-child is fidgeting restlessly. I hope Japan paint their robot red because for all we know, it will go three times faster.
'Making shit up' still requires some form of understanding of underlying concept (how would you know you're making shit up?). And understanding new things are still derived from either existing knowledge or observation and experiments (it does not have to be rigorous). As long as you have a stick for the agent to measure against and a proper problem definition, an artificial intelligence program could certainly 'create real art'. The problem is that we don't even have a proper problem definition for 'art', else we would have called art an engineering problem.
>Google can provide the data-rich API platform, the interconnectedness, the big brain calculations in the cloud. Instead of investing more resources in apps smaller teams could build better, let's free developers do what they do best: leverage Google services to build new and engaging experiences across a variety of platforms.
Eh? Well, there's Google Cloud Computing and tons of other bunch of API that Google provides to developers, the question is why is the author not using them to " make meaningful connections between people and facilitate organic engagement within a rich ecosystem"?
Frankly, I wonder whether they even know how to utilise what they have collected. Granted, blackmail and all but really with the all bureaucracy and other baggage, I wonder even whether utilising those data would be worth all the trouble. It seems to be a really bad case of the hoarder's mentality.
I skimmed through the article and I don't think it implied that. Private companies seem to be using NASA infrastructure to send their hopefully-looking transformer-esque mining bots to the moon. Sure those companies could build their own infrastructure but NASA has the manpower and experience and is opened to collaborations.
Slashdot Mirror
We cyberneed to cyberallocate more cyberresources to our cyberwarriors cyberfighting these cybercriminals. Cyberwarfare is cyberserious cyberbusiness. CyberFTFcyberY. --Cyberdude
and know your enemy's secrets and you will win a hundred battles. Or a hundred blackmails. You know what, forget about the 'thyself' bit, just know your enemy's dirty laundry.
Well according to this, the theory kinda fall flat. US would do it in a heartbeat and it's all fair game really:
The reason why the government is sending mixed signal is probably what you mention, if the Chinese really do it, why would they be so obvious in showing the source of attack is from China?
Point I'm trying to make is that OP is making mountain out of molehills. Everybody can write and the pen is mightier than the sword but not everybody can write just as well to be handed the keys of the world (laws and other important documents), this applies to software as well. Scarcity of top level positions will ensure the fittest. Unfortunate or not, I leave that to you.
On linux, it shall be named LIMP, on the OSX: Bloody Muppets and Unix: UBERMENSCH.
Remember to open all ports, the more the merrier!
Does a whitelist actually block certain functionality from browser plugins? What I was thinking is to prevent the plugin that are put into the sandbox from accessing certain resources or executing certain routines. Any plugin that does that will be blocked while other plugins that do not block such resources will just be displayed as normal. This will give a more gradual migration of technology.
>teenage boys don't like big breasted women.
What sorcery is this? Back in times, big breasted women are living goddesses. That's breast shaming, I'm telling ya'!
Is it possible for major browser vendors to implement a sandbox for obsolete technology? When a tech becomes too outdated, put them in and restrict their functionality, hence reducing the different ways of attack and slowly let them fade away gracefully, giving other people time to update their stuff.
Have you ever had thoughts that make you go, "Where the hell did that come from?" I guess it's something like that. Thoughts that appear out of nowhere and makes you confused. Or it could be like schizophrenia.
I don't really think a lie detector should be used as a judge. It should be something like an advisor. So if the detector is warning the person that he/she is lying when the person is being truthful, one should be asking why is the device indicating as such. Likewise, if I am not sure whether the person is lying or not, the detector would be my advisor, telling me to be optimistically cautious. Besides, in a typical conversation, I would think a good 90% of the conversation is mostly harmless. When the stakes are high, I am sure the cracks are much easier to detect and see.
I know the fight will be boring and all but my inner-child is fidgeting restlessly. I hope Japan paint their robot red because for all we know, it will go three times faster.
Run AI through millions of generations of a genetic algorithm and they could pump out Shakespeare and only Shakespeare.
'Making shit up' still requires some form of understanding of underlying concept (how would you know you're making shit up?). And understanding new things are still derived from either existing knowledge or observation and experiments (it does not have to be rigorous). As long as you have a stick for the agent to measure against and a proper problem definition, an artificial intelligence program could certainly 'create real art'. The problem is that we don't even have a proper problem definition for 'art', else we would have called art an engineering problem.
>Google can provide the data-rich API platform, the interconnectedness, the big brain calculations in the cloud. Instead of investing more resources in apps smaller teams could build better, let's free developers do what they do best: leverage Google services to build new and engaging experiences across a variety of platforms. Eh? Well, there's Google Cloud Computing and tons of other bunch of API that Google provides to developers, the question is why is the author not using them to " make meaningful connections between people and facilitate organic engagement within a rich ecosystem"?
Frankly, I wonder whether they even know how to utilise what they have collected. Granted, blackmail and all but really with the all bureaucracy and other baggage, I wonder even whether utilising those data would be worth all the trouble. It seems to be a really bad case of the hoarder's mentality.
I skimmed through the article and I don't think it implied that. Private companies seem to be using NASA infrastructure to send their hopefully-looking transformer-esque mining bots to the moon. Sure those companies could build their own infrastructure but NASA has the manpower and experience and is opened to collaborations.
Except it's China this time and not Japan. So instead of the Zaibatsu, what should the new term be? Zhizhaoye?