Perhaps the AEGIS system had some Chinese made parts, which were actually bought from Russia, where the traditional equivalent of the AEGIS system is a Crazy Ivan. Perhaps the defective AEGIS directed the ship to make a sharp turn to clear the baffles... not realizing it was installed on a cruiser.
On the other hand, maybe it just saw a whale and froze up, like a dog with a squirrel. "Ship... ship... ship... ship... WHALE!!!"
Instead of trying to implement DRM that would be circumvented, Ford would just watermark their files such that one of the following would occur:
The following words would be etched into the trunk lid, hood and doors in 1000pt font: ATTN POLICE THIS CAR IS STOLEN ARREST DRIVER
Instead of superimposing an image, the watermark superimposes the engine of a Yugo, rendering it completely useless outside of Russia. (Ahh Zastava... great guns, shitty cars)
The watermarked file produces a car that loses its brakes and catches fire after 50 miles.
You think you're downloading a Mustang, but when it prints you have an '88 Dodge Aries
Downloading a car – or a pair of sneakers – will be entirely possible, although Ford and Nike won't be particularly happy if people use their designs to do so.
I wouldn't worry about it. The MPAA has already stated that people wouldn't steal cars. What concerns them is the possibility that people will start 3D printing DVDs.
The real paradox here is that as Executive Chairman of RSA, Covielo has a responsibility to know where it's written that if company X has access to your data it will be exploited. However, as Chairman of a company, he has a responsibility to deny that companies cannot be trusted. This conflict of interest means that his public statements will always be somewhat... ah, what's the word? Oh, yeah, cryptic.
No, curiosity will be a contestant on America's Got Talent and they'll have people text their opinion of who they think is more talented: Curiosity for landing on Mars or some girl who plays the theme to Gossip Girl on a marimba made of partially-filled Coke bottles. I bet the marketers win.
Apparently, as many concluded early on, the "leaked" messages were just old Wall-to-Wall posts, that users had mistakenly believed were private.
facebook user. n,/fsbook yoozr/
A person (living, deceased, real, fake or other) who mistakenly believes they have any measure of control over information they provide to facebook.
facebook shareholder. n,/fsbook SHe()rhldr/
A person (wealthy, poor, playing with someone else's money, possibly underwater or other) who understands the definition of a facebook user, believes such creatures will continue to flourish, and believes shareholders have any measure of control over the company.
Mark Zuckerberg. n,/märk Sookrbrgh/
A person (genius, swindler, dumbass kid in a hoodie or other) who understands both of the above definitions and whose fortunes depend upon his ability to keep moving terms, conditions and settings around while presenting the illusion of continuity by wearing the same shirt every single day.
One of the first things Steve Jobs did upon his return to Apple in the 90s was kill off all the random, overlapping, redundant, confusing product lines... Which each cost money to develop, produce, support and market. He drew a cross on the whiteboard and wrote "pro laptop" in one corner, "consumer laptop" in another, pro desktop and consumer desktop in the others. And that was their strategy. The point was to FOCUS a company that had lost its way, and HP certainly looks like a company that has lost its way.
Accordingly, it is a fact, as far as I am informed, that England was, until we copied her, the only country on earth which ever, by a general law, gave a legal right to the exclusive use of an idea.
In other words, no one copied the concept of copyright from England because they feared retaliation for violating England's copyright on the exclusive use of the idea of copyright. How interesting that if the United States had respected England's right to the exclusive use of the idea, we would be permitted to copy whatever we like, but because of the United States' brazenly lawless violation of copyright we are headed toward a state in which one may not copy anything.
I'm just old enough to remember seeing Halley's Comet in '86 and telling my parents I'd be too old to remember the first sighting when it came back in 2061.
And I remember the next day at school when the teacher asked if everyone saw the comet, and one person proudly announced that he watched it on TV. That was the first time I said the word "dumbass" in public. I have a terrible feeling that the percentage of kids who tell the class they saw the comet on TV (or "YouTwitFace" -- the future conglomerate of YouTube, Twitter and Facebook) will be much higher the next time around.
Is that going to be more accurate than the voting machines? And what will happen if there is a discrepancy?
By definition, any system (such as the "counting on fingers and toes" method) where the total number of votes counted equals the total number of votes cast is more accurate than voting machines.
Not that this has anything to do with the article, which is about Google informing voters about how to register, where to vote and what the trends are. This way you know which bumper sticker is least likely to get your car keyed in your county.
As an aside, years ago I worked with Kiwanis (a community service organization) on an initiative to promote political awareness among high school kids. At first I was concerned that they were going to try to push a particular viewpoint or agenda, but they made it clear that as an organization, for the purposes of this initiative, they were completely agnostic about it. Their mandate was to get people involved, and informed, so they could make their own decisions, because that's how the system works best. The system fails when you have a few informed people and masses of uninformed people who just vote for the candidate they think is the most attractive. So if that is Google's intent (which is the impression I get), it's an honorable goal. And making the API available seems to be an effort to give more people the tools to pursue that goal.
As long as Google doesn't start skewing the information (or, through a security hole, allows someone else to skew it), this is a good thing. There should be some sort of oversight to ensure that.
...investigating a sophisticated hacker attack spanning its operations in the United States, Canada and Spain... and they're not running what they think they're running.
Sounds like they need a modern-day Inigo Montoya to do their security: <SPANISH ACCENT>"You keep using that software, I do not think you're running what you think you are running."</SPANISH ACCENT> And if the worst happens, he can exact revenge: "Hello. My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my power grid during a level 85 raid. Prepare to die."
While every crime violates the law, not every violation of the law counts as a crime; for example: breaches of contract and of other civil law may rank as "offences" or as "infractions". Modern societies generally regard crimes as offences against the public or the state, as distinguished from torts (wrongs against private parties that can give rise to a civil cause of action).
While it may seem like I'm splitting hairs or trolling, in reality it actually makes a difference in how a person is dealt with for breaking the law.
Why is this on Slashdot? Is there a tech/science/maths/nerd angle I'm missing.
To help you see the nerd angle, I'm going to answer your questions in Reverse Russian Notation:
There are many smart tech/science/maths/nerd people in Russia. Don't forget they're only the ones still putting humans in space. This is also where many of the black hats penetrating Western computers are based, because things are so bad there this is the best employment a lot of those smart people can get.
This is on slashdot because ever since Kasparov was arrested they need someone to come up with a strategy for revolution, and slashdot is full of people who are well-versed in the "Step 1, Step 2, Step 3, ???, Profit" form. With a thousand slashdot monkeys submitting thousands of random 5-step plans, someone is bound to come up with the answer. Then all they have to do is figure out which one is correct.
It was on the front page of the NY Times earlier, but has since been buried here.
Key points:
The plant has 79,000 workers, makes parts for automotive electronics and "assembles various electronic devices" including the iPhone 5 (yeah, I know, so what... but you know that's what everyone wants to know out of morbid curiosity and how this might relate to them)
As many as a thousand workers may have been involved, but the fight took place at the company's dormitories, not in the factory itself
In the U.S., we send in professional teams of world-class experts to get the job done. That's how we got Bin Laden. So it sounds like you're saying is we should send a diplomatic delegation of pr0n stars to Iran, after an intensive six-week boot camp with Drill Sgt. Goatse. Interesting, but I don't think it would work because pr0n is on the list of evil Western things the government doesn't like.
But when 46% of the U.S. population earnestly believes that humans were created in their present form within the last 10,000 years, you have to be open to what happens if that number goes to 56%, or 96%.
46%? I know that number. Aren't those the people Mitt Romney said don't pay any taxes? Just as Mitt's numbers were a gross mischaracterization of nearly half the country, I would tend to question the assertion that 46% of the population supports religious censorship. In the United States no one is more aware of the ties between "freedom of speech" and "freedom of religion" than the religious right. Their way of life couldn't exist without those. I've sat through sermons in numerous churches of different denominations that talk about how lucky we are to have this, and how fortunate we are that we don't live in states like China that practice censorship. Many of them ask their congregations to donate money to support missionaries to subvert censorship in other countries to spread religion. They don't want anyone censoring their beliefs, and censoring others who are anathema to your religious beliefs is an exercise in stones and glass houses of worship. Sure, there are a few short-sighted religious leaders out there who don't understand this or care, but the majority get it, and they would tell their congregations to apply the golden rule here.
Every Iranian I've ever met has been erudite, intelligent, moderate and truly delightful.
This is consistent with my experience. I have the utmost respect for every Iranian I have personally gotten to know.
Then again, every Iranian I've ever met (a few dozen) took huge risks to escape the regime in Iran and request asylum in the U.S. Unless you have wide experience in Iranian cities and rural areas, the people we have met are more extreme than the general population, in much the same way that the steam that rises from a boiling pot is hotter than the water in the pot. I absolutely believe that in Iran, as in Russia, the masses do not believe the state propaganda being produced to keep a paranoid minority in power, but it would be a mistake to assume that the majority of people in Iran are like the ones who escaped. By definition, they're different because they didn't escape (for whatever reason).
It's also important to remember that being erudite, intelligent and moderate doesn't preclude one from being complicit with more radical ideas. About 15 years ago a relative in New York doing business with a factory in Pakistan asked me work with a technically-proficient relative of the owner of the factory to set up a modern communications channel to replace the expensive fax and telex method they'd been using for years. I was expecting difficulty in communicating concepts and file formats because I had no idea what kind of equipment they were using. As I talked with my counterpart in Pakistan, who happened to be a military officer, I was struck by how erudite, intelligent, moderate and practical he was. I liked the guy. We very quickly figured things out and saved both sides a lot of time and money. A year later, when Pakistan tested its first nuclear weapon, he was the military spokesperson quoted in all the English-language newspapers announcing the test. I am sure he was opposed to the test and the increased tensions with India that would result, but that didn't stop him from being used as the mouthpiece that spread fear around the world in the spring of 1998.
If he barters for BitCoin does that make them Bacon BitCoin? Forget gold and silver standards... We need a currency backed by bacon. So when you can't afford food you can go down to your local foodbank and cash it in for a shaker of bacon bits.
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps the AEGIS system had some Chinese made parts, which were actually bought from Russia, where the traditional equivalent of the AEGIS system is a Crazy Ivan. Perhaps the defective AEGIS directed the ship to make a sharp turn to clear the baffles... not realizing it was installed on a cruiser.
On the other hand, maybe it just saw a whale and froze up, like a dog with a squirrel. "Ship... ship... ship... ship... WHALE!!!"
My sister walked in to the Lumina trap by getting a Windows Mobile 7 device.
So she's the one. Up until now I thought the reports that Microsoft had actually sold one were pure propaganda.
Downloading a car – or a pair of sneakers – will be entirely possible, although Ford and Nike won't be particularly happy if people use their designs to do so.
I wouldn't worry about it. The MPAA has already stated that people wouldn't steal cars. What concerns them is the possibility that people will start 3D printing DVDs.
<BLINK>DOWNLOAD CANCELLED</BLINK>
Where is it written that cyber criminals can steal our identities but any industry action to protect us invites cries of Big Brother?
The real paradox here is that as Executive Chairman of RSA, Covielo has a responsibility to know where it's written that if company X has access to your data it will be exploited. However, as Chairman of a company, he has a responsibility to deny that companies cannot be trusted. This conflict of interest means that his public statements will always be somewhat... ah, what's the word? Oh, yeah, cryptic.
I'm betting it's a light grenade with the words "pick me up" inscribed in Martian, the last remnant of a great but very stupid civilization.
Mars Rover Bicuriosity will be visiting Uranus next year.
I just hope it doesn't check in there.
Curiosity is a judge on America's Got Talent?
No, curiosity will be a contestant on America's Got Talent and they'll have people text their opinion of who they think is more talented: Curiosity for landing on Mars or some girl who plays the theme to Gossip Girl on a marimba made of partially-filled Coke bottles. I bet the marketers win.
Apparently, as many concluded early on, the "leaked" messages were just old Wall-to-Wall posts, that users had mistakenly believed were private.
facebook user. n, /fsbook yoozr/
/fsbook SHe()rhldr/
/märk Sookrbrgh/
A person (living, deceased, real, fake or other) who mistakenly believes they have any measure of control over information they provide to facebook.
facebook shareholder. n,
A person (wealthy, poor, playing with someone else's money, possibly underwater or other) who understands the definition of a facebook user, believes such creatures will continue to flourish, and believes shareholders have any measure of control over the company.
Mark Zuckerberg. n,
A person (genius, swindler, dumbass kid in a hoodie or other) who understands both of the above definitions and whose fortunes depend upon his ability to keep moving terms, conditions and settings around while presenting the illusion of continuity by wearing the same shirt every single day.
One of the first things Steve Jobs did upon his return to Apple in the 90s was kill off all the random, overlapping, redundant, confusing product lines... Which each cost money to develop, produce, support and market. He drew a cross on the whiteboard and wrote "pro laptop" in one corner, "consumer laptop" in another, pro desktop and consumer desktop in the others. And that was their strategy. The point was to FOCUS a company that had lost its way, and HP certainly looks like a company that has lost its way.
Accordingly, it is a fact, as far as I am informed, that England was, until we copied her, the only country on earth which ever, by a general law, gave a legal right to the exclusive use of an idea.
In other words, no one copied the concept of copyright from England because they feared retaliation for violating England's copyright on the exclusive use of the idea of copyright. How interesting that if the United States had respected England's right to the exclusive use of the idea, we would be permitted to copy whatever we like, but because of the United States' brazenly lawless violation of copyright we are headed toward a state in which one may not copy anything.
I'm just old enough to remember seeing Halley's Comet in '86 and telling my parents I'd be too old to remember the first sighting when it came back in 2061.
And I remember the next day at school when the teacher asked if everyone saw the comet, and one person proudly announced that he watched it on TV. That was the first time I said the word "dumbass" in public. I have a terrible feeling that the percentage of kids who tell the class they saw the comet on TV (or "YouTwitFace" -- the future conglomerate of YouTube, Twitter and Facebook) will be much higher the next time around.
So... there's no actual sugar in it, just a carbon/sodium anode. So why call it a sugar battery?
So everyone can have a good laugh when New York City bans them.
Is that going to be more accurate than the voting machines? And what will happen if there is a discrepancy?
By definition, any system (such as the "counting on fingers and toes" method) where the total number of votes counted equals the total number of votes cast is more accurate than voting machines.
Not that this has anything to do with the article, which is about Google informing voters about how to register, where to vote and what the trends are. This way you know which bumper sticker is least likely to get your car keyed in your county.
As an aside, years ago I worked with Kiwanis (a community service organization) on an initiative to promote political awareness among high school kids. At first I was concerned that they were going to try to push a particular viewpoint or agenda, but they made it clear that as an organization, for the purposes of this initiative, they were completely agnostic about it. Their mandate was to get people involved, and informed, so they could make their own decisions, because that's how the system works best. The system fails when you have a few informed people and masses of uninformed people who just vote for the candidate they think is the most attractive. So if that is Google's intent (which is the impression I get), it's an honorable goal. And making the API available seems to be an effort to give more people the tools to pursue that goal.
As long as Google doesn't start skewing the information (or, through a security hole, allows someone else to skew it), this is a good thing. There should be some sort of oversight to ensure that.
...investigating a sophisticated hacker attack spanning its operations in the United States, Canada and Spain... and they're not running what they think they're running.
Sounds like they need a modern-day Inigo Montoya to do their security: <SPANISH ACCENT>"You keep using that software, I do not think you're running what you think you are running."</SPANISH ACCENT> And if the worst happens, he can exact revenge: "Hello. My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my power grid during a level 85 raid. Prepare to die."
If someone "broke the law" that makes them a _______? The correct answer is "criminal". By definition.
IANAL, and I used to believe this was true as well. And then I was informed by a lawyer that this is not the case. From Wikipedia's article on Crime, paragraph 2:
While every crime violates the law, not every violation of the law counts as a crime; for example: breaches of contract and of other civil law may rank as "offences" or as "infractions". Modern societies generally regard crimes as offences against the public or the state, as distinguished from torts (wrongs against private parties that can give rise to a civil cause of action).
While it may seem like I'm splitting hairs or trolling, in reality it actually makes a difference in how a person is dealt with for breaking the law.
My first thought was: "Edge of space? I hope he doesn't cut his feet!"
The edge of space, you say? I hope he doesn't fall the wrong way! Which could very well happen since the edge of space is invisible and all.
Why is this on Slashdot? Is there a tech/science/maths/nerd angle I'm missing.
To help you see the nerd angle, I'm going to answer your questions in Reverse Russian Notation:
There are many smart tech/science/maths/nerd people in Russia. Don't forget they're only the ones still putting humans in space. This is also where many of the black hats penetrating Western computers are based, because things are so bad there this is the best employment a lot of those smart people can get.
This is on slashdot because ever since Kasparov was arrested they need someone to come up with a strategy for revolution, and slashdot is full of people who are well-versed in the "Step 1, Step 2, Step 3, ???, Profit" form. With a thousand slashdot monkeys submitting thousands of random 5-step plans, someone is bound to come up with the answer. Then all they have to do is figure out which one is correct.
+
Slashdot set Russia up the revolution
Key points:
In the U.S., we send in professional teams of world-class experts to get the job done. That's how we got Bin Laden. So it sounds like you're saying is we should send a diplomatic delegation of pr0n stars to Iran, after an intensive six-week boot camp with Drill Sgt. Goatse. Interesting, but I don't think it would work because pr0n is on the list of evil Western things the government doesn't like.
But when 46% of the U.S. population earnestly believes that humans were created in their present form within the last 10,000 years, you have to be open to what happens if that number goes to 56%, or 96%.
46%? I know that number. Aren't those the people Mitt Romney said don't pay any taxes? Just as Mitt's numbers were a gross mischaracterization of nearly half the country, I would tend to question the assertion that 46% of the population supports religious censorship. In the United States no one is more aware of the ties between "freedom of speech" and "freedom of religion" than the religious right. Their way of life couldn't exist without those. I've sat through sermons in numerous churches of different denominations that talk about how lucky we are to have this, and how fortunate we are that we don't live in states like China that practice censorship. Many of them ask their congregations to donate money to support missionaries to subvert censorship in other countries to spread religion. They don't want anyone censoring their beliefs, and censoring others who are anathema to your religious beliefs is an exercise in stones and glass houses of worship. Sure, there are a few short-sighted religious leaders out there who don't understand this or care, but the majority get it, and they would tell their congregations to apply the golden rule here.
Every Iranian I've ever met has been erudite, intelligent, moderate and truly delightful.
This is consistent with my experience. I have the utmost respect for every Iranian I have personally gotten to know.
Then again, every Iranian I've ever met (a few dozen) took huge risks to escape the regime in Iran and request asylum in the U.S. Unless you have wide experience in Iranian cities and rural areas, the people we have met are more extreme than the general population, in much the same way that the steam that rises from a boiling pot is hotter than the water in the pot. I absolutely believe that in Iran, as in Russia, the masses do not believe the state propaganda being produced to keep a paranoid minority in power, but it would be a mistake to assume that the majority of people in Iran are like the ones who escaped. By definition, they're different because they didn't escape (for whatever reason).
It's also important to remember that being erudite, intelligent and moderate doesn't preclude one from being complicit with more radical ideas. About 15 years ago a relative in New York doing business with a factory in Pakistan asked me work with a technically-proficient relative of the owner of the factory to set up a modern communications channel to replace the expensive fax and telex method they'd been using for years. I was expecting difficulty in communicating concepts and file formats because I had no idea what kind of equipment they were using. As I talked with my counterpart in Pakistan, who happened to be a military officer, I was struck by how erudite, intelligent, moderate and practical he was. I liked the guy. We very quickly figured things out and saved both sides a lot of time and money. A year later, when Pakistan tested its first nuclear weapon, he was the military spokesperson quoted in all the English-language newspapers announcing the test. I am sure he was opposed to the test and the increased tensions with India that would result, but that didn't stop him from being used as the mouthpiece that spread fear around the world in the spring of 1998.
If he barters for BitCoin does that make them Bacon BitCoin? Forget gold and silver standards... We need a currency backed by bacon. So when you can't afford food you can go down to your local foodbank and cash it in for a shaker of bacon bits.
He may find that he's divorced when he gets to L.A. "He's always talking about how much he's got but he never brings home the bacon."