In this case, there was no hacking involved. He knew the password and used it. Unauthorized access isn't hacking.
I disagree. If you're not supposed to know the password and you find it out and use it knowingly, then that is hacking. Regardless of how simple or basic the password is, it's still hacking because you've bypassed an access control system (no matter how trivial)
I agree the word hacking is overused - "life hack" shits me to tears, but I do something similar for shits and giggles. Watch carefully as people in the office swipe or tap their key on their phone, then when they leave it unattended on the desk charging, I'll tap it in to see if I got it right. This is a very basic type of hack, but still a hack nonetheless.
I think the problem here is that teachers are not technically literate as the kids (my wife is a teacher, I work in IT so am very familiar with this type of thing).
So the kid has unauthorised access to a computer system, which may or may not have personal and or sensitive information on it. The school has a duty to report it in case of the worst case scenario (what if it was an actual breach and they didn't report it? Can't win).
What causes this is that school or Dept has no resources to address this themselves (Tax cuts! Yee haa!), so rely on an equally underfunded Police dept to help out. The cops are in the same boat, and are only doing what their underfunding allows them. Underfunding generally results in undertrained staff, which is the cause of most stupid decisions).
So the root cause is politics on both sides always selling tax cuts for votes. Quality services cost money. And money comes from taxes. If you want better services at some point we have to be prepared to pay for it.
Australia wants to heavily regulate 3D printers in case someone decides to make a plastic gun,
The difference is, someone somewhere wants this, which is not the same is this actually happened and was brought into law by anyone with the power to do so. See how that works?
Probably not, because it is true that the US is the laughing stock, at least when it comes to OECD standards for health, education, social equality, legal rights etc etc...
If you don't like the law, there are two things you can do. Either 1. Don't break the law. or 2. Appeal to your congresscritter to get the law changed.
I can think of some other options:
3. Abuse it for your own benefit
4. Move to a different place with different laws that you find more satisfactory
5. Revolt and overthrow the government
I'm sure there are many others...
The law is screwed up. This isn't hacking.
Hacking is when someone intrudes into a properly secured computer system containing high-valued data and conducts ransom, espionage, theft, damage in a large amount, such as stealing SSNs, identity theft, or intellectual property on which a business is based.
No it isn't. Hacking is simply accessing something you're not supposed to. Sure the punishment here is ridiculous as the offence is the equivalent of defacing an exercise book, but it's technically still hacking.
Probably worth noting, that many cars have robot parking abilities these days, yet I know of precisely zero people that use this feature (and know quite a few owners of luxury cars). Robot powers may not be in as big a demand as some Slashdotters might wish.
Governments don't exist by taxing, they exist because we as humans have figured out that a central power working on behalf of the population works better than the alternatives. Tax simply is how we fund this enterprise.
There is a discipline to not letting it control your life. I see people who are slaves to their devices and make a conscious effort to not fall into that trap. No silly games or FB, I very rarely even answer it unless I'm expecting a call. Let calls go to voicemail and listen when I feel like it. But having the technology available for when you want it is handy (ie maps or transport schedules when traveling).
Yes, yes, I know, people buy cars they can't really afford all the time. I'm simply saying what *should* happen, not what does happen.
Having some experience in this area, I'd go so far as to say that most people who own luxury cars can't afford them. In fact the luxury car is the gleaming epitome of poor financial choices.
If you want to understand the actual political spectrum that shows State Power verses Individual Liberty (an increase on one necessarily detracts from the other) then please study the following diagram:
You're an idiot. I suggest you go hang out Afghanistan or Somalia for a bit and see how individualism works out for you.
You will NEVER overcome the resistance to people wanting their 'own' transportation space.
This is a new invention that only exists in the west, and only in the last 60 years. In another 60 it might just disappear again as a failed experiment.
but it won't be 'mass transit'
You mean like in Hong Kong and Singapore where it already is? Mass transit is the only transport solution that scales in large cities. Dream all you like, but that is the reality.
Utopias are all well and good, but they are typically found only in the fertile human imagination
Up there with flying cars, robot cars and personal privacy....
You're making some big assumptions here. Once robot cars are cheap and plentiful... when it is that going to be, the 23rd century? It's one thing to have a working proof of concept, it's whole other universe to get from there to mainstream.
The other challenge which isn't covered is just because a robot car can get me from A to B, do I actually want that? If I can manually get from A to B faster then why bother? We've all had experience with crap GPS directions, what magic ingredient will prevent the robot car from not making the same stupid errors?
How do you introduce this slowly? You're either in control or you aren't, and each accident will add years to the development cycle. I'm sure they'll get it right eventually, but the gamble is if it takes 50 years, will the appetite for wasted investment continue? Or will someone come up with something better to make this obsolete (ie better designed cities that don't require cars).
Both cases involve me keeping my hands on the wheel. I've actually had mechanical brakes fail on me, and was able to recover by steering off into the nature strip. Good luck doing that in your robot car.
Yes, yes it will. And I can see the looks on the cops faces when you present them with the evidence. Excuse me officer I'd like to lay formal charges against this guy who applied his brakes in front of me and caused my robot car to keep stopping. Good luck with that one...
I've thought about it, and while agree most of the smartphone universe is pointless, I do like Google Maps, Shazam and my mobile banking. Apart from that and maybe a few things like large hi-res screen, email and camera, the rest of the smartphone world can go jump.
I think the iPhone 6 is too bigâI think all 5-ish inch phones are too big.
That's fine, I think all sub 5" phones are too small. I've had my Note 3 (5.8") for 18 months and couldn't use anything smaller. The great thing about a free market is we each have options to choose from.
the problem is that most people prefer seeing more over better ergonomics.
I fail to see how this is a problem. Ergonomics only matter when using something extensively. Most people only use their device for a few minutes at a time, in that case, a bigger screen is more useful than an ergonomic one.
Trust me: in five years, the Moto 360 will be remembered only as the Nomad of smart watches.
Trust you? Why, because Apple got it right right once or twice that makes them immune from ever making a mistake in the future? Is that your logic?
In my opinion, in five years people will wonder what the fuck a "smart watch" was supposed to be, and why anyone cared. Just like the Apple Newton, Lisa and other crud Apple failed with.
A friend has a BMW M5, at 23l/100kms and $1.50/litre, that's $1 every 3km. In the first 3 months all he did was rave about the car, now all he does is moan about how much it costs him to run. Servicing over $1000 each, tyres the same, and Insurance is equally ridiculous. Not all people with cash are sensible about how they spend it.
Slashdot Mirror
In this case, there was no hacking involved. He knew the password and used it. Unauthorized access isn't hacking.
I disagree. If you're not supposed to know the password and you find it out and use it knowingly, then that is hacking. Regardless of how simple or basic the password is, it's still hacking because you've bypassed an access control system (no matter how trivial)
I agree the word hacking is overused - "life hack" shits me to tears, but I do something similar for shits and giggles. Watch carefully as people in the office swipe or tap their key on their phone, then when they leave it unattended on the desk charging, I'll tap it in to see if I got it right. This is a very basic type of hack, but still a hack nonetheless.
I think the problem here is that teachers are not technically literate as the kids (my wife is a teacher, I work in IT so am very familiar with this type of thing).
So the kid has unauthorised access to a computer system, which may or may not have personal and or sensitive information on it. The school has a duty to report it in case of the worst case scenario (what if it was an actual breach and they didn't report it? Can't win).
What causes this is that school or Dept has no resources to address this themselves (Tax cuts! Yee haa!), so rely on an equally underfunded Police dept to help out. The cops are in the same boat, and are only doing what their underfunding allows them. Underfunding generally results in undertrained staff, which is the cause of most stupid decisions).
So the root cause is politics on both sides always selling tax cuts for votes. Quality services cost money. And money comes from taxes. If you want better services at some point we have to be prepared to pay for it.
Australia wants to heavily regulate 3D printers in case someone decides to make a plastic gun,
The difference is, someone somewhere wants this, which is not the same is this actually happened and was brought into law by anyone with the power to do so. See how that works?
Probably not, because it is true that the US is the laughing stock, at least when it comes to OECD standards for health, education, social equality, legal rights etc etc...
If you don't like the law, there are two things you can do. Either 1. Don't break the law. or 2. Appeal to your congresscritter to get the law changed.
I can think of some other options:
3. Abuse it for your own benefit
4. Move to a different place with different laws that you find more satisfactory
5. Revolt and overthrow the government
I'm sure there are many others...
The law is screwed up. This isn't hacking. Hacking is when someone intrudes into a properly secured computer system containing high-valued data and conducts ransom, espionage, theft, damage in a large amount, such as stealing SSNs, identity theft, or intellectual property on which a business is based.
No it isn't. Hacking is simply accessing something you're not supposed to. Sure the punishment here is ridiculous as the offence is the equivalent of defacing an exercise book, but it's technically still hacking.
Er, it's a fully automated robot truck, what fucking purpose would a weapon serve when robbing it? .
Probably worth noting, that many cars have robot parking abilities these days, yet I know of precisely zero people that use this feature (and know quite a few owners of luxury cars). Robot powers may not be in as big a demand as some Slashdotters might wish.
If he bought an M5 without knowing that all the parts and service are stupendously expensive, then he was blind.
Well this is the target market for luxury goods is it not?
Oh I'm sure they'll be made, but just like aeroplanes, elevators, or nuclear power stations, we won't all necessarily own one.
Governments don't exist by taxing, they exist because we as humans have figured out that a central power working on behalf of the population works better than the alternatives. Tax simply is how we fund this enterprise.
It's defective because it is commonplace in the US to ridicule other cultures where this is considered normal.
And dude, google translate is so cool when outside USA.
Like when you go to the UK and have to learn how to speak English properly?
There is a discipline to not letting it control your life. I see people who are slaves to their devices and make a conscious effort to not fall into that trap. No silly games or FB, I very rarely even answer it unless I'm expecting a call. Let calls go to voicemail and listen when I feel like it. But having the technology available for when you want it is handy (ie maps or transport schedules when traveling).
>
Yes, yes, I know, people buy cars they can't really afford all the time. I'm simply saying what *should* happen, not what does happen.
Having some experience in this area, I'd go so far as to say that most people who own luxury cars can't afford them. In fact the luxury car is the gleaming epitome of poor financial choices.
If you want to understand the actual political spectrum that shows State Power verses Individual Liberty (an increase on one necessarily detracts from the other) then please study the following diagram:
You're an idiot. I suggest you go hang out Afghanistan or Somalia for a bit and see how individualism works out for you.
You will NEVER overcome the resistance to people wanting their 'own' transportation space.
This is a new invention that only exists in the west, and only in the last 60 years. In another 60 it might just disappear again as a failed experiment.
but it won't be 'mass transit'
You mean like in Hong Kong and Singapore where it already is? Mass transit is the only transport solution that scales in large cities. Dream all you like, but that is the reality.
Utopias are all well and good, but they are typically found only in the fertile human imagination
Up there with flying cars, robot cars and personal privacy....
You're making some big assumptions here. Once robot cars are cheap and plentiful... when it is that going to be, the 23rd century? It's one thing to have a working proof of concept, it's whole other universe to get from there to mainstream. The other challenge which isn't covered is just because a robot car can get me from A to B, do I actually want that? If I can manually get from A to B faster then why bother? We've all had experience with crap GPS directions, what magic ingredient will prevent the robot car from not making the same stupid errors?
How do you introduce this slowly? You're either in control or you aren't, and each accident will add years to the development cycle. I'm sure they'll get it right eventually, but the gamble is if it takes 50 years, will the appetite for wasted investment continue? Or will someone come up with something better to make this obsolete (ie better designed cities that don't require cars).
Both cases involve me keeping my hands on the wheel. I've actually had mechanical brakes fail on me, and was able to recover by steering off into the nature strip. Good luck doing that in your robot car.
Yes, yes it will. And I can see the looks on the cops faces when you present them with the evidence. Excuse me officer I'd like to lay formal charges against this guy who applied his brakes in front of me and caused my robot car to keep stopping. Good luck with that one...
I have no idea what you just talked about so assume this is some Twitter thing. Suggest you switch off and come back to the real world.
I've thought about it, and while agree most of the smartphone universe is pointless, I do like Google Maps, Shazam and my mobile banking. Apart from that and maybe a few things like large hi-res screen, email and camera, the rest of the smartphone world can go jump.
I think the iPhone 6 is too bigâI think all 5-ish inch phones are too big.
That's fine, I think all sub 5" phones are too small. I've had my Note 3 (5.8") for 18 months and couldn't use anything smaller. The great thing about a free market is we each have options to choose from.
the problem is that most people prefer seeing more over better ergonomics.
I fail to see how this is a problem. Ergonomics only matter when using something extensively. Most people only use their device for a few minutes at a time, in that case, a bigger screen is more useful than an ergonomic one.
Trust me: in five years, the Moto 360 will be remembered only as the Nomad of smart watches.
Trust you? Why, because Apple got it right right once or twice that makes them immune from ever making a mistake in the future? Is that your logic?
In my opinion, in five years people will wonder what the fuck a "smart watch" was supposed to be, and why anyone cared. Just like the Apple Newton, Lisa and other crud Apple failed with.
A friend has a BMW M5, at 23l/100kms and $1.50/litre, that's $1 every 3km. In the first 3 months all he did was rave about the car, now all he does is moan about how much it costs him to run. Servicing over $1000 each, tyres the same, and Insurance is equally ridiculous. Not all people with cash are sensible about how they spend it.