I just don't see how this ruling could stand the way it is described here.
If the software market value is zero, how did the original judge get to $700,000 damages? That calculation or at least argument would have to be shown. Does anyone know what it was?
Why single out Trump, you really think there is a single politician left who isn't just interested in lining his own pockets and would harvest and sell your organs if he thought he'd get away with it?
#1: The article was about a a Trump appointee and crony.
#2: There are many politicians and even more career bureaucrats who are community minded, idealistic, and work hard from the common good. I am not going to name names here because I don't want to get into a shitstorm of denials and misinformation.
#3: I will, however, point out that every time I see a statement like this, I remember there is one woman who has been investigated pretty much constantly for over a quarter of a century by the most nasty and mean legislators and political operatives using over $100M of taxpayer money to do so. A media network including Fox News, all right wing radio, and several print publications are fully dedicated to to defaming her. There has been no such thing as a crackpot theory or accusation that was too extreme to investigate. After all this she has not been indicted or convicted of one single crime.
I am skeptical of any Trump associate (or even any guy Trump likes) proclaiming they are trying to make a government agency more transparent. Remember this is the guy who insisted on a bug sweep of his government office and also installed an expensive privacy phone booth, and insists on a security detail greater than that of most 3rd world dictators. He gets favors like cheap rent from industry lobbyists and then tries to lie about it.
And, for good measure, freely uses taxpayer money for luxury travel so lavish that even Trump has to notice.
So spare me protestations that this member of the Trump clown show is going to make anything better at the EPA for anyone except his industry executive friends and that any criticism is just anti-Trump bias. For someone to have faith in him doing the right thing they would have to be delusional, ignorant, partisan or any combination.
It really seems to me that someone or someones high up in the U.S. govt really has it in for Kasperskey. Is that just my impression or does anyone else feel that way?
I would think that if the company actually had any malware in their security products it would have been detected by now. At the end of the day if they were doing Bad Guy Stuff then it would have to write Bad Guy Stuff either to local storage or onto the wire even if it is encrypted. There are a number of automated tools for detecting this both in a simulated environment (VM) and on real hardware.
Has there been any revealing of this kind of behavior that I missed? If not this seems like an awful lot of punishment in the absence of any crime.
What I wonder is what Reddit, fark, *chan, many others (or/. for that matter) really have that wasn't present when USENET was the preeminent multi-topic/multi-cultural/worldwide community media. Other than browser interface that is.
It is nice to take credit for polluting the world community and all but I haven't seen much of anything said that couldn't have been said about USENET 20-30 years ago. The only real difference was size -- I recall the O'Reilly book on USENET warned that an all-groups feed (not including binaries) could consume 15MB (yes MB) or more daily. But trolls, illicit porn, copyright violations, flamewars, fragile sex abuse survivors, libertarians, outrage and people promising to alert the FBI, all of it was there.
"Tesla loses money on every car they sell"
"Tesla only survives due to government handouts"
I have always wondered about these arguments. I haven't looked at Tesla's P&L recently (in spite of being a stockholder) but I was under the impression that they are plowing tons of money into R&D.
So if they wanted to suddenly be profitable all they would have to do is stop spending on R&D. Just bank the gross profit they get off of selling their existing product which is heavily in demand.
So what would their stock be worth if they did that?
What I want to know is that did he use a script to (or curl feature) download 7,000 documents or did he just edit the URL 6,999 times?
And where is he storing 30TB of data? Yes that is actually affordable (say 4 drives about $250 each) but who spends that kind of pocket money for something so nearly unusable?
Try doing a grep -r for some string on a mounted USB drive holding 1TB of data and see how long it takes. So what good is that?
Maybe he scrolls through all those documents one by one. For what. Anybody know?
Just what could he use all this crap for. What is wrong with his brain that he wasn't just downloading porn like every other kid?
Once upon a time Tesla used to brag about how great their relationship was with the NTSB. That was when they were getting their "highest safety rating ever" awards. They used to claim they sent data to the NTSB before it was even asked for.
I guess those times have changed.
If Musk is correct in that the NTSB is releasing data in violation of their own rules then he has a right to bitch about it. Does anyone here know if he is correct?
At the same time I am sure that Musk/Tesla has caused the NTSB concern with their amped up PR efforts. Telsa has to respect that the NTSB can and should control the flow of information.
My guess is Musk is very sensitive to this due to the rampant bias the media has shown against Tesla at every opportunity. Sure they have fanbois but there is no question there is a significant demographic of keyboard warriors panting and slavering to get the goods on Tesla. You can see a number of them right here in this thread.
I wouldn't say it is the level of Hillary Clinton hatred but it is there. You still find people thinking Telsa's wheels are falling off all the time and fires every week. Just like you have people convinced Hillary is running a child sex slave ring. It is the nature of the beast.
Donald Trump pushing morality laws. I can't say I didn't see it coming but it still boggles the mind how anyone can see that person as a leader in any positive cause whatsoever.
But I will say one good thing Trump has done. He has exposed, once and for all and as completely as possible, the abject hypocrisy of the fundamentalist evangelical hustlers and the right wing politicians they are in bed with.
Agree. I can't think of a better case of "you don't rely on Revision 1.0 (and certainly not anything earlier!) of any software. You expect it to glitch, lock up, and crash outright.
It is annoying enough to lose a document or some data records. It is a bit beyond annoying to ride a car into a concrete abutment at 60MPH.
I have wondered about this and haven't found a definitive answer: if you use water for a radiation shield, does it become contaminated and unusable after it absorbs the output of a solar storm?
Next Article: Tech people get enraged over the pettiest things.
Pro Tip: If you don't like the Mac Pro don't buy the Mac Pro. Don't whine about every little design decision they made because it didn't cater to your specific fetish. Nobody cares.
Humans are problem-solving animals. Tech can be pretty and use lots and lots of transistors but if it has nothing to offer by way of personal growth they people be bored with it.
You can increase the resolution on a video game -- all the way from the original breadboarded Pong to the latest real-time 4K-3D gorefest and VR and yes you will get attention and often addiction. But at the end of the day the competition and the puzzles to solve ("find the key to the door", "learn this riddle") is the same or banal routine and you get bored with that even though the stunning graphics and sound give you an endorphin squirt.
Addiction and Boredom at the same time. Remember that can happen and is what is happening. Some kids today spend countless hours with their video games and at the risk of sounding like an Old Fart (tm) it just isn't healthy. It is obvious why their personalities end up so flaccid. Fortunately I think that is a minority of kids and I still see lots of them doing better things.
Chess, Go, Poker, and any competition sport will be around longer than any edition of Call Of Duty.
We are approaching almost a decade since Intel offered anything significantly different or improved.
One of the hardest lessons for hardware tech entrepreneurs to learn is that IT and personal-computing buyers, the majority of business for Intel, is not really interested in anything "different." What they want is what they bought last year faster and cheaper and 101% software compatible.
Star Trek did only a year or two after 2001. The "flip phone" style that was dominant before smartphones was often compared to the communicator device.
I also recall in the novel "Space Cadet" by Heinlein almost 20 years earlier had a fairly accurate description of a cell phone. Not only in the concept of using local cell relay stations but also the social situation of one kid telling another "hey is that your phone (in your bag) going off? Oh, yeah."
The visuals are just astounding, especially if you see it in glorious 70mm. I can somewhat see the original reactions though. If you're somehow able to ignore the amazing job Kubrick did presenting the majesty and elegance of Space, you're left with just an OK story.
I agree with this but the critics all seemed to expect to compare it to "That Darned Cat" or something. Seriously was it the first movie anyone ever saw that was supported by a book?
As a pre-teen in the late '60s I saw the original at the Cooper Theater (now torn down sadly) in Denver. There were not that many theaters that could show 70mm and that was one of them. In those days it was not unusual for people to put on better clothes to go to a place like that.
The impact of the visuals and the quality of the art were far beyond anything anyone had experienced before. Sci-fi movies even then had a very cheesy quality where it was easy even for the moderately sophisticated to see why the things they saw on the screen just "wouldn't work" in real life.
Not 2001. Kubrik enlisted IBM to build the data displays and they were state of the art with vector graphics that could be produced in a computer lab. The shuttle had a very convincing interior which very accurately predicted the seat-back display panels we know today. The dual-torus space station was well-founded as was the Discovery ship. You had something that looked very much like a modern tablet aboard it.
One other major impact that 2001 had on sci-fi films going forward is that it set the gold standard for how to handle zero-G scenes and the views of planets from orbit.
Also the use of real-life company logos: IBM, Pan-AM, AT&T and Hilton was inspired. (And I think it provided funding as well.) It gave you something to relate to. I remember leaving the theater and doing the calculation of just how old I would be in 2001 with the idea of that was when I would be able to have that experience and book a flight. At that time many people put deposits with Pan-AM for a preferential seat on a ride to the moon (when available) and 2001 was influential.
The critics of the story were and are just lazy. Because the ending wasn't just spoon fed to them with a nice pabulum moral they just couldn't take it. 2001 deserves to be ranked in anyone's top 25 movies of last century regardless.
It seems like a counter-intuitive movement but I can think of some things I would wish for if I could spec this design from scratch. For example:
* Hardware execution of x86 instruction set to support VMs compiled for x86.
* Tightly coupled 3d graphics support with the ability to expand graphics memory.
* Encryption/Decryption support.
* Power saving logic and features as good as ARM
* All integrated peripherals. Your portable devices as close to one-chip-on-a-PCB as possible.
* At least 64 qbits.
Now I realize that all of this already exists in one form or another in existing architectures but not (as far as I know) in one set of silicon devices (from small to large) tailored to Apple's intended view to an fully integrated OS and tool chain base. Even if it were available, if Apple could save $5 per unit production cost by doing this it would pay for itself in greater profit margin in no time.
And what else is Apple going to do with the billions of dollars they have stockpiled anyway?
The core question is: why did the car not brake and stop in fromt of the obstacle?
The core answer is: Because the driver did not apply the brakes.
The original question is a good one and should not be just tossed off like this.
If you did a GIS on the accident you would quickly see that the car impacted a fixed obstacle with a clear view of it. The obstacle was marked with black-and-yellow safety stripes exactly the sort to alert a human driver it was there.
So why did the autopilot not see that obstacle and take action? (Either divert or stop?) What sensor system failed to see it? Does it have something to do with the material on the surface that holds the black-and-yellow paint?
If they get to the root cause of that they have a good chance of never having an accident like this again.
But of course they will be excoriated for having a problem in the first place by the usual suspects. Finally proof once and for all that Elon Musk is a delusional failure-in-the-making.
So Elon figures to sell the waste product from his company. Better than paying to have it disposed. Very clever, right?
Not a new idea. He ain't got nuttin on the masters of this trade.
Take Fluoride for example. Poisonous to the body but somehow the idea was completely entrenched with no credible scientific evidence that it was great to put in drinking water. To save your teeth which would totally rot out otherwise.
Some time later the phosphate mining industry discovered they could sell fluorosilicic acid -- the waste product of their industry and expensive to dispose of -- for water utilities to dump into drinking water. This is poison. And tax dollars pay them for it.
They weren't alone. Sodium fluoride is a waste product of the aluminum industry. Toxic waste also purchased for water fluoridation supply. I heard that domestic industry ran out of this so now we import it from China who consider it a dangerous pollutant. (China!)
Just tie it only to loopback and let it produce a random password that gets logged on an only-root-can-read file (or at least to a 0700 owned by the user launching it).
I think that is a good approach. MySQL does the first part -- tied to loopback only to start off but not the second part. Note one of the examples in the article was a MySQL with a trivial password where the user must have opened up the port and created that password both.
Slashdot Mirror
I just don't see how this ruling could stand the way it is described here.
If the software market value is zero, how did the original judge get to $700,000 damages? That calculation or at least argument would have to be shown. Does anyone know what it was?
Why single out Trump, you really think there is a single politician left who isn't just interested in lining his own pockets and would harvest and sell your organs if he thought he'd get away with it?
#1: The article was about a a Trump appointee and crony.
#2: There are many politicians and even more career bureaucrats who are community minded, idealistic, and work hard from the common good. I am not going to name names here because I don't want to get into a shitstorm of denials and misinformation.
#3: I will, however, point out that every time I see a statement like this, I remember there is one woman who has been investigated pretty much constantly for over a quarter of a century by the most nasty and mean legislators and political operatives using over $100M of taxpayer money to do so. A media network including Fox News, all right wing radio, and several print publications are fully dedicated to to defaming her. There has been no such thing as a crackpot theory or accusation that was too extreme to investigate. After all this she has not been indicted or convicted of one single crime.
There is no telling how many unwashed fat 50-ish men are on the Internet posing as 14-year-old virgin girls.
That's been going on since way back into the BBS days.
I am skeptical of any Trump associate (or even any guy Trump likes) proclaiming they are trying to make a government agency more transparent. Remember this is the guy who insisted on a bug sweep of his government office and also installed an expensive privacy phone booth, and insists on a security detail greater than that of most 3rd world dictators. He gets favors like cheap rent from industry lobbyists and then tries to lie about it.
And, for good measure, freely uses taxpayer money for luxury travel so lavish that even Trump has to notice.
So spare me protestations that this member of the Trump clown show is going to make anything better at the EPA for anyone except his industry executive friends and that any criticism is just anti-Trump bias. For someone to have faith in him doing the right thing they would have to be delusional, ignorant, partisan or any combination.
It really seems to me that someone or someones high up in the U.S. govt really has it in for Kasperskey. Is that just my impression or does anyone else feel that way?
I would think that if the company actually had any malware in their security products it would have been detected by now. At the end of the day if they were doing Bad Guy Stuff then it would have to write Bad Guy Stuff either to local storage or onto the wire even if it is encrypted. There are a number of automated tools for detecting this both in a simulated environment (VM) and on real hardware.
Has there been any revealing of this kind of behavior that I missed? If not this seems like an awful lot of punishment in the absence of any crime.
So what's the motive here?
What I wonder is what Reddit, fark, *chan, many others (or /. for that matter) really have that wasn't present when USENET was the preeminent multi-topic/multi-cultural/worldwide community media. Other than browser interface that is.
It is nice to take credit for polluting the world community and all but I haven't seen much of anything said that couldn't have been said about USENET 20-30 years ago. The only real difference was size -- I recall the O'Reilly book on USENET warned that an all-groups feed (not including binaries) could consume 15MB (yes MB) or more daily. But trolls, illicit porn, copyright violations, flamewars, fragile sex abuse survivors, libertarians, outrage and people promising to alert the FBI, all of it was there.
It is only a matter of time before a contract hit gets carried out this way. Untraceable.
Anyone know how long before we launch a telescope capable of imaging one of these planets?
"Tesla loses money on every car they sell" "Tesla only survives due to government handouts"
I have always wondered about these arguments. I haven't looked at Tesla's P&L recently (in spite of being a stockholder) but I was under the impression that they are plowing tons of money into R&D.
So if they wanted to suddenly be profitable all they would have to do is stop spending on R&D. Just bank the gross profit they get off of selling their existing product which is heavily in demand.
So what would their stock be worth if they did that?
What I want to know is that did he use a script to (or curl feature) download 7,000 documents or did he just edit the URL 6,999 times?
And where is he storing 30TB of data? Yes that is actually affordable (say 4 drives about $250 each) but who spends that kind of pocket money for something so nearly unusable?
Try doing a grep -r for some string on a mounted USB drive holding 1TB of data and see how long it takes. So what good is that?
Maybe he scrolls through all those documents one by one. For what. Anybody know?
Just what could he use all this crap for. What is wrong with his brain that he wasn't just downloading porn like every other kid?
Once upon a time Tesla used to brag about how great their relationship was with the NTSB. That was when they were getting their "highest safety rating ever" awards. They used to claim they sent data to the NTSB before it was even asked for.
I guess those times have changed.
If Musk is correct in that the NTSB is releasing data in violation of their own rules then he has a right to bitch about it. Does anyone here know if he is correct?
At the same time I am sure that Musk/Tesla has caused the NTSB concern with their amped up PR efforts. Telsa has to respect that the NTSB can and should control the flow of information.
My guess is Musk is very sensitive to this due to the rampant bias the media has shown against Tesla at every opportunity. Sure they have fanbois but there is no question there is a significant demographic of keyboard warriors panting and slavering to get the goods on Tesla. You can see a number of them right here in this thread.
I wouldn't say it is the level of Hillary Clinton hatred but it is there. You still find people thinking Telsa's wheels are falling off all the time and fires every week. Just like you have people convinced Hillary is running a child sex slave ring. It is the nature of the beast.
Donald Trump pushing morality laws. I can't say I didn't see it coming but it still boggles the mind how anyone can see that person as a leader in any positive cause whatsoever.
But I will say one good thing Trump has done. He has exposed, once and for all and as completely as possible, the abject hypocrisy of the fundamentalist evangelical hustlers and the right wing politicians they are in bed with.
Agree. I can't think of a better case of "you don't rely on Revision 1.0 (and certainly not anything earlier!) of any software. You expect it to glitch, lock up, and crash outright.
It is annoying enough to lose a document or some data records. It is a bit beyond annoying to ride a car into a concrete abutment at 60MPH.
I have wondered about this and haven't found a definitive answer: if you use water for a radiation shield, does it become contaminated and unusable after it absorbs the output of a solar storm?
Even if it does it seems to me the best option.
Next Article: Tech people get enraged over the pettiest things.
Pro Tip: If you don't like the Mac Pro don't buy the Mac Pro. Don't whine about every little design decision they made because it didn't cater to your specific fetish. Nobody cares.
Humans are problem-solving animals. Tech can be pretty and use lots and lots of transistors but if it has nothing to offer by way of personal growth they people be bored with it.
You can increase the resolution on a video game -- all the way from the original breadboarded Pong to the latest real-time 4K-3D gorefest and VR and yes you will get attention and often addiction. But at the end of the day the competition and the puzzles to solve ("find the key to the door", "learn this riddle") is the same or banal routine and you get bored with that even though the stunning graphics and sound give you an endorphin squirt.
Addiction and Boredom at the same time. Remember that can happen and is what is happening. Some kids today spend countless hours with their video games and at the risk of sounding like an Old Fart (tm) it just isn't healthy. It is obvious why their personalities end up so flaccid. Fortunately I think that is a minority of kids and I still see lots of them doing better things.
Chess, Go, Poker, and any competition sport will be around longer than any edition of Call Of Duty.
We are approaching almost a decade since Intel offered anything significantly different or improved.
One of the hardest lessons for hardware tech entrepreneurs to learn is that IT and personal-computing buyers, the majority of business for Intel, is not really interested in anything "different." What they want is what they bought last year faster and cheaper and 101% software compatible.
Star Trek did only a year or two after 2001. The "flip phone" style that was dominant before smartphones was often compared to the communicator device.
I also recall in the novel "Space Cadet" by Heinlein almost 20 years earlier had a fairly accurate description of a cell phone. Not only in the concept of using local cell relay stations but also the social situation of one kid telling another "hey is that your phone (in your bag) going off? Oh, yeah."
The visuals are just astounding, especially if you see it in glorious 70mm. I can somewhat see the original reactions though. If you're somehow able to ignore the amazing job Kubrick did presenting the majesty and elegance of Space, you're left with just an OK story.
I agree with this but the critics all seemed to expect to compare it to "That Darned Cat" or something. Seriously was it the first movie anyone ever saw that was supported by a book?
As a pre-teen in the late '60s I saw the original at the Cooper Theater (now torn down sadly) in Denver. There were not that many theaters that could show 70mm and that was one of them. In those days it was not unusual for people to put on better clothes to go to a place like that.
The impact of the visuals and the quality of the art were far beyond anything anyone had experienced before. Sci-fi movies even then had a very cheesy quality where it was easy even for the moderately sophisticated to see why the things they saw on the screen just "wouldn't work" in real life.
Not 2001. Kubrik enlisted IBM to build the data displays and they were state of the art with vector graphics that could be produced in a computer lab. The shuttle had a very convincing interior which very accurately predicted the seat-back display panels we know today. The dual-torus space station was well-founded as was the Discovery ship. You had something that looked very much like a modern tablet aboard it.
One other major impact that 2001 had on sci-fi films going forward is that it set the gold standard for how to handle zero-G scenes and the views of planets from orbit.
Also the use of real-life company logos: IBM, Pan-AM, AT&T and Hilton was inspired. (And I think it provided funding as well.) It gave you something to relate to. I remember leaving the theater and doing the calculation of just how old I would be in 2001 with the idea of that was when I would be able to have that experience and book a flight. At that time many people put deposits with Pan-AM for a preferential seat on a ride to the moon (when available) and 2001 was influential.
The critics of the story were and are just lazy. Because the ending wasn't just spoon fed to them with a nice pabulum moral they just couldn't take it. 2001 deserves to be ranked in anyone's top 25 movies of last century regardless.
It seems like a counter-intuitive movement but I can think of some things I would wish for if I could spec this design from scratch. For example:
* Hardware execution of x86 instruction set to support VMs compiled for x86.
* Tightly coupled 3d graphics support with the ability to expand graphics memory.
* Encryption/Decryption support.
* Power saving logic and features as good as ARM
* All integrated peripherals. Your portable devices as close to one-chip-on-a-PCB as possible.
* At least 64 qbits.
Now I realize that all of this already exists in one form or another in existing architectures but not (as far as I know) in one set of silicon devices (from small to large) tailored to Apple's intended view to an fully integrated OS and tool chain base. Even if it were available, if Apple could save $5 per unit production cost by doing this it would pay for itself in greater profit margin in no time.
And what else is Apple going to do with the billions of dollars they have stockpiled anyway?
The core question is: why did the car not brake and stop in fromt of the obstacle?
The core answer is: Because the driver did not apply the brakes.
The original question is a good one and should not be just tossed off like this.
If you did a GIS on the accident you would quickly see that the car impacted a fixed obstacle with a clear view of it. The obstacle was marked with black-and-yellow safety stripes exactly the sort to alert a human driver it was there.
So why did the autopilot not see that obstacle and take action? (Either divert or stop?) What sensor system failed to see it? Does it have something to do with the material on the surface that holds the black-and-yellow paint?
If they get to the root cause of that they have a good chance of never having an accident like this again.
But of course they will be excoriated for having a problem in the first place by the usual suspects. Finally proof once and for all that Elon Musk is a delusional failure-in-the-making.
It appears that whomever wrote the article has little idea of how VMs work.
So Elon figures to sell the waste product from his company. Better than paying to have it disposed. Very clever, right?
Not a new idea. He ain't got nuttin on the masters of this trade.
Take Fluoride for example. Poisonous to the body but somehow the idea was completely entrenched with no credible scientific evidence that it was great to put in drinking water. To save your teeth which would totally rot out otherwise.
Some time later the phosphate mining industry discovered they could sell fluorosilicic acid -- the waste product of their industry and expensive to dispose of -- for water utilities to dump into drinking water. This is poison. And tax dollars pay them for it.
They weren't alone. Sodium fluoride is a waste product of the aluminum industry. Toxic waste also purchased for water fluoridation supply. I heard that domestic industry ran out of this so now we import it from China who consider it a dangerous pollutant. (China!)
Elon. Very bright guy. Lots to learn.
Just tie it only to loopback and let it produce a random password that gets logged on an only-root-can-read file (or at least to a 0700 owned by the user launching it).
I think that is a good approach. MySQL does the first part -- tied to loopback only to start off but not the second part. Note one of the examples in the article was a MySQL with a trivial password where the user must have opened up the port and created that password both.