Every major decision on this planet is made with $ in mind.
If corporations knew that by investing 10 billion they would get access to quasi-infinite resources with a value nearing infinity, you better believe that they would have somebody on the moon by next week.
However the has not been a huge breakthroughs in space travel since the 60's. It's been slow and incremental improvements, and they have yet to drop the cost down to where resource extraction in space makes economical sense.
The way I see it, this is going to pan out in 3 ways:
1 We discover a new resource with unique and useful properties that can only be obtained in space; Call it Unobtainium. This would lead to explosive growth in space travel practically overnight.
2 We make a huge breakthrough discovery in space travel tech, making space travel affordable and we start colonizing and extracting resources. This would lead to slow but gradual growth in space travel.
3 Neither 1 or 2 happens, our civilization keeps humming along like it has for the last 100 years, until we run out of cheap and readily available resources. After some highly destructive wars, we revert back to an agrarian society, until an extinction event finally wipes us off the face of the Earth.
If we can reach other stellar objects, there is no need to make anything sustainable.
Just the resources available in our own solar system, heck just with what is available in the main asteroid belt is estimated to be able to support 10 QUADRILLION humans
The way our current economic system works, it depends on infinite growth. However we are on a planet with finite resources. The moment our ability to increase production of one of key resources can no longer keep up with the growth in demand,the entire thing comes crashing down like a house of cards. New science and technology has so far kept this problem at bay (by either allowing us to use the resource more efficiently, or increases efficiency in extraction or both, but we are on borrowed time. WE NEED TO EXPAND TO THE STARS, or find another economic model, and we are running out of time. If the global economy comes to a crash before we do, there will not be a second chance (as we will have used up all cheap resources and it will likely takes millions, if not billions of years before the Earth can replenish them).
All it would take it 1 compromised vehicle to gain access and cause complete and utter chaos.
Humans, for all their faults, are for the moment still not remotely hackable. Until this changes, I do not see automated vehicles becoming the norm any time in the foreseeable future.
Unfortunately I think it will take a major disaster before the majority of people realize this.
I checked out the link, there was no mention of what kind of encryption they will be implementing. Most likely one that was already compromised by NSA? And they basically want to cram this one down our throats before a less NSA-friendly protocol takes hold.
Also as for dropping the password requirement, we are 1 step closer to losing anonymity on the Internet (It never really was anonymous). But when you tie-in services with something like a phone number and/or address, it gives the powers to be a way to punish you for misbehaving online (because for most of us, changing phone numbers/address is no trivial task).
I see your point, however one would imagine there would be as much copyrighted material posted that is not R rated....So why the focus on adult content exclusively?
There is obviously more going on here than we are aware of. Maybe they made a deal with an adult content company (or just outright bought one). Or maybe they are looking to cut some major deals with some kind of conservative organizations that look down on adult entertainment. Who knows.....
It's not just Google, any of the big service providers behave like this.
It seems once they achieve a certain critical mass, where they are no longer concerned with getting new people to use it, they clamp down on pretty much everything that made them appealing in the first place.
I mean at the end of the day the result is the same. However I would consider that explanation as "plausible" (I still would not buy it without some verifiable facts posted along with it).
If somebody (capable that is) decides they are going to target me or my workplace, it's game over I already lost.
And TBH ANYBODY other than the NSA (and even them I am not sure) makes the claim they can secure your data, THEY ARE FULL OF SHIT.
NOBODY, NOT EVEN HUGE GOV AGENCIES, have the resources to adequately protect themselves. Think about it, Apple, Microsoft and Sony where all recently in the news for having been hacked...We are talking about the guys who MAKE everything that is used to spy against me, being hacked themselves. And if with all those resources and people, some which had nothing else to do but secure them, failed, there is no wayyyyyyy any supergenius joe schmoe super admin will protect you.
I content myself with just making sure systems run so people can do their daily work, have frequent backups in case of an attack, and hope for the best.
However I cannot spend the hours and hours necessary to make sure everything is completely secure 100% of the time. And even though the products you linked claim to protect my privacy, the ONLY way I can be 1000% sure is to review each and every line of code myself, look at every chip and circuit on my own. Which is obviously impossible to do.
So that means I have to have faith in others that they are not lying to me (or possibly are compromised and just not aware of it yet). Which is what got us to this point in the first place.
Also, even if somehow I managed to secure myself, I would not be able to do the same at work, where I used computers extensively (as I am an IT manager/sys admin) . I cannot possibly justify to my boss scrapping EVERYTHING and redoing it with privacy in mind. I will quickly find myself in the unemployment office. So whatever they do not get at home, they will get while I am at work.
No the answer to this is not technology, IMHO, it will need to be resolved by society. We will essentially need to change people's mentality about how important privacy is and we are willing to pay what it costs (freedom is not free). Only when we think of invasion of somebody's privacy as extremely serious crime with extremely serious penalties will things start to change.
Why do you assume that Dell, HP or Acer would be any better than Lenovo?
If they are not doing the same, they soon will be. Even if they did not want to do it for moral reasons, the market and capitalism will force them to or risk losing revenue.....
And even if we do sue them and win...they will just come back with 2 new methods to do the same, only this time a little more careful not to get caught.
Worse than that: there are stories out there that some keybaords & mouses have been compromised and record every keystroke, every mouse movement.
Even if somehow you manage to secure your hardware somehow, if you HAVE to use the Internet, you are screwed.......even with strong encryption, you might secure your data as it transits through the internet, however the receiving party on the other end can just as easily leak it via their compromised machines.
And then there are some technologies where strong encryption does exist however it is almost near impossible to use because the lack of widespread acceptance...for example e-mails. It is quite trivial to encrypt....however since nooobody uses it, it creates more problems than it solves.
It just feels like the battle has already been lost.....we are like a fish on a hook......only hope is the line breaks....
Anybody else work in IT and is starting to get depressed?
I am just soo tried of trying to keep up with all the hacking, spying & stealing going on.......
Constantly feeling attacked from all sides (gov, corporations etc.)
Who can you even trust anymore?
I would like to take a more active role in protecting my privacy and personal data, however I do not see how this is possible without completely abandoning all electronic gadgets and the internet?
I been shopping around for a new TV for a while now since my 46" fried last summer (amazingly 1 month after the extended warranty expired/sigh).
At first I wanted a smart tv because I do watch a lot of netflix and youtube. I have a WD Live TV and Chromecast hooked up figured why not get it built in from the get go. Then during the course of my research I realized that a lot of these manufacturers actually spied and reported on what you watched. I would assume WD and Google do the same, however only when I use that device, not EVERYTHING I ever watch ever. As more and more times goes by, I am starting to notice more and more TVs having built-in smart abilities for the same price (and sometimes cheaper) than a comparable model without smart features. And I do not like it.
Now I would actively avoid buying one with smart abilities, however I am not most people. It will get to the point where there will be no "dumb" TV for sale. Which is kinda fine, since you do not need to setup your wifi on it.
However the day is coming, where if your TV (or fridge, stove, etc.) will refuse to work if you do not enable internet access. Either that or wireless will become soo cheap they will all come with a built in 3g connection to report back in secret.
And this scares me. And it ought to scare everybody. But it does not. This is worrisome for the future of the human race (Imagine a world where your every action, every word, every though is recorded and send to a central storage, analyzed and action taken upon).
Honestly, where did this idea come from that there is a conspiracy to keep women out of the tech field? I work in a school with both high school and primary students (as the IT manager, not a teacher) that offers advanced computer classes (compared to other schools in the area). And not once have a I heard a teacher say no girls or this is geared for guys etc... (yes I know anecdotal evidence bla bla)....Hell even when I was in high school people did not ever say this profession is men only/women only...or even hint maybe you should not go into this field because you are a man/woman. In fact everybody is always told (falsely IMHO) you can do annnnnnything you want with your life (nice fairytale).
Why is this not a major issue in other male dominated fields? Like car mechanics? Or trucking? Taxi? Miners? People who cut trees for a living?
You want to know why? Because companies like Google, Apple and other tech giants are probably looking for another way to bring down salaries of IT workers by trying to recruit from another pool of workers.That is what, IMHO, it comes down to. Outsourcing and H1B visas (or wtv they are called, not from the US) are not very popular policy and are getting harder and harder to increase/justify.....So they are looking at the next best thing: get more women involved! In a perfect scenario it should hypothetically double the number of IT workers and nothing can be done to stop it (if you did how dare you you sexist), unlike the other methods.
It's all about the benjamins my friends, nothing more nothing less. If Apple really gave a shit about society & fairness, it wouldn't be using slave labor to manufacture the goods that lead to the hugest income reported EVER by a company. Hypocrites.....
As other have mentioned before me, a nuclear physicist will likely know more about GMOs for example than the average high school grad.
However, this does not make him an expert on the subject, and although his opinion is his opinion and he has a right to express it, it should not hold any weight when it comes to making policy.
This is because he did not spend years of his life specializing in bio-engineering. He does not spend his career days, day in day out, reading studying and keeping up to date on the latest developments. Only Biological Engineer should have the ability to make claims on the safety of GMOs.
Same with nuclear power. Although Biological engineers might be more educated than the average person on the subject, this does not mean he knows enough to be helping to shape policy on the merits of nuclear energy.
So when studies such as this come out that have polled "scientists" on their opinion on certain (usually controversial topics) they tend to do more damage than good, IMHO.
Decisions and laws should be made based on facts and research on hand at the time. Not opinions. And should be revised when new developments occur.
Exactly where does this lawlessness exist exactly, perhaps I can move there?
Communication is not illegal! Though is not ILLEGAL. How has encryption created a zone of lawlessness?
Last I checked, stuff was illegal on the Internet as well.......You can't sell cocaine online any more than you can on the street.
Now people have the power to talk to each other on ohhhh noesssss the super nanny police state can't on a whim know what the sheep are discussing...Oh noesssss!!!:(
Yeah yeah I know, think of the children.....
People sharing pedophile pictures as an example is STILL ILLEGAL. The only thing encryption does is make it so nobody can snoop in when exchanging information (or pictures). If you know who the source is and who he is in communication with (which encryption on it's own does not hide), well simple enough investigate and if necessary get a warrant. You know, the WAY THINGS ARE SUPPOSED TO BE DONE. Yeah I know actually working for your money is hard to do.....
Also talking about something, even if you are plotting to overthrow the Queen is not a crime if you do not intend to carry it out. It is the action which itself is illegal. If it was the other way around, then any counter-terrorist or defense/security/policing whomever though of how an attack could occur is a criminal and immediately needs to be arrested.
The truth is, those in power (the 0.1% boys club) have always been scared of the rest 99.9% of us. They do not see us as equals, and are terrified that one day we stop fighting over the crumbs they have thrown us and realize where the real problems is. Hence why they sleep better when they can at all times know where we are, who we are talking to and about what.
I do not understand how high placed officials can get away from making stupid public statements, and get away with it. If I made a public statement such as this, I would likely get fired (assuming anybody noticed). These kind of idiots need to be shamed into silence (not as in to silence free speech, but if you say something stupid you immediately lose credibility and people stop listening to you). You are free to have any opinion you want, but if you are going to publicly make a stupid statement without providing facts to back your argument, be prepared to be ridiculed.......
As well as accessing any other kind of sensitive information (grades, health, etc.).
And how is this supposed to help them catch the "bad guys"? Since any "bad guy" smarter than a rock will:
1) Not use email, text, web, Facebook etc. as it is compromised. Those that do are quickly caught and eliminated from the gene pool. 2) Use strong encryption regardless if it is illegal or not (as if anything else they do is legal).
I am curious to know how many "bad guys" are caught because spy agencies have been able read their email and texts? Maybe when it all started, before anybody knew how it worked, they caught some dumb folks but now that the cat is out of the bag? Like seriously is this some lame Bond movie where the villain explains his devious plot in an e-mail, in clear text?
My guess if they catch most people using stuff like networking, known associates and such.....Which you can still do WITHOUT breaking encryption (if I email a buddy of mine an encrypted email, although they might not be able to read the contents, they still know I am keeping in touch with the person of interest).
This is a perfect example of why cloud computing is a baaaaad idea...
At least when you have it in-house, the gov usually needs a warrant to come through your door and seize stuff....At the very least you are aware you are being targeted and can start mounting a legal defense.
When it's housed on a 3rd party provider, you need not even be aware they have seized your stuff.....
Not to mention corporate espionage going on and you have exactly 0 ways of detecting it.
Yes yes you can encrypt. But encryption does not work for EVERYTHING in every situation. You can encrypt documents easy enough, but what if those documents are only available via a web interface (something like good docs). Or how do you encrypt say virtual servers so the host (who has root access to the hardware) cannot see them or what is inside them but their hypervisor can execute it....
Funny enough phone service suffers from the same problems. Your service provider knows who you are calling, when, from where and can listen in to your convo at will without you knowing any better. But this is why, pre-911, you needed a warrant to do that and there where legal protections in place to prevent that from occurring.
99% Can seem high degree of protection, however if you work in an area where you meet thousands in a day, it will only be a matter of time before you succumb.
Now if everybody is at 99%.....it is as damn near to impossible as you are going to get.
Which is not 100%......which means you can still get infected.
However when everybody is vaccinated, it is very very very unlikely you will be able to pass the disease along before it runs it's course.
Now lets say you are the only person that is vaccinated, nobody else. If you keep running into people that are infected, day after day, in a place such as Disneyland where thousands visit daily, even with 97% effectiveness, it's only a matter of time before you yourself get infected (of course this is a worst case scenario).
I understand why they need to be vaccinated. And should be.
All I was saying is if they had been properly educated in their chosen vocation there shouldn't be a requirement by law. They would all have voluntarily done so, but alas this is not a perfect world.
Slashdot Mirror
It's more than that.
We have not found a way to monetize it.
Every major decision on this planet is made with $ in mind.
If corporations knew that by investing 10 billion they would get access to quasi-infinite resources with a value nearing infinity, you better believe that they would have somebody on the moon by next week.
However the has not been a huge breakthroughs in space travel since the 60's. It's been slow and incremental improvements, and they have yet to drop the cost down to where resource extraction in space makes economical sense.
The way I see it, this is going to pan out in 3 ways:
1 We discover a new resource with unique and useful properties that can only be obtained in space; Call it Unobtainium. This would lead to explosive growth in space travel practically overnight.
2 We make a huge breakthrough discovery in space travel tech, making space travel affordable and we start colonizing and extracting resources. This would lead to slow but gradual growth in space travel.
3 Neither 1 or 2 happens, our civilization keeps humming along like it has for the last 100 years, until we run out of cheap and readily available resources. After some highly destructive wars, we revert back to an agrarian society, until an extinction event finally wipes us off the face of the Earth.
If we can reach other stellar objects, there is no need to make anything sustainable.
Just the resources available in our own solar system, heck just with what is available in the main asteroid belt is estimated to be able to support 10 QUADRILLION humans
http://nix.nasa.gov/search.jsp...
The way our current economic system works, it depends on infinite growth. However we are on a planet with finite resources. The moment our ability to increase production of one of key resources can no longer keep up with the growth in demand,the entire thing comes crashing down like a house of cards. New science and technology has so far kept this problem at bay (by either allowing us to use the resource more efficiently, or increases efficiency in extraction or both, but we are on borrowed time. WE NEED TO EXPAND TO THE STARS, or find another economic model, and we are running out of time. If the global economy comes to a crash before we do, there will not be a second chance (as we will have used up all cheap resources and it will likely takes millions, if not billions of years before the Earth can replenish them).
....go wrong with v2v communication?
All it would take it 1 compromised vehicle to gain access and cause complete and utter chaos.
Humans, for all their faults, are for the moment still not remotely hackable. Until this changes, I do not see automated vehicles becoming the norm any time in the foreseeable future.
Unfortunately I think it will take a major disaster before the majority of people realize this.
I checked out the link, there was no mention of what kind of encryption they will be implementing. Most likely one that was already compromised by NSA? And they basically want to cram this one down our throats before a less NSA-friendly protocol takes hold.
Also as for dropping the password requirement, we are 1 step closer to losing anonymity on the Internet (It never really was anonymous). But when you tie-in services with something like a phone number and/or address, it gives the powers to be a way to punish you for misbehaving online (because for most of us, changing phone numbers/address is no trivial task).
I see your point, however one would imagine there would be as much copyrighted material posted that is not R rated....So why the focus on adult content exclusively?
There is obviously more going on here than we are aware of. Maybe they made a deal with an adult content company (or just outright bought one). Or maybe they are looking to cut some major deals with some kind of conservative organizations that look down on adult entertainment. Who knows.....
Yes you are correct it, it is censorship and it is against the public interest.
However when you use their services, they can do with them as they please since they own the servers, the software and their end of the bandwidth.
Worst part is that there is nothing you can (realistically) do about it. Government is of no help, since they like censorship more than corporations.
It's not just Google, any of the big service providers behave like this.
It seems once they achieve a certain critical mass, where they are no longer concerned with getting new people to use it, they clamp down on pretty much everything that made them appealing in the first place.
Why not just say that in the press release?
I mean at the end of the day the result is the same. However I would consider that explanation as "plausible" (I still would not buy it without some verifiable facts posted along with it).
...to their "do no evil" policy?
Yeah yeah I know, it's those damn terrorist pedophiles we need protection against.
I know for a fact I am not on top of things.
If somebody (capable that is) decides they are going to target me or my workplace, it's game over I already lost.
And TBH ANYBODY other than the NSA (and even them I am not sure) makes the claim they can secure your data, THEY ARE FULL OF SHIT.
NOBODY, NOT EVEN HUGE GOV AGENCIES, have the resources to adequately protect themselves. Think about it, Apple, Microsoft and Sony where all recently in the news for having been hacked...We are talking about the guys who MAKE everything that is used to spy against me, being hacked themselves. And if with all those resources and people, some which had nothing else to do but secure them, failed, there is no wayyyyyyy any supergenius joe schmoe super admin will protect you.
I content myself with just making sure systems run so people can do their daily work, have frequent backups in case of an attack, and hope for the best.
Hypothetically this does seem like a good idea.
However I cannot spend the hours and hours necessary to make sure everything is completely secure 100% of the time. And even though the products you linked claim to protect my privacy, the ONLY way I can be 1000% sure is to review each and every line of code myself, look at every chip and circuit on my own. Which is obviously impossible to do.
So that means I have to have faith in others that they are not lying to me (or possibly are compromised and just not aware of it yet). Which is what got us to this point in the first place.
Also, even if somehow I managed to secure myself, I would not be able to do the same at work, where I used computers extensively (as I am an IT manager/sys admin) . I cannot possibly justify to my boss scrapping EVERYTHING and redoing it with privacy in mind. I will quickly find myself in the unemployment office. So whatever they do not get at home, they will get while I am at work.
No the answer to this is not technology, IMHO, it will need to be resolved by society. We will essentially need to change people's mentality about how important privacy is and we are willing to pay what it costs (freedom is not free). Only when we think of invasion of somebody's privacy as extremely serious crime with extremely serious penalties will things start to change.
Why do you assume that Dell, HP or Acer would be any better than Lenovo?
If they are not doing the same, they soon will be. Even if they did not want to do it for moral reasons, the market and capitalism will force them to or risk losing revenue.....
And even if we do sue them and win...they will just come back with 2 new methods to do the same, only this time a little more careful not to get caught.
Worse than that: there are stories out there that some keybaords & mouses have been compromised and record every keystroke, every mouse movement.
Even if somehow you manage to secure your hardware somehow, if you HAVE to use the Internet, you are screwed.......even with strong encryption, you might secure your data as it transits through the internet, however the receiving party on the other end can just as easily leak it via their compromised machines.
And then there are some technologies where strong encryption does exist however it is almost near impossible to use because the lack of widespread acceptance...for example e-mails. It is quite trivial to encrypt....however since nooobody uses it, it creates more problems than it solves.
It just feels like the battle has already been lost.....we are like a fish on a hook......only hope is the line breaks....
Anybody else work in IT and is starting to get depressed?
I am just soo tried of trying to keep up with all the hacking, spying & stealing going on.......
Constantly feeling attacked from all sides (gov, corporations etc.)
Who can you even trust anymore?
I would like to take a more active role in protecting my privacy and personal data, however I do not see how this is possible without completely abandoning all electronic gadgets and the internet?
I been shopping around for a new TV for a while now since my 46" fried last summer (amazingly 1 month after the extended warranty expired /sigh).
At first I wanted a smart tv because I do watch a lot of netflix and youtube. I have a WD Live TV and Chromecast hooked up figured why not get it built in from the get go. Then during the course of my research I realized that a lot of these manufacturers actually spied and reported on what you watched. I would assume WD and Google do the same, however only when I use that device, not EVERYTHING I ever watch ever. As more and more times goes by, I am starting to notice more and more TVs having built-in smart abilities for the same price (and sometimes cheaper) than a comparable model without smart features. And I do not like it.
Now I would actively avoid buying one with smart abilities, however I am not most people. It will get to the point where there will be no "dumb" TV for sale. Which is kinda fine, since you do not need to setup your wifi on it.
However the day is coming, where if your TV (or fridge, stove, etc.) will refuse to work if you do not enable internet access. Either that or wireless will become soo cheap they will all come with a built in 3g connection to report back in secret.
And this scares me. And it ought to scare everybody. But it does not. This is worrisome for the future of the human race (Imagine a world where your every action, every word, every though is recorded and send to a central storage, analyzed and action taken upon).
I feel bad for you and what you went through.
There is no doubt some negative stereotypes flying around for all sort of things that should be eliminated no doubt.
However, as a far as I can tell, there is no systemic conspiracy to keep women out of Computer Science.
IMHO all the sudden attention to the number of women in IT industry is all about $$$ as I explain in my post further down.
Glad it all worked out for you!
Honestly, where did this idea come from that there is a conspiracy to keep women out of the tech field? I work in a school with both high school and primary students (as the IT manager, not a teacher) that offers advanced computer classes (compared to other schools in the area). And not once have a I heard a teacher say no girls or this is geared for guys etc... (yes I know anecdotal evidence bla bla)....Hell even when I was in high school people did not ever say this profession is men only/women only...or even hint maybe you should not go into this field because you are a man/woman. In fact everybody is always told (falsely IMHO) you can do annnnnnything you want with your life (nice fairytale).
Why is this not a major issue in other male dominated fields? Like car mechanics? Or trucking? Taxi? Miners? People who cut trees for a living?
You want to know why? Because companies like Google, Apple and other tech giants are probably looking for another way to bring down salaries of IT workers by trying to recruit from another pool of workers.That is what, IMHO, it comes down to. Outsourcing and H1B visas (or wtv they are called, not from the US) are not very popular policy and are getting harder and harder to increase/justify.....So they are looking at the next best thing: get more women involved! In a perfect scenario it should hypothetically double the number of IT workers and nothing can be done to stop it (if you did how dare you you sexist), unlike the other methods.
It's all about the benjamins my friends, nothing more nothing less. If Apple really gave a shit about society & fairness, it wouldn't be using slave labor to manufacture the goods that lead to the hugest income reported EVER by a company. Hypocrites.....
As other have mentioned before me, a nuclear physicist will likely know more about GMOs for example than the average high school grad.
However, this does not make him an expert on the subject, and although his opinion is his opinion and he has a right to express it, it should not hold any weight when it comes to making policy.
This is because he did not spend years of his life specializing in bio-engineering. He does not spend his career days, day in day out, reading studying and keeping up to date on the latest developments. Only Biological Engineer should have the ability to make claims on the safety of GMOs.
Same with nuclear power. Although Biological engineers might be more educated than the average person on the subject, this does not mean he knows enough to be helping to shape policy on the merits of nuclear energy.
So when studies such as this come out that have polled "scientists" on their opinion on certain (usually controversial topics) they tend to do more damage than good, IMHO.
Decisions and laws should be made based on facts and research on hand at the time. Not opinions. And should be revised when new developments occur.
Exactly where does this lawlessness exist exactly, perhaps I can move there?
Communication is not illegal! Though is not ILLEGAL. How has encryption created a zone of lawlessness?
Last I checked, stuff was illegal on the Internet as well.......You can't sell cocaine online any more than you can on the street.
Now people have the power to talk to each other on ohhhh noesssss the super nanny police state can't on a whim know what the sheep are discussing...Oh noesssss!!! :(
Yeah yeah I know, think of the children.....
People sharing pedophile pictures as an example is STILL ILLEGAL. The only thing encryption does is make it so nobody can snoop in when exchanging information (or pictures). If you know who the source is and who he is in communication with (which encryption on it's own does not hide), well simple enough investigate and if necessary get a warrant. You know, the WAY THINGS ARE SUPPOSED TO BE DONE. Yeah I know actually working for your money is hard to do.....
Also talking about something, even if you are plotting to overthrow the Queen is not a crime if you do not intend to carry it out. It is the action which itself is illegal. If it was the other way around, then any counter-terrorist or defense/security/policing whomever though of how an attack could occur is a criminal and immediately needs to be arrested.
The truth is, those in power (the 0.1% boys club) have always been scared of the rest 99.9% of us. They do not see us as equals, and are terrified that one day we stop fighting over the crumbs they have thrown us and realize where the real problems is. Hence why they sleep better when they can at all times know where we are, who we are talking to and about what.
I do not understand how high placed officials can get away from making stupid public statements, and get away with it. If I made a public statement such as this, I would likely get fired (assuming anybody noticed). These kind of idiots need to be shamed into silence (not as in to silence free speech, but if you say something stupid you immediately lose credibility and people stop listening to you). You are free to have any opinion you want, but if you are going to publicly make a stupid statement without providing facts to back your argument, be prepared to be ridiculed.......
and online shopping gone......
As well as accessing any other kind of sensitive information (grades, health, etc.).
And how is this supposed to help them catch the "bad guys"? Since any "bad guy" smarter than a rock will:
1) Not use email, text, web, Facebook etc. as it is compromised. Those that do are quickly caught and eliminated from the gene pool.
2) Use strong encryption regardless if it is illegal or not (as if anything else they do is legal).
I am curious to know how many "bad guys" are caught because spy agencies have been able read their email and texts? Maybe when it all started, before anybody knew how it worked, they caught some dumb folks but now that the cat is out of the bag? Like seriously is this some lame Bond movie where the villain explains his devious plot in an e-mail, in clear text?
My guess if they catch most people using stuff like networking, known associates and such.....Which you can still do WITHOUT breaking encryption (if I email a buddy of mine an encrypted email, although they might not be able to read the contents, they still know I am keeping in touch with the person of interest).
This is a perfect example of why cloud computing is a baaaaad idea...
At least when you have it in-house, the gov usually needs a warrant to come through your door and seize stuff....At the very least you are aware you are being targeted and can start mounting a legal defense.
When it's housed on a 3rd party provider, you need not even be aware they have seized your stuff.....
Not to mention corporate espionage going on and you have exactly 0 ways of detecting it.
Yes yes you can encrypt. But encryption does not work for EVERYTHING in every situation. You can encrypt documents easy enough, but what if those documents are only available via a web interface (something like good docs). Or how do you encrypt say virtual servers so the host (who has root access to the hardware) cannot see them or what is inside them but their hypervisor can execute it....
Funny enough phone service suffers from the same problems. Your service provider knows who you are calling, when, from where and can listen in to your convo at will without you knowing any better. But this is why, pre-911, you needed a warrant to do that and there where legal protections in place to prevent that from occurring.
99% Can seem high degree of protection, however if you work in an area where you meet thousands in a day, it will only be a matter of time before you succumb.
Now if everybody is at 99%.....it is as damn near to impossible as you are going to get.
Which is not 100%......which means you can still get infected.
However when everybody is vaccinated, it is very very very unlikely you will be able to pass the disease along before it runs it's course.
Now lets say you are the only person that is vaccinated, nobody else. If you keep running into people that are infected, day after day, in a place such as Disneyland where thousands visit daily, even with 97% effectiveness, it's only a matter of time before you yourself get infected (of course this is a worst case scenario).
I understand why they need to be vaccinated. And should be.
All I was saying is if they had been properly educated in their chosen vocation there shouldn't be a requirement by law. They would all have voluntarily done so, but alas this is not a perfect world.
No vaccine is close to 100% effective.
The protection is provides is on the herd level and NOT the individual.
Look up herd immunity to understand how this works.