If communication is critical and false communication could result in the loss of life, twitter is not an appropriate resource. I'm sorry it's the only way to share info in a way the masses will listen, but it's just reality that there is no way to make consumer social media communications safe for state sponsored critical communications. In order to be remotely sane you'd at least have to have and extremely long complex password, 2FA and you need some mechanism where two authorized parties have to approve any message before it can be sent. Even at that without some special access and change audit controls and alerts it's a risk to involve a third party in communications.
Intelligence measurement seems to me to be too focused on speed to be a good measure for everyone. I've never been very fast myself, but it doesn't limit the complexity or scope of what I can achieve. I haven't taken an IQ test since my teens, but at the time I remember being annoyed that I had to settle for a lower score than I felt I could have achieved simply because I ran out of time. A math tutor once told me he was a genius not because he could do something others couldn't, but because he could do the same steps very quickly. In my mind speed is one form of intelligence which can be very valuable, but it's a shallow measure. Particularly when judging student ability, speed can be a bad measure because students who are bored are often not remotely mentally engaged by the task at hand. That is where the grit factor comes in to play, by achieving the results even if it takes longer or proves more difficult in the focus and execution.
While I don't find my life in America to be lacking, you are correct about the general brain washing. If you collect enough media pundits and politicians who believe their own bullshit it's possible get people to act completely against their own interests. The remaining population that understands the games they are playing is stuck piecing together the fractured and incomplete truth of our own reality. We can't really agree on anything in time to act on it and we don't have the ability to get any sustained momentum to affect change. The brainwashed are convinced that life would be good like it was in the 1950's if only we stopped writing welfare checks, lowered taxes on businesses, quit the socialist overreach and interference in the god given rights of the corporation, got the coloreds to know their place, deported the illegals, brought democracy to the world and got right with Jesus.
It is something we have to approach cautiously, but it makes a lot of sense to look at the practical application of ideas. It's not unlikely that we will get to the point where something must be done and it will come at at time much to late to fix the issue by changing current carbon output. I don't know if it's possible to have an impact without a significant downside or insurmountable costs, but it seems like one the best areas to focus practical research.
A good hitman might appreciate it. Got a high profile target, what better way to achieve real time anonymous attribution prior to payment? This technology has no place outside the military. I'm a strong supporter of gun rights, but I see some serious risks to allowing this technology outside the military and every time a gun is used for evil it hurts the cause of protecting their legitimate ownership and use.
It seems like a bad precedent to allow a company to impersonate another. I'd rather they throttle people to 256K each and let the performance lag weed out the excess usage naturally.
I've been in tech for over 15 years, but someday because I don't have a degree someone is going to say, "oh, we can't hire you because you are a white male and you're less qualified than this other person that just graduated, but isn't a white male". If that person that says that to me doesn't get beat to death with a stapler, they won't know it, but it'll be the luckiest day of their life.
It's easy to get people to adopt internet connected devices when for most people the internet is the only network they comprehend. People need education in the power capability and security of private networks. We are in an age where consumer devices don't respect security or privacy, the corporate interests pushing these devices are never going to be the ones to say that the user needs to have control over all incoming and outgoing information flows. We have accepted best practices for security in business environments, but I don't think we have any model for consumer devices and the IoT that regular people can look to for guidance on safe and sane deployment. Smart phones and wearables are a particular problem because while you can possibly put a firewall to filter outbound as well as inbound communications in your home we don't have a practical means for non-rooted devices to self impose any outbound security control. You can't even poison the hosts file on a non-rooted phone. Currently if you use their technology, you use it on their terms and users don't have the knowledge or control needed to provide for their own security.
"Senator arguing that DHSâ(TM)s $700 million cybersecurity budget could better be spent elsewhere."
A $700 million budget alone is evidence that they are way off target. The mission should be fairly narrow and focused and require only relatively small staff. The private sector does fine in most security area's. They just need to fill the gaps that are outside the scope of the private sector. Pick 8-10 real priorities do those really well and just cut everything else. Considering the FBI/NSA isn't even part of their budget, $700 million is just obscene. What exactly do they need to do that couldn't be done with a staff of two or three hundred good people and a $150-$200 million budget? WTF
It is because I support the second amendment that I oppose their actions. Often pushing the envelope leads to legislative backfire. The last thing I want is a bunch of useless laws governing ammo and gun parts that make home made guns practical. Thank god we have a new congress that won't go anywhere near that rabbit hole. In California the Open Carry Movement scared the liberals, so they banned open carry. The good news since they didn't have open carry or access to concealed carry the courts are saying they have to give us concealed carry if they take away open carry. Clearly that's a bullshit half-measure as it creates too many situations where an honest reasonable person could be deemed to be in violation. How about instead of a gun rights cold war with unpredictable consequences we just knock off the bullshit. Accept that people have a right to bear arms fully and completely and stop making every gun owner go to extremes to ensure big brother can't take away our toys or our right to defend life, liberty and property.
It may have something to do with ATI legacy manufacturing as much as AMD CPU legacy. If ATI didn't have their own fab maybe it wasn't doable for AMD to outlay cash to create one for GPU, not that legacy ATI tooling would be up to task for modern GPU fab anyway.
I say "Fuck you, I don't care what you think of me". Big Brother then declines to comment and writes it down in his notebook and files it away. Despite what some say, we are free now in our actions. Government's tolerant response to political protests tell me this is true for now. Corporations are also free to collect information they shouldn't and government is free to spy on people it shouldn't. We are free, but if we wish to maintain that for much longer we must rein in the freedoms of corporations and government. Government get its power from the consent of the people, people do not get their rights from the consent of government. If we don't fix it soon, we'll wind up with a population that believes the opposite.
We are not having an IoT revolution just because corporations smell enough blood in the water to try and start one. I don't place any value on my house being able to automatically put lube and tissues on my shopping list because the cloud can track the frequency at which I whack off. In order for the IoT to be sanely implemented there needs to be a safe secure OS with security and privacy controls at the heart of it that is local and 100% user controlled. If the intelligence is in the cloud then they get the data and once again we are the product. Yes, I realize it isn't rational to be angry about products that I'll never own, but security and privacy is a bit of religion. It isn't always rational.
Welcome to Big Data driven marketing. It doesn't matter if correlation doesn't prove causation. It only matters that it does, often enough. If one thing doesn't mean another it doesn't matter to them, as long as it means it often enough. Machine learning plus crowd thinking means there is no room for indecipherable incongruity. This is the hubris of Big Data. God help the unlovable, undatable, unemployable, weirdos, reformers, artists, revolutionaries, poets and perverts for the algorithm will never be their ally.
I've been using the job sites, because they do work however the general tendency to offer contract roles is true. Some will be contract-to-hire. Lately I get contacted by phone directly by 20+ different recruiters, mostly not with jobs that are the right fit. By the end of the process I get 2 or 3 serious prospects that I'll actually try to land. I'm pretty much done with this model. I'm not working for anyone else that doesn't have work that's worth doing. Work has to have some meaning or you have to be somewhat emotionally invested in the company's success or showing up is just a waste of time. This year I'm starting my own company and then likely going back into corporate with a much more selective outlook.
No, that I would not like to see. Going to the movies is something I still really value despite the factors eroding the experience. I'd really miss it if it didn't exist as an option. The issues have that are potentially resolvable are in some cases the show times and the food options. How many intelligent people with money to spend these days actually want either candy, popcorn or the worst hot dogs and nachos on the face of the planet? We need some in theater options that aren't garbage. On the week nights the show times don't work that well for me. Since there is only garbage to eat at the theater I have to get dinner first and it's hard to get off work, get dinner and make the 7:30 show. Give me more 8PM or 8:30PM shows so I can get dinner, see the show and be home about 11PM and I'll go to a lot more weeknight movies. It's always 7:30/7:45 or 9:30/10PM, but those options suck on a weeknight especially since the only food at the theater is diabetes inducing floor scrapings.
The West is never going to let that happen. It may lead to World War III, but China will never going be allowed to take the dominant position in the world. I really hope it doesn't come to that in my lifetime.
That makes tremendous sense on face value and it would work if you were talking about one factory or maybe one industry, but when the whole economy in involved it won't arrive there at the same time. Management will never agree to that until they find themselves at the pointy end of the pitchforks. Things would have to become seriously desperate before it would happen and from what I've seen of people and from the manipulation of people by the rich and powerful, we would have a very hard time getting enough public unity to properly direct the effects of the pitchforks.
Are you supposing that the robots would belong to the public and be operated for public benefit? I really doubt that being a likely outcome. Raw materials even when converted to products with nearly free labor are still not free, neither are they infinite. Those in power are not that keen on sharing with those that aren't contributing. The goal of much automation is to reduce the degree business must employ people. I think the degree automation will displace workers is often exaggerated, but it is having an impact and will no doubt be devastating to certain segments of the global workforce. I think people will find their way by leveraging their creativity and ability to adapt.
Absolutely. We should not be wasting time and money allowing free access to video footage. If someone has a legal claim or suspects police abuse in a specific situation that directly concerns them then there should be a means to obtain it, but it just isn't practical to make all of it available to any yahoo that wants hundreds of hours of footage and has no direct involvement in the filmed activities. Privacy is more important in this case than FOIA in my book and the police do not have the resources to waste redacting footage.
I'm a fan of the free market and not proposing a different economic system. I would just like to see ethical business practices all the way through the supply chain become a voluntary norm accepted and encouraged in the business community. My belief system just doesn't allow for exploiting anyone just because they are willing to be exploited.
I think you mean AOL. It baffles me that any analyst would want them to touch AOL. The problem with Yahoo is that people think of them as a forgotten relic from the 90's even though they have hugely popular services. AOL on the other hand is a forgotten relic from the 90's that would only further tarnish Yahoo as people would continue to use the companies in the same sentence. No offense to AOL, I don't even know that they do anymore I just know public perception. Yahoo needs to just keep at it and focus on finding the right young company to acquire that they can integrate and cross pollinate ad revenue and rebuild their brand with a younger generation.
I would like to see a cultural shift in business where instead of the company that designs the product taking a gigantic slice and the company that runs the retail store taking a giant slice, the manufacturer that invests the time and effort into making the product would get a much, much greater share. If the manufacturer was guaranteed 10% of the final retail price per unit on any product produced, no matter where it was made, we could actually demand a stop to human rights violations in return for paying them enough to compensate for their contribution to the product. That or we can let the big corporations have it all, because their magic design fairy dust is the only part of process that actually creates value.
You're not overreacting. You could say they are going too far, and certainly not everything needs encryption. It's largely unnecessary; if people don't know the difference on their own, then they should never transmit any sensitive data over the internet.
Slashdot Mirror
If communication is critical and false communication could result in the loss of life, twitter is not an appropriate resource. I'm sorry it's the only way to share info in a way the masses will listen, but it's just reality that there is no way to make consumer social media communications safe for state sponsored critical communications. In order to be remotely sane you'd at least have to have and extremely long complex password, 2FA and you need some mechanism where two authorized parties have to approve any message before it can be sent. Even at that without some special access and change audit controls and alerts it's a risk to involve a third party in communications.
Intelligence measurement seems to me to be too focused on speed to be a good measure for everyone. I've never been very fast myself, but it doesn't limit the complexity or scope of what I can achieve. I haven't taken an IQ test since my teens, but at the time I remember being annoyed that I had to settle for a lower score than I felt I could have achieved simply because I ran out of time. A math tutor once told me he was a genius not because he could do something others couldn't, but because he could do the same steps very quickly. In my mind speed is one form of intelligence which can be very valuable, but it's a shallow measure. Particularly when judging student ability, speed can be a bad measure because students who are bored are often not remotely mentally engaged by the task at hand. That is where the grit factor comes in to play, by achieving the results even if it takes longer or proves more difficult in the focus and execution.
While I don't find my life in America to be lacking, you are correct about the general brain washing. If you collect enough media pundits and politicians who believe their own bullshit it's possible get people to act completely against their own interests. The remaining population that understands the games they are playing is stuck piecing together the fractured and incomplete truth of our own reality. We can't really agree on anything in time to act on it and we don't have the ability to get any sustained momentum to affect change. The brainwashed are convinced that life would be good like it was in the 1950's if only we stopped writing welfare checks, lowered taxes on businesses, quit the socialist overreach and interference in the god given rights of the corporation, got the coloreds to know their place, deported the illegals, brought democracy to the world and got right with Jesus.
It is something we have to approach cautiously, but it makes a lot of sense to look at the practical application of ideas. It's not unlikely that we will get to the point where something must be done and it will come at at time much to late to fix the issue by changing current carbon output. I don't know if it's possible to have an impact without a significant downside or insurmountable costs, but it seems like one the best areas to focus practical research.
A good hitman might appreciate it. Got a high profile target, what better way to achieve real time anonymous attribution prior to payment? This technology has no place outside the military. I'm a strong supporter of gun rights, but I see some serious risks to allowing this technology outside the military and every time a gun is used for evil it hurts the cause of protecting their legitimate ownership and use.
Step 1. Talk publicly about freedom, Step 2. Vote only to protect corporate freedom, Step 3. Get reelected and repeat.
Net Neutrality is broad issue that deserves our unyielding support. The Netflix/Comcast debacle is a corner case that is debatable in some respects.
It seems like a bad precedent to allow a company to impersonate another. I'd rather they throttle people to 256K each and let the performance lag weed out the excess usage naturally.
I've been in tech for over 15 years, but someday because I don't have a degree someone is going to say, "oh, we can't hire you because you are a white male and you're less qualified than this other person that just graduated, but isn't a white male". If that person that says that to me doesn't get beat to death with a stapler, they won't know it, but it'll be the luckiest day of their life.
It's easy to get people to adopt internet connected devices when for most people the internet is the only network they comprehend. People need education in the power capability and security of private networks. We are in an age where consumer devices don't respect security or privacy, the corporate interests pushing these devices are never going to be the ones to say that the user needs to have control over all incoming and outgoing information flows. We have accepted best practices for security in business environments, but I don't think we have any model for consumer devices and the IoT that regular people can look to for guidance on safe and sane deployment. Smart phones and wearables are a particular problem because while you can possibly put a firewall to filter outbound as well as inbound communications in your home we don't have a practical means for non-rooted devices to self impose any outbound security control. You can't even poison the hosts file on a non-rooted phone. Currently if you use their technology, you use it on their terms and users don't have the knowledge or control needed to provide for their own security.
"Senator arguing that DHSâ(TM)s $700 million cybersecurity budget could better be spent elsewhere."
A $700 million budget alone is evidence that they are way off target. The mission should be fairly narrow and focused and require only relatively small staff. The private sector does fine in most security area's. They just need to fill the gaps that are outside the scope of the private sector. Pick 8-10 real priorities do those really well and just cut everything else. Considering the FBI/NSA isn't even part of their budget, $700 million is just obscene. What exactly do they need to do that couldn't be done with a staff of two or three hundred good people and a $150-$200 million budget? WTF
It is because I support the second amendment that I oppose their actions. Often pushing the envelope leads to legislative backfire. The last thing I want is a bunch of useless laws governing ammo and gun parts that make home made guns practical. Thank god we have a new congress that won't go anywhere near that rabbit hole. In California the Open Carry Movement scared the liberals, so they banned open carry. The good news since they didn't have open carry or access to concealed carry the courts are saying they have to give us concealed carry if they take away open carry. Clearly that's a bullshit half-measure as it creates too many situations where an honest reasonable person could be deemed to be in violation. How about instead of a gun rights cold war with unpredictable consequences we just knock off the bullshit. Accept that people have a right to bear arms fully and completely and stop making every gun owner go to extremes to ensure big brother can't take away our toys or our right to defend life, liberty and property.
It may have something to do with ATI legacy manufacturing as much as AMD CPU legacy. If ATI didn't have their own fab maybe it wasn't doable for AMD to outlay cash to create one for GPU, not that legacy ATI tooling would be up to task for modern GPU fab anyway.
I say "Fuck you, I don't care what you think of me". Big Brother then declines to comment and writes it down in his notebook and files it away. Despite what some say, we are free now in our actions. Government's tolerant response to political protests tell me this is true for now. Corporations are also free to collect information they shouldn't and government is free to spy on people it shouldn't. We are free, but if we wish to maintain that for much longer we must rein in the freedoms of corporations and government. Government get its power from the consent of the people, people do not get their rights from the consent of government. If we don't fix it soon, we'll wind up with a population that believes the opposite.
We are not having an IoT revolution just because corporations smell enough blood in the water to try and start one. I don't place any value on my house being able to automatically put lube and tissues on my shopping list because the cloud can track the frequency at which I whack off. In order for the IoT to be sanely implemented there needs to be a safe secure OS with security and privacy controls at the heart of it that is local and 100% user controlled. If the intelligence is in the cloud then they get the data and once again we are the product. Yes, I realize it isn't rational to be angry about products that I'll never own, but security and privacy is a bit of religion. It isn't always rational.
Welcome to Big Data driven marketing. It doesn't matter if correlation doesn't prove causation. It only matters that it does, often enough. If one thing doesn't mean another it doesn't matter to them, as long as it means it often enough. Machine learning plus crowd thinking means there is no room for indecipherable incongruity. This is the hubris of Big Data. God help the unlovable, undatable, unemployable, weirdos, reformers, artists, revolutionaries, poets and perverts for the algorithm will never be their ally.
I've been using the job sites, because they do work however the general tendency to offer contract roles is true. Some will be contract-to-hire. Lately I get contacted by phone directly by 20+ different recruiters, mostly not with jobs that are the right fit. By the end of the process I get 2 or 3 serious prospects that I'll actually try to land. I'm pretty much done with this model. I'm not working for anyone else that doesn't have work that's worth doing. Work has to have some meaning or you have to be somewhat emotionally invested in the company's success or showing up is just a waste of time. This year I'm starting my own company and then likely going back into corporate with a much more selective outlook.
No, that I would not like to see. Going to the movies is something I still really value despite the factors eroding the experience. I'd really miss it if it didn't exist as an option. The issues have that are potentially resolvable are in some cases the show times and the food options. How many intelligent people with money to spend these days actually want either candy, popcorn or the worst hot dogs and nachos on the face of the planet? We need some in theater options that aren't garbage. On the week nights the show times don't work that well for me. Since there is only garbage to eat at the theater I have to get dinner first and it's hard to get off work, get dinner and make the 7:30 show. Give me more 8PM or 8:30PM shows so I can get dinner, see the show and be home about 11PM and I'll go to a lot more weeknight movies. It's always 7:30/7:45 or 9:30/10PM, but those options suck on a weeknight especially since the only food at the theater is diabetes inducing floor scrapings.
The West is never going to let that happen. It may lead to World War III, but China will never going be allowed to take the dominant position in the world. I really hope it doesn't come to that in my lifetime.
That makes tremendous sense on face value and it would work if you were talking about one factory or maybe one industry, but when the whole economy in involved it won't arrive there at the same time. Management will never agree to that until they find themselves at the pointy end of the pitchforks. Things would have to become seriously desperate before it would happen and from what I've seen of people and from the manipulation of people by the rich and powerful, we would have a very hard time getting enough public unity to properly direct the effects of the pitchforks.
Are you supposing that the robots would belong to the public and be operated for public benefit? I really doubt that being a likely outcome. Raw materials even when converted to products with nearly free labor are still not free, neither are they infinite. Those in power are not that keen on sharing with those that aren't contributing. The goal of much automation is to reduce the degree business must employ people. I think the degree automation will displace workers is often exaggerated, but it is having an impact and will no doubt be devastating to certain segments of the global workforce. I think people will find their way by leveraging their creativity and ability to adapt.
Absolutely. We should not be wasting time and money allowing free access to video footage. If someone has a legal claim or suspects police abuse in a specific situation that directly concerns them then there should be a means to obtain it, but it just isn't practical to make all of it available to any yahoo that wants hundreds of hours of footage and has no direct involvement in the filmed activities. Privacy is more important in this case than FOIA in my book and the police do not have the resources to waste redacting footage.
I'm a fan of the free market and not proposing a different economic system. I would just like to see ethical business practices all the way through the supply chain become a voluntary norm accepted and encouraged in the business community. My belief system just doesn't allow for exploiting anyone just because they are willing to be exploited.
I think you mean AOL. It baffles me that any analyst would want them to touch AOL. The problem with Yahoo is that people think of them as a forgotten relic from the 90's even though they have hugely popular services. AOL on the other hand is a forgotten relic from the 90's that would only further tarnish Yahoo as people would continue to use the companies in the same sentence. No offense to AOL, I don't even know that they do anymore I just know public perception. Yahoo needs to just keep at it and focus on finding the right young company to acquire that they can integrate and cross pollinate ad revenue and rebuild their brand with a younger generation.
I would like to see a cultural shift in business where instead of the company that designs the product taking a gigantic slice and the company that runs the retail store taking a giant slice, the manufacturer that invests the time and effort into making the product would get a much, much greater share. If the manufacturer was guaranteed 10% of the final retail price per unit on any product produced, no matter where it was made, we could actually demand a stop to human rights violations in return for paying them enough to compensate for their contribution to the product. That or we can let the big corporations have it all, because their magic design fairy dust is the only part of process that actually creates value.
You're not overreacting. You could say they are going too far, and certainly not everything needs encryption. It's largely unnecessary; if people don't know the difference on their own, then they should never transmit any sensitive data over the internet.