It is important to realize that you couldn't even have a Hacking Olympics without shitty vulnerable OSs like Microsoft makes, vulnerable email servers like criminal Hillary ran, and a generous supp;y of back doors like the NSA has given us. Say what you like about China and Russia here, but they are not the ones who have done the most damage.
Presumably you understand that in "Hacking Olympics" "hacking" means "developing software" not "breaking into computer systems".
nominally they are "cities", in reality they are incorporated neighborhoods in a much bigger, continuous metropolis. You wouldn't know it's a new place/city/town exept for a map or maybe a label on the street sign.
Or the "Welcome to XXX" sign along El Camino Real (assuming you're reading signs in the medium or along the curb rather than watching traffic).
(Or the color and/or font of the street sign, but see previous parenthetical note.)
I can understand how the mayor feels because software coding is just like finance, it does nothing to contribute to the economy other than offer a service. We need a manufacturing economy to bring jobs back.
Presumably manufacturing stuff that has no processors in it, otherwise, you'd have to write software for those processors, thus reducing the contribution to the economy of that manufacturing.
(And what about the engineering work done designing the stuff being made? Does that also do nothing to contribute to the economy other than offer a service?)
And the number of jobs offered by a manufacturing economy depends on the volume of production and the productivity of the labor - the higher the productivity, the fewer jobs offered per unit produced. Enough robots and you don't get as many jobs back as you might want.
And those manufacturing companies may even need finance to grow, although it might not involve some exotic financial derivatives and an huge pile of servers doing high-frequency trading to get the finance.
Yes, it's reasonable to ask to what extent the software or finance industries are contributing to the economy, and whether we'd be better off with smaller versions of either of them, but that's different from casually dismissing those industries.
So long as there's rhyme and reason to the numbering scheme, I have no problem with it.
BMW does this, and it's awesome. The first digit is the body style (3 is small, 5 is mid, 7 is large), and the next 2 digits are the engine displacement.
"We are building a citizen-fueled clean power plant,"
A new twist on "Soylent Green?" A conspiracy against cemetery plots? Trumps "Final Solution" to the Immigration problem?
Or maybe it's just a way to use the results of a bean-heavy diet, given that the goal is to get "as much power as a small natural gas-fired plant produces" - get enough, umm, natural gas from citizens, and you've solved your problem!
Or an OS inheriting some ideas and design characteristics from Mica, Mica being an OS that inherited some ideas and design characteristics from VMS - not surprisingly, given that Cutler was involved with all three.
That's weird, this is what I got. I guess it's a sponsored link? It even showed a blurb from the site above the link as if Google were just answering my question.
No, Strassler's a Real Physicist, and that link does show up, later in the list, in my search.
However, whilst the Higgs field might be a force field (in the sense of something that can change the motion of an object, i.e. can transfer momentum), it's apparently not considered one of the "fundamental" forces; the Standard Model has only four "fundamental" forces. The proposed new force would be a fifth.
But, hey, he's first to break the news about Julian Assange's sex change:
In a manifesto that he wrote during the early days of WikiLeaks, founding member Julianne Assange observed that security services, confronting the threat of internal data breaches, would have to be extra vigilant in order to fly under the radar.
Slower than TCP/IP, but 100% deterministic network behaviour and speed.
So how does it compare to TCP/IP over Token Ring?:-)
Basically it's what you want to run your Nuclear Power Plants, live-saving medical devices and bizarly expensive "failure is not an option" Space Equiment with.
So what protocols are run atop Token Ring in that case?
(Or did you really mean "Slower than Ethernet, but 100% deterministic network behavior and speed"?)
They are not even on the same level. Token Ring is layer 2, and you can run TCP/IP over it, the same way you can run it over the various Ethernet protocols (wired or wireless).
IPv4andIPv6, so it's not "vs." in the sense of "using Token Ring rather than TCP/IP".
So "I instantaneously "got" TCP/IP, and only much later understood the point of Token Ring" presumably means "I understood why you'd use TCP/IP on various networks, and only much later understood why you'd use Token Ring for a network segment (rather than, say, Ethernet)", so it's not quite the same as "HTTP vs. Gopher".
I have to agree The OS market has got really boring.
Back in the old days we had a bunch of OS
Dos/Windows for the PC
MacOS (No X) for Apple
UNIX/Linux for servers (each one designed for different platforms)
VMS for digital systems servers.
Z/OS for IBM mainframes
PrimeOS for prime mainframes...
Now in 2016 almost all of our OS are based in 1970's or 1980's technology.
VMS - from the 1970's.
z/OS - it's still around (and, unlike VMS, not at end-of-life), but it's a descendant of the 1970's MVS, itself a descendant of the 1960's OS/360 MVT.
(And Prime machines were minicomputers/superminicomputers, not mainframes.)
The last thing I want is every ISP commercial followed by 25 seconds of a guy reciting disclaimers like we are at with pharmaceutical ads. Fucking lawyers.
How about every ISP commercial avoids saying "the fastest in-home Wi-Fi" unless the facts justify such a claim without 25 seconds of disclaimers? Don't say anything that requires disclaimers, and you can avoid the disclaimers. If you need fine print, perhaps you're making a claim in order to fool people into making incorrect assumptions if they don't read the fine print, rather than to actually inform people.
The chip, the machines to make the chips, the plastics, the microprocessor, the communications protocols, the error correction, the networking, the programming languages, etc.
The chip:
If you mean "the notion of a microprocessor", that might well be a US invention, although the particular chip used in the first "smart cards" was, I think, originally developed by Bull, a French company.
However, if PVCA is an enabling technology for smart cards, so are "arabic" numerals, an invention from India; it's as much an enabling technology for "dumb" cards, and, as such, not particularly relevant.
The microprocessor:
See above, for "the chip">
The communications protocols:
Are you certain that the particular protocols used for chip cards, or EMV cards in particular, were a US invention? The "M" and "V" in "EMV" were US companies, but the "E" stands for "EuroPay", and the protocols might have been based on European protocols used prior to that.
The error correction:
Which particular ECC is used?
The networking:
To which networking are you referring? The one between the payment terminal and whatever host it talks to?
The programming languages:
OK, what programming languages are used? Pascal had better not be one of them, given that it was a European creation.
Seems it's the other way around in Europe. We run a retail with several outlets. When we do "Chip/Mag + Signature" we pay for what fraud we get, when we do "Chip + Pin" the bank is responsible
Here in Yankland, if chip+anything is used the credit card issuer is responsible, but if mag+signature is used, the credit card companies (Visa, MasterCard, American Express) are saying that the "acquiring bank" (which apparently means the bank that has the merchant's account) is responsible, and they may just pass that on to the merchant.
I.e., here in the US, if a merchant does mag+signature when a chip card is used (meaning the merchant doesn't have a chip-card-capable reader, or has one with the chip card capability not enabled) the merchant pays for what fraud they get and, for anything else, the bank is responsible. The difference between that and (most of?) the rest of the world is that chip+signature is treated the same as chip+PIN.
The card companies and banks don't give a shit about security. The chip-and-signature conversion enabled a huge liability shift. As I understand it, prior to the shift, the card companies/banks were liable for fraud committed with their cards. If fraud is committed now, the liability lies with the retailer.
As I understand it, if fraud is committed with a chip card and the terminal used doesn't support chip authentication - i.e., if a chip card is swiped because there's no chip reader or the chip reader isn't enabled - the liability ends up with the retailer.
Another Payment Brand ruling is the impending chip liability shift. Once this goes into effect, merchants who have not made the investment in chip-enabled technology may be held financially liable for card-present counterfeit and potentially lost and stolen fraud that could have been prevented with the use of a chip-enabled POS system.
("payment brands" are the brand names for various cards, such as Visa, MasterCard, and American Express, so it means that Visa/Master Card/American Express/etc. are saying "if the POS equipment you're using to handle credit cards is a real POS that doesn't handle EMV chips, you may be held responsible for fraud"), and also says:
With the liability shift, if a chip card is presented to a merchant that has not adopted a terminal that is certified for chip card acceptance, liability for counterfeit fraud may shift to the merchant's acquirer – who may then pass this fee back to the merchant. The liability shift encourages chip adoption since any chip-on-chip transaction (chip card read by a chip certified terminal) provides the dynamic authentication data that helps to better protect all parties. In addition, if a counterfeit magnetic stripe card is presented at a chip certified terminal, the liability for the counterfeit fraud will be the responsibility of the card issuer.
where "In addition, if a counterfeit magnetic stripe card is presented at a chip certified terminal, the liability for the counterfeit fraud will be the responsibility of the card issuer." means "dear retailer: if the card has no chip, the card issuer still eats the fraud, you don't get stuck with it".
Slashdot Mirror
Just one. That's the point.
One type of connector - USB-C - but multiple types of cables (USB Type-C to HDMI, USB Type-C to USB Type-B for older devices such as disks, etc.).
What sort of lovely content protection schemes will encumber this?
"High Bandwidth Digital Content Protection (HDCP 1.4 and HDCP 2.2)", as TFA says. Same thing as other flavors of HDMI.
University ave and the one parallel to that on the south.
Hamilton. City Hall is on Hamilton.
It is important to realize that you couldn't even have a Hacking Olympics without shitty vulnerable OSs like Microsoft makes, vulnerable email servers like criminal Hillary ran, and a generous supp;y of back doors like the NSA has given us. Say what you like about China and Russia here, but they are not the ones who have done the most damage.
Presumably you understand that in "Hacking Olympics" "hacking" means "developing software" not "breaking into computer systems".
nominally they are "cities", in reality they are incorporated neighborhoods in a much bigger, continuous metropolis. You wouldn't know it's a new place/city/town exept for a map or maybe a label on the street sign.
Or the "Welcome to XXX" sign along El Camino Real (assuming you're reading signs in the medium or along the curb rather than watching traffic).
(Or the color and/or font of the street sign, but see previous parenthetical note.)
I can understand how the mayor feels because software coding is just like finance, it does nothing to contribute to the economy other than offer a service. We need a manufacturing economy to bring jobs back.
Presumably manufacturing stuff that has no processors in it, otherwise, you'd have to write software for those processors, thus reducing the contribution to the economy of that manufacturing.
(And what about the engineering work done designing the stuff being made? Does that also do nothing to contribute to the economy other than offer a service?)
And the number of jobs offered by a manufacturing economy depends on the volume of production and the productivity of the labor - the higher the productivity, the fewer jobs offered per unit produced. Enough robots and you don't get as many jobs back as you might want.
And those manufacturing companies may even need finance to grow, although it might not involve some exotic financial derivatives and an huge pile of servers doing high-frequency trading to get the finance.
Yes, it's reasonable to ask to what extent the software or finance industries are contributing to the economy, and whether we'd be better off with smaller versions of either of them, but that's different from casually dismissing those industries.
Service economies are third world.
So an economy with 75% of its citizens working in service industries and with 70% of its GDP coming from service industries is a third-world economy?
So long as there's rhyme and reason to the numbering scheme, I have no problem with it.
BMW does this, and it's awesome. The first digit is the body style (3 is small, 5 is mid, 7 is large), and the next 2 digits are the engine displacement.
Except when they aren't; these days, the next 2 digits may, or may not, have any connection to the engine size. For example, both the BMW UK page giving technical data for the 3 series and the BMW USA page for building your own car, after selecting the 3 series sedan indicate that both the 320i and the 330i have a 2-litre turbo 4, with the 330i just having a more powerful version.
I love this show! Lee Pace (who plays Joe) was the actor who played Thanos in "Guardians of the Galaxy"...
No, he played Ronan. Josh Brolin was Thanos.
"We are building a citizen-fueled clean power plant,"
A new twist on "Soylent Green?" A conspiracy against cemetery plots? Trumps "Final Solution" to the Immigration problem?
Or maybe it's just a way to use the results of a bean-heavy diet, given that the goal is to get "as much power as a small natural gas-fired plant produces" - get enough, umm, natural gas from citizens, and you've solved your problem!
For a while it looked like Turkey would be the one exception to the rule that majority-Muslim states cannot have democracy.
So presumably you're not counting (post-Suharto) Indonesia as a democracy.
Or an OS inheriting some ideas and design characteristics from Mica, Mica being an OS that inherited some ideas and design characteristics from VMS - not surprisingly, given that Cutler was involved with all three.
That's weird, this is what I got. I guess it's a sponsored link? It even showed a blurb from the site above the link as if Google were just answering my question.
No, Strassler's a Real Physicist, and that link does show up, later in the list, in my search.
However, whilst the Higgs field might be a force field (in the sense of something that can change the motion of an object, i.e. can transfer momentum), it's apparently not considered one of the "fundamental" forces; the Standard Model has only four "fundamental" forces. The proposed new force would be a fifth.
If you google "what are the forces of nature" the first result says there are 5.
When I searched for "what are the forces of nature" (without the quotes) in Google just now, the first result was the Wikipedia disambiguation page for "Force of nature", which says "In physics, there are four fundamental forces." as the second line. The second result is the Wikipedia page for Forces of Nature , a romantic comedy starring Ben Affleck and Sandra Bullock, and the third result is for a HowStuffWorks page entitled "What are the four fundamental forces of nature?".
Below that are some news articles about this "maybe a fifth force" story.
But, hey, he's first to break the news about Julian Assange's sex change:
(emphasis mine).
"the point of Token Ring"
Enlighten us.
Slower than TCP/IP, but 100% deterministic network behaviour and speed.
So how does it compare to TCP/IP over Token Ring? :-)
Basically it's what you want to run your Nuclear Power Plants, live-saving medical devices and bizarly expensive "failure is not an option" Space Equiment with.
So what protocols are run atop Token Ring in that case?
(Or did you really mean "Slower than Ethernet, but 100% deterministic network behavior and speed"?)
> Same thing as with TCP/IP vs Token Ring
They are not even on the same level. Token Ring is layer 2, and you can run TCP/IP over it, the same way you can run it over the various Ethernet protocols (wired or wireless).
IPv4 and IPv6, so it's not "vs." in the sense of "using Token Ring rather than TCP/IP".
So "I instantaneously "got" TCP/IP, and only much later understood the point of Token Ring" presumably means "I understood why you'd use TCP/IP on various networks, and only much later understood why you'd use Token Ring for a network segment (rather than, say, Ethernet)", so it's not quite the same as "HTTP vs. Gopher".
I have to agree The OS market has got really boring. Back in the old days we had a bunch of OS
Dos/Windows for the PC
MacOS (No X) for Apple
UNIX/Linux for servers (each one designed for different platforms)
VMS for digital systems servers.
Z/OS for IBM mainframes
PrimeOS for prime mainframes...
Now in 2016 almost all of our OS are based in 1970's or 1980's technology.
VMS - from the 1970's.
z/OS - it's still around (and, unlike VMS, not at end-of-life), but it's a descendant of the 1970's MVS, itself a descendant of the 1960's OS/360 MVT.
(And Prime machines were minicomputers/superminicomputers, not mainframes.)
I thought the old SGI building was now the Computer History Museum...
SGI campus. One of the old SGI buildings now houses the Computer History Museum; the rest of the campus is now the Googleplex.
The last thing I want is every ISP commercial followed by 25 seconds of a guy reciting disclaimers like we are at with pharmaceutical ads. Fucking lawyers.
How about every ISP commercial avoids saying "the fastest in-home Wi-Fi" unless the facts justify such a claim without 25 seconds of disclaimers? Don't say anything that requires disclaimers, and you can avoid the disclaimers. If you need fine print, perhaps you're making a claim in order to fool people into making incorrect assumptions if they don't read the fine print, rather than to actually inform people.
Hamster Dance
And the Goatse Pancake Bunny Dance. (analse.cx; now gone, but preserved by the Wayback Machine.)
The chip, the machines to make the chips, the plastics, the microprocessor, the communications protocols, the error correction, the networking, the programming languages, etc.
The chip:
If you mean "the notion of a microprocessor", that might well be a US invention, although the particular chip used in the first "smart cards" was, I think, originally developed by Bull, a French company.
The machines to make the chips:
Yes, probably originally developed in the US.
The plastics:
If you mean "the plastics from which credit cards are made", that's probably polyvinyl chloride acetate; PVC was originally a German discovery, although it appears that a US company may have been the first to make it a practical plastic.
However, if PVCA is an enabling technology for smart cards, so are "arabic" numerals, an invention from India; it's as much an enabling technology for "dumb" cards, and, as such, not particularly relevant.
The microprocessor:
See above, for "the chip">
The communications protocols:
Are you certain that the particular protocols used for chip cards, or EMV cards in particular, were a US invention? The "M" and "V" in "EMV" were US companies, but the "E" stands for "EuroPay", and the protocols might have been based on European protocols used prior to that.
The error correction:
Which particular ECC is used?
The networking:
To which networking are you referring? The one between the payment terminal and whatever host it talks to?
The programming languages:
OK, what programming languages are used? Pascal had better not be one of them, given that it was a European creation.
It's a bit ironic that most of this technology was invented in the US
Which parts were invented in the US rather than France?
The credit card companies have been forced to accept this.
Who are "the credit card companies"? Visa/MasterCard/American Express/etc.? Or the banks that issue Visa/MasterCard cards?
And who forced them to accept this?
Seems it's the other way around in Europe. We run a retail with several outlets. When we do "Chip/Mag + Signature" we pay for what fraud we get, when we do "Chip + Pin" the bank is responsible
Here in Yankland, if chip+anything is used the credit card issuer is responsible, but if mag+signature is used, the credit card companies (Visa, MasterCard, American Express) are saying that the "acquiring bank" (which apparently means the bank that has the merchant's account) is responsible, and they may just pass that on to the merchant.
I.e., here in the US, if a merchant does mag+signature when a chip card is used (meaning the merchant doesn't have a chip-card-capable reader, or has one with the chip card capability not enabled) the merchant pays for what fraud they get and, for anything else, the bank is responsible. The difference between that and (most of?) the rest of the world is that chip+signature is treated the same as chip+PIN.
The card companies and banks don't give a shit about security. The chip-and-signature conversion enabled a huge liability shift. As I understand it, prior to the shift, the card companies/banks were liable for fraud committed with their cards. If fraud is committed now, the liability lies with the retailer.
As I understand it, if fraud is committed with a chip card and the terminal used doesn't support chip authentication - i.e., if a chip card is swiped because there's no chip reader or the chip reader isn't enabled - the liability ends up with the retailer.
See, for example, Chase's FAQ for chip cards, which says:
("payment brands" are the brand names for various cards, such as Visa, MasterCard, and American Express, so it means that Visa/Master Card/American Express/etc. are saying "if the POS equipment you're using to handle credit cards is a real POS that doesn't handle EMV chips, you may be held responsible for fraud"), and also says:
where "In addition, if a counterfeit magnetic stripe card is presented at a chip certified terminal, the liability for the counterfeit fraud will be the responsibility of the card issuer." means "dear retailer: if the card has no chip, the card issuer still eats the fraud, you don't get stuck with it".