But individuals DO decide. The director of the NSA is an individual. He makes decisions about what things are secrets, and what things aren't. Sometimes he consults with the President on it. He decides what, if anything, to tell Congress. The NSA isn't a democratic institution, it's military, and it doesn't make decisions based on consensus. We shouldn't want it to. However, Congress abandoned oversight of intelligence a long time ago. In that vacuum, we have whistleblowers.
So, let me get this straight. We shouldn't be doing research that doesn't exist solely to increase the profits of an existing private enterprise. That sounds like a recipe for economic stagnation to me. It's well known that drug companies often withold improvements in their own drugs until they near the end of their patent period, and that they pay each other to not develop competing drugs, particularly in generics. You're saying you want all science to work this way?
I'm not sure it would help. The accusation that a couple of software engineers were solely responsible is absurd on its face, given that the entire engine design itself cannot possibly pass emissions tests without the hack. However, the argument that software guys are to blame apparently has traction anyway, despite the logical problems of that. If Congress wants to believe it that badly, I'm not sure any documents written by the blamed engineers would make a difference...
They can see the IP address you connect to, yes. As for the hostname of the HTTP endpoint, the answer is maybe. As for the path portion of the URL (the specific page) you are getting, the answer is no. However, some places use proxies to forceably MITM the connection, but that can usually be detected by a client if the user is sophisticated.
To be fair, Microsoft recently pushed out a Windows update to their live servers which was literally random garbage, so Apple's problems aren't unprecedented.
If you are relying on the JVM for security you are doing it wrong to begin with. In fact, there are some cases where you have to disable certain features of the Java security manager in order for some Java reflection APIs to work. You're asking the JVM to police itself. Mandatory access control implemented by the OS (i.e., SELinux), outside of the memory space of the application you are trying to sandbox, is the crutch you should be leaning on if you're really worried about security. Android is drifting in this direction anyway. Good security is hard, and pushing the easy button in Java only gets you so far.
I'm guessing it has more to do with the share-nothing message-passing design of the library the rewrite of the system was built on, meaning it scaled better across high processor core counts. There's an upper limit to how well Java scales if you run everything in a single JVM, due to all memory being shared between threads, the global garbage collection process, increased memory consumption (which affects cache locality), the Java security manager, etc. Due to the above, multiprocessor hardware has to do more work to keep the shared state synchronized between all of the cores. Notice in the memcached graph that even moving to separate processes and away from threads had a significant impact as the number of cores increased. The overall design of Cassandra is pretty distributed in nature, so the java version is probably sharing things between cores that don't really need to be shared in order for Cassandra to work as intended.
Cassandra and other NoSQL databases (particularly CHORD-oriented designs) are probably fringe cases, though. I don't expect you would see differences this great in every application. I also suspect that if you were having to hit the disk a little harder the difference wouldn't be as pronounced either.
So Irving Police and counter terrorism agents (and school teachers) apparently don't realize that a bomb requires explosive material to work.
Plus, how is a bomb a hoax bomb if the person repeatedly tells everyone who has seen it that it's not? How is that even prosecutable?
Contracts would have been attractive to customers if the service the telco provided didn't change in the middle of the term. The way it stood, the telco could revise terms such as service levels and coverage areas, but the customer couldn't until the contract was up.
The reenforced cockpit door had more to do with it than airport security screening, because the cockpit door is actually effective in preventing a 911 style attack. There's no doubt airport screening deters bombers, but there's little evidence that drastically more invasive screening increased the deterrence value. Guerillas go for low hanging fruit, because they don't have the numbers to expend personnel for high-risk targets. That means they bomb anything else that has a lot of people but no explosives screening. A better way to stop bombings would be for the US intelligence community to stop training foreign paramilitaries and playing the game of thrones using corrupt proxies.
That list includes journalists who embarrassed the government, a few actors, some folks who had similar names to dangerous people, etc. This would have never become an issue if the government actually took people off the list when there was a mistake, but they didn't until forced by judicial sanction. For the longest time they refused to acknowledge that such a list existed at all, and refused to verify if anyone had ever been placed on it. How do you resolve mistakes in a list that's top secret? That was the whole problem; excessive secrecy led directly to the abuse they promised wouldn't happen. If they had acted responsibly we wouldn't be here now.
Well....you could say Apple had more of a head start. Work on Objective C started back in the 80's, and was licensed to NeXT in the late 80's early 90's. They've had around 20 years to work the kinks out in a production environment. And BTW, Google _is_ actually creating a language, called Go, but it's still immature at this point. It has the potential, however, to replace Dalvik/ART if they can get some kind of JIT compilation going, via LLVM probably. The key is the language needs to be able to elegantly handle multicore stuff in a way that is portable across devices with different hardware.
Dalvik has to go through unbelievable contortions to get the Java programming model to work on a small memory-limited device: stuff like zygotes, bytecode-stripping, changes to GC, etc. It's very much a square-peg round-hole kind of thing. The real reason for use of Java was programmer adoption. Sun poured a huge amount of resources into lobbying public universities to churn out Java programmers, so that's what Google had to work with. Now that we have a lot of people in the boat, we can focus on getting where we want to go. Long-term, dropping Java would probably be a net positive.
We signed the Bill of Rights because if we didnt, several of the original States would not have agreed to a federal government, period. Recognition of certain basic freedoms was a precondition for the deal that made the US possible. It wasn't just some intellectual exercise. The States didn't want a repeat of the government of King George, and there were some schemers who were aiming for exactly that. Throw out the Bill of Rights, and what you have, functionally, is the English system we rebelled from.
You would be amazed at the number of people who rip off int main(int argc, char **argv) and present it like its their own work. There ought to be a law. Don't even get me started about the whole stdio business.
Slashdot Mirror
Or they would respond like they did to Thomas Drake and try to put him in solitary for the rest of his life.
But individuals DO decide. The director of the NSA is an individual. He makes decisions about what things are secrets, and what things aren't. Sometimes he consults with the President on it. He decides what, if anything, to tell Congress. The NSA isn't a democratic institution, it's military, and it doesn't make decisions based on consensus. We shouldn't want it to. However, Congress abandoned oversight of intelligence a long time ago. In that vacuum, we have whistleblowers.
So, let me get this straight. We shouldn't be doing research that doesn't exist solely to increase the profits of an existing private enterprise. That sounds like a recipe for economic stagnation to me. It's well known that drug companies often withold improvements in their own drugs until they near the end of their patent period, and that they pay each other to not develop competing drugs, particularly in generics. You're saying you want all science to work this way?
You mean like when the US bombed the Chinese embassy during the war in Bosnia?
In the title. Thank you and have a great day.
I'm not sure it would help. The accusation that a couple of software engineers were solely responsible is absurd on its face, given that the entire engine design itself cannot possibly pass emissions tests without the hack. However, the argument that software guys are to blame apparently has traction anyway, despite the logical problems of that. If Congress wants to believe it that badly, I'm not sure any documents written by the blamed engineers would make a difference...
They can see the IP address you connect to, yes. As for the hostname of the HTTP endpoint, the answer is maybe. As for the path portion of the URL (the specific page) you are getting, the answer is no. However, some places use proxies to forceably MITM the connection, but that can usually be detected by a client if the user is sophisticated.
The UK also has a tiny fraction of the population of the US.
To be fair, Microsoft recently pushed out a Windows update to their live servers which was literally random garbage, so Apple's problems aren't unprecedented.
Until it crashes, at which point it's all garbage.
It's 110% awesome.
If you are relying on the JVM for security you are doing it wrong to begin with. In fact, there are some cases where you have to disable certain features of the Java security manager in order for some Java reflection APIs to work. You're asking the JVM to police itself. Mandatory access control implemented by the OS (i.e., SELinux), outside of the memory space of the application you are trying to sandbox, is the crutch you should be leaning on if you're really worried about security. Android is drifting in this direction anyway. Good security is hard, and pushing the easy button in Java only gets you so far.
I'm guessing it has more to do with the share-nothing message-passing design of the library the rewrite of the system was built on, meaning it scaled better across high processor core counts. There's an upper limit to how well Java scales if you run everything in a single JVM, due to all memory being shared between threads, the global garbage collection process, increased memory consumption (which affects cache locality), the Java security manager, etc. Due to the above, multiprocessor hardware has to do more work to keep the shared state synchronized between all of the cores. Notice in the memcached graph that even moving to separate processes and away from threads had a significant impact as the number of cores increased. The overall design of Cassandra is pretty distributed in nature, so the java version is probably sharing things between cores that don't really need to be shared in order for Cassandra to work as intended. Cassandra and other NoSQL databases (particularly CHORD-oriented designs) are probably fringe cases, though. I don't expect you would see differences this great in every application. I also suspect that if you were having to hit the disk a little harder the difference wouldn't be as pronounced either.
Read James Risen. Part of that story has been out there for years, but the media avoided it (mainly due to what happened to Risen).
So Irving Police and counter terrorism agents (and school teachers) apparently don't realize that a bomb requires explosive material to work. Plus, how is a bomb a hoax bomb if the person repeatedly tells everyone who has seen it that it's not? How is that even prosecutable?
Contracts would have been attractive to customers if the service the telco provided didn't change in the middle of the term. The way it stood, the telco could revise terms such as service levels and coverage areas, but the customer couldn't until the contract was up.
The reenforced cockpit door had more to do with it than airport security screening, because the cockpit door is actually effective in preventing a 911 style attack. There's no doubt airport screening deters bombers, but there's little evidence that drastically more invasive screening increased the deterrence value. Guerillas go for low hanging fruit, because they don't have the numbers to expend personnel for high-risk targets. That means they bomb anything else that has a lot of people but no explosives screening. A better way to stop bombings would be for the US intelligence community to stop training foreign paramilitaries and playing the game of thrones using corrupt proxies.
That list includes journalists who embarrassed the government, a few actors, some folks who had similar names to dangerous people, etc. This would have never become an issue if the government actually took people off the list when there was a mistake, but they didn't until forced by judicial sanction. For the longest time they refused to acknowledge that such a list existed at all, and refused to verify if anyone had ever been placed on it. How do you resolve mistakes in a list that's top secret? That was the whole problem; excessive secrecy led directly to the abuse they promised wouldn't happen. If they had acted responsibly we wouldn't be here now.
Well....you could say Apple had more of a head start. Work on Objective C started back in the 80's, and was licensed to NeXT in the late 80's early 90's. They've had around 20 years to work the kinks out in a production environment. And BTW, Google _is_ actually creating a language, called Go, but it's still immature at this point. It has the potential, however, to replace Dalvik/ART if they can get some kind of JIT compilation going, via LLVM probably. The key is the language needs to be able to elegantly handle multicore stuff in a way that is portable across devices with different hardware. Dalvik has to go through unbelievable contortions to get the Java programming model to work on a small memory-limited device: stuff like zygotes, bytecode-stripping, changes to GC, etc. It's very much a square-peg round-hole kind of thing. The real reason for use of Java was programmer adoption. Sun poured a huge amount of resources into lobbying public universities to churn out Java programmers, so that's what Google had to work with. Now that we have a lot of people in the boat, we can focus on getting where we want to go. Long-term, dropping Java would probably be a net positive.
We signed the Bill of Rights because if we didnt, several of the original States would not have agreed to a federal government, period. Recognition of certain basic freedoms was a precondition for the deal that made the US possible. It wasn't just some intellectual exercise. The States didn't want a repeat of the government of King George, and there were some schemers who were aiming for exactly that. Throw out the Bill of Rights, and what you have, functionally, is the English system we rebelled from.
That's why I use the HOSTS file!
You would be amazed at the number of people who rip off int main(int argc, char **argv) and present it like its their own work. There ought to be a law. Don't even get me started about the whole stdio business.
That's a very common view from a former attorney, which Hillary is. There's a certain mindset in the profession.
It actually did get passed, as part of the fast track authority bill. The implementation is simply delayed at this point.
Yeah, transmission loss from one end of the country to the other isn't really a big deal, right?