Nobody ever said "engineering is only about math and science". I've never seen it written or heard somebody ever even imply that, nor do engineering curriculums limit themselves in such a way. Reading between the lines it would seem that one person feels inadequate around people with significantly superior "math and science" knowledge and feels the need to justify their self image (and position) by implying that other people are somehow incomplete or defective.
Snowden is spouting bullshit, FOSS is great, but to suggest it is all you need is complete and utter rubbish. Unless you are running completely open hardware right down to the CPU microcode level you cannot audit 100% of the system, as Snowden's Russian masters know, otherwise they would not have gone to the trouble of fabricating their own CPUs (to be sure that the only back-doors in them were the ones thy put there themselves.).
All they have to do is compromise an existing staff member, same goes for any other foreign state or non-state group. Therefore what Apple needs to do is be very careful that they don't have any key employees with habits or secrets that could be used to black mail them. In fact that risk has always existed and your comment is pretty much redundant.
So Apple just has to "un-exist" it when they are done. Develop and use it in a clean room, then destroy the contents of the room once they hand over the pin to the FBI, if it turns out that the FBI has a constitutional right to demand Apples assistance. You are worrying about the wrong things, this has never been a technical issue, it is a matter of law which has yet to be settled through due process.
These guys probably haven't even tried what they claim they can do, drop it in the actual sea for months then call it back, otherwise they would know that corrosion is only half the problem. Unless the entire thing is sprayed in a toxic substance it will have all types of things growing on it after a month or two.
An enclosing pod that can alter it's buoyancy without external parts or ports would have made a lot more sense, then the drone can just launch out of the pod when it reaches the surface. The pod would then sink again so as to not leave a trace that a drone had been deployed in the area. Using a pod also gives you much more battery life as the drone does not need to carry all the standby power equipment and can maintain it's charge from the pod until launch.
About 20 years from now nanotechnology, 3D fabrication systems, AI and fusion power will be very far ahead of what we have now so the plan seems viable except for one little detail, why would we need to send humans at all?
There are already a large number of abandoned reactors in space, shitty old fission ones that are due to fall back to Earth in about 10,000 years from now.
That is the problem with anonymity, it is impossible to protect your reputation if you are anonymous (even if they were not childish twits half the time). Anyone can do wonderful or horrific things in the name of anonymous and there is nothing anyone else can do about it. In fact people can even take credit for what anonymous does by letting themselves "get caught" then claim they are the real anonymous and that all the new actions are by imposers. How could you prove they were not the original anonymous?
Because the bad guy market is a significant segment for Apple? Your logic is ridiculous. Most "good" people either do not even think about security or they trust companies and governments (in the free world) to mostly respect their rights and privacy even if back-doors are possible.
The truth is most bad guys are idiots and can't make a phone, let alone a secure one, and the OS is irrelevant if you don't have control of the firmware on the hardware the OS runs on. You don't really have much insight into what that device in your pocket really is or how it works, do you?
How can they mask the signal if a detector has a larger bandwidth? Part of your spectrum is going to have more energy, even if it is digitally smeared. However if they are also doing something tricky with multiple transmit locations and a random phase array effect a snooper can't even be sure what time period a section of the spectrum belongs in. So not only is your signal dancing around on different frequencies it is also dancing around in space and time so only the receivers with the correct key to track the random sequences can make use of the reflected signal off the targets. So yeah you could really encrypt a radar signal, but they didn't describe what I just did did they?:-)
I hope they can improve their customer service because at the moment it is so bad, and their procedures so illogical, that it is faster to churn across to another service provider than it is to get Telstra to fix things, so if you are out of contract just jump and don't even bother asking them for help.
Why is there a need for people to do this work? How many online shops selling the same thing using images and advertising materials ripped off each other do we need? Call me cynical but this really just looks like party insiders finding yet another way to bleed millions out of a "plump pig" and the flow of money will mostly go into far fewer pockets than people imagine.
You just suggested that Apple have mislead the public when they implied that currently their systems are secure because if their systems could be compromised right now they would know about it given their intimate knowledge or their code and information technology in general. i.e. They know what is possible more than you ever could, and they have said nothing to suggest that the FBI request is redundant.
i.e. In seeking to support Apple you have actually condemned them as probable collaborators.
You are right about one thing, no system is entirely secure, but that does not prove any given system has been compromised, yet.
Swartz killed himself because he was mentally ill and not able to see the multitude of possible ways he could have extricated himself from the situation he found himself in, ways that would have allowed him to continue to be an effective advocate.
Yes, it is the same sort of distorted thinking (often shown in the media) that being a victim of crime somehow makes you an expert in criminology, social problems and what to do about them, when really you are just an expert (perhaps) in how the event impacted your your life.
Abstractly, it is the inappropriate projection of a local value into a global context, I am good at A therefore I am good at A...Z
However being famous and rich does not mean that you cannot be competent across a diverse range of topics, therefore we cannot dismiss people's opinions on the grounds that they are "just some guy who manage to climb up on the biggest soap box", we need to consider the value of their arguments without personalising the issue.
Slashdot Mirror
Nobody ever said "engineering is only about math and science". I've never seen it written or heard somebody ever even imply that, nor do engineering curriculums limit themselves in such a way. Reading between the lines it would seem that one person feels inadequate around people with significantly superior "math and science" knowledge and feels the need to justify their self image (and position) by implying that other people are somehow incomplete or defective.
Snowden is spouting bullshit, FOSS is great, but to suggest it is all you need is complete and utter rubbish. Unless you are running completely open hardware right down to the CPU microcode level you cannot audit 100% of the system, as Snowden's Russian masters know, otherwise they would not have gone to the trouble of fabricating their own CPUs (to be sure that the only back-doors in them were the ones thy put there themselves.).
All they have to do is compromise an existing staff member, same goes for any other foreign state or non-state group. Therefore what Apple needs to do is be very careful that they don't have any key employees with habits or secrets that could be used to black mail them. In fact that risk has always existed and your comment is pretty much redundant.
So Apple just has to "un-exist" it when they are done. Develop and use it in a clean room, then destroy the contents of the room once they hand over the pin to the FBI, if it turns out that the FBI has a constitutional right to demand Apples assistance. You are worrying about the wrong things, this has never been a technical issue, it is a matter of law which has yet to be settled through due process.
These guys probably haven't even tried what they claim they can do, drop it in the actual sea for months then call it back, otherwise they would know that corrosion is only half the problem. Unless the entire thing is sprayed in a toxic substance it will have all types of things growing on it after a month or two.
An enclosing pod that can alter it's buoyancy without external parts or ports would have made a lot more sense, then the drone can just launch out of the pod when it reaches the surface. The pod would then sink again so as to not leave a trace that a drone had been deployed in the area. Using a pod also gives you much more battery life as the drone does not need to carry all the standby power equipment and can maintain it's charge from the pod until launch.
It is a lump of metal and plastic, or hadn't you noticed?
About 20 years from now nanotechnology, 3D fabrication systems, AI and fusion power will be very far ahead of what we have now so the plan seems viable except for one little detail, why would we need to send humans at all?
There are already a large number of abandoned reactors in space, shitty old fission ones that are due to fall back to Earth in about 10,000 years from now.
And by "driving test" I mean the exact same test that humans do, by following the instructions of a human examiner who is talking to them.
That is the problem with anonymity, it is impossible to protect your reputation if you are anonymous (even if they were not childish twits half the time). Anyone can do wonderful or horrific things in the name of anonymous and there is nothing anyone else can do about it. In fact people can even take credit for what anonymous does by letting themselves "get caught" then claim they are the real anonymous and that all the new actions are by imposers. How could you prove they were not the original anonymous?
They are going to live stream the breeding program on the web, and you have to ask that question?
10 free pairs of shoes per year, for life, and he will stop threatening to vaporise the rest of humanity.
Because the bad guy market is a significant segment for Apple? Your logic is ridiculous. Most "good" people either do not even think about security or they trust companies and governments (in the free world) to mostly respect their rights and privacy even if back-doors are possible.
The truth is most bad guys are idiots and can't make a phone, let alone a secure one, and the OS is irrelevant if you don't have control of the firmware on the hardware the OS runs on. You don't really have much insight into what that device in your pocket really is or how it works, do you?
How can they mask the signal if a detector has a larger bandwidth? Part of your spectrum is going to have more energy, even if it is digitally smeared. However if they are also doing something tricky with multiple transmit locations and a random phase array effect a snooper can't even be sure what time period a section of the spectrum belongs in. So not only is your signal dancing around on different frequencies it is also dancing around in space and time so only the receivers with the correct key to track the random sequences can make use of the reflected signal off the targets. So yeah you could really encrypt a radar signal, but they didn't describe what I just did did they? :-)
We either have a fire on board or Harold is breathing heavily again, either way I've got a problem.
Last time I checked 100% of the junk in orbit got there intentionally, including a lot of nuclear reactors and stuff you should actually care about.
Plus have you ever seen a really fat Bangladeshi, most of Florida will just float to the new high tide line.
I hope they can improve their customer service because at the moment it is so bad, and their procedures so illogical, that it is faster to churn across to another service provider than it is to get Telstra to fix things, so if you are out of contract just jump and don't even bother asking them for help.
Why is there a need for people to do this work? How many online shops selling the same thing using images and advertising materials ripped off each other do we need? Call me cynical but this really just looks like party insiders finding yet another way to bleed millions out of a "plump pig" and the flow of money will mostly go into far fewer pockets than people imagine.
You just suggested that Apple have mislead the public when they implied that currently their systems are secure because if their systems could be compromised right now they would know about it given their intimate knowledge or their code and information technology in general. i.e. They know what is possible more than you ever could, and they have said nothing to suggest that the FBI request is redundant.
i.e. In seeking to support Apple you have actually condemned them as probable collaborators.
You are right about one thing, no system is entirely secure, but that does not prove any given system has been compromised, yet.
The last thing you want is for a botcab to turn up with something nasty inside that was left by the last passenger.
Swartz killed himself because he was mentally ill and not able to see the multitude of possible ways he could have extricated himself from the situation he found himself in, ways that would have allowed him to continue to be an effective advocate.
https://www.google.com/search?...
Yes, it is the same sort of distorted thinking (often shown in the media) that being a victim of crime somehow makes you an expert in criminology, social problems and what to do about them, when really you are just an expert (perhaps) in how the event impacted your your life.
Abstractly, it is the inappropriate projection of a local value into a global context, I am good at A therefore I am good at A...Z
However being famous and rich does not mean that you cannot be competent across a diverse range of topics, therefore we cannot dismiss people's opinions on the grounds that they are "just some guy who manage to climb up on the biggest soap box", we need to consider the value of their arguments without personalising the issue.
I for one welcome our very slow, car stealing, microbot overlords, but how good are they at playing Go?