Somebody needs to go and look up the definition of avatar.
The idea of recycling old jets into autonomous aircraft goes back many decades, the new part is putting AI in them, but suggesting there could still always be a man-in-the-middle is deceptive. It only works 100% if the jet can fly itself and make weapons fire decisions autonomously, that is not an avatar, that is the terminator, with wings.
Ah right, like having a radio transmitter on a robot with a constantly on, two way, broadband data link is a good idea, if it is trying to hide and not get hit. If you radiate energy of any frequency you can be detected and if you can be detected you can be targeted.
All of these ideas are over engineered yet lame, do the designers even role play possible scenarios before starting on a design? Haven't any of them seen these? https://www.youtube.com/watch?... or this https://www.youtube.com/watch?... A $1000 solution that is countered by a swarm of $20 drones is useless. Wouldn't it be easier to have a way of deploying a large number of small cheap drones with tangle lines and pull-out parachutes? You just launch them one after the other until all of your targets are eliminated. Given the noise (both types) that comes from a drone they probably could be auto targeting too if they have a neural network trained to ignore their own noise profile, therefore moronic assumptions like the target not moving are not required. Nothing could get away from something as fast as this this, https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
So with passive mode and triangulation they can locate you accurately no matter what you do, therefore going to all the trouble to stop active mode methods is ultimately futile and the behaviour of your "protected" phone would possibly cause you to get red flagged if you pass near an area they are operating in?
The trick is to not be so narrow minded when thinking through the entire scenario, because your advice, while technically lucid, could get people more attention than they otherwise would.
That is more probable than you think and potentially another of the reasons why the terrorist wanted to kill infidels. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
So he picks a fight and some good and innocent people die, but 100% of his country gets vaporised in the counter strike. He had better check the weather before he wumps SK too, because at the moment the fallout would poison most of eastern China. Or does he realise that and is trying to intimidate Xi Jinping as well? Somehow I don't think that strategy is likely to go well for him.
Cue cartoons of him in a nappy trying to count on his fingers, because that is the magnitude of his arsenal and the nature of his behaviour.
The capability to create it already exists at Apple and so if they do make it, use it for this case and destroy it afterwards, you just end up back at the start, where the capability to create it exists and they are no more or less likely to be coerced into doing it by any other party. They shot themselves in the foot when they indicated so publicly that they could, but would not do it. Furthermore if you claim that they can't make and then securely destroy such tools you are also claiming that they can't securely do anything and the iPhone isn't secure. You can't have it both ways. Anyway the phone can be cracked, it would just cost a lot more money than if Apple did it. All Apple has to do is take the phone into a clean room with the equipment needed, get the codes, hand them and the phone back to the FBI and then completely destroy the contents of the clean room. Apple just do not want to do it because it devalues their product in the eyes of those who have secrets and naively believe that no other party can crack the iPhone.
Sure if you think you are a better maker than they are breakers and you have a genuine need to lock down your network that hard by all means build hand crafted secure gatekeepers and monitoring devices so you can control the data flows on your networks and see what is going on without your logs being manipulated. You could also have your infrastructure more layered and virtualise more vulnerable processes so that you can throw them away and load a fresh one if you have suspicions that they are compromised. But who is going to monitor your logs 24/7, you? Or are you going to write an AI to do that for you too?
At the end of the day the sad fact of the matter is that, for the average person, protecting yourself 100% from intrusion takes as much work as never catching cold.
So good luck with that, and in the mean time you could look at other contingencies, like regular backups and discretion as to what information you store, in what form, and where you keep it. How many examples of people following all best practices and still getting owned can you think of anyway? Perhaps if you are specifically targeted by people with very high skill levels, but why do you feel that you would ever be more than the victim of a random selection?
As delusional as thinking the iPhone is currently secure from "state actors" (including foreign ones) if they physically get hold of it? Because that would be very delusional.
No, he is right, it can be done, the hard part is virtualising the entire phone in the first place, once you have done that you can crack it in milliseconds by running a thousand virtual copies in parallel.
So how do you virtualise a piece of computer hardware? With a form of diffraction tomography using a coherent light-source such as a synchrotron. The only problem is you need very smart people with very expensive gear to do it and that costs a hell of a lot of money that the FBI should not have to waste just because some company does not want to cooperate and hasten the inevitable. Once the iPhone is virtualised doing it for any device they (FBI) physically seize will become a lot cheaper and easier, the first one of anything always cost a lot. Can Apple protect their chips from this method? No, the tomography can operate in a room with less than the normal background radiation levels and be so weak as to go undetected by self destruction devices incorporated onto the silicon, because they need to be able to go though an airport x-ray scanner without self destructing too. The conceptual flaw in Apple device security is essentially that they are relying on a form of 'Security by Obscurity" because they think that people cant see inside the chips and watch the data and address lines operating, and they really should know better than to do that.
Exactly, in fact there is vector that joins any two place in the universe that traverses each black hole's event horizon, they are universal information routers therefore a huge primary burst that is shielded by one black-hole will manifest as multiple smaller echoes as it is routed to the observer with time delays according to the individual path distances, accounting for the fact that there is also further shielding of some of the echoes by other bodies.
What sort of idiot would not already know this about a work phone? It is same for a work PC, and work land line, or even a room at work. Oh yeah Apple users...
Slashdot Mirror
To see a big difference try all of these together Disconnect + AdBlock + ScriptBlock + FlashBlock + Vanilla (cookie blocker and manager)
Somebody needs to go and look up the definition of avatar.
The idea of recycling old jets into autonomous aircraft goes back many decades, the new part is putting AI in them, but suggesting there could still always be a man-in-the-middle is deceptive. It only works 100% if the jet can fly itself and make weapons fire decisions autonomously, that is not an avatar, that is the terminator, with wings.
What do you expect when the subject is electroluminescent tumescence?
What about bionic eyes or ears, do I have to leave those at the door too?
That is the gist of it isn't it, some guy encouraged a woman to publish utter rubbish knowing it would completely destroy her academic credibility?
Ah right, like having a radio transmitter on a robot with a constantly on, two way, broadband data link is a good idea, if it is trying to hide and not get hit. If you radiate energy of any frequency you can be detected and if you can be detected you can be targeted.
Why does he even get a mention on /. if everything that comes out of his mouth is suspect?
All of these ideas are over engineered yet lame, do the designers even role play possible scenarios before starting on a design? Haven't any of them seen these? https://www.youtube.com/watch?... or this https://www.youtube.com/watch?... A $1000 solution that is countered by a swarm of $20 drones is useless. Wouldn't it be easier to have a way of deploying a large number of small cheap drones with tangle lines and pull-out parachutes? You just launch them one after the other until all of your targets are eliminated. Given the noise (both types) that comes from a drone they probably could be auto targeting too if they have a neural network trained to ignore their own noise profile, therefore moronic assumptions like the target not moving are not required. Nothing could get away from something as fast as this this, https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
I think that an unsigned long int should hold that data without much risk of overflow.
Who cares what the lumps of meat think, in AI we trust. ;-)
So with passive mode and triangulation they can locate you accurately no matter what you do, therefore going to all the trouble to stop active mode methods is ultimately futile and the behaviour of your "protected" phone would possibly cause you to get red flagged if you pass near an area they are operating in?
The trick is to not be so narrow minded when thinking through the entire scenario, because your advice, while technically lucid, could get people more attention than they otherwise would.
Here is some more trivia for you, on Earth 151,600 people die each day, and more than twice that number are born.
That is more probable than you think and potentially another of the reasons why the terrorist wanted to kill infidels. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Pumpkins have far better range, https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
All NK has to do is put men in it's rockets and call them peaceful astronauts. Who just happen to take a nuclear lunch box with them.
There are so many reasons why SDI can't give 100% protection and even one failure would be economically devastating.
Better to cure the disease than just treat the symptoms.
So he picks a fight and some good and innocent people die, but 100% of his country gets vaporised in the counter strike. He had better check the weather before he wumps SK too, because at the moment the fallout would poison most of eastern China. Or does he realise that and is trying to intimidate Xi Jinping as well? Somehow I don't think that strategy is likely to go well for him.
Cue cartoons of him in a nappy trying to count on his fingers, because that is the magnitude of his arsenal and the nature of his behaviour.
The capability to create it already exists at Apple and so if they do make it, use it for this case and destroy it afterwards, you just end up back at the start, where the capability to create it exists and they are no more or less likely to be coerced into doing it by any other party. They shot themselves in the foot when they indicated so publicly that they could, but would not do it. Furthermore if you claim that they can't make and then securely destroy such tools you are also claiming that they can't securely do anything and the iPhone isn't secure. You can't have it both ways. Anyway the phone can be cracked, it would just cost a lot more money than if Apple did it. All Apple has to do is take the phone into a clean room with the equipment needed, get the codes, hand them and the phone back to the FBI and then completely destroy the contents of the clean room. Apple just do not want to do it because it devalues their product in the eyes of those who have secrets and naively believe that no other party can crack the iPhone.
Sure if you think you are a better maker than they are breakers and you have a genuine need to lock down your network that hard by all means build hand crafted secure gatekeepers and monitoring devices so you can control the data flows on your networks and see what is going on without your logs being manipulated. You could also have your infrastructure more layered and virtualise more vulnerable processes so that you can throw them away and load a fresh one if you have suspicions that they are compromised. But who is going to monitor your logs 24/7, you? Or are you going to write an AI to do that for you too?
At the end of the day the sad fact of the matter is that, for the average person, protecting yourself 100% from intrusion takes as much work as never catching cold.
So good luck with that, and in the mean time you could look at other contingencies, like regular backups and discretion as to what information you store, in what form, and where you keep it. How many examples of people following all best practices and still getting owned can you think of anyway? Perhaps if you are specifically targeted by people with very high skill levels, but why do you feel that you would ever be more than the victim of a random selection?
This is a philosopher, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
As delusional as thinking the iPhone is currently secure from "state actors" (including foreign ones) if they physically get hold of it? Because that would be very delusional.
Oh that ain't the half of it, http://www.doctorwho.tv/50-yea...
You didn't want to pay us for WiFi royalties anyway,
No, he is right, it can be done, the hard part is virtualising the entire phone in the first place, once you have done that you can crack it in milliseconds by running a thousand virtual copies in parallel.
:-)
So how do you virtualise a piece of computer hardware? With a form of diffraction tomography using a coherent light-source such as a synchrotron. The only problem is you need very smart people with very expensive gear to do it and that costs a hell of a lot of money that the FBI should not have to waste just because some company does not want to cooperate and hasten the inevitable. Once the iPhone is virtualised doing it for any device they (FBI) physically seize will become a lot cheaper and easier, the first one of anything always cost a lot. Can Apple protect their chips from this method? No, the tomography can operate in a room with less than the normal background radiation levels and be so weak as to go undetected by self destruction devices incorporated onto the silicon, because they need to be able to go though an airport x-ray scanner without self destructing too. The conceptual flaw in Apple device security is essentially that they are relying on a form of 'Security by Obscurity" because they think that people cant see inside the chips and watch the data and address lines operating, and they really should know better than to do that.
BTW Welcome to ten years ago.
Exactly, in fact there is vector that joins any two place in the universe that traverses each black hole's event horizon, they are universal information routers therefore a huge primary burst that is shielded by one black-hole will manifest as multiple smaller echoes as it is routed to the observer with time delays according to the individual path distances, accounting for the fact that there is also further shielding of some of the echoes by other bodies.
Oh Stan you silly man.
Read the screen grabs, http://imgur.com/a/Eb4yJ
[ This iPhone is managed by your organisation. ]
What sort of idiot would not already know this about a work phone? It is same for a work PC, and work land line, or even a room at work. Oh yeah Apple users...