I kind of agree with you, although I personally don't really consider Trump a viable alternative, but would like to add that the problem with this AI is that it apparently can't tell an evil grin / fake smile from a real smile. Humans can do that fairly well.
Why shouldn't Wikileaks make politics? There is no valid reason not to. Take a look at NYT or CNN and tell me they don't have political opinions. Every journalist and every press organization is biased in one way or another, and of course Julian Assange and other Wikipeaks members have opinions. The only problem you have with people that are in such positions and have political opinions is really just that they don't happen to have your political opinion.
These treaties should be canceled or at least more limited, because (a) the US justice system does not really guarantee a fair trial, (b) US penal law has around 10 times higher maximum sentences than in the rest of the civilized world, so it is unreasonable from the perspective of other countries, (c) the US still allows and executes the death penalty, which violates human rights and is prohibited or no longer practiced in most other civilized countries (Japan being a notable exception), and (d) the US penal system defies human dignity and involves serious human rights abuses (e.g. permanent prison lock downs, solitary confinement, serious and sometimes even life-threatening malnutrition of inmates due to a diet based on calories rather than healthy ingredients, not adequately preventing rape and violence in prisons, etc.).
You should point out the countless inadequacies of the US system to your local lawmakers to urge them to revise extradition treaties.
Serious question, not an attempt to troll. What kind of people buy these 'smart TVs' and why? For Internet? Doesn't almost everybody have a PC or tablet nowadays anyway?
I also don't support Putin in any way whatsoever, because he is known to be a poison murderer, has annexed the Crimea, wages an illegal war against the Ukraine, and is responsible for various war crimes and crimes against humanity.
Actually, it appears that the real actor was rather John Kerry in this case - to support his party and prevent Wikileaks from dumping more emails before the last presidential debate.
What's worse, this is insanity even if Russia is behind the hacks. By publicly announcing a 'cyber strike' in advance, the Russian government would be practically forced to retaliate for it in order not to loose face in front of their own people. This would be a certain recipe for a quick escalation and cannot be in anyone's interest.
This is all bullshit, both the critique on Trump and this alleged email scandal.
These are both pseudo-scandals and the obvious result of concerted, well-orchestrated media campaigns. In my opinion, both parties run disgusting and immoral smear campaigns, and it really saddens me that (apparently) American voters are so easy to influence and distract from the real topics. Yes, I know that US presidential campaigns have always been a lot about the personality of the candidates, but I've followed many of them and this one is an absolute low so far. And just to make this clear, the Democrats are just as much to blame for this as Trump. There are no real arguments and only personal attacks on both sides, it's a disgrace.
The thought frightens me that the next president of the most important nation on earth (in terms of economic and military power) could be elected, because two days before election someone publishes a video in which the other candidate says "woah, what a nice piece of ass", or the next president could be elected because two days before the election an email shows up in which the other candidate writes "fuck those idiots in Benghazi, they died because they were incompetent" -- or whatever people dig out from the past (up to 30 years ago) or from dubious unconfirmed Internet sources and "leak" to the press.
It's not really my business, but if I were a US voter, I'd completely and deliberately ignore Trump's real or alleged misogyny and whatever emails Clinton has deleted or not, ignore all this mud slinging, and instead make a decision on the basis of the policies and plans that the candidates have laid out. If Clinton and Trump are really the "creme de la creme" of US politics and the whole nation really cannot come up with better candidates for the highest office, please at least make political issues count.
People in India need to eat something, too, and most of them are piss poor in comparison to US standards anyway. It's hard to find a reason why they shouldn't deserve to get work on an international labor market. I bet I'm going to be downvoted for this, and fully understand the personal problems of the workers who get fired, of course, but there is also another side to these kind of stories.
I'm not pro-Trump at all and welcome future President Clinton, but this extreme campaign bullshit hypocrisy on both sides is more than annoying. (Don't get me wrong, it's same way in most other countries.) Maybe there are some male US politicians who have never talked this way in their life -- mormons, religious fanatics and extreme douchebags come to my mind --, but they surely are in a minority and nobody in his right mind would want to have one of those as a president.
I understand when some naive women are outraged about this tape, unless they happen to work as prostitutes women often have no clue what and how men are talking when they are among themselves (or how often and in which way they masturbate, to give another example). But the vast majority of all men knows better, and the hypocrites among them in both parties with their fake shock and concern really are just assholes. That's my opinion about them.
Tell me something new. I understand the purpose of this device perfectly well. What I'm saying is that there are only very few threat scenarios in which such a device makes any sense at all. The only data that is better lost than sacrificed are server logs and various types of incriminating evidence. For your personal data, on the other hand, instant wiping is worthless and dangerous, so you will need backups, thus the attacker will attack the backups, of course. Thanks.
Makes no sense. If you keep secure backups, then the data is not wiped. The attacker will obtain the passphrases first (keylogger, camera, bug, attacks on software, soc. engineering) and then obtain the backups. If you wipe the keys, on the other hand, then your backups are worthless, too.
The problem is that for many if not most threat scenarios you definitely don't want your data wiped immediately once somebody tries to access your computer. But has it could have its uses, e.g. as a secure server that doesn't store anything precious. You might want to physically disable the USB ports for some uses, though.
True, but Putin has a vested interest in seeing Trump elected. His goal is to destabilize Europe and further pro-Russian right wing movements there, and Trump as US president would make this happen for sure even if he'd just stick to 10% of the isolationism he has advocated so far.
Hillary's strategy is 100% calculus. Troves of aides have analyzed Trump's key vulnerability, which is the question whether he has the personal integrity to be a statesman, and now they act on this knowledge. They started early with this strategy to counter Trump's attempt to portray his campaign as a sort of grass-root movement, which would have been very powerful if successful. At the same time, the strategy also deflects from Hillary's lack of empathy and robot-like evil smiles, issues that would be decisive against her if she ran against another Republican candidate.
Hillary will win without a doubt, but she's going to be hated a lot and might not get re-elected for a second term.
Overall, this campaign will go down as the lowest, most personal and most childish campaign in history so far, and certainly not just because of Trump's annoying personality, but also because of the Democrats' working strategy.
With my wild imagination I prefer to think that those tools were part of a deliberate but failed NSA attempt to lure someone out, set up a false-flag hacker group or disinform about their capabilities, some scripts they quickly smashed together, took from internal classes, contractors or old ad hoc testing code, and that these tools have not much to do with their real systems. Or, someone put these out to discredit the NSA. But maybe I think a bit too highly of the NSA's skills and have read too many spy novels.
The problem with God is first and foremost that it's not a coherent concept. God is omniscient and omnipotent. These two properties alone create irreconcilable logical and metaphysical problems. Then there are other problems like the theodicy problem that are pretty hard to answer consistently despite many vain (and sometimes ridiculous) attempts by theologists over many centuries. On the other hand, a supernatural being that is neither omniscient nor omnipotent is not particularly implausible, so if that's your concept of God, then you're way better off.
But the crucial point is this: Asking whether we live in a simulation or not is a completely different type of question. There is nothing particularly religious about it. You can just ask it out of curiosity, for instance, and the concept of a simulation is not a religious concept. The question is also not illogical and there might even be (non-obvious) ways to answer it. There could be bugs in the simulation, for instance, that we might be able to recognize as such.
You guys are making lots of fun of this, and maybe it's all false alarm, but then again some foreign intelligence agency might indeed try to massively influence your elections. I wouldn't consider that funny if I were you.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think anybody should go to jail for defacing a website, but somebody should give him a slap on the wrist.
I kind of agree with you, although I personally don't really consider Trump a viable alternative, but would like to add that the problem with this AI is that it apparently can't tell an evil grin / fake smile from a real smile. Humans can do that fairly well.
Why shouldn't Wikileaks make politics? There is no valid reason not to. Take a look at NYT or CNN and tell me they don't have political opinions. Every journalist and every press organization is biased in one way or another, and of course Julian Assange and other Wikipeaks members have opinions. The only problem you have with people that are in such positions and have political opinions is really just that they don't happen to have your political opinion.
These treaties should be canceled or at least more limited, because (a) the US justice system does not really guarantee a fair trial, (b) US penal law has around 10 times higher maximum sentences than in the rest of the civilized world, so it is unreasonable from the perspective of other countries, (c) the US still allows and executes the death penalty, which violates human rights and is prohibited or no longer practiced in most other civilized countries (Japan being a notable exception), and (d) the US penal system defies human dignity and involves serious human rights abuses (e.g. permanent prison lock downs, solitary confinement, serious and sometimes even life-threatening malnutrition of inmates due to a diet based on calories rather than healthy ingredients, not adequately preventing rape and violence in prisons, etc.).
You should point out the countless inadequacies of the US system to your local lawmakers to urge them to revise extradition treaties.
Serious question, not an attempt to troll. What kind of people buy these 'smart TVs' and why? For Internet? Doesn't almost everybody have a PC or tablet nowadays anyway?
I also don't support Putin in any way whatsoever, because he is known to be a poison murderer, has annexed the Crimea, wages an illegal war against the Ukraine, and is responsible for various war crimes and crimes against humanity.
Actually, it appears that the real actor was rather John Kerry in this case - to support his party and prevent Wikileaks from dumping more emails before the last presidential debate.
So "unwanted kiss" sounds better to you? To me they sound roughly the same.
What's worse, this is insanity even if Russia is behind the hacks. By publicly announcing a 'cyber strike' in advance, the Russian government would be practically forced to retaliate for it in order not to loose face in front of their own people. This would be a certain recipe for a quick escalation and cannot be in anyone's interest.
This is all bullshit, both the critique on Trump and this alleged email scandal.
These are both pseudo-scandals and the obvious result of concerted, well-orchestrated media campaigns. In my opinion, both parties run disgusting and immoral smear campaigns, and it really saddens me that (apparently) American voters are so easy to influence and distract from the real topics. Yes, I know that US presidential campaigns have always been a lot about the personality of the candidates, but I've followed many of them and this one is an absolute low so far. And just to make this clear, the Democrats are just as much to blame for this as Trump. There are no real arguments and only personal attacks on both sides, it's a disgrace.
The thought frightens me that the next president of the most important nation on earth (in terms of economic and military power) could be elected, because two days before election someone publishes a video in which the other candidate says "woah, what a nice piece of ass", or the next president could be elected because two days before the election an email shows up in which the other candidate writes "fuck those idiots in Benghazi, they died because they were incompetent" -- or whatever people dig out from the past (up to 30 years ago) or from dubious unconfirmed Internet sources and "leak" to the press.
It's not really my business, but if I were a US voter, I'd completely and deliberately ignore Trump's real or alleged misogyny and whatever emails Clinton has deleted or not, ignore all this mud slinging, and instead make a decision on the basis of the policies and plans that the candidates have laid out. If Clinton and Trump are really the "creme de la creme" of US politics and the whole nation really cannot come up with better candidates for the highest office, please at least make political issues count.
People in India need to eat something, too, and most of them are piss poor in comparison to US standards anyway. It's hard to find a reason why they shouldn't deserve to get work on an international labor market. I bet I'm going to be downvoted for this, and fully understand the personal problems of the workers who get fired, of course, but there is also another side to these kind of stories.
Wow, you've really taught me a lesson here. Such a smart and witty reply! Is there a newsletter I can subscribe to?
I'm not pro-Trump at all and welcome future President Clinton, but this extreme campaign bullshit hypocrisy on both sides is more than annoying. (Don't get me wrong, it's same way in most other countries.) Maybe there are some male US politicians who have never talked this way in their life -- mormons, religious fanatics and extreme douchebags come to my mind --, but they surely are in a minority and nobody in his right mind would want to have one of those as a president.
I understand when some naive women are outraged about this tape, unless they happen to work as prostitutes women often have no clue what and how men are talking when they are among themselves (or how often and in which way they masturbate, to give another example). But the vast majority of all men knows better, and the hypocrites among them in both parties with their fake shock and concern really are just assholes. That's my opinion about them.
It really doesn't, you're just a victim of selection bias.
That money makes a huge difference. Because of her ads she's just that tad little bit less hated to get enough votes to ensure her election.
Tell me something new. I understand the purpose of this device perfectly well. What I'm saying is that there are only very few threat scenarios in which such a device makes any sense at all. The only data that is better lost than sacrificed are server logs and various types of incriminating evidence. For your personal data, on the other hand, instant wiping is worthless and dangerous, so you will need backups, thus the attacker will attack the backups, of course. Thanks.
Makes no sense. If you keep secure backups, then the data is not wiped. The attacker will obtain the passphrases first (keylogger, camera, bug, attacks on software, soc. engineering) and then obtain the backups. If you wipe the keys, on the other hand, then your backups are worthless, too.
The problem is that for many if not most threat scenarios you definitely don't want your data wiped immediately once somebody tries to access your computer. But has it could have its uses, e.g. as a secure server that doesn't store anything precious. You might want to physically disable the USB ports for some uses, though.
True, but Putin has a vested interest in seeing Trump elected. His goal is to destabilize Europe and further pro-Russian right wing movements there, and Trump as US president would make this happen for sure even if he'd just stick to 10% of the isolationism he has advocated so far.
Hillary's strategy is 100% calculus. Troves of aides have analyzed Trump's key vulnerability, which is the question whether he has the personal integrity to be a statesman, and now they act on this knowledge. They started early with this strategy to counter Trump's attempt to portray his campaign as a sort of grass-root movement, which would have been very powerful if successful. At the same time, the strategy also deflects from Hillary's lack of empathy and robot-like evil smiles, issues that would be decisive against her if she ran against another Republican candidate.
Hillary will win without a doubt, but she's going to be hated a lot and might not get re-elected for a second term.
Overall, this campaign will go down as the lowest, most personal and most childish campaign in history so far, and certainly not just because of Trump's annoying personality, but also because of the Democrats' working strategy.
With my wild imagination I prefer to think that those tools were part of a deliberate but failed NSA attempt to lure someone out, set up a false-flag hacker group or disinform about their capabilities, some scripts they quickly smashed together, took from internal classes, contractors or old ad hoc testing code, and that these tools have not much to do with their real systems. Or, someone put these out to discredit the NSA. But maybe I think a bit too highly of the NSA's skills and have read too many spy novels.
The parent post is not insightful at all.
The problem with God is first and foremost that it's not a coherent concept. God is omniscient and omnipotent. These two properties alone create irreconcilable logical and metaphysical problems. Then there are other problems like the theodicy problem that are pretty hard to answer consistently despite many vain (and sometimes ridiculous) attempts by theologists over many centuries. On the other hand, a supernatural being that is neither omniscient nor omnipotent is not particularly implausible, so if that's your concept of God, then you're way better off.
But the crucial point is this: Asking whether we live in a simulation or not is a completely different type of question. There is nothing particularly religious about it. You can just ask it out of curiosity, for instance, and the concept of a simulation is not a religious concept. The question is also not illogical and there might even be (non-obvious) ways to answer it. There could be bugs in the simulation, for instance, that we might be able to recognize as such.
I like this Q&A, so go fuck yourself!
You guys are making lots of fun of this, and maybe it's all false alarm, but then again some foreign intelligence agency might indeed try to massively influence your elections. I wouldn't consider that funny if I were you.
What's the point of an encrypted VPN that anybody can decrypt within minutes?