From the article: "To disclose or not disclose -- it's a question that's been under heavy discussion in the computer security industry over the past year."
I think it's fair to say this debate has been raging for at least as long as Microsoft has been in existence.
While I appreciate and share your concerns regarding after-market brains, I can assure you that despite the label, this brain is in factory-fresh, like-new condition. She hardly ever uses it.
Unfortunately, I was sufficiently vague in my initial offer and for that, I apologize. It is not my brain, per se, that is available. Negotiations with the "donor" will begin immediately.
fobbman writes: "Don't be silly. I don't have the simulator. I've got the damned tank in my backyard. It's just that the neighbors got upset last time I blew up their Buick."
This reminds me of a Bill Cosby skit regarding the effect of Noah's arc on your average neighbor...
[thwap thwap thwap thwap] "Hey!" "Yes?" "What is this thing?" "It's an arc." "... Well could you get it out of my driveway? I have to get to work! [pause] What is this thing for, anyway?" "I can't tell you. HA HA HA HA HA HA HA." "Well, can't you just give me a little hint?" "You want a hint?" "Yes, please." "How long can you tread water? HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA."
Evil Adrian writes: "Has Escher's copyright run out yet?:-)"
Well, if we represent a timeline with an Escher staircase and we represent the passage of time as the people walking up the stairs, then the answer is no, his copyright will actually never run out. =)
Do-Over and Slashdot Interest
on
Ask William Shatner
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Mr Shatner,
If you went back in point to the moment you were offered the role of Captain Kirk, would you still take it? If so, why? If not, why and what would you have done differently?
Also, given that you agreed to a Q&A, I have to ask; are you a regular reader of Slashdot?
I'm no expert on cars but I'm told that when a transmission is about to go, you can forestall any symptoms by putting what is basically a glue, a thickener. This causes a hideous amount of wear to the transmission, however, and will simply accelerate the breakdown, but someone giving the car a once-over or a drive will notice nothing amis.
Anyway, what I'm driving at is...at what expense, if any, are they getting this performance boost? Are you essentially overclocking the neurons doing the work, causing them to just burn out that much faster?
Further, the article states: "For electrical signals, the low levels of noise essentially tickle the membranes of the neurons," he said, making them more likely to fire when there is a physical stimulus of some amplitude. For mechanical signals, noise serves to boost weak stimuli. "The experiment is a good example of how noise lets a neuron fire in the company of a signal that it is normally unable to detect,'' Dr. Collins said."
That's great, sounds like they're simply boosting the baseline so that it takes a smaller signal to breach the neuron firing threshold. Well...what else does it effect? Does it cause hypertension? Increased irritability? I'm just really skeptical that this technique just happens to help one thing through such a relatively clumsy, non-focused method and get away with harming nothing else in the process. Drugs with only precise effects and nothing bad are more or less the holy grail of pharmaceuticals.
Just a thought. This isn't a troll and I know even less about neuroscience than I know about cars (at least I know where to put the oil).
error0x100 writes: "Essentially, the gist of all this is that managers realise that most of the jobs in a retail store can be automated, and that all you really need is a few managers using the right software and hardware tools. You don't need human cashiers when the customer can just put his trolley of goods under a scanner that tallies his entire shopping cart in under a second and automatically bills his credit card. What this is probably going to mean, 10 or 20 years from now, is that HUGE numbers of people in retail and distributing are going to lose their jobs to these little tags."
I think one of the biggest reasons that online purchasing hasn't reached the levels that even the most conservative prognosticators guessed is because people feel more comfortable with human interaction.
For example, I can search for a book and virtually be guaranteed that I'll (a) find it faster and (b) find it in-stock by going to amazon.com or bn.com, yet I'd rather go to the actual store. Why? Because I can just sorta look around, pick up real books and talk to real people (both sales clerks and other customers).
I don't know if you have any of those 100% automated checkout lines at your local grocery store yet. Just put your stuff on the belt, it's scanned, tallied and you're presented with a bill. Even takes cash by way of a regular bill-sucking machine. Don't need a person at all. But I think you'll find a lot of people would rather wait in a line than scoot through one of them with no delay.
I know that's cliched, and probably more a matter of people becoming more comfortable with the method (ie, 20 year-olds never knew life without computers so they're generally more comfortable around them, etc.), but I don't expect to retail salespeople made obsolete quite that fast.
autechre writes: "What, exactly, does your Windows machine do with media files that Mplayer can't?"
For some reason I can't get sound to work on this mobo under linux. The code was poured over by a friend who then sent a rather detailed email to the maintainer but no reply was ever received.
Honestly, all I really care to do is play mp3's. Streaming video is nice and whatnot, but hardly ever done. If this machine had sound running, the other box would be a server or something.
Quaoar writes: "When Earth is threatened by a large asteroid, everyone should turn their radios on and play loud, annoying music until the rock explodes."
Oh, this is fantastic! Instead of launching building materials into space, you could simply supergun material into orbit or, safer, Lagrange points for longer-term parking, and then coagulate and shape them as needed. Of course space material could be used but if that was impractical for the need -- such as not providing the type of radiation shielding needed, for example -- this would be a cheap alternative.
I have two machines -- one dual-boots Win2k and Debian, the other is dedicated Windows and I despise Microsoft.
This machine, the one that dual-boots, only goes into Windows to play games (and if it wasn't for America's Army, that would never happen). The other machine is permanently booted into Windows and I use that exclusively for my media files; streaming video (news), audio, mp3's, etc.
So I guess the reason for Linux is all my primary use. Surfing, email, developing PHP code. Everything else is booting into Windows because it is generally dirt easy to set up and handles media with no issues.
I'm a linux fan but lord only knows that I'm still a bit hazy on driver modules, how they work, how to troubleshoot, etc. Anything but the most basic problem in Linux generally has me spending a good chunk of time trying to fix it. The difference is that with Linux it is fixable, but with Windows the worst-case scenario is a re-install. And since there is nothing important there and on a seperate partition, that's not such a bad thing.
comic-not writes: "You don't seem to know the difference between the Republic of China (ROC, AKA Taiwan) and the People's Republic of China (PRC) (Hint: the Square of the Heavenly Peace is in the latter one)."
Wups. There's a difference? How much do I suck?
Moderators! Flog me with every -1 you have, I utterly screwed up.
phillymjs writes "We're probably all familiar with Uzi Nissan and his fight to keep his nissan.com domain name from the clutches of Nissan Motors. Well, more same-name idiocy came to light today..."
I'm normally 100% on the side of the small guy but Uzi Nissan initially bought it for his own, private family business but -- and this is the important part -- he "modified its website to include a 'Nissan Computer' logo that was allegedly confusingly similar to plaintiff's logo and also included numerous banner advertisements linking to various automobile-related websites."
So let's not have a knee-jerk reaction which stipulates that "small guy good, big guy bad" (four legs good, two legs better?) every time push comes to shove. When we do, we start looking like reactionaries and that is the most effective way to discredit us as a group.
Yeah. I knew that you could. Chinese citizens are still regularly detained, imprisoned and killed for their thoughts and speech. And they want openness?
For once I'm with Microsoft I'm OUTRAGED that such an oppressive group of 1950 throwbacks, not one iota distinct from common criminals, would even request it. Tell them to shove it up their ass.
What do you want to bet that giving it a quick spray of clearcoat will render the disk substrate isolated from oxygen yet still useable?
What is to stop me from making a copy that is less unstable, for that matter (the article actual touches upon this at the end) once the price of blanks come down? A right, I might add (and we all know) that is codified in the Fair Use clause of Copyright law.
I'm gonna go out on a limb and say this isn't happening anytime soon.
John Hasler writes: But they are not required to reveal any details. The typical "disclosure" will appear in the legal notices section of a newspaper of record or some such thing and will look like this: "There was a break-in at Amazon some time in the last two weeks. Some customer data may have been compromised."
If it is that vague, what is the difference between forcing the people running the software to admit there was a break-in and forcing those who created the software from admitting there was a breach in their product? Why not require software manufacturers to release known security holes? That's closer to the root than this initiative is.
If you take the position that the admin should have secured the software, how do you know that? The information is sufficiently vague as to leave the culpability an unknown variable.
The end-result is "Some Company, Inc. was broken into and data was compromised," which looks terrible for Some Company, but you won't hear "...because of an unpatched and unacknowledged bug in Win2k that the admin couldn't either know or do anything about" because revealing the exploit is illegal, or at least professionally dangerous.
Look, I'm not flaming you and I'm VERY big on letting people know when their data has been compromised but why does the fan poop only get as far as the victim? That just seems inherently unfair unless the blame does turn out to be theirs.
On one hand you have lawmakers calling hackers 'thugs' and 'criminals' because -- and this is generally after months of reporting the problem to, say, Microsoft -- they notify the public that there is a security hole.
NOW they're going to make it illegal to not notify the public. Is telling the world about a security breach irresponsible or isn't it?
Yeesh. I feel like the whole gang from Bloom County who didn't know if they were watching "F Troop" or CNN and thus whether they should be enjoying the carnage or not.
Slashdot Mirror
From the article:
"To disclose or not disclose -- it's a question that's been under heavy discussion in the computer security industry over the past year."
I think it's fair to say this debate has been raging for at least as long as Microsoft has been in existence.
Dear IBM,
While I appreciate and share your concerns regarding after-market brains, I can assure you that despite the label, this brain is in factory-fresh, like-new condition. She hardly ever uses it.
Trust me. I'd know.
Regards,
Jason
----[%snip]----
Dear IBM,
Thank you for your prompt and courteous reply.
Unfortunately, I was sufficiently vague in my initial offer and for that, I apologize. It is not my brain, per se, that is available. Negotiations with the "donor" will begin immediately.
Regards,
Jason
----[%snip]----
Dear IBM,
I couldn't help but notice that you were hard at work developing a computer to rival the human brain to the tune of $184,000,000.
It just so happens that I have a human brain and I would be quite happy to let you use it for a tidy sum that is far below the aformentioned $184M.
Please give me a call at your earliest convenience to work out the details.
Thanks,
Jason
----[%snip]----
fobbman writes:
"Don't be silly. I don't have the simulator. I've got the damned tank in my backyard. It's just that the neighbors got upset last time I blew up their Buick."
This reminds me of a Bill Cosby skit regarding the effect of Noah's arc on your average neighbor...
[thwap thwap thwap thwap]
"Hey!"
"Yes?"
"What is this thing?"
"It's an arc."
"... Well could you get it out of my driveway? I have to get to work! [pause] What is this thing for, anyway?"
"I can't tell you. HA HA HA HA HA HA HA."
"Well, can't you just give me a little hint?"
"You want a hint?"
"Yes, please."
"How long can you tread water? HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA."
Evil Adrian writes: :-)"
"Has Escher's copyright run out yet?
Well, if we represent a timeline with an Escher staircase and we represent the passage of time as the people walking up the stairs, then the answer is no, his copyright will actually never run out. =)
Mr Shatner,
If you went back in point to the moment you were offered the role of Captain Kirk, would you still take it? If so, why? If not, why and what would you have done differently?
Also, given that you agreed to a Q&A, I have to ask; are you a regular reader of Slashdot?
I'm no expert on cars but I'm told that when a transmission is about to go, you can forestall any symptoms by putting what is basically a glue, a thickener. This causes a hideous amount of wear to the transmission, however, and will simply accelerate the breakdown, but someone giving the car a once-over or a drive will notice nothing amis.
...at what expense, if any, are they getting this performance boost? Are you essentially overclocking the neurons doing the work, causing them to just burn out that much faster?
...what else does it effect? Does it cause hypertension? Increased irritability? I'm just really skeptical that this technique just happens to help one thing through such a relatively clumsy, non-focused method and get away with harming nothing else in the process. Drugs with only precise effects and nothing bad are more or less the holy grail of pharmaceuticals.
Anyway, what I'm driving at is
Further, the article states:
"For electrical signals, the low levels of noise essentially tickle the membranes of the neurons," he said, making them more likely to fire when there is a physical stimulus of some amplitude. For mechanical signals, noise serves to boost weak stimuli. "The experiment is a good example of how noise lets a neuron fire in the company of a signal that it is normally unable to detect,'' Dr. Collins said."
That's great, sounds like they're simply boosting the baseline so that it takes a smaller signal to breach the neuron firing threshold. Well
Just a thought. This isn't a troll and I know even less about neuroscience than I know about cars (at least I know where to put the oil).
error0x100 writes:
"Essentially, the gist of all this is that managers realise that most of the jobs in a retail store can be automated, and that all you really need is a few managers using the right software and hardware tools. You don't need human cashiers when the customer can just put his trolley of goods under a scanner that tallies his entire shopping cart in under a second and automatically bills his credit card. What this is probably going to mean, 10 or 20 years from now, is that HUGE numbers of people in retail and distributing are going to lose their jobs to these little tags."
I think one of the biggest reasons that online purchasing hasn't reached the levels that even the most conservative prognosticators guessed is because people feel more comfortable with human interaction.
For example, I can search for a book and virtually be guaranteed that I'll (a) find it faster and (b) find it in-stock by going to amazon.com or bn.com, yet I'd rather go to the actual store. Why? Because I can just sorta look around, pick up real books and talk to real people (both sales clerks and other customers).
I don't know if you have any of those 100% automated checkout lines at your local grocery store yet. Just put your stuff on the belt, it's scanned, tallied and you're presented with a bill. Even takes cash by way of a regular bill-sucking machine. Don't need a person at all. But I think you'll find a lot of people would rather wait in a line than scoot through one of them with no delay.
I know that's cliched, and probably more a matter of people becoming more comfortable with the method (ie, 20 year-olds never knew life without computers so they're generally more comfortable around them, etc.), but I don't expect to retail salespeople made obsolete quite that fast.
Makarand writes:
The surface of a Smart Display will be touch sensitive allowing you to interact using a finger or a stylus."
This sounds suspiciously like my girlfriend...
autechre writes:
"What, exactly, does your Windows machine do with media files that Mplayer can't?"
For some reason I can't get sound to work on this mobo under linux. The code was poured over by a friend who then sent a rather detailed email to the maintainer but no reply was ever received.
Honestly, all I really care to do is play mp3's. Streaming video is nice and whatnot, but hardly ever done. If this machine had sound running, the other box would be a server or something.
Quaoar writes:
"When Earth is threatened by a large asteroid, everyone should turn their radios on and play loud, annoying music until the rock explodes."
That, more or less, worked against Manuel Noriega...
Oh, this is fantastic! Instead of launching building materials into space, you could simply supergun material into orbit or, safer, Lagrange points for longer-term parking, and then coagulate and shape them as needed. Of course space material could be used but if that was impractical for the need -- such as not providing the type of radiation shielding needed, for example -- this would be a cheap alternative.
This is the best news I've heard all day.
I have two machines -- one dual-boots Win2k and Debian, the other is dedicated Windows and I despise Microsoft.
This machine, the one that dual-boots, only goes into Windows to play games (and if it wasn't for America's Army, that would never happen). The other machine is permanently booted into Windows and I use that exclusively for my media files; streaming video (news), audio, mp3's, etc.
So I guess the reason for Linux is all my primary use. Surfing, email, developing PHP code. Everything else is booting into Windows because it is generally dirt easy to set up and handles media with no issues.
I'm a linux fan but lord only knows that I'm still a bit hazy on driver modules, how they work, how to troubleshoot, etc. Anything but the most basic problem in Linux generally has me spending a good chunk of time trying to fix it. The difference is that with Linux it is fixable, but with Windows the worst-case scenario is a re-install. And since there is nothing important there and on a seperate partition, that's not such a bad thing.
...and in other news, today is the "Latest Day, Ever."
comic-not writes:
"You don't seem to know the difference between the Republic of China (ROC, AKA Taiwan) and the People's Republic of China (PRC) (Hint: the Square of the Heavenly Peace is in the latter one)."
Wups. There's a difference? How much do I suck?
Moderators! Flog me with every -1 you have, I utterly screwed up.
phillymjs writes
"We're probably all familiar with Uzi Nissan and his fight to keep his nissan.com domain name from the clutches of Nissan Motors. Well, more same-name idiocy came to light today..."
I'm normally 100% on the side of the small guy but Uzi Nissan initially bought it for his own, private family business but -- and this is the important part -- he "modified its website to include a 'Nissan Computer' logo that was allegedly confusingly similar to plaintiff's logo and also included numerous banner advertisements linking to various automobile-related websites."
So let's not have a knee-jerk reaction which stipulates that "small guy good, big guy bad" (four legs good, two legs better?) every time push comes to shove. When we do, we start looking like reactionaries and that is the most effective way to discredit us as a group.
comic-not writes:
"Nope. Don't have any mod points handy just now, so here's the intelligent reply: Taiwan is a democratic, modern country which..."
From the article:
"...the Republic of China government has asked Microsoft to open Windows source code..."
Anything else? =)
pjgeer writes:
"Taiwan, not China, read the blurb"
From the article:
"...the Republic of China government has asked Microsoft to open Windows source code..."
Anything else? =)
China has some balls suggesting Microsoft open it's code to their government when the Chinese government isn't open to it's own populace.
Can you say "Tiananmen Square, 1989?"
Yeah. I knew that you could. Chinese citizens are still regularly detained, imprisoned and killed for their thoughts and speech. And they want openness?
For once I'm with Microsoft I'm OUTRAGED that such an oppressive group of 1950 throwbacks, not one iota distinct from common criminals, would even request it. Tell them to shove it up their ass.
What do you want to bet that giving it a quick spray of clearcoat will render the disk substrate isolated from oxygen yet still useable?
What is to stop me from making a copy that is less unstable, for that matter (the article actual touches upon this at the end) once the price of blanks come down? A right, I might add (and we all know) that is codified in the Fair Use clause of Copyright law.
I'm gonna go out on a limb and say this isn't happening anytime soon.
John Hasler writes:
But they are not required to reveal any details. The typical "disclosure" will appear in the legal notices section of a newspaper of record or some such thing and will look like this: "There was a break-in at Amazon some time in the last two weeks. Some customer data may have been compromised."
If it is that vague, what is the difference between forcing the people running the software to admit there was a break-in and forcing those who created the software from admitting there was a breach in their product? Why not require software manufacturers to release known security holes? That's closer to the root than this initiative is.
If you take the position that the admin should have secured the software, how do you know that? The information is sufficiently vague as to leave the culpability an unknown variable.
The end-result is "Some Company, Inc. was broken into and data was compromised," which looks terrible for Some Company, but you won't hear "...because of an unpatched and unacknowledged bug in Win2k that the admin couldn't either know or do anything about" because revealing the exploit is illegal, or at least professionally dangerous.
Look, I'm not flaming you and I'm VERY big on letting people know when their data has been compromised but why does the fan poop only get as far as the victim? That just seems inherently unfair unless the blame does turn out to be theirs.
Oh, I wish you could bequeath karma to someone because your comment is way better than mine.
Uhh_Duh wrote:
"Seriously, linux w/ a touchscreen?? How useful is that?!"
I agree. When was the last time you heard Picard say, "Data, bring up the command-line interface!"
On one hand you have lawmakers calling hackers 'thugs' and 'criminals' because -- and this is generally after months of reporting the problem to, say, Microsoft -- they notify the public that there is a security hole.
NOW they're going to make it illegal to not notify the public. Is telling the world about a security breach irresponsible or isn't it?
Yeesh. I feel like the whole gang from Bloom County who didn't know if they were watching "F Troop" or CNN and thus whether they should be enjoying the carnage or not.