Google might be the hardest to avoid, giving its status as a search engine. Alternative search engines would likely have to spread via word of mouth, or by a mass market shift away from Google, should Google decide to censor. Same goes for DNS providers.
"Failing to implement" means it was a failure, not an intent to circumvent or violate.
Volkswagon's violation was intentional.
While a "robots.txt" file is unknown, and is intentionally hidden from the user. It is intended to only be visible to "bots" which are actively looking for a "robots.txt". As bots are not sentient, they must be programmed by an individual aware of the existence and purpose of "robots.txt", and understands it to be more than a request.
Though, if "robots.txt" isn't required to be understood to be more than a request, then the same must be applied for "Do Not Track" settings in a browser. Thus any website which is aware of "Do Not Track", and violates DNT, would be liable to criminal charges.
"Robots.txt" is something you have to know is there. No "hacking" is required to avoid it or bypass it. If you don't know its there, it doesn't exist.
Once you know it is there, and then fail to abide by the terms and conditions, then maybe it qualifies as a violation which should be a felony under CFAA. As was written above, the request LinkedIn placed was poorly worded.
If you've seen the setups various different county and small town governments, it might actually be a toss up. The IT budgets seem to be local, which means security is lax if implemented at all. Security by obscurity seems to be the name of the game. Cloud Services are protected by trained security professionals. So while you've got a single big target, it is a target that is protected. Might be the difference between burying gold in the backyard, and storing it at Fort Knox.
Are we actually talking "government secrets"? Or are we talking some more uniform way to store essentially the same "private information" that businesses collect and store "in the cloud" already?
I am expecting more of a push for the civilian branches to move towards a more centralized and standardized platform.
SI-Simulated Intelligence: Things like the "Computer" in Star Trek, Siri, Cortana, Alexa, and many a chatbot. They are programmed to mimic and respond to human interactions.
ML-Machine Learning: Machine learning algorithms which can adapt, and thus make decisions or interpret data. The computer which can play "Go" is an apt example.
Sentient Computerized Intelligence: This is Skynet at its peak. Cortana in Halo?, Data, the EMH/Doctor, etc. These are self-aware, self-driven machines. They are more likely to exist as advanced versions of Simulated Intelligence, but likely have the capability of machine learning AI.
Federal agencies was mentioned several times. It merely affects the civilian branches of the US government, not civilians in the private sector. Still, I doubt there is much of a market left. Too much bad PR.
Fake it til you make it! Classic advice from a time before "expert" computerized lie detectors in the form of emotion recognition. Now its fake it until Big Brother is sufficiently advanced enough, and commodotized enough to see through you.
Agreed. Except coaching softball, etc, grants a leadership experience role, and other experience which can be leveraged into a promotion, or leveraged into moving out of IT and into another role in the organization.
But, yeah, I do feel that IT is as ErichTheRed points out, a series of jumping in and out of rabbit holes, which is a job for the young and unattached.
There is no need to disturb the original thread until the type of traffic is identified. No need to intercept and conduct a man-in-the-middle attack. Just do some packet sniffing. So all that latency you went on about is a non-issue as far as the customer is concerned.
Where the rub comes in is for the ISP to have sufficient processing power to identify the traffic of multitudes to throttle or block it. Which the ISP can mask by calling it "burst speeds up to".
By the rest of the packets, my intent wasn't to convey the ISP needed the entire 5-20GB of HD video footage. What I meant to convey was that a single frame of video encoded for streaming typically does not contain an entire and recognizable image, unlike a frame on Blu-Ray. Thus they would need a set of packets to build a few frames to positively identify the media as video.
Probably a moot point though, we're likely talking an encrypted video feed, which means they would have to intercept and conduct a man in the middle attack to decode the video. Which can be done well individually, but not en masse without severely bottlenecking the infrastructure.
Since Google started complaining about non-HTTPS websites, every website with a major web presence is HTTPS. Of course there is no noticeable difference between a TLS encrypted packet, and a packet encrypted using ipsec or whatever encryption protocol the chosen VPN uses.
Even still, a udp video stream is typically a partial chunk of bits, almost impossible to reconstruct into anything legible without the rest of the packets. Aside from that, video "encoding" is not a great leap from "encryption" aside from the fact that most players have the ability to decrypt video.
Try comparing the differences between encrypted and unencrypted short emails, or SMS, or MMS messages. Something that is likely to fit within the MTU size.
Not exactly. Whack the wrong customer(s) too many times and the competitor who doesn't block or overcharge for said traffic wins the day. That is more than $50 per whack.
Of course this requires a means of unifying without the internet. So corporations will be the mostly likely ones to leave major ISPs for another option.
The government does not, but the American economy considers the telephone, internet access, and a mailing address to be basic necessities. Do without any one of those and you will be marginalized, and your earning potential will be quite limited.
Wait, didn't we know this was happening 20 years ago? If I remember correctly, that started back in the 90s, sometime. As soon as advertisers found out about cookies, it began.
The parent suggested that encryption would be blocked.
While numerous forms of encryption are utilized on the net, when I see the term used in a manner such as the parent, I assume VPN. Encryption is a big part of how a VPN operates, as well as why it is used.
I don't even have a choice. AT&T no longer services my area, not does any other provider. I can barely get a cell signal, not enough to even use data on a smart phone.
Fortunately, I have a DSL account grandfathered in.
So basically the hate speech law takes away responsibility from citizens, and places yhe actions of citizens entirely the shoulders of content creators.
I used Windows 8 very early in its life. I'm also using Windows 8.1, and Windows 10 Pro, and Windows Vista on a daily basis.
The tiles on Windows 8 could be organized, but if I recall, you had to zoom out on the Start Menu to get to the grouping system. I haven't replicated the functionality on 8.1 yet, but it seems to be a step backwards.
Windows 10 significantly improves the functionality. Anniversary seemed good, but I barely used it. I have few complaints about the Fall Creators' Start Menu. It functions the way you would expect the Windows 8 Metro interface should work, and it is very customizable. With enough work I am beginning to think it is actually an improvement over the Windows 7 start menu. The lack of Jump Lists of any kind does hold it back, but otherwise I think they've finally managed an improvement, if only slightly, over the Vista/7 Start Menu.
Where Windows 10 shines is on the Surface. Sure I've said it is a prototype of sorts, but it really demonstrates what Windows 10 is capable of. It proves itself to be a transitionary or dualistic OS.
Once you've typed in the full name into the run dialog box, you never have to type the whole thing again. Effectively it works very similarly, but there are a few differences.
One difference is since it isn't a search, it never hits the file system after it loads. Which makes a big difference in performance if you're still using a mechanical drive, or simply have a lot of files to search through. I've considered indexing the entire drive simply to avoid the slowdowns and unresponsiveness once the search finishes sith the indexed locations.
Another difference is that since it doesn't search, there is usually a lower amount of risk of hitting enter on the wrong App or file, while Windows shuffles them around as you type. This is the biggest reason I avoid search.
The old school search history is pretty good at learning, which means the items you call upon most frequently are there waiting.
The final difference is you can add batch scripts to your $PATH to be more precise, and to automate various tasks. (I have a game mode script, which kills everything but Steam. I've also got an iTunes script which fires all the related executables and services, and kills them when I'm done. Best one is for the corporate VPN. Emergency purposes only, no reason to have it running all the time.)
And the flipside of it is that Windows 7's start menu is itself a dogs breakfast of poor usability and poor design choices.
How exactly would you improve on a compact, low mouse travel distance UI, with user customizable organization methods, and a built-in search feature which will return applications in the organization system, as well as those which are not?
Windows 7's Start Menu is clearly an evolved design centered around practical application.
Slashdot Mirror
Google might be the hardest to avoid, giving its status as a search engine. Alternative search engines would likely have to spread via word of mouth, or by a mass market shift away from Google, should Google decide to censor. Same goes for DNS providers.
Net Neutrality is about preventing much worse..
Datacollection does not equate to controlling other sites. Facebook does not control Slashdot.
"Failing to implement" means it was a failure, not an intent to circumvent or violate.
Volkswagon's violation was intentional.
While a "robots.txt" file is unknown, and is intentionally hidden from the user. It is intended to only be visible to "bots" which are actively looking for a "robots.txt". As bots are not sentient, they must be programmed by an individual aware of the existence and purpose of "robots.txt", and understands it to be more than a request.
Though, if "robots.txt" isn't required to be understood to be more than a request, then the same must be applied for "Do Not Track" settings in a browser. Thus any website which is aware of "Do Not Track", and violates DNT, would be liable to criminal charges.
"Robots.txt" is something you have to know is there. No "hacking" is required to avoid it or bypass it. If you don't know its there, it doesn't exist. Once you know it is there, and then fail to abide by the terms and conditions, then maybe it qualifies as a violation which should be a felony under CFAA. As was written above, the request LinkedIn placed was poorly worded.
Yes, a "good bot" should follow robots.txt. But failing to implement a standard is not "hacking".
If you've seen the setups various different county and small town governments, it might actually be a toss up. The IT budgets seem to be local, which means security is lax if implemented at all. Security by obscurity seems to be the name of the game. Cloud Services are protected by trained security professionals. So while you've got a single big target, it is a target that is protected. Might be the difference between burying gold in the backyard, and storing it at Fort Knox.
Are we actually talking "government secrets"? Or are we talking some more uniform way to store essentially the same "private information" that businesses collect and store "in the cloud" already? I am expecting more of a push for the civilian branches to move towards a more centralized and standardized platform.
SI-Simulated Intelligence: Things like the "Computer" in Star Trek, Siri, Cortana, Alexa, and many a chatbot. They are programmed to mimic and respond to human interactions.
ML-Machine Learning: Machine learning algorithms which can adapt, and thus make decisions or interpret data. The computer which can play "Go" is an apt example.
Sentient Computerized Intelligence: This is Skynet at its peak. Cortana in Halo?, Data, the EMH/Doctor, etc. These are self-aware, self-driven machines. They are more likely to exist as advanced versions of Simulated Intelligence, but likely have the capability of machine learning AI.
Federal agencies was mentioned several times. It merely affects the civilian branches of the US government, not civilians in the private sector. Still, I doubt there is much of a market left. Too much bad PR.
Fake it til you make it! Classic advice from a time before "expert" computerized lie detectors in the form of emotion recognition. Now its fake it until Big Brother is sufficiently advanced enough, and commodotized enough to see through you.
Diving in and out of rabbit holes. That is how I view IT as well. That is what I rely on for job security.
Agreed. Except coaching softball, etc, grants a leadership experience role, and other experience which can be leveraged into a promotion, or leveraged into moving out of IT and into another role in the organization.
But, yeah, I do feel that IT is as ErichTheRed points out, a series of jumping in and out of rabbit holes, which is a job for the young and unattached.
Non-Career or life goal focused responsibilities can undermine one's ability to excel in one's chosen career.
So to can life's responsibilities recieved at inopportune times. But that's life. Life never goes according to plan.
There is no need to disturb the original thread until the type of traffic is identified. No need to intercept and conduct a man-in-the-middle attack. Just do some packet sniffing. So all that latency you went on about is a non-issue as far as the customer is concerned.
Where the rub comes in is for the ISP to have sufficient processing power to identify the traffic of multitudes to throttle or block it. Which the ISP can mask by calling it "burst speeds up to".
By the rest of the packets, my intent wasn't to convey the ISP needed the entire 5-20GB of HD video footage. What I meant to convey was that a single frame of video encoded for streaming typically does not contain an entire and recognizable image, unlike a frame on Blu-Ray. Thus they would need a set of packets to build a few frames to positively identify the media as video.
Probably a moot point though, we're likely talking an encrypted video feed, which means they would have to intercept and conduct a man in the middle attack to decode the video. Which can be done well individually, but not en masse without severely bottlenecking the infrastructure.
Since Google started complaining about non-HTTPS websites, every website with a major web presence is HTTPS. Of course there is no noticeable difference between a TLS encrypted packet, and a packet encrypted using ipsec or whatever encryption protocol the chosen VPN uses.
Even still, a udp video stream is typically a partial chunk of bits, almost impossible to reconstruct into anything legible without the rest of the packets. Aside from that, video "encoding" is not a great leap from "encryption" aside from the fact that most players have the ability to decrypt video.
Try comparing the differences between encrypted and unencrypted short emails, or SMS, or MMS messages. Something that is likely to fit within the MTU size.
Not exactly. Whack the wrong customer(s) too many times and the competitor who doesn't block or overcharge for said traffic wins the day. That is more than $50 per whack.
Of course this requires a means of unifying without the internet. So corporations will be the mostly likely ones to leave major ISPs for another option.
The government does not, but the American economy considers the telephone, internet access, and a mailing address to be basic necessities. Do without any one of those and you will be marginalized, and your earning potential will be quite limited.
Wait, didn't we know this was happening 20 years ago? If I remember correctly, that started back in the 90s, sometime. As soon as advertisers found out about cookies, it began.
The parent suggested that encryption would be blocked.
While numerous forms of encryption are utilized on the net, when I see the term used in a manner such as the parent, I assume VPN. Encryption is a big part of how a VPN operates, as well as why it is used.
I don't even have a choice. AT&T no longer services my area, not does any other provider. I can barely get a cell signal, not enough to even use data on a smart phone.
Fortunately, I have a DSL account grandfathered in.
So basically the hate speech law takes away responsibility from citizens, and places yhe actions of citizens entirely the shoulders of content creators.
I used Windows 8 very early in its life. I'm also using Windows 8.1, and Windows 10 Pro, and Windows Vista on a daily basis.
The tiles on Windows 8 could be organized, but if I recall, you had to zoom out on the Start Menu to get to the grouping system. I haven't replicated the functionality on 8.1 yet, but it seems to be a step backwards.
Windows 10 significantly improves the functionality. Anniversary seemed good, but I barely used it. I have few complaints about the Fall Creators' Start Menu. It functions the way you would expect the Windows 8 Metro interface should work, and it is very customizable. With enough work I am beginning to think it is actually an improvement over the Windows 7 start menu. The lack of Jump Lists of any kind does hold it back, but otherwise I think they've finally managed an improvement, if only slightly, over the Vista/7 Start Menu.
Where Windows 10 shines is on the Surface. Sure I've said it is a prototype of sorts, but it really demonstrates what Windows 10 is capable of. It proves itself to be a transitionary or dualistic OS.
Once you've typed in the full name into the run dialog box, you never have to type the whole thing again. Effectively it works very similarly, but there are a few differences.
One difference is since it isn't a search, it never hits the file system after it loads. Which makes a big difference in performance if you're still using a mechanical drive, or simply have a lot of files to search through. I've considered indexing the entire drive simply to avoid the slowdowns and unresponsiveness once the search finishes sith the indexed locations.
Another difference is that since it doesn't search, there is usually a lower amount of risk of hitting enter on the wrong App or file, while Windows shuffles them around as you type. This is the biggest reason I avoid search.
The old school search history is pretty good at learning, which means the items you call upon most frequently are there waiting.
The final difference is you can add batch scripts to your $PATH to be more precise, and to automate various tasks. (I have a game mode script, which kills everything but Steam. I've also got an iTunes script which fires all the related executables and services, and kills them when I'm done. Best one is for the corporate VPN. Emergency purposes only, no reason to have it running all the time.)
And the flipside of it is that Windows 7's start menu is itself a dogs breakfast of poor usability and poor design choices.
How exactly would you improve on a compact, low mouse travel distance UI, with user customizable organization methods, and a built-in search feature which will return applications in the organization system, as well as those which are not?
Windows 7's Start Menu is clearly an evolved design centered around practical application.
I only use search (Windows key) for programs which are not in my $PATH.
I use Win+R for the apps I have learned the name for, and that are in my $PATH. Its much less of a pain than the search.