It can do a dollar hold, and that verifies that you're a real person. A lot of places do this, and when you hear "they swear it won't be stored" it could very well be they don't want to spend the money it takes to stay in PCI compliance, among other legal reasons.
The 3rd key would effectively be a "backdoor" and cause the encryption to be weaker. Especially if the government holds the 3rd key, and it's the same for all encrypted devices. What if the government made a new 3rd key for each unique device? Where would they store the multiple exabytes of keys? How would they secure that data? (Insert "Yo Dawg I heard you like to encrypt" joke here) How does anyone know the government keys aren't manipulated, who watches the watchers? Is a 3 key system any less weak? No, not really.
It's a very simple idea: if the government is given a way to circumvent encryption, then malicious hackers are also given that way. You can't have your cake and eat it too. Hey FBI, stop asking already, the answer is permanently No.
I went to high school in Hawaii, and I don't understand how this could work without rebuilding the high schools themselves. Most (if not all) the schools are open-air campuses; there's no indoors except the classrooms themselves. The classrooms have no significant insulation (why would they?), and generally feature jalousie windows. How they intend to keep the cold air in is a mystery to me. The other thing to consider here is that it's not just the heat that's the problem. The "heat" itself is generally just fine, it's not like Las Vegas or Phoenix out there. It's the humidity that gets you, and you get acclimated to that after a few months. I'm sure I'm missing something but when I hear A/C in Hawaii schools I immediately imagine all that cold air seeping out the jalousies and the A/C units constantly overworking. Sounds like a massive waste.
There are nuclear fallout shelters in Hawaii. You can easily find them as you walk around the downtown area. I lived on O'ahu for several years, and I admit I'm not aware of any shelters elsewhere on the island. But I do know that the island is home to 8 military bases, so I'm sure there are plenty of other shelters I'm not aware of.
No, because trains are open-air, i.e., not in a vacuum, which is required to produce the pneumatic tube effect. That leads us back to orlanz's response, where we decide that above-ground pneumatic tubes are undesirable. I would offer that they're undesirable not only because they're unsightly but also because they take up space and will cause other kinds of pollution (light, sound, air, etc). Not to mention logistics of terrorism prevention... it's far better that a bomb on the Hyperloop go off underground than above (not that we want it to go off at all).
I agree with your other points though. Remember that we got here because Edison's electric company replaced Rockefeller's kerosene lamps, and Ford's automobile started to replace Rockefeller's trains. At the time there was a plan to connect all of America via passenger trolleys; you could ride from LA to NY, even though it would take you a couple weeks or so. So Rockefeller got Ford to replace his clean burning ethanol fuel with Rockefeller's own kerosene waste product: gasoline, and the nationwide trolley system was scrapped in favor of a highway system for cars. Now we're coming full circle with an electric powered train that can take passengers from LA to NY, in minutes not days.
The tunnel is hardly nonsense. Apart from passenger trains, it will become an effective way to move shipping containers and other large items quickly. Currently, shipping goods to and from Hawaii on those Matson freighters takes a month each way. We could also reduce the number of trucks on the road by shipping their contents via pneumatic tube.
There aren't a lot of trains in action because of several reasons. Not all goods that need to be shipped, or people waiting to receive them, can wait the duration of a cross-country train trip. Trains also need a lot more buffering to manage traffic, as they need more time/space to speed up and slow down. The system simply can't accommodate the level of traffic that an invention like the Hyperloop would fill.
"Blockchain technology and cryptocurrencies are a new and exciting area we have been working on for some time."
The shares pared gains after the company published a follow-up release on Friday, cautioning investors that the development of its blockchain product is still at an early stage.
"We feel the time is right to re-name the company to reflect these developments, where we believe the future growth will be in our sector."
It's new, but they've been at it a long time, like, before it was new. They have still produced nothing, and that makes it a great time to swell the hype. So give them your money!
Slashdot Mirror
Is this really meant to get students used to the idea they will have to work outside of work hours when they grow up and get a career? :P
It can do a dollar hold, and that verifies that you're a real person. A lot of places do this, and when you hear "they swear it won't be stored" it could very well be they don't want to spend the money it takes to stay in PCI compliance, among other legal reasons.
But which one? Even poop is diverse: https://aboveaverage.com/final...
The 3rd key would effectively be a "backdoor" and cause the encryption to be weaker. Especially if the government holds the 3rd key, and it's the same for all encrypted devices. What if the government made a new 3rd key for each unique device? Where would they store the multiple exabytes of keys? How would they secure that data? (Insert "Yo Dawg I heard you like to encrypt" joke here) How does anyone know the government keys aren't manipulated, who watches the watchers? Is a 3 key system any less weak? No, not really.
It's a very simple idea: if the government is given a way to circumvent encryption, then malicious hackers are also given that way. You can't have your cake and eat it too. Hey FBI, stop asking already, the answer is permanently No.
I went to high school in Hawaii, and I don't understand how this could work without rebuilding the high schools themselves. Most (if not all) the schools are open-air campuses; there's no indoors except the classrooms themselves. The classrooms have no significant insulation (why would they?), and generally feature jalousie windows. How they intend to keep the cold air in is a mystery to me. The other thing to consider here is that it's not just the heat that's the problem. The "heat" itself is generally just fine, it's not like Las Vegas or Phoenix out there. It's the humidity that gets you, and you get acclimated to that after a few months. I'm sure I'm missing something but when I hear A/C in Hawaii schools I immediately imagine all that cold air seeping out the jalousies and the A/C units constantly overworking. Sounds like a massive waste.
I might have some loathing for Apple but I loathe clickbait garbage like this even more. Please have some respect for yourself.
Decentralize the info you would normally put on Facebook and Twitter. The concept is old, but apparently becoming more relevant.
https://alistapart.com/article...
A better answer is no, it should not.
There are nuclear fallout shelters in Hawaii. You can easily find them as you walk around the downtown area. I lived on O'ahu for several years, and I admit I'm not aware of any shelters elsewhere on the island. But I do know that the island is home to 8 military bases, so I'm sure there are plenty of other shelters I'm not aware of.
No, because trains are open-air, i.e., not in a vacuum, which is required to produce the pneumatic tube effect. That leads us back to orlanz's response, where we decide that above-ground pneumatic tubes are undesirable. I would offer that they're undesirable not only because they're unsightly but also because they take up space and will cause other kinds of pollution (light, sound, air, etc). Not to mention logistics of terrorism prevention... it's far better that a bomb on the Hyperloop go off underground than above (not that we want it to go off at all).
I agree with your other points though. Remember that we got here because Edison's electric company replaced Rockefeller's kerosene lamps, and Ford's automobile started to replace Rockefeller's trains. At the time there was a plan to connect all of America via passenger trolleys; you could ride from LA to NY, even though it would take you a couple weeks or so. So Rockefeller got Ford to replace his clean burning ethanol fuel with Rockefeller's own kerosene waste product: gasoline, and the nationwide trolley system was scrapped in favor of a highway system for cars. Now we're coming full circle with an electric powered train that can take passengers from LA to NY, in minutes not days.
The tunnel is hardly nonsense. Apart from passenger trains, it will become an effective way to move shipping containers and other large items quickly. Currently, shipping goods to and from Hawaii on those Matson freighters takes a month each way. We could also reduce the number of trucks on the road by shipping their contents via pneumatic tube.
There aren't a lot of trains in action because of several reasons. Not all goods that need to be shipped, or people waiting to receive them, can wait the duration of a cross-country train trip. Trains also need a lot more buffering to manage traffic, as they need more time/space to speed up and slow down. The system simply can't accommodate the level of traffic that an invention like the Hyperloop would fill.
This should have been obvious from the start, the article feels like clickbait. This is like asking why do cashiers still give the wrong change?
It's new, but they've been at it a long time, like, before it was new. They have still produced nothing, and that makes it a great time to swell the hype. So give them your money!