While I agree with you in general, Richard Feynman scored in the 120s on IQ tests. I score in the 160s. I am nowhere near as smart in any practical sense as Feynman was.
" The Harvard Classics, originally known as Dr. Eliot's Five Foot Shelf, is a 51-volume anthology of classic works from world literature, compiled and edited by Harvard University president Charles W. Eliot and first published in 1909.[1]
Eliot had stated in speeches that the elements of a liberal education could be obtained by spending 15 minutes a day reading from a collection of books that could fit on a five-foot shelf. (Originally he had said a three-foot shelf.) The publisher P. F. Collier and Son saw an opportunity and challenged Eliot to make good on this statement by selecting an appropriate collection of works, and the Harvard Classics was the result. "
All are in the public domain. Finding good compilations is hard, but I've done it for several of the 51 volumes.
The only way around it is to view the binary code and inspect it (either manually or automatically). Either way, the level of effort to detect it is immense, and either way you may still be subject to some further hack that shows you different binary data than what's actually executed.
I suppose in theory the hack could be in the hardware somewhere.
You are also assuming that the outside air pressure wouldn't crush it down to a density that would make it sink.
I would be really surprised if you could just evacuate the stuff and make it float. Some day we'll use evacuated carbon nanostructures for lighter than air, but I don't think we're there yet.
There is no such legal entity as IP. I believe you're thinking of trademark, where infringement means someone is misrepresenting the trademark holder. Copyright is a totally different animal.
Excellent point; I had missed the "all revenue so far" on the last point.
So this is probably only 36 years of copyright. I think that's a travesty and will become more & more of one as technology changes our culture so much it's unrecognizable 36 years later, but it's less of a travesty.
This is a shit proposal. (46 years copyright for the highest grossing properties, mostly overlapping with the content with the highest cultural impact).
That said, compared to what we have today, it is a shining example of truth & justice.
A typical quasar looks about as bright from 33 light years away as the sun does from earth. A quasar's lifespan is from tens of millions to a few billion years.
That means in galaxies with a quasar, there is a shell 33 light years in radius, and a few light years in thickness, in which essentially every planet in every stellar system (as well as rogue planets and moons) is in the "habitable zone".
That seems way cooler to me than speculation about a few planets being in the habitable zone.
If Apple's browser promises to stop tracking, and Google ignores the 'stop tracking' indicator, and Apple says "that's fine, just pay us some $$$"...
Does that mean we should have a class action lawsuit against Apple for false advertising? If they're claiming that setting this flag means don't track me, then they go ahead and make a settlement with Google that *allows them to keep the data they got tracking me*, aren't they advertising a false sense of security?
Of course, I'm also peeved against Google. I am hoping : a) this was unintentional b) Google will issue (has issued?) a statement that they will delete the data despite not being required to
The proposal is that rich people invest in business, creating more new jobs and more value. Poor people spend their money on stuff.
I haven't seen any real support for the notion that investing in businesses based on what rich people think will succeed creates more jobs or a "bigger economic pie" than poor people giving more money to businesses that provide services & goods that the poor actually need.
Obviously, I don't buy it, but that's the supposed reason.
That said, you don't know me. And I don't know anyone else who carries an extra battery.
BTW, my phone is a Nexus One. And probably will remain so until it dies (which seems unlikely considering all the abuse it's survived so far) or until Google Glass comes out.
In fact, I see nothing in this whole thread that goes beyond ad hominem. Please provide arguments for or against the one on-topic notion for this story: "Ray Kurzweil predicts the cloud will... help expand our brain capacity beyond its current limits."
This, to me, is a very sensible, even self-evident, statement. Right now I use Google's cloud of computer mapping services to navigate virtually anywhere I go. I use Google's cloud of search services to find the answer to virtually any question I may have, from the syntax for an API, to repairs for my car, to the lyrics to some song I like. Even in the last few years these capabilities have improved dramatically; I'm sure they will continue to do so.
You may not like the word "cloud", but it accurately describes computing systems with multiple redundant computers accessing multiple copies of information to provide speed and reliability.
Frankly, all the spastic reactions whenever Kurzweil's name is used make you guys look like the unbalanced ones, not him.
(Note that while I'm replying to the grandparent of this conversation, this is directed to the thread as a whole. This one comment is innocuous; the trend here is not.)
Now I don't have to RTFA. IMO that simple statement "this only applies to running untrusted code in a JVM with a SecurityManager" is the most important thing to say about this exploit; sad it wasn't in the summary.
I run my ssh service on port 443 to get through more firewalls. I believe they could check traffic patterns to see that it isn't really https, but I'm not sure they do.
By the time we're doing that, we'll be stimulating memories directly and expanding your imagination with DirectX48 at 120fps, while giving the answer to any question you briefly consider instantly in full multimedia a la Google+Wolfram Alpha+Wikipedia+Mathematica.
And the future *I* want involves my enhanced, uploaded mind occupying a few metric tons of atomically precise computronium distributed across the solar system, with continuous incremental backup a few light years away.
(Of course, from my point of view that computronium is an utterly immersive universe in which I am the dashing hero.)
It works now, with some bugs. The first targeted usecase is distributed backup.
However, it can store arbitrary read-only content-addressed data as well as signed labels that point point to a particular piece of CBA data to emulate mutable data.
I have a whole slew of plans beyond backup for it, but backup seemed like the thing everyone needs and would most like to have for free on a federated data store.
Hmm, I'm from Arkansas, and I liked it except for about 40% of the people there. And that's pretty much middle of the road for % of local population I find tolerable.
I agree that your bank password should be different from your Amazon password, but please don't list eBay and Amazon as if they are on par with one another regarding password security.
Amazon takes customer trust astoundingly seriously, and has more than a decade of contributions by very bright engineers to protect your password. There are systems, and meta-systems, and corporate policies, and repeated internal emails reiterating the importance of defense social as well as technical attacks.
eBay may be great at keeping your data safe, but I very much doubt they go to the lengths or apply the ingenuity that Amazon does.
Slashdot Mirror
What do you mean by 'own the path'? For TLS to be broken, you need to own *both* a CA on the end-user's machine, *and* DNS.
People executing arbitrary code on their computers (or just in their browser) is a much bigger problem than someone installing a CA on their browser.
While I agree with you in general, Richard Feynman scored in the 120s on IQ tests. I score in the 160s. I am nowhere near as smart in any practical sense as Feynman was.
"
The Harvard Classics, originally known as Dr. Eliot's Five Foot Shelf, is a 51-volume anthology of classic works from world literature, compiled and edited by Harvard University president Charles W. Eliot and first published in 1909.[1]
Eliot had stated in speeches that the elements of a liberal education could be obtained by spending 15 minutes a day reading from a collection of books that could fit on a five-foot shelf. (Originally he had said a three-foot shelf.) The publisher P. F. Collier and Son saw an opportunity and challenged Eliot to make good on this statement by selecting an appropriate collection of works, and the Harvard Classics was the result.
"
All are in the public domain. Finding good compilations is hard, but I've done it for several of the 51 volumes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvard_Classics
In case you want to put in some legwork, I have some of them up here: http://static.bobbymartin.name/Calibre%20Library/
Here are the paths:
Calibre Library/Bibliobazaar/Harvard Classics 01B - John Woolman (138)
Calibre Library/Plato/Harvard Classics 02A Euthyphro; The Apol (48)
Calibre Library/Charles Darwin/Harvard Classics 04 (125)
Calibre Library/Eliot, Charles W. (Charles William), 183/Harvard Classics 04 (245)
Calibre Library/Eliot, Charles W. (Charles William), 183/Harvard Classics 06 (247)
Calibre Library/Charles Darwin/Harvard Classics 07 (244)
Calibre Library/Charles Darwin/Harvard Classics 07 (243)
Calibre Library/Virgil/Harvard Classics 13 - Aeneid (38)
Calibre Library/Eliot, Charles William, 1834-1926/Harvard classics 33,34,__ (246)
Calibre Library/Eliot, Charles William, 1834-1926/Harvard Classics 33,34,__ (248)
Calibre Library/Charles William Eliot/The Harvard Classics (188)
Calibre Library/Unknown/The Harvard classics The Apol (127)
Calibre Library/Unknown/The Harvard classics New Atla (126)
If not, wait a few weeks and I'll probably have them organized and more easily accessible here: http://www.harvardclassics.net/
Mod parent up. I had no idea there was a trusted way to show a compiler hasn't been Thompson hacked!
http://www.dwheeler.com/trusting-trust/
You're talking about the Thompson hack, an extremely effective mechanism for subverting huge swaths of software: http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?TheKenThompsonHack
The only way around it is to view the binary code and inspect it (either manually or automatically). Either way, the level of effort to detect it is immense, and either way you may still be subject to some further hack that shows you different binary data than what's actually executed.
I suppose in theory the hack could be in the hardware somewhere.
You are also assuming that the outside air pressure wouldn't crush it down to a density that would make it sink.
I would be really surprised if you could just evacuate the stuff and make it float. Some day we'll use evacuated carbon nanostructures for lighter than air, but I don't think we're there yet.
I'll look that up, thanks!
There is no such legal entity as IP. I believe you're thinking of trademark, where infringement means someone is misrepresenting the trademark holder. Copyright is a totally different animal.
Excellent point; I had missed the "all revenue so far" on the last point.
So this is probably only 36 years of copyright. I think that's a travesty and will become more & more of one as technology changes our culture so much it's unrecognizable 36 years later, but it's less of a travesty.
This is a shit proposal. (46 years copyright for the highest grossing properties, mostly overlapping with the content with the highest cultural impact).
That said, compared to what we have today, it is a shining example of truth & justice.
Why are we impressed with this?
A typical quasar looks about as bright from 33 light years away as the sun does from earth. A quasar's lifespan is from tens of millions to a few billion years.
That means in galaxies with a quasar, there is a shell 33 light years in radius, and a few light years in thickness, in which essentially every planet in every stellar system (as well as rogue planets and moons) is in the "habitable zone".
That seems way cooler to me than speculation about a few planets being in the habitable zone.
The comment was about understanding life, synthetic biology, an end to the use of fossil fuels, and health.
The story has nothing to do with any of those.
The story is only (extremely) tangentially even related to uploading...
WTF does this comment have to do with this story? Why is it +4 interesting?
Oh, duh, settlement with the FTC. Thanks.
In that case, can we sue the FTC for incompetence?
If Apple's browser promises to stop tracking, and Google ignores the 'stop tracking' indicator, and Apple says "that's fine, just pay us some $$$"...
Does that mean we should have a class action lawsuit against Apple for false advertising? If they're claiming that setting this flag means don't track me, then they go ahead and make a settlement with Google that *allows them to keep the data they got tracking me*, aren't they advertising a false sense of security?
Of course, I'm also peeved against Google. I am hoping :
a) this was unintentional
b) Google will issue (has issued?) a statement that they will delete the data despite not being required to
The proposal is that rich people invest in business, creating more new jobs and more value. Poor people spend their money on stuff.
I haven't seen any real support for the notion that investing in businesses based on what rich people think will succeed creates more jobs or a "bigger economic pie" than poor people giving more money to businesses that provide services & goods that the poor actually need.
Obviously, I don't buy it, but that's the supposed reason.
I do carry an extra battery.
That said, you don't know me. And I don't know anyone else who carries an extra battery.
BTW, my phone is a Nexus One. And probably will remain so until it dies (which seems unlikely considering all the abuse it's survived so far) or until Google Glass comes out.
In fact, I see nothing in this whole thread that goes beyond ad hominem. Please provide arguments for or against the one on-topic notion for this story: "Ray Kurzweil predicts the cloud will ... help expand our brain capacity beyond its current limits."
This, to me, is a very sensible, even self-evident, statement. Right now I use Google's cloud of computer mapping services to navigate virtually anywhere I go. I use Google's cloud of search services to find the answer to virtually any question I may have, from the syntax for an API, to repairs for my car, to the lyrics to some song I like. Even in the last few years these capabilities have improved dramatically; I'm sure they will continue to do so.
You may not like the word "cloud", but it accurately describes computing systems with multiple redundant computers accessing multiple copies of information to provide speed and reliability.
Frankly, all the spastic reactions whenever Kurzweil's name is used make you guys look like the unbalanced ones, not him.
(Note that while I'm replying to the grandparent of this conversation, this is directed to the thread as a whole. This one comment is innocuous; the trend here is not.)
Now I don't have to RTFA. IMO that simple statement "this only applies to running untrusted code in a JVM with a SecurityManager" is the most important thing to say about this exploit; sad it wasn't in the summary.
I run my ssh service on port 443 to get through more firewalls. I believe they could check traffic patterns to see that it isn't really https, but I'm not sure they do.
By the time we're doing that, we'll be stimulating memories directly and expanding your imagination with DirectX48 at 120fps, while giving the answer to any question you briefly consider instantly in full multimedia a la Google+Wolfram Alpha+Wikipedia+Mathematica.
And the future *I* want involves my enhanced, uploaded mind occupying a few metric tons of atomically precise computronium distributed across the solar system, with continuous incremental backup a few light years away.
(Of course, from my point of view that computronium is an utterly immersive universe in which I am the dashing hero.)
https://github.com/wurp/Friendly-Backup
It works now, with some bugs. The first targeted usecase is distributed backup.
However, it can store arbitrary read-only content-addressed data as well as signed labels that point point to a particular piece of CBA data to emulate mutable data.
I have a whole slew of plans beyond backup for it, but backup seemed like the thing everyone needs and would most like to have for free on a federated data store.
Hmm, I'm from Arkansas, and I liked it except for about 40% of the people there. And that's pretty much middle of the road for % of local population I find tolerable.
I agree that your bank password should be different from your Amazon password, but please don't list eBay and Amazon as if they are on par with one another regarding password security.
Amazon takes customer trust astoundingly seriously, and has more than a decade of contributions by very bright engineers to protect your password. There are systems, and meta-systems, and corporate policies, and repeated internal emails reiterating the importance of defense social as well as technical attacks.
eBay may be great at keeping your data safe, but I very much doubt they go to the lengths or apply the ingenuity that Amazon does.
Do you want to die today?
You won't tomorrow, either.