However when you factor in a 1 Gbit or preferably 10 Gbit connection to said server for ie. having your / of your desktop computers there, the economics turn upside down.
And the great thing about crowbars is that they work on delivery people as well! Just pick a pizza delivery or UPS guy, apply crowbar and BAM you've got free pizza or some random gizmo off the Internet!
But let's say a common scenario in traffic: you need to peek to your shoulder to ensure there's no another vehicle. And what if at that instant someone in front you you does something surprising? Well, you just enable autopilot before the peek and you're better off than before.
When someone gives you money, it might be fake. The same might be true for such a btcnote, but I shall claim that it's much more difficult to fake USD than btcnotes:).
In fact, you can have a 100% "genuine" btcnote, but it might be spent, and you cannot tell until you access the Bitcoin data.
So once you receive one, you should make a transaction to your account as fast as you can, and then destroy the note. Not quite the same how you deal with plain old money..
You must use the system to transfer the funds, to ensure the person giving you the USB stick didn't just go and spend the BC as well, in addition to "giving" it to you.
As I understand it, the research team that demonstrated the "vulnerability" first created the tool to detect traffic signs, then exploited their own tool. It does sound it would be a lot more difficult to exploit the sign detectors of algorithms you don't have complete control over. For example, the recognition might not be based on neural networks or might be based on neural networks with adversarial training.
And the last big news I read about Google's project are maybe a year or two old. I would be amazed to learn had they not advanced their software a lot after that time..
The company is responsible for the device working. Obviously they are not responsible for ie. resetting passwords the customer forgot.
And who is to tell why the device doesn't boot up anymore? They are, and investigating is likely going to mean having an engineer spend time with the device. And that costs money.
And if the device is cleaned wipe, there is really no proof that the client had done anything bad regarding its securing. It's not going to be an easy situation for a company to handle a sudden surge of 10000 warranty repairs.
Yes, there are of course ways to do it as you can always convert an iteration to recursion. But, it's pretty much pointless unless you're working with a pure language. If you're going to use a queue, why not just iterate?
In particular, a version that collects a queue is easily parametrized to work breadth first, depth first, or some alternative strategy.
enum Mode { DepthFirst, BreadthFirst };
void visit(Node* root, Mode mode)
{
std::list work { root };
while (work.size()) {
Node* node = work.front();
work.pop_front();
if (node) {
printf("%d\n", node->value);
switch (mode) {
case DepthFirst: {
nodes.push_front(node->left);
nodes.push_front(node->right);
} break;
case BreadthFirst: {
nodes.push_back(node->left);
nodes.push_back(node->right);
} break;
}
}
}
}
Proper tail call optimizations also optimizes the case of not recursing to the same function That's a bit more difficult to make an iteration and you need to move all those functions involved into the same iterative loop.
You know, it might be a pretty good idea to not use recursion and just implement your own stack in many of those cases, because recursion locks you into one traversal algorithm, namely depth-first.
If instead you collect the new nodes to visit to a list, you are able to choose whichever order to traverse those nodes easily. Such as in the order of "most promising prospect".
With a list you can also wait until its size is larger than n and then split the list for multiple cores to execute, merge the resulting lists and gain some concurrency benefits this way.
It's just a few lines of code to do the stack anyways in modern programming languages anyway.
It's funny though how my multi-screen setup has the displays placed on a curve instead of a plane.. As if there was some point in having the normal of the surface to be targeted towards the viewer..
For applications involving multiple viewers I certainly agree.
I'm not at all sure why people should be upset about the small size and the related loseability, because isn't the whole point of these to be small?!
If they don't like them, perhaps they can opt not to buy them, or possibly buy from the competition. Oh, but they are not as small, and not white, don't start with an "i", we don't like them..;-)
And there certainly are other headsets with Bluetooth, have been for years. I've used to use one from Sony a few years ago and I'm currently using Phiaton BT 220 NC.
Well, there's some benefit to having fast round-trip-times. I've noticed that Shapeways can take weeks to deliver, but I suppose that cold be because I've only ever ordered metal things from them.
But no service can beat one hour delivery time.
This is probably valuable to you only if you're designing and building something, though.
You don't need to be worried about people who might think about hooking up a special router or even RPi to their network to deal with IoT devices, but rather with people that don't. And that's going to be pretty difficult to solve before all consumer routers come with decent default firewall rules or such additional functionality you're describing.
They'll simply subscribe to the new updates of Adblock, automatically install the latest version in a sandbox and determine which ads are being blocked. Then they automatically rearrange the urls, css or content in the page so that they are no longer blocked. Within minutes of the new release it's been neutered. Failing that an engineer is automatically alerted to look into it via the ticket system.
And what's to stop Adblock from doing exactly the same? The amount of resources. If Adblock starts blocking actually useful content on the page, people will just stop using it.
It should be painfully obvious that if your system repeats the same varying sequence of 1000 consecutive frame sizes the iPlayer sends (taking into account possible difference introduced by potentially different framing), you are receiving the signal. Or otherwise you should buy a lottery ticket.
Slashdot Mirror
However when you factor in a 1 Gbit or preferably 10 Gbit connection to said server for ie. having your / of your desktop computers there, the economics turn upside down.
Hopefully that will change in the future.
The article ends with
> "A low-cost efficient solution could be to securely combine the hash of the pageâ(TM)s content with the guest-assigned GPA."
There exists some pretty compelling research on having a 3d model walk a complicated terrain in a natural looking fashion.
But I was unable to find the video :(. It probably isn't older than a year or so..
And the great thing about crowbars is that they work on delivery people as well! Just pick a pizza delivery or UPS guy, apply crowbar and BAM you've got free pizza or some random gizmo off the Internet!
As all easter eggs in Tesla software, you need to explicitly enable them. They are not going to jump up unexpected.
It's hardly a driving service - at least yet.
But let's say a common scenario in traffic: you need to peek to your shoulder to ensure there's no another vehicle. And what if at that instant someone in front you you does something surprising? Well, you just enable autopilot before the peek and you're better off than before.
When someone gives you money, it might be fake. The same might be true for such a btcnote, but I shall claim that it's much more difficult to fake USD than btcnotes :).
In fact, you can have a 100% "genuine" btcnote, but it might be spent, and you cannot tell until you access the Bitcoin data.
So once you receive one, you should make a transaction to your account as fast as you can, and then destroy the note. Not quite the same how you deal with plain old money..
You must use the system to transfer the funds, to ensure the person giving you the USB stick didn't just go and spend the BC as well, in addition to "giving" it to you.
> they suddenly they get all like "can you fix this?"or "can you help us with that?" and you end up essentially working for free for several months
Man, you need to learn to say "No". Or lie, "Sorry, I'm busy".
Nevertheless, this has not been my experience at all. Perhaps I've contributed to projects with less needy people running it.
The good thing is that this patent will be expired by the time it's feasible and then the exact same thing cannot be patented again.
As I understand it, the research team that demonstrated the "vulnerability" first created the tool to detect traffic signs, then exploited their own tool. It does sound it would be a lot more difficult to exploit the sign detectors of algorithms you don't have complete control over. For example, the recognition might not be based on neural networks or might be based on neural networks with adversarial training.
And the last big news I read about Google's project are maybe a year or two old. I would be amazed to learn had they not advanced their software a lot after that time..
The company is responsible for the device working. Obviously they are not responsible for ie. resetting passwords the customer forgot.
And who is to tell why the device doesn't boot up anymore? They are, and investigating is likely going to mean having an engineer spend time with the device. And that costs money.
And if the device is cleaned wipe, there is really no proof that the client had done anything bad regarding its securing. It's not going to be an easy situation for a company to handle a sudden surge of 10000 warranty repairs.
Yes, there are of course ways to do it as you can always convert an iteration to recursion. But, it's pretty much pointless unless you're working with a pure language. If you're going to use a queue, why not just iterate?
In particular, a version that collects a queue is easily parametrized to work breadth first, depth first, or some alternative strategy.
enum Mode { DepthFirst, BreadthFirst };
void visit(Node* root, Mode mode)
{
std::list work { root };
while (work.size()) {
Node* node = work.front();
work.pop_front();
if (node) {
printf("%d\n", node->value);
switch (mode) {
case DepthFirst: {
nodes.push_front(node->left);
nodes.push_front(node->right);
} break;
case BreadthFirst: {
nodes.push_back(node->left);
nodes.push_back(node->right);
} break;
}
}
}
}
My algorithm class was just fine. But just for sake of discussion, please convert this depth-first binary tree iteration to breadth-first:
void visit(Node* node)
{
if (!node) return;
printf("%d\n", node->value);
visit(node->left);
visit(node->right);
}
Proper tail call optimizations also optimizes the case of not recursing to the same function That's a bit more difficult to make an iteration and you need to move all those functions involved into the same iterative loop.
You know, it might be a pretty good idea to not use recursion and just implement your own stack in many of those cases, because recursion locks you into one traversal algorithm, namely depth-first.
If instead you collect the new nodes to visit to a list, you are able to choose whichever order to traverse those nodes easily. Such as in the order of "most promising prospect".
With a list you can also wait until its size is larger than n and then split the list for multiple cores to execute, merge the resulting lists and gain some concurrency benefits this way.
It's just a few lines of code to do the stack anyways in modern programming languages anyway.
And you imply that when code is revised, flaws are always removed and never added?
> So...exactly like curved screens then?
It's funny though how my multi-screen setup has the displays placed on a curve instead of a plane.. As if there was some point in having the normal of the surface to be targeted towards the viewer..
For applications involving multiple viewers I certainly agree.
Wakey wakey? https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
I'm not at all sure why people should be upset about the small size and the related loseability, because isn't the whole point of these to be small?!
If they don't like them, perhaps they can opt not to buy them, or possibly buy from the competition. Oh, but they are not as small, and not white, don't start with an "i", we don't like them.. ;-)
And there certainly are other headsets with Bluetooth, have been for years. I've used to use one from Sony a few years ago and I'm currently using Phiaton BT 220 NC.
Well, there's some benefit to having fast round-trip-times. I've noticed that Shapeways can take weeks to deliver, but I suppose that cold be because I've only ever ordered metal things from them.
But no service can beat one hour delivery time.
This is probably valuable to you only if you're designing and building something, though.
You don't need to be worried about people who might think about hooking up a special router or even RPi to their network to deal with IoT devices, but rather with people that don't. And that's going to be pretty difficult to solve before all consumer routers come with decent default firewall rules or such additional functionality you're describing.
They'll simply subscribe to the new updates of Adblock, automatically install the latest version in a sandbox and determine which ads are being blocked. Then they automatically rearrange the urls, css or content in the page so that they are no longer blocked. Within minutes of the new release it's been neutered. Failing that an engineer is automatically alerted to look into it via the ticket system.
And what's to stop Adblock from doing exactly the same? The amount of resources. If Adblock starts blocking actually useful content on the page, people will just stop using it.
Oops, I should've patented that instead!
It should be painfully obvious that if your system repeats the same varying sequence of 1000 consecutive frame sizes the iPlayer sends (taking into account possible difference introduced by potentially different framing), you are receiving the signal. Or otherwise you should buy a lottery ticket.
There's really no reason why both of them shouldn't be looked into. Yet one person can only focus on so many things.