Is it Honda's fault a slimjim opens the door of my Civic?
No, but if Honda simply had only two keys which opened up all their products--then it would be their fault.
However, I fully believe that having laws such as these is a bad idea. We, as consumers [in the US at least] - whether private or corporate - have the ability to sue for damages and that really can keep a company in line.
If your credit card number is stolen from an on-line retailer [as mine was] who was using an unencrypted database on unsecure NT4, sue the fsck out of them. Their negligence caused you [and your CC company] damage--make them pay for it. If running unsecure [insecure?] software is a contributing factor--then add that to your case. The vendor will eventually be forced to shape up or haemorrhage cash to death.
The problem is taken care of, without more unnecessary laws.
Laws and liabilities are not, and should not be, "black and white"--they need consideration which is what judges, juries, and lawyers are for. Current gist on liability can simply be extended to this arena.
War can be considered many things, but it is not futile. All we are, and all we believe is the result of thousands of years of warfare--the "winning" side promoting their agenda [religion, philosophy, genetic code, or business] and destroying/assimilating the "losing" population.
To quote the cliché, "History is written by the victor".
To this end, war is not "futile"--this is not an evaluation of whether war is "right", "justifiable", or "a necessary evil". Regardless of these [important] evaluations, war is effective.
That's part of the reason it's a problem.
There is a certain futility to modern warfare. In that, war requires deeds now considered unethical in most cultures; great contradictions as "Thou shalt not kill" and Ste. Augustine's"Just War".
What is making modern war futile [thankfully] is our problem with executing it properly. A typical pre-industrial culture has different rules of war--take the Japanese, Aztecs, Native Americans, Cossacks--the general rule is, conquer them by slaughter, kill all of their men, kill all of their children down to the cradle, rape/marry/kill all of their females so their decedents are also yours. If you applied this method to Palestine or Ireland, there would not be a terrorist problem in either location.
This method was applied by the Europeans and their American, Canadian, and Mexican decedents upon the scores of nations in the Americas [at least we gained the "United Nations" idea from the Iroquois nations first]. How many terrorist attacks have occurred based upon an entire continent under occupation? Close to none over the last hundred years.
Also, war seemed effective in eliminating slavery in the USA. And, through allowing the slave-owning population to survive, resulted in a very powerful terrorist organisation to be born [the KKK]. Strong enough to have both Senators and Governors as open members for about a century.
So, we are unwilling to fight these kinds of wars anymore, and follow the logical course--we start making the war "clean". Higher technology does not mean "more ethically sound" war. The United States has the military-industrial power to nuke just about any nation on Earth into molten glass, and then gave flotillas of B-52s dumping salt to cover their entire land so that nothing grows there for a thousand years. But instead of using the higher-tech to build more effective weaponry in greater quantities, they develop highly precise weaponry and invent the concept of "surgical strikes".
But don't think that it'll just be a bot-on-bot match. The end targets are the same--military, industrial, command and control, logistic, support, and 'terror'. All of which involve people. If the Taliban/Al-Qaeda had the capacity to pop up a sub of nuke-wielding bots in San Francisco, you wouldn't be stretching to find the "suffering of war".
What's really changed:
Tech-war results in much fewer civilian casualties, especially when you consider the numbers and agendas involved.
Modern warfare is ineffectual against occupying areas and halting ideas.
Since Orwell was quoted to start, I'll quote him to close:
People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because
rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.
--George Orwell
Now...if they'd made it a *bit* more expandable (for example, being able to replace the 15" LCD with a special iMac-ized version of the Cinema display)...
Well, you could simply attach the Cinema display to the VGA port on back [but you'd lose the swing-mount (or just duct-tape it onto the existing one, but I think that'd mess up the counter balancing {not to mention the aesthetics})].
One thing that doesn't get mentioned as much as it should is its appeal as hardware consolidation. I purchased a used iMac about a year ago, even though it was a little weaker than the computer it replaced, simply because we needed the room that the tower+17" Monitor+speakers were taking up.
These things become relevant when your limiting factor is space [from which I am suffering] or four power-strips hooked into two outlets isn't enough for your needs [from which I am also suffering].
Never read TC.
I know that there are helicopter mounted versions used to disable vehicles.
From what I understand, you can take one a TV mini-dish, pull off the receiver, drill a hole and put a spark-plug in the middle, and hook it to a potential [stun-gun should work fine] and have a directed EMP weapon.
I was thinking of testing this out on my neighbour's car the next time its alarm goes off--I'll keep you posted.
Re:This raises some frightening questions
on
Battlefield Lasers
·
· Score: 1
The LASERs would be effective at kill. Heck, a friend used to bull's-eye rats on base with the target designator in his M1A--and that was enough to kill w/o being designed as such [unless he was BS-ing me, of course].
Of course, chemically projected slugs and their launchers are CHEAP: and the budget makes the army.
Heck with 'plane mounted', use a dozen satelites--have a low power same freq LASER to draw a bead and then burn them down to their boots with the high-power one. Hit whoever you want in the world at your convenience and from the comfort of your office terminal.
Militarily: useless
Politically: priceless.
Re:Also under development:
on
Battlefield Lasers
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
"All kidding aside, you also can't rule out, as I said, revolutionary new developments in mirrored armour. I mean, if there was no way to deflect the beam, there would be no way to generate or aim it! "
Exactly. You don't polish steel, you give is a coating which does not absorb the wavelengths the other guys are using [make it the colour of the beam].
Or you make it so extreme heat doesn't generally cause a catastrophic failure [HE is already like this].
Or you start applying stealth technology to the projectiles so they can't be tracked.
Or you give your troops Rosco Model 4500 Foggers to disperse the defensive beams [plus, it'll make the war-time photography look so cool!]
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the "encryption" which was broken merely the default setting of ROT13?
Oops, guess anyone who read that broke it too--better run while you can.
The technology to shoot down aircraft was developed and during the 1970's--no big deal. I remember seeing great footage of the engine compartment being nicely sliced out of a flying drone.
Problem is: the dispersion/diffraction of a high-powered LASER being used outdoors has the side effect of permanently blinding most of the people in line-of-sight to the aircraft [which can be a lot and, of course, include one's own troops].
Question is: why not just attach a whatever-KV potential to a spark-plug in a mini-dish and knock out the target's electronics instead? Should be easier--of course, that'd have little effect upon an incoming shell/bomb once the fuse has been armed.
Babbage's printer , was also completed. Holy smokes! The thing could line-space, character-space, do column-and-row formatting, and even word-wrap.
Man, and I was impressed with his breaking of the Vigenère ciphre . . . .
"What Apple needs to add to it's lineup is an Apple print server... then when you hook it up to the Airport, you get a wireless print server, for 'free':)"
OMFG: I want that product.
Actually, that shape is a practical decision: the unit cools itself via convection--just show it to someone who has had Thermo/E and they'll spot it right off.
Plus, though I don't have one, it seems that the cord-winding ability ['yo-yo'] would be useful--though the shape isn't specifically integral to it.
Slashdot Mirror
Is it Honda's fault a slimjim opens the door of my Civic?
No, but if Honda simply had only two keys which opened up all their products--then it would be their fault.
However, I fully believe that having laws such as these is a bad idea. We, as consumers [in the US at least] - whether private or corporate - have the ability to sue for damages and that really can keep a company in line.
If your credit card number is stolen from an on-line retailer [as mine was] who was using an unencrypted database on unsecure NT4, sue the fsck out of them. Their negligence caused you [and your CC company] damage--make them pay for it. If running unsecure [insecure?] software is a contributing factor--then add that to your case. The vendor will eventually be forced to shape up or haemorrhage cash to death.
The problem is taken care of, without more unnecessary laws.
Laws and liabilities are not, and should not be, "black and white"--they need consideration which is what judges, juries, and lawyers are for. Current gist on liability can simply be extended to this arena.
Dr. Strangelove
Sorry, sir, the CRM114 was damaged in the explosion and blew itself up.
" . . . futility of war . . . . "
War can be considered many things, but it is not futile. All we are, and all we believe is the result of thousands of years of warfare--the "winning" side promoting their agenda [religion, philosophy, genetic code, or business] and destroying/assimilating the "losing" population.
To quote the cliché, "History is written by the victor".
To this end, war is not "futile"--this is not an evaluation of whether war is "right", "justifiable", or "a necessary evil". Regardless of these [important] evaluations, war is effective.
That's part of the reason it's a problem.
There is a certain futility to modern warfare. In that, war requires deeds now considered unethical in most cultures; great contradictions as "Thou shalt not kill" and Ste. Augustine's "Just War".
What is making modern war futile [thankfully] is our problem with executing it properly. A typical pre-industrial culture has different rules of war--take the Japanese, Aztecs, Native Americans, Cossacks--the general rule is, conquer them by slaughter, kill all of their men, kill all of their children down to the cradle, rape/marry/kill all of their females so their decedents are also yours. If you applied this method to Palestine or Ireland, there would not be a terrorist problem in either location.
This method was applied by the Europeans and their American, Canadian, and Mexican decedents upon the scores of nations in the Americas [at least we gained the "United Nations" idea from the Iroquois nations first]. How many terrorist attacks have occurred based upon an entire continent under occupation? Close to none over the last hundred years.
Also, war seemed effective in eliminating slavery in the USA. And, through allowing the slave-owning population to survive, resulted in a very powerful terrorist organisation to be born [the KKK]. Strong enough to have both Senators and Governors as open members for about a century.
So, we are unwilling to fight these kinds of wars anymore, and follow the logical course--we start making the war "clean". Higher technology does not mean "more ethically sound" war. The United States has the military-industrial power to nuke just about any nation on Earth into molten glass, and then gave flotillas of B-52s dumping salt to cover their entire land so that nothing grows there for a thousand years. But instead of using the higher-tech to build more effective weaponry in greater quantities, they develop highly precise weaponry and invent the concept of "surgical strikes".
But don't think that it'll just be a bot-on-bot match. The end targets are the same--military, industrial, command and control, logistic, support, and 'terror'. All of which involve people. If the Taliban/Al-Qaeda had the capacity to pop up a sub of nuke-wielding bots in San Francisco, you wouldn't be stretching to find the "suffering of war".
What's really changed:
Tech-war results in much fewer civilian casualties, especially when you consider the numbers and agendas involved.
Modern warfare is ineffectual against occupying areas and halting ideas.
Since Orwell was quoted to start, I'll quote him to close:
People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because
rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.
--George Orwell
Now...if they'd made it a *bit* more expandable (for example, being able to replace the 15" LCD with a special iMac-ized version of the Cinema display)...
Well, you could simply attach the Cinema display to the VGA port on back [but you'd lose the swing-mount (or just duct-tape it onto the existing one, but I think that'd mess up the counter balancing {not to mention the aesthetics})].
One thing that doesn't get mentioned as much as it should is its appeal as hardware consolidation. I purchased a used iMac about a year ago, even though it was a little weaker than the computer it replaced, simply because we needed the room that the tower+17" Monitor+speakers were taking up.
These things become relevant when your limiting factor is space [from which I am suffering] or four power-strips hooked into two outlets isn't enough for your needs [from which I am also suffering].
there aren't any viable solutions
Not if we can find a way to steer it into Redmond . . . .
I'm sending you a cleaning bill to get off all the Coke I just sprayed on this monitor.
Damn. That was funny.
On a similar note--make sure to not let your Rod of Cancelation come into contact with any stray Spheres of Annihilation either.
WRT to gas-hogging cars: Nearly the entire environmental-pollution output by the existence of a car is in its manufacturing process.
Continuing to drive a 1978 International Harvester with its 6400ft-# of torque is more environmentally friendly than buying a new electric car.
I guess that means we should move our electric car manufacturing to Mars.
This was painful to transcribe: mostly because I'm at work and trying to not burst out laughing:
KPMG:
We're strong as can be
A dream of power and energy
We go for the goal
Together we hold on to
Our vision of global strategy
We create
We elevate
We pass the ones that are la-ey-ate
A global shield
This is our dream of success
That we create
We'll be number one
#Whenever that comes?# [hard to make out]
Together each of us will run for gold
That shines like the sun in our eyes
Chorus [1st stanza]
The time is now
To lead the way
We share the same idea that may
Win by the end of the day
A friend that's here to stay
Identity
One energy
One strategy
With sypathy
These are the words
That can lead us to a new world
Chorus
Chorus
key-changed chorus
key-changed chorus a'la Gospel
They need to change their name to OMFG.
Plus, it'd make the song even funnier.
AHK!
You're right!
Let's use the system to smoke the hippies!
Never read TC.
I know that there are helicopter mounted versions used to disable vehicles.
From what I understand, you can take one a TV mini-dish, pull off the receiver, drill a hole and put a spark-plug in the middle, and hook it to a potential [stun-gun should work fine] and have a directed EMP weapon.
I was thinking of testing this out on my neighbour's car the next time its alarm goes off--I'll keep you posted.
The LASERs would be effective at kill. Heck, a friend used to bull's-eye rats on base with the target designator in his M1A--and that was enough to kill w/o being designed as such [unless he was BS-ing me, of course].
Of course, chemically projected slugs and their launchers are CHEAP: and the budget makes the army.
Heck with 'plane mounted', use a dozen satelites--have a low power same freq LASER to draw a bead and then burn them down to their boots with the high-power one. Hit whoever you want in the world at your convenience and from the comfort of your office terminal.
Militarily: useless
Politically: priceless.
Exactly. You don't polish steel, you give is a coating which does not absorb the wavelengths the other guys are using [make it the colour of the beam].
I saw this tactic employed once . . . the best part came in targeting the unsuspecting victims' crotch at the final moment.
He and the cat didn't think so; but, Damn, that was funny.
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the "encryption" which was broken merely the default setting of ROT13?
Oops, guess anyone who read that broke it too--better run while you can.
The technology to shoot down aircraft was developed and during the 1970's--no big deal. I remember seeing great footage of the engine compartment being nicely sliced out of a flying drone.
Problem is: the dispersion/diffraction of a high-powered LASER being used outdoors has the side effect of permanently blinding most of the people in line-of-sight to the aircraft [which can be a lot and, of course, include one's own troops].
Question is: why not just attach a whatever-KV potential to a spark-plug in a mini-dish and knock out the target's electronics instead? Should be easier--of course, that'd have little effect upon an incoming shell/bomb once the fuse has been armed.
You'd have to do it on a per-cycle basis.
Chip--Clk[MHz]--MIPS---MIPS/clk--New Name
4004--0.108-----0.060--0.556-----base [4004]
P4----2000------3804---1.902-----7616
Babbage's printer , was also completed. Holy smokes! The thing could line-space, character-space, do column-and-row formatting, and even word-wrap.
Man, and I was impressed with his breaking of the Vigenère ciphre . . . .
"What Apple needs to add to it's lineup is an Apple print server... then when you hook it up to the Airport, you get a wireless print server, for 'free' :)"
OMFG: I want that product.
Actually, that shape is a practical decision: the unit cools itself via convection--just show it to someone who has had Thermo/E and they'll spot it right off.
Plus, though I don't have one, it seems that the cord-winding ability ['yo-yo'] would be useful--though the shape isn't specifically integral to it.