So, just work it out over a multi-year average or something. Or, the guy could have just paid himself more of a salary so that the business has less in assets and doesn't sell for as much.
Most people who work for 30 years at $30k/yr don't get to just collect $2M when they're done. They just collect whatever is in social security, or a 401k should they be lucky enough to have one with something in it.
Maybe that would work in Europe. Over in the US there are FAR more cases of prosecutors going after people with little evidence to back them. Just look at all the exonerations as the result of DNA testing in recent years.
Another big problem in the US is the plea bargain. Most likely the prosecutor would charge the guy with murder, rape, and the works. Then if he thought the case was weak, offer some kind of plea bargain - maybe you could get off with only 5 years in prison or something. So then the accused can either take 5 years for a crime they didn't commit, or roll the dice with a jury who has no understanding of the birthday paradox and such and see if they'll only be out tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees, or be out the fees plus life in prison.
In the US justice has been transformed from discerning guilt and innocence to just taking the average and sticking it to everybody.
I don't think the terms are used quite so consistently as you suggest.
Block ciphers use keys. And when looking up the definition of encrypt in a dictionary the first definition was "to put into code or cipher."
Clasically ciphers and codes have tended to be distinguished on whether they operate at the level of meaning (usually words) or syntax (usually characters).
You're assuming the stores in question were smart enough to correlate shipping addresses and such. For all we know he just needed a stack of disposable email addresses, or maybe he had to add some whitespace or misspell his address a little (sure, they can normalize it with the post office, but in the world of 5000 corporate computer systems that don't talk to each other, that could just happen after any discount was already applied).
Getting the discounts probably won't be hard unless we're once day forced to use some nationally-issued ID online.
Now, reselling stuff on ebay is a different matter. Unless I could do quite a large business I don't see how you can make much money marking stuff up by $5 and reselling it. I do know somebody who made a mint essentially being a broker on somewhat exotic stuff that doesn't have an efficient market, but usually that involved buying gadgets for $2k from rich people who were bored with them, and selling them for $10k to collectors. You see that sort of thing in antique circles as well. Expensive items tend to have limited markets so there is a lot more room for market makers.
Most DNA matches do not have million-to-one odds. Sure, if they did whole genome sequencing they could do that and better. However, usually they're just screening for a couple of markers, and the odds of a match are much higher as a result.
Since commercial full-genomic sequencing is only a few thousand dollars now, I can't quite understand why this simply isn't done, at least as a confirmatory test (no harm in doing the cheaper screening first). Almost certainly the result of penny-wise-pound-foolish budget decisions, externalities (the prosecutor gets paid the same if he convicts the wrong man), and the tradition of court precedents (why your newfangled sciencey thing isn't as established as my centuries-old tea leaf interpretation).
And what if you're a 1-in-7000 guy, and happen to not have alibi and don't have many friends around the place cause you're seen as a bit weird?
Then they'll take a closer look at you and while you may be a bit weird and not have an alibi also don't seem to have any ties to the case whatsoever, and be let go.
No ties to the case? Your DNA matches the semen found in the victim, or whatever they got it from!
Do you think the prosecutor is going to stand up and announce to the town, well, we found this guy with a DNA match but we let him go since that is all the evidence we had. That would never go over. They're going to have to prosecute, which means the guy with the DNA match goes through the wringer no matter what the outcome is, and they're quite likely to end up in prison.
You couldn't use passwords stored as hashes to authenticate with remote resources - those systems are expecting to receive the password, not a hash of it. If they were happy with the hash, then storing the passwords as a hash provides no security since the hash effectively would be the password.
Actually it is quite relevant. Just search for examples of using TPM, linux, and trusted Grub to store passwords that can only be retrieved if you boot via the same boot chain. All that Palladium stuff that started the whole treacherous computing buzz years ago was fully implemented in hardware and BIOS - it is only Windows that doesn't generally support it.
If you boot into an OS that supports it, you can store keys in a TPM hardware vault that can only be retrieved if the software that stored them is run (with the chain from BIOS-bootloader-OS-drivers-application intact), or if the TPM is defeated.
This is used by many full disk encryption systems. Those can get away with it on Windows since the encryption happens very early in the boot process - before the lack of Windows support breaks the chain of trust. For whatever reason I've yet to see any Linux distro implement it, but both grub and the kernel fully support this.
The summary states that the passwords are scrambled but not encrypted. I fail to see the distinction. If I take a word and reverse it, that is a form of encryption. Sure, it is a very weak form, but it is.
And if you're going to just store the session key in the registry then it doesn't matter if they're using AES with a 5000-bit key.
If they used strong encryption on the password database, and then used TPM to store the session key, with a full trusted boot chain to the software needed to obtain the keys, then that would be pretty strong. However, I don't know that enough of Palladium was ever implemented to make this practical. Full-disk encryption software tends to work this way, but that runs before the bootloader, so it only needs the boot chain to be secure up to that point.
Makes sense. It seems to me that the deep space network is remarkably limiting for what it is used for.
How much does it cost to get a probe to Pluto, vs what it costs to build an antenna to talk to it? Unless those dishes are REALLY expensive it almost seems silly to not have near-realtime communications with them (well, light delay aside).
I realize they're big dishes that cost millions to put up, but we're talking about probes that cost MANY times that much to launch and operate.
Uh, care to prove that it isn't understandable by human limited brains? To suggest that because we don't understand it today we will never know it is a bit arrogant as well.
The genome is finite, as is the complexity of a human. It can be understood.
Yup. The thing that concerns me as a parent is what the kids might do. I have caught them with sharing software on their PCs and have had to remove it. It is almost impossible to detect at the network level, and I can't go and inspect their PCs daily. I just have to set rules and monitor, but the nature of kids is to not believe their parent who works in IT over their friend who says you can just click on this link to download a bunch of music. They don't really have much to lose either.
So I just try to monitor as best as I can, and deal with issues when they arise. The average user does NOT understand how torrents even work, let alone how those tracking them operate. A teenager has no concept of what a $10k legal settlement is either.
Yeah, NaK makes sense when your operating temperature is thousands of degrees. I can't see how it makes sense for a CPU. Nobody but the Russians even used it in Nuclear Submarines, though the sub that used it is one fast sub.
And what is its melting point? Wouldn't the stuff freeze when you turn off your PC?
True, but his point is still correct about it being the air that is compressed, which happens to have droplets of fuel suspended in it. Those droplets themselves will certainly be compressed ever so slightly, in the same sense that water in a glass compresses slightly every time you exhale, or the atmosphere of the earth expands whenever you light a fire.
I think the other key to MAD is that the barriers of entry are very high, so only those with a lot to lose get to play the game.
If you're already the ruler of Elbonia and you have gold-plated toilets, then do you really want to start shooting nukes at the USA?
The problem with patents is that anybody can get one of those trivial ones without building anything. If I have $10k to my name and can afford a $35 filing fee at the courthouse, and I get a patent for phones with microphones in them, why wouldn't I take a shot at the lottery?
The other key to mad is the "assured destruction" bit - as in fire it and you're GUARANTEED to be toast. Google and Apple are still in business, the last time I checked. They have a lot to lose, but don't think that the threat of actually losing it all is credible.
I don't see why, if this was made clear when it floated.
It creates a situation where the average member of the public can get ripped off. What is to keep the board from issuing a dividend to only certain classes of shares, or agreeing to give Zuckerburg a $1B/yr salary or whatever? He can just put it up for a vote, and since he has a majority of the votes he approves it and all the other shareholders lose out.
Just making this clear when the stock is floated doesn't really help - that's why we have the SEC in the first place. It wasn't like all those investors in 1929 didn't know they could have lost everything. The problem is that the stock market is too important to the economy to be allowed to fail, and therefore it needs to be regulated. Unless you want to just ban public ownership of companies entirely you need to control how it can operate, since individuals don't really have any power to dictate how Facebook stock is issued.
Someone works for 10 months (+/- a bit). You ask them to work another two months, you pay them more. I knew plenty of teachers, both when I was one and when I was growing up who grabbed part time or seasonal work during the summer.
Well, they don't have to take the job if they don't want it. I doubt that will create too many problems, and since teacher salaries are almost always seniority-based you'll easily have plenty for the zero-seniority workers you have to hire to replace those who get fed up and quit. Maybe if enough quit you could even get away with hiring non-union replacements.:)
Agreed. Nothing an undergraduate is likely to learn has changed in 10 years. In STEM it changes a bit more often, but they could refresh textbooks once a decade and be fine. In graduate school textbooks are less useful anyway - you're going to be passing out literature references and such. In fact, I'd have loved it if some of my graduate classes had decent textbooks, but about the best you'll do are those technical tomes in the library that have one chapter written in English, and then the rest of the book is only understandable if you could have written the book in the first place. Anything dealing with any kind of sophisticated methodology is like that - they're basically apprenticeships.
Or they could just allocate money to hire teachers, and spend less on other stuff like provosts and their armies of staff...
Back in the dark ages when I was in school I was paying $10k/yr tuition. That basically covered about 10 courses in total, so that is about $1k per course. Figure 15 weeks per semester and 3 hour long classes per week. That's $22/hr/student. Even for upperclass courses with only 10 in the room that is $220/hr which is plenty to pay a professor even on modern wages. And of course a modern college easily can triple those figures.
Sure, there is the cost of the building/etc, but what are all those donors paying for anyway, let alone the billion dollar endowment?
Sure, there is some overhead to pay for the building. And labs are expensive/etc. However, I can't see how the bulk of all those money is actually going towards stuff that has a direct impact on educating students.
I think the issue is that MBAs are running colleges they way they run businesses. It isn't about not being able to afford to hire teachers - it is about being able to get away with not hiring them. If the kids are willing to put up with this stuff then by all means do it. The kids of course don't care - they just do whatever they're told to do as long as they have plenty of time to have fun. That's what got them through high school, so that must be what you do for the rest of your life, right?
In case you'd like to buy the book someplace else? Presumably if they don't disclose the ISBN they're not going to disclose the author/title/etc either.
Why increase teacher salaries - at least around here their annual salaries are comparable to others of similar education, so I'm not sure why you'd have to offer more pay to get them to not quit and give up their seniority...
Slashdot Mirror
So, just work it out over a multi-year average or something. Or, the guy could have just paid himself more of a salary so that the business has less in assets and doesn't sell for as much.
Most people who work for 30 years at $30k/yr don't get to just collect $2M when they're done. They just collect whatever is in social security, or a 401k should they be lucky enough to have one with something in it.
Maybe that would work in Europe. Over in the US there are FAR more cases of prosecutors going after people with little evidence to back them. Just look at all the exonerations as the result of DNA testing in recent years.
Another big problem in the US is the plea bargain. Most likely the prosecutor would charge the guy with murder, rape, and the works. Then if he thought the case was weak, offer some kind of plea bargain - maybe you could get off with only 5 years in prison or something. So then the accused can either take 5 years for a crime they didn't commit, or roll the dice with a jury who has no understanding of the birthday paradox and such and see if they'll only be out tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees, or be out the fees plus life in prison.
In the US justice has been transformed from discerning guilt and innocence to just taking the average and sticking it to everybody.
I don't think the terms are used quite so consistently as you suggest.
Block ciphers use keys. And when looking up the definition of encrypt in a dictionary the first definition was "to put into code or cipher."
Clasically ciphers and codes have tended to be distinguished on whether they operate at the level of meaning (usually words) or syntax (usually characters).
That wouldn't bother me so much if it weren't for the fact that they're usually trying to get ME to spend $1B for a stadium.
I tend to be a libertarian, but I can at least see the argument when you're talking about poor people without health care.
You're assuming the stores in question were smart enough to correlate shipping addresses and such. For all we know he just needed a stack of disposable email addresses, or maybe he had to add some whitespace or misspell his address a little (sure, they can normalize it with the post office, but in the world of 5000 corporate computer systems that don't talk to each other, that could just happen after any discount was already applied).
Getting the discounts probably won't be hard unless we're once day forced to use some nationally-issued ID online.
Now, reselling stuff on ebay is a different matter. Unless I could do quite a large business I don't see how you can make much money marking stuff up by $5 and reselling it. I do know somebody who made a mint essentially being a broker on somewhat exotic stuff that doesn't have an efficient market, but usually that involved buying gadgets for $2k from rich people who were bored with them, and selling them for $10k to collectors. You see that sort of thing in antique circles as well. Expensive items tend to have limited markets so there is a lot more room for market makers.
Of course! They get results!
Sure, they get the wrong results quite often, but as long as you never find out that it happened everybody sleeps well.
Most DNA matches do not have million-to-one odds. Sure, if they did whole genome sequencing they could do that and better. However, usually they're just screening for a couple of markers, and the odds of a match are much higher as a result.
Since commercial full-genomic sequencing is only a few thousand dollars now, I can't quite understand why this simply isn't done, at least as a confirmatory test (no harm in doing the cheaper screening first). Almost certainly the result of penny-wise-pound-foolish budget decisions, externalities (the prosecutor gets paid the same if he convicts the wrong man), and the tradition of court precedents (why your newfangled sciencey thing isn't as established as my centuries-old tea leaf interpretation).
Then they'll take a closer look at you and while you may be a bit weird and not have an alibi also don't seem to have any ties to the case whatsoever, and be let go.
No ties to the case? Your DNA matches the semen found in the victim, or whatever they got it from!
Do you think the prosecutor is going to stand up and announce to the town, well, we found this guy with a DNA match but we let him go since that is all the evidence we had. That would never go over. They're going to have to prosecute, which means the guy with the DNA match goes through the wringer no matter what the outcome is, and they're quite likely to end up in prison.
You couldn't use passwords stored as hashes to authenticate with remote resources - those systems are expecting to receive the password, not a hash of it. If they were happy with the hash, then storing the passwords as a hash provides no security since the hash effectively would be the password.
Actually it is quite relevant. Just search for examples of using TPM, linux, and trusted Grub to store passwords that can only be retrieved if you boot via the same boot chain. All that Palladium stuff that started the whole treacherous computing buzz years ago was fully implemented in hardware and BIOS - it is only Windows that doesn't generally support it.
If you boot into an OS that supports it, you can store keys in a TPM hardware vault that can only be retrieved if the software that stored them is run (with the chain from BIOS-bootloader-OS-drivers-application intact), or if the TPM is defeated.
This is used by many full disk encryption systems. Those can get away with it on Windows since the encryption happens very early in the boot process - before the lack of Windows support breaks the chain of trust. For whatever reason I've yet to see any Linux distro implement it, but both grub and the kernel fully support this.
The summary states that the passwords are scrambled but not encrypted. I fail to see the distinction. If I take a word and reverse it, that is a form of encryption. Sure, it is a very weak form, but it is.
And if you're going to just store the session key in the registry then it doesn't matter if they're using AES with a 5000-bit key.
If they used strong encryption on the password database, and then used TPM to store the session key, with a full trusted boot chain to the software needed to obtain the keys, then that would be pretty strong. However, I don't know that enough of Palladium was ever implemented to make this practical. Full-disk encryption software tends to work this way, but that runs before the bootloader, so it only needs the boot chain to be secure up to that point.
Makes sense. It seems to me that the deep space network is remarkably limiting for what it is used for.
How much does it cost to get a probe to Pluto, vs what it costs to build an antenna to talk to it? Unless those dishes are REALLY expensive it almost seems silly to not have near-realtime communications with them (well, light delay aside).
I realize they're big dishes that cost millions to put up, but we're talking about probes that cost MANY times that much to launch and operate.
Uh, care to prove that it isn't understandable by human limited brains? To suggest that because we don't understand it today we will never know it is a bit arrogant as well.
The genome is finite, as is the complexity of a human. It can be understood.
Yup, it is about 68K of RAM split across a bunch of processors, and another 68k or so of tape storage. I don't know how usable the tape drive is now.
True, but Voyager isn't splashed with salt water either.
Comparing anything to space probe construction is going to be of limited use in any case.
Yup. The thing that concerns me as a parent is what the kids might do. I have caught them with sharing software on their PCs and have had to remove it. It is almost impossible to detect at the network level, and I can't go and inspect their PCs daily. I just have to set rules and monitor, but the nature of kids is to not believe their parent who works in IT over their friend who says you can just click on this link to download a bunch of music. They don't really have much to lose either.
So I just try to monitor as best as I can, and deal with issues when they arise. The average user does NOT understand how torrents even work, let alone how those tracking them operate. A teenager has no concept of what a $10k legal settlement is either.
Yeah, NaK makes sense when your operating temperature is thousands of degrees. I can't see how it makes sense for a CPU. Nobody but the Russians even used it in Nuclear Submarines, though the sub that used it is one fast sub.
And what is its melting point? Wouldn't the stuff freeze when you turn off your PC?
True, but his point is still correct about it being the air that is compressed, which happens to have droplets of fuel suspended in it. Those droplets themselves will certainly be compressed ever so slightly, in the same sense that water in a glass compresses slightly every time you exhale, or the atmosphere of the earth expands whenever you light a fire.
I think the other key to MAD is that the barriers of entry are very high, so only those with a lot to lose get to play the game.
If you're already the ruler of Elbonia and you have gold-plated toilets, then do you really want to start shooting nukes at the USA?
The problem with patents is that anybody can get one of those trivial ones without building anything. If I have $10k to my name and can afford a $35 filing fee at the courthouse, and I get a patent for phones with microphones in them, why wouldn't I take a shot at the lottery?
The other key to mad is the "assured destruction" bit - as in fire it and you're GUARANTEED to be toast. Google and Apple are still in business, the last time I checked. They have a lot to lose, but don't think that the threat of actually losing it all is credible.
I don't see why, if this was made clear when it floated.
It creates a situation where the average member of the public can get ripped off. What is to keep the board from issuing a dividend to only certain classes of shares, or agreeing to give Zuckerburg a $1B/yr salary or whatever? He can just put it up for a vote, and since he has a majority of the votes he approves it and all the other shareholders lose out.
Just making this clear when the stock is floated doesn't really help - that's why we have the SEC in the first place. It wasn't like all those investors in 1929 didn't know they could have lost everything. The problem is that the stock market is too important to the economy to be allowed to fail, and therefore it needs to be regulated. Unless you want to just ban public ownership of companies entirely you need to control how it can operate, since individuals don't really have any power to dictate how Facebook stock is issued.
Someone works for 10 months (+/- a bit). You ask them to work another two months, you pay them more. I knew plenty of teachers, both when I was one and when I was growing up who grabbed part time or seasonal work during the summer.
Well, they don't have to take the job if they don't want it. I doubt that will create too many problems, and since teacher salaries are almost always seniority-based you'll easily have plenty for the zero-seniority workers you have to hire to replace those who get fed up and quit. Maybe if enough quit you could even get away with hiring non-union replacements. :)
Agreed. Nothing an undergraduate is likely to learn has changed in 10 years. In STEM it changes a bit more often, but they could refresh textbooks once a decade and be fine. In graduate school textbooks are less useful anyway - you're going to be passing out literature references and such. In fact, I'd have loved it if some of my graduate classes had decent textbooks, but about the best you'll do are those technical tomes in the library that have one chapter written in English, and then the rest of the book is only understandable if you could have written the book in the first place. Anything dealing with any kind of sophisticated methodology is like that - they're basically apprenticeships.
Or they could just allocate money to hire teachers, and spend less on other stuff like provosts and their armies of staff...
Back in the dark ages when I was in school I was paying $10k/yr tuition. That basically covered about 10 courses in total, so that is about $1k per course. Figure 15 weeks per semester and 3 hour long classes per week. That's $22/hr/student. Even for upperclass courses with only 10 in the room that is $220/hr which is plenty to pay a professor even on modern wages. And of course a modern college easily can triple those figures.
Sure, there is the cost of the building/etc, but what are all those donors paying for anyway, let alone the billion dollar endowment?
Sure, there is some overhead to pay for the building. And labs are expensive/etc. However, I can't see how the bulk of all those money is actually going towards stuff that has a direct impact on educating students.
I think the issue is that MBAs are running colleges they way they run businesses. It isn't about not being able to afford to hire teachers - it is about being able to get away with not hiring them. If the kids are willing to put up with this stuff then by all means do it. The kids of course don't care - they just do whatever they're told to do as long as they have plenty of time to have fun. That's what got them through high school, so that must be what you do for the rest of your life, right?
In case you'd like to buy the book someplace else? Presumably if they don't disclose the ISBN they're not going to disclose the author/title/etc either.
Why increase teacher salaries - at least around here their annual salaries are comparable to others of similar education, so I'm not sure why you'd have to offer more pay to get them to not quit and give up their seniority...