Most mammals have an inverse relationship between rate and lifetime. (And barring the use of medicine, probably humans too.) Almost as if there were a limited number of beats allocated...
It's not very often that hackers (by definition, intelligent people) do something purely and solely for the reason of being an asshole.
I guess the fear is not about hackers trying to be assholes, but actually planned murder using the pacemaker as "weapon". Indeed, if the attacker can change the pacemaker to operate normally again afterwards, it might actually be the perfect murder.
Well, at least the Google calculator still tells me that 2+2=4. So it's not all bad. (And those who don't understand this comment might want to read 1984)
This is the exact same reaction I had when I looked at the 'new' service. I already know what services I use from Google. What I really wanted to know is how much information they keep when I occasionally perform search using Google while being logged into Google or whether what info Google stores based on my ip address etc. but as you would imagine that information is no where to be found.
Fortunately the first part I can answer affirmatively for myself: Since I don't log into Google and don't plan to ever do, they'll get zero information about me that way.
I just don't get why people are focusing on the whole rat part of the story rather than the cool part. I didn't see people complaining about the glow in the dark mice
Glowing mice are easier to find in the dark. Why should we complain?:-)
Actually they will just remember better how they not learned the history sessions, and successfully cheated at their less-intelligent teachers who didn't yet have the genetic enhancement.
Maybe the trade-off is that their brain simply needs more energy, which isn't great when food availability is the main factor limiting reproduction. Or maybe, the better memory simply doesn't help the rats too much in their natural habitat. After all, natural selection doesn't favour long memories, it favours large effective reproduction rates. If long memory doesn't lead to higher effective reproduction rates, it won't be improved by natural selection.
You mean, like "In soviet Russia, our new Rat Bastard overlords welcome YOU"?:-) Of course, in Korea, only old people forget those references. Maybe they got Alzheimer...
Well, imagine a Beowulf cluster of memory-improved rats. Given how fast rats reproduce, this would give an exponential speedup of your calculation. However, do those rats run Linux? Maybe we would need memory-enhanced penguins instead. But those don't breed as fast...
The company surely did have the private PGP key lying around. They just forgot the password.
As an analogy, think of a safe. A good safe is hard to break in if you don't have the key. If you have the key, it's quite easy. Now you fear that someone could break in your house, get the key and open your safe. Therefore you put the key for the big safe into another, smaller safe. If you need to open the big safe, you first open the small safe, take out the key of the big safe and then open that.
Now if you have lost the key for the small safe, and the small safe is less secure than the big safe, you'll certainly not crack the big safe, but just the small safe in order to get the key of the big safe.
Now, the key for the small safe is your password, and the key of the big safe is the PGP key. If someone has access to the small safe (the password-protected PGP key), then the security of whatever is in the big safe is certainly limited by the security of the small safe.
Now with emails, the point is that the big safe (the encrypted email) is out in the public, while the small safe (the password-protected PGP key) is in your home (i.e. on your computer, which hopefully itself has appropriate protection against intruders).
So the security of your PGP encrypted mail is limited by the combination of the security of your computer and the security of your PGP password. If your computer is basically unprotected, and your PGP password is weak, then anyone can read your encrypted mail by simply breaking into your computer, copying the private PGP key, and breaking the password. If your computer is well-secured, the attacker will have a hard time to get your private PGP key, and if you PGP password is strong, the attacker will have a hard time to break it if he manages to get the PGP private key.
When we have computer software composing best-selling music and writing best-selling novels or creating entire computer-generated movies from scratch, it will be obvious that such things are merely mechanical activities, requiring no actual intelligence.
When looking at some best-selling stuff, I'm already not sure that you need intelligence to produce it.:-)
What you are describing is that the U.S. justice system is fucked up. But the fix for this is to fix the justice system.
About the Marijuana example: I don't know about the U.S., but here in Germany this would be deleted from your criminal record after some time. So unless the Marijuana event was recent, your criminal record would be clean.
I always found it odd that people are pushing for more government when they've just been victimized by the last one.
What is it that most people seem to be only able to hold extreme views? Government handling everything and government handling nothing is both equally bad. There are things better handled by government, and there are things better not handled by government. If government handles things it shouldn't, it's bad. If government doesn't handle things it should, it's equally bad.
Now in many cases deciding whether it is better handled by government or not isn't easy. But the world just is complicated, live with it. Extreme positions are simply wrong.
Capitalism is not the automatic win that the "laissez-faire" crowd presents it as
The "win" is not in the end result being to everyone's liking. The "win" is in the fact that everyone is left free to make his own choices and succeed or fail by them.
The problem is that one person's choice may cause other people fail. This is the point which usually is forgotten.
There are some choices which harm other people very directly, like just taking their money away (also known as stealing). Those obvious ways of succeeding on the cost of others are forbidden, and for good reasons. However, as soon as the connection isn't as direct, it often isn't any more forbidden to harm others for your own profit.
Slashdot Mirror
Even if the wearer is the worst scumbag on earth, killing him certainly isn't the right thing.
Most mammals have an inverse relationship between rate and lifetime. (And barring the use of medicine, probably humans too.) Almost as if there were a limited number of beats allocated...
And then you die from a null pointer exception?
I guess the fear is not about hackers trying to be assholes, but actually planned murder using the pacemaker as "weapon". Indeed, if the attacker can change the pacemaker to operate normally again afterwards, it might actually be the perfect murder.
If they want to keep with Japanese board games, what about "Gobang"? ...
But then, maybe people would understand the "bang" as "!"
Unlike IBM. APL stands for "A Programming Language".
Yes, the language would have been way cooler if it stood for "APL programming language" :-)
Better yet, why would anyone who seriously wants to avoid a wiretap *use a phone*?
To connect his acoustic coupler :-)
MS DOS or DR DOS?
Here in the US legal aliens can purchase and own firearms if they keep a valid hunting or fishing license.
I doubt it's a good idea to allow extraterrestrial life forms which grow inside people to own firearms. :-)
Well, at least the Google calculator still tells me that 2+2=4. So it's not all bad.
(And those who don't understand this comment might want to read 1984)
You mean, they've identified you as security risk?
This is the exact same reaction I had when I looked at the 'new' service. I already know what services I use from Google. What I really wanted to know is how much information they keep when I occasionally perform search using Google while being logged into Google or whether what info Google stores based on my ip address etc. but as you would imagine that information is no where to be found.
Fortunately the first part I can answer affirmatively for myself: Since I don't log into Google and don't plan to ever do, they'll get zero information about me that way.
Glowing mice are easier to find in the dark. Why should we complain? :-)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piracetam
Actually they will just remember better how they not learned the history sessions, and successfully cheated at their less-intelligent teachers who didn't yet have the genetic enhancement.
Maybe the trade-off is that their brain simply needs more energy, which isn't great when food availability is the main factor limiting reproduction. Or maybe, the better memory simply doesn't help the rats too much in their natural habitat. After all, natural selection doesn't favour long memories, it favours large effective reproduction rates. If long memory doesn't lead to higher effective reproduction rates, it won't be improved by natural selection.
You mean, like "In soviet Russia, our new Rat Bastard overlords welcome YOU"? :-) Of course, in Korea, only old people forget those references. Maybe they got Alzheimer ...
Well, imagine a Beowulf cluster of memory-improved rats. Given how fast rats reproduce, this would give an exponential speedup of your calculation. However, do those rats run Linux? Maybe we would need memory-enhanced penguins instead. But those don't breed as fast ...
The company surely did have the private PGP key lying around. They just forgot the password.
As an analogy, think of a safe. A good safe is hard to break in if you don't have the key. If you have the key, it's quite easy. Now you fear that someone could break in your house, get the key and open your safe. Therefore you put the key for the big safe into another, smaller safe. If you need to open the big safe, you first open the small safe, take out the key of the big safe and then open that.
Now if you have lost the key for the small safe, and the small safe is less secure than the big safe, you'll certainly not crack the big safe, but just the small safe in order to get the key of the big safe.
Now, the key for the small safe is your password, and the key of the big safe is the PGP key. If someone has access to the small safe (the password-protected PGP key), then the security of whatever is in the big safe is certainly limited by the security of the small safe.
Now with emails, the point is that the big safe (the encrypted email) is out in the public, while the small safe (the password-protected PGP key) is in your home (i.e. on your computer, which hopefully itself has appropriate protection against intruders).
So the security of your PGP encrypted mail is limited by the combination of the security of your computer and the security of your PGP password. If your computer is basically unprotected, and your PGP password is weak, then anyone can read your encrypted mail by simply breaking into your computer, copying the private PGP key, and breaking the password. If your computer is well-secured, the attacker will have a hard time to get your private PGP key, and if you PGP password is strong, the attacker will have a hard time to break it if he manages to get the PGP private key.
When looking at some best-selling stuff, I'm already not sure that you need intelligence to produce it. :-)
And of course "Some day" is a vague term which I'd immediately associate with the distant future.
If you don't use the power, but do everything on the remote machines, the powerful computer is in effect just an overpowered thin client.
However, some of them have an impressive flash interface.
What you are describing is that the U.S. justice system is fucked up. But the fix for this is to fix the justice system.
About the Marijuana example: I don't know about the U.S., but here in Germany this would be deleted from your criminal record after some time. So unless the Marijuana event was recent, your criminal record would be clean.
In other words, you have to be able to handle money well. Seems like a good thing for someone whose job it is to handle other people's money.
I'm pretty sure we won't solve the problems by allowing criminals into the banks.
I'd hope that they don't demand just any degree, but specifically a degree in economy. After all, you should have a clue about what you are doing.
OK, that one's is a problem.
What is it that most people seem to be only able to hold extreme views? Government handling everything and government handling nothing is both equally bad. There are things better handled by government, and there are things better not handled by government. If government handles things it shouldn't, it's bad. If government doesn't handle things it should, it's equally bad.
Now in many cases deciding whether it is better handled by government or not isn't easy. But the world just is complicated, live with it. Extreme positions are simply wrong.
Capitalism is not the automatic win that the "laissez-faire" crowd presents it as
The "win" is not in the end result being to everyone's liking. The "win" is in the fact that everyone is left free to make his own choices and succeed or fail by them.
The problem is that one person's choice may cause other people fail. This is the point which usually is forgotten.
There are some choices which harm other people very directly, like just taking their money away (also known as stealing). Those obvious ways of succeeding on the cost of others are forbidden, and for good reasons. However, as soon as the connection isn't as direct, it often isn't any more forbidden to harm others for your own profit.