Before announcing it you change it so you can safely announce your old password. After that you change it back due to the danger of forgetting the new one.
The problem with this approach is that you never know if he told the full information. Say he's supposed to send two identical CDs to each address. The CNw gets the addresses out of him and sends one CD to each. This is the secret signal for "caught, code not secure". The others now know
that they can't use the code for any secret messages (they can, however, use the code for fake messages they want the CNw to see)
that their addresses are now likely known (and therefore they should take precaution measures)
that they should not rely on any further information which comes from the caught person, nor give any critical information to him
after the wall finally broke down (you know, that concrete thingy that used to be somewhere in Europe)
You see? They destroyed a wall. Buildings have walls. So there's only a small step from destroying walls to destroying complete buildings. Terrorists everywhere!
Assuming I find out that someone records static at a given place for a given frequency, could I then transmit "pseudostatic" to reduce the randomness of that data without him noticing that his statics are manipulated?
There are many other possibilities. For example, you can hide data in ping packets. You e.g. can reserve 256 ports for the 256 byte values, but there are also possibilities to hide information in other fields. Or what about hiding it in packets used for transmitting normal data (e.g. data from a web server)? Or even from a regular chat session (where two people sit on each side, one doing the harmless regular chat, and one doing the secret chat hidden in the TCP/IP packets).
Really? You know communication is quite similar to communism, it's just the ending which was exchanged. So how can something which is that similar to communism be good?
(So anyway, would that mean that sanctions would come with a GPL?)
With the permission for everyone to change them in any way? "Hmmmm... I don't like that sanction. I want to sell my products there. Well, I'll just chance it to have an exception for my products."
In fact the best choice in most cases is to not choose at all.
Well, in one of the cases you mentioned, this is not the best choice. Because if you don't choose, others choose for you.
In general, choosing none is just one of the choices, and then you're back to square one: Choose the least shitty option. Which may actually be the option "none of them", but it may also not be.
Indeed, even if you downloaded the source, read and verified every line (assuming you could actually do that in reasonable time, say you have supernatural reading/understanding skills), and then compiled it to get your executable, you'd still have to trust
the maker of your OS (that it sent the same file to the compiler which it sent to your editor/printer/whatever)
the maker of your compiler (that it didn't insert any vulnerability behind your back)
the maker of your editor/printer/whatever (that it really showed you the file you wanted to check unaltered)
the maker of your processor (could you make a processor which detects certain typical instruction sequences and then does something else?)
the maker of your hard disk (what if the hard disk has extra logic which detects firefox executables and modifies them directly on disk?)
the maker of your mainboard (after all, this is what controls all your data streams in your computer)
Vienna tried to provide such a service, too [German text]. However, this concept failed due to to much damaging and stealing of the bikes. Now they have a new high-tech system [German again], which is not anonymous, and where only the first hour is free. I don't know if it's technically the same system as in Germany, though.
You claim humans run code, then show me the code. Alter the code so I like onions and dislike Thai food without going through Pavlovian training.
But Pavlovian training is one of the ways changing your code. Disallowing such things is like demanding "please program this PC, but don't touch any input device!"
I guess this would be the end of the time when living was based on human work. Yes, at the beginning it would cause harm, because the current society is built around the "work to live" paradigm. But once we overcome this paradigm, and assuming we keep the AI under control so it works for us and not against us, this could be the beginning of a wonderful new period where we simply don't have to work to make a living. Yes, it would be the end of capitalism, but only to replaced by something better. Not by communism where you have to work without being rewarded, but by a society where you simply don't need to work if you don't want to.
Then you hook an electrode up to that nerve and take the signal from there. And as soon as anyone with that chip dies, you can just explant his chip and use the signal directly.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, given that two Half Lifes give a complete life, it must be Half Life 3.
Of course both:
Before announcing it you change it so you can safely announce your old password.
After that you change it back due to the danger of forgetting the new one.
SCNR
You see? They destroyed a wall. Buildings have walls. So there's only a small step from destroying walls to destroying complete buildings. Terrorists everywhere!
SCNR
It can be used as argument: "See, if we had had more ressources, we could have prevented the attack. So please increase our budget."
Assuming I find out that someone records static at a given place for a given frequency, could I then transmit "pseudostatic" to reduce the randomness of that data without him noticing that his statics are manipulated?
As in "I told him sucess about it"?
Obviously you discussed the slashdot moderation system.
There are many other possibilities. For example, you can hide data in ping packets. You e.g. can reserve 256 ports for the 256 byte values, but there are also possibilities to hide information in other fields. Or what about hiding it in packets used for transmitting normal data (e.g. data from a web server)? Or even from a regular chat session (where two people sit on each side, one doing the harmless regular chat, and one doing the secret chat hidden in the TCP/IP packets).
You mean like this?
Really? You know communication is quite similar to communism, it's just the ending which was exchanged. So how can something which is that similar to communism be good?
Sorry, you failed.
With the permission for everyone to change them in any way?
"Hmmmm
Open Source Coffee? :-)
No, it's Kelvin. I'd not consider that warm, however.
You need 3 years to compile? You really should get newer hardware!
Well, in one of the cases you mentioned, this is not the best choice. Because if you don't choose, others choose for you.
In general, choosing none is just one of the choices, and then you're back to square one: Choose the least shitty option. Which may actually be the option "none of them", but it may also not be.
Vienna tried to provide such a service, too [German text]. However, this concept failed due to to much damaging and stealing of the bikes. Now they have a new high-tech system [German again], which is not anonymous, and where only the first hour is free. I don't know if it's technically the same system as in Germany, though.
The laser, especially in burning mode, heats the disk up. Therefore it wouldn't be quite cool, but rather hot.
How do you differentiate male from female computers?
I guess this depends on how much harm the machines can do to us if we say no.
But Pavlovian training is one of the ways changing your code. Disallowing such things is like demanding "please program this PC, but don't touch any input device!"
I guess this would be the end of the time when living was based on human work. Yes, at the beginning it would cause harm, because the current society is built around the "work to live" paradigm. But once we overcome this paradigm, and assuming we keep the AI under control so it works for us and not against us, this could be the beginning of a wonderful new period where we simply don't have to work to make a living. Yes, it would be the end of capitalism, but only to replaced by something better. Not by communism where you have to work without being rewarded, but by a society where you simply don't need to work if you don't want to.
Then you hook an electrode up to that nerve and take the signal from there. And as soon as anyone with that chip dies, you can just explant his chip and use the signal directly.