I guess, call me paranoid. It's worth money to me not to have a black box in my car. Or as someone else might have said I do not have it in my car. I do not have it in my (something else that rhymes with car). I do not (something that rhymes with "do not") sam I am. Wow, that's harder than it looks.
> So, how to accomodate non-smartphone users? Different floors with bluetooth vs card key? Just don't go to that hotel?
They could have a box of 'loaner phones' that they hand out...
That's interesting. They could even create a custom device that did the lock/unlock only, (someone else mentioned a "card key with a CPU") but I suspect that would be more expensive (at least on the short term) than just handing out burner phones (in management-speak "leveraging existing technology") that are barely equal to the task, and then doing a factory reset on them when returned. (And charging an outrageous delayed charge on your amex bill if they're not.)
How will this be implemented? Even in this day and age, I suspect there can be customers who do not have smartphones with bluetooth. (For instance, some people feel more comfortable carrying "dumb" phones that are less hackable and less prone to data breeches if stolen, because they don't have usable data on them.)
Having a card key as a backup to bluetooth would be ok for a pilot program, but over the long term it seems like such a dual system would not be significantly more secure than a card key only system.
So, how to accomodate non-smartphone users? Different floors with bluetooth vs card key? Just don't go to that hotel?
I don't know what cards with an active CPU cost in quantity, (if anyone does, please chime in) but a little googling shows that monogrammed card keys can be had for about two cents (American) apiece in quantity.
An app is essentially the cost of NRE plus the cost of maintenance. Card keys with an active CPU is an ongoing, much more significant (I suspect...) expense. You could see that the hotels would want this.
> With an active CPU behind it, certainly this system can be more secure than the current card system.
That was my first thought. Such a system, for several reasons, has the potential of being significantly more secure.
The counter-argument might be that it depends entirely on the implementation. Whether an *effective* solution is generated, or just a solution that's convenient and looks secure, is an open question. Also whether such a solution has a back door or a weakness that can be globally exploited. I think this is a good thing, but I wouldn't want to bet my possessions on it until it had been in the field for awhile and experts had evaluated it for weaknesses.
I understand we're not talking about an airplane falling out of the sky, but as a person who travels with expensive equipment, door security is somewhat important to me.
> Also means much less chance of leaving the card in the room
For most people, although I'm related to people who regularly leave their phone behind when they leave the house. (Wife and daughter, mostly.) (And yes, a young lady without her smartphone in this age is a big deal, but that doesn't stop her from leaving it behind regularly. And of course it's a tragedy each time...)
> and less money spent replacing lost cards.
This is probably less significant. A little googling shows that you can get card keys printed with your logo for $0.02 apiece in quantity, making it cheaper than the monogrammed pens they give away.
That's a good point. A good observation might also be that Linux is strong in the server market. But I believe OP was specifically talking about desktop.
When have you ever known a political party supporter switch affiliation because their party's policies don't work? Because the parties ideology has shifted, sure, but because they've tried their policies and they didn't work? Very rare.
When have you ever known a political party supporter switch affiliation because their party's policies don't work? Because the parties ideology has shifted, sure, but because they've tried their policies and they didn't work? Very rare.
You mean an individual voter? I've seen it fairly often.
Perhaps it depends in which circles you travel. If one only hangs out with sycophants, it has to have an effect on one's perception. The people I hang out with tend to be issue driven, not party driven, which makes elections a matter of individual qualifications, not whether they have an R or a D after their name.
So yes Linux has come a long way. Windows may still own the desktop. Market share in what is though of as the PC-market (desktop/laptop/nettbook) its only 1.64% today. But in market share of the computers that are used to surf on the net, supercomputers, servers real time system there Linux are thriving.
Linux is in second place and increasing in the IT that folks use today
Right, but doesn't that include the server market? Linux is doing very well there. But I think the OP was specifically speaking of desktop.
Linux still lags behind MS Vista, by a 2:1 margin (Vista enjoys about a 2.5% total market share, Linux about 1.4%), but still Linux advocates declare Linux is poinsed to take over the desktop market any day now!
I'm a fan of Linux, but have to agree. It's like we're going to have practical nuclear fusion in 40 years....
I wonder how many of Windows 8.X's sales are "forced", IE, preinstalled on a PC that a consumer bought because they needed a PC, not because they wanted Windows 8? Stipulating that the consumer is not a geek, and not aware that they might be able to ask for Windows 7 preinstalled instead?
It's interesting that while 8.1 is around 10%-ish, 8 is still about 5%. Considering 8.1 is a free update for registered copies of 8, how many of the un-updated copies of 8 are pirated versions?
> My reading (erm, listening) is: Any form of duress-self-destruct code, they will most likely bend you over for "anticipatory obstruction."
Although this would still be that, I wonder if a self-destruct code that deletes *most* data, and perhaps even leaves behind something minor (perhaps tempting but bogus, easily fought in court) for the cops to find, might be effective.
Yet another reason not to use biometrics to unlock devices.
Sorry, this is off-topic but I haven't found the proper place...
"I'm sorry, your QUESTION must be in the form of A QUESTION! -- What husbands would say if they only had the guts #31"
My wife simply asks the WRONG question: "Do you want to (whatever chore or other disagreeable thing)". My reply: No, I don't WANT to (whatever), but if you ask me nicely, I will"
I've been saying this for 22 years now. That qualifies me as insane, correct?
A long time ago mine switched to "I want this and that. Make it happen" with a dismissive backwards wave with the fingers of one hand. It's pretty annoying, but if it's reasonable I'll do it. But if it's "I want the old turtle habitat turned into a koi pond in the back yard" my response is "that's not going to happen". And then she refuses to cook for awhile, but it's better than digging in the mud to put something together that she's never ever going to look at.
What I was referring to originally with that line is the phenomenon where she has something urgent to ask you but instead launches into a long story about her sister saying this about that but she really meant this and getting buried in sub-clauses, so that both of us lose track of what she's trying to say, after several minutes of which, she thinks she's asked me a question, but she really hasn't. "So, what's the question?" "I just told you!" "No, you really didn't. You told me a long story about your sister's allergies that devolved into the state of her house and as far as I can tell her lawn needing seed, but you haven't actually asked me anything yet." And then I find that the actual question, which was not in any of the words spoken thus far, was "did any mail for my sister get delivered here?"
You might be right, but I think the point is, the first step is to take out the drone to protect your assets. And it seems to me that drones are particularly vulnerable to electronic countermeasures.
If someone were so morally bankrupt enough to create a drone army to infiltrate certain gaps and structural weaknesses in the plant and detonate significant payload to disrupt cooling/power/containment, surrounding area is going to be uninhabitable for a looong time.
Time for plants to consider netting, maybe? If it would help at all? Perhaps reinforce areas so that drones can't easily fly into them?
I'd think, a combination of automatic RF and laser countermeasures. It might actually be fun to design.
> Will millions of people really want to charge and fuss with their watch at least once a day?
I can't speak for everyone else, but I vote a decisive no. I already have a stupid company-issued phone with a non-swappable battery that I have to charge every night, and occasionally during the day if I use it a lot. I tell ya, I long for the days when a pager would run for weeks on a single AA battery. The thought of having a second device that needs that level of care and feeding is frankly revolting.
Slashdot Mirror
A mini atlas-shrug?
I guess, call me paranoid. It's worth money to me not to have a black box in my car. Or as someone else might have said I do not have it in my car. I do not have it in my (something else that rhymes with car). I do not (something that rhymes with "do not") sam I am. Wow, that's harder than it looks.
that's very easy. dump chemicals around the the whole thing as needed
Maybe we could use all the oil we're saving?
Space: 1999 becomes reality?
Please don't say that! It'll give some producer an idea for an ecologically-slanted remake.
> So, how to accomodate non-smartphone users? Different floors with bluetooth vs card key? Just don't go to that hotel?
They could have a box of 'loaner phones' that they hand out...
That's interesting. They could even create a custom device that did the lock/unlock only, (someone else mentioned a "card key with a CPU") but I suspect that would be more expensive (at least on the short term) than just handing out burner phones (in management-speak "leveraging existing technology") that are barely equal to the task, and then doing a factory reset on them when returned. (And charging an outrageous delayed charge on your amex bill if they're not.)
How will this be implemented? Even in this day and age, I suspect there can be customers who do not have smartphones with bluetooth. (For instance, some people feel more comfortable carrying "dumb" phones that are less hackable and less prone to data breeches if stolen, because they don't have usable data on them.)
Having a card key as a backup to bluetooth would be ok for a pilot program, but over the long term it seems like such a dual system would not be significantly more secure than a card key only system.
So, how to accomodate non-smartphone users? Different floors with bluetooth vs card key? Just don't go to that hotel?
Unless the cards also have an active CPU.
I don't know what cards with an active CPU cost in quantity, (if anyone does, please chime in) but a little googling shows that monogrammed card keys can be had for about two cents (American) apiece in quantity.
An app is essentially the cost of NRE plus the cost of maintenance. Card keys with an active CPU is an ongoing, much more significant (I suspect...) expense. You could see that the hotels would want this.
> With an active CPU behind it, certainly this system can be more secure than the current card system.
That was my first thought. Such a system, for several reasons, has the potential of being significantly more secure.
The counter-argument might be that it depends entirely on the implementation. Whether an *effective* solution is generated, or just a solution that's convenient and looks secure, is an open question. Also whether such a solution has a back door or a weakness that can be globally exploited. I think this is a good thing, but I wouldn't want to bet my possessions on it until it had been in the field for awhile and experts had evaluated it for weaknesses.
I understand we're not talking about an airplane falling out of the sky, but as a person who travels with expensive equipment, door security is somewhat important to me.
> Also means much less chance of leaving the card in the room
For most people, although I'm related to people who regularly leave their phone behind when they leave the house. (Wife and daughter, mostly.) (And yes, a young lady without her smartphone in this age is a big deal, but that doesn't stop her from leaving it behind regularly. And of course it's a tragedy each time...)
> and less money spent replacing lost cards.
This is probably less significant. A little googling shows that you can get card keys printed with your logo for $0.02 apiece in quantity, making it cheaper than the monogrammed pens they give away.
That's a good point. A good observation might also be that Linux is strong in the server market. But I believe OP was specifically talking about desktop.
When have you ever known a political party supporter switch affiliation because their party's policies don't work? Because the parties ideology has shifted, sure, but because they've tried their policies and they didn't work? Very rare.
When have you ever known a political party supporter switch affiliation because their party's policies don't work? Because the parties ideology has shifted, sure, but because they've tried their policies and they didn't work? Very rare.
You mean an individual voter? I've seen it fairly often.
here's a recent example.
Perhaps it depends in which circles you travel. If one only hangs out with sycophants, it has to have an effect on one's perception. The people I hang out with tend to be issue driven, not party driven, which makes elections a matter of individual qualifications, not whether they have an R or a D after their name.
Since this is usage stats. Lets looks at client usage stats on internet:
Windows 57.12%
Linux 20.12%
Apple 18.04%
Other 4.74%
Stats are from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_systems
So yes Linux has come a long way. Windows may still own the desktop. Market share in what is though of as the PC-market (desktop/laptop/nettbook) its only 1.64% today. But in market share of the computers that are used to surf on the net, supercomputers, servers real time system there Linux are thriving.
Linux is in second place and increasing in the IT that folks use today
Right, but doesn't that include the server market? Linux is doing very well there. But I think the OP was specifically speaking of desktop.
Linux still lags behind MS Vista, by a 2:1 margin (Vista enjoys about a 2.5% total market share, Linux about 1.4%), but still Linux advocates declare Linux is poinsed to take over the desktop market any day now!
I'm a fan of Linux, but have to agree. It's like we're going to have practical nuclear fusion in 40 years....
I wonder how many of Windows 8.X's sales are "forced", IE, preinstalled on a PC that a consumer bought because they needed a PC, not because they wanted Windows 8? Stipulating that the consumer is not a geek, and not aware that they might be able to ask for Windows 7 preinstalled instead?
It's interesting that while 8.1 is around 10%-ish, 8 is still about 5%. Considering 8.1 is a free update for registered copies of 8, how many of the un-updated copies of 8 are pirated versions?
What would be the point of pirating Windows 8?
I think it's important to note, even if we happen to disagree on the global warming component, we can agree on this.
Or use your eleventh finger to unlock your phone.
Inconvenient in a restaurant.
> My reading (erm, listening) is: Any form of duress-self-destruct code, they will most likely bend you over for "anticipatory obstruction."
Although this would still be that, I wonder if a self-destruct code that deletes *most* data, and perhaps even leaves behind something minor (perhaps tempting but bogus, easily fought in court) for the cops to find, might be effective.
> And my wife can rub my hand on the phone while I am asleep.
"I dreamt I was stroking your butt cheek last night."
"Hm," she answers as she pages through the private detective's analysis of his phone records "I wonder why?"
Yet another reason not to use biometrics to unlock devices.
Sorry, this is off-topic but I haven't found the proper place...
"I'm sorry, your QUESTION must be in the form of A QUESTION! -- What husbands would say if they only had the guts #31"
My wife simply asks the WRONG question: "Do you want to (whatever chore or other disagreeable thing)".
My reply: No, I don't WANT to (whatever), but if you ask me nicely, I will"
I've been saying this for 22 years now. That qualifies me as insane, correct?
A long time ago mine switched to "I want this and that. Make it happen" with a dismissive backwards wave with the fingers of one hand. It's pretty annoying, but if it's reasonable I'll do it. But if it's "I want the old turtle habitat turned into a koi pond in the back yard" my response is "that's not going to happen". And then she refuses to cook for awhile, but it's better than digging in the mud to put something together that she's never ever going to look at.
What I was referring to originally with that line is the phenomenon where she has something urgent to ask you but instead launches into a long story about her sister saying this about that but she really meant this and getting buried in sub-clauses, so that both of us lose track of what she's trying to say, after several minutes of which, she thinks she's asked me a question, but she really hasn't. "So, what's the question?" "I just told you!" "No, you really didn't. You told me a long story about your sister's allergies that devolved into the state of her house and as far as I can tell her lawn needing seed, but you haven't actually asked me anything yet." And then I find that the actual question, which was not in any of the words spoken thus far, was "did any mail for my sister get delivered here?"
Yet another reason not to use biometrics to unlock devices.
I thought they wanted our wimmin.
To hell with karma, when I pull a stunt like that I'm looking to get some interesting replies.
I agree. Starting a vigorous discussion is a lot more interesting than acquiring some silly karma number.
You might be right, but I think the point is, the first step is to take out the drone to protect your assets. And it seems to me that drones are particularly vulnerable to electronic countermeasures.
If someone were so morally bankrupt enough to create a drone army to infiltrate certain gaps and structural weaknesses in the plant and detonate significant payload to disrupt cooling/power/containment, surrounding area is going to be uninhabitable for a looong time.
Time for plants to consider netting, maybe? If it would help at all? Perhaps reinforce areas so that drones can't easily fly into them?
I'd think, a combination of automatic RF and laser countermeasures. It might actually be fun to design.
> Will millions of people really want to charge and fuss with their watch at least once a day?
I can't speak for everyone else, but I vote a decisive no. I already have a stupid company-issued phone with a non-swappable battery that I have to charge every night, and occasionally during the day if I use it a lot. I tell ya, I long for the days when a pager would run for weeks on a single AA battery. The thought of having a second device that needs that level of care and feeding is frankly revolting.