I'm in favor of that for hard lines, so obviously I think it's great for wireless too. At this point having telecoms owning all of our information architecture is getting pretty scary.
It'd be no different than IPv6, with every node available.
No mistake, in the long run we're going to have to have significant advances in security, because we won't be able to segregate every vulnerable machine behind a big security infrastructure.
Heh. No I have no idea; I'd imagine that repeaters would be set up in a lot of places, just to lighten the load on consumer devices. How they'd be funded, I have no idea. It'll all depend on the eventual power consumption, and what parts of the spectrum are used.
Just because someone routes traffic through your node, doesn't mean you can read it. A man in the middle attack across encryption requires that people accept unsecured certificates, which happens often enough, but it's not a slam dunk by any stretch. Theoretically they could try to screw with the PKI, but that would involve breaking their keys, and if you could do that, then stealing someone's bank info would be trivial.
The great thing about public key crypto is that the key that is visible is meant to be.
Encryption still works the same over this sort of network...Doesn't matter if someone in the middle reads your public key, the communication is still encrypted.
Still, I was thinking encryption would be necessary for basic privacy...Something like Tor, where you don't know who is requesting what data. Otherwise it'd be too easy to figure out who was downloading what porn in your neighborhood.
The day when this becomes real will be the day that traditional ISPs die. The only way to reliably monitor the traffic will be some kind of "seeding" where the monitor-er will put out relays that monitor the traffic that passes across them.
I think this is really possible in the long run, but in the short run I don't think most things have sufficient computing or broadcast power to make it a reality. Cool that they're working on it though.
"Do you not get it, lads? The Irish are the blacks of Europe. And Dubliners are the blacks of Ireland. And the Northside Dubliners are the blacks of Dublin. So say it once, say it loud: I'm black and I'm proud."
Yes and no. The europeans pulled the pension burden off of their steel industries, so they aren't responsible for the welfare of their workers after they retire, whereas we're still paying pensions from the days when steel industry was vastly more labor intensive than it is today...It's a huge drain on the industry.
U.S Steel hasn't changed the amount of steel it produces in 100 years. It's pathetic.
Meh. It's security theater. Just buy a normal one and keep it in your wallet...That'll keep everyone out. What's the point of securing it only against people who don't really care if they get in it or not?
Depends on whether you left a print on the hard drive when you installed it. =P
The scanners are still foolable. They did it on mythbusters without much trouble...I think they lifted a print, photoshopped it to make it look "cleaner", printed it out, licked the paper, and ran it over the scanner.
Passwords are much more secure at this point. No one is going to steal your password off an old soda bottle.
I've never seen a fingerprint system that was worth a damn...I was doing consulting at a company a few years back that had the "pad style" thumb readers (rather than the little scanners that are more popular now), and I "hacked" one of them for the company director by taking a deep breath and breathing on it. Warm breath condenses on the previous fingerprint and heats up the temperature sensor, and voila.
Now I had garlic pizza for lunch, so there is more than one reason that would have worked, but the fact that it did work was more than enough to convince me of the worthlessness of the tech. They had a Mythbusters episode a while back where they were fooling fingerprint readers with xeroxes and rubber casts; again, a huge glaring flaw.
At this point, security is still about passwords. I haven't seen any consumer grade biometric I'd trust with my MySpace profile (if I ever make one), more less anything sensitive.
The biggest problem with US steel is, appropriately U.S Steel. If we could get some more modern , high-tech, and agile steel producers we could restart the whole industry here. But it's all unions and subsidies and dinosaurs right now, and there is no sign of that changing any time soon.
Just typical market speak. 400% sounds sexier than "a factor of four".
The problem that leaps to my mind is that either you're going to have to collect a huge chunk of routing information so your client can figure out which peers are "close" to you, or a third party is going to have to manage the peering...Neither one of those thrills me, especially since an ISP is pushing the technology, which would make them the obvious third party.
No, actually, that's not what I meant. I've no illusions about my own rightness in all things; sometimes my view isn't going to be the best view. Someone who can listen to all sides and pick the best option is far better than someone who always chooses the same option, regardless of the situation.
And as for PACs...I don't think there is ever a case where I want my congress-critter to be swayed more by money than by the "rightness" of the idea, even if the money would have swayed them in the direction I personally believed in. Once you move in to financial politics, all you get is crap law, because law that benefits everyone is more "expensive" than law that benefits moneyed special interests who are willing to foot the bill.
Surely someone who can code will make a superior congress-critter!
Meh. Smart is not the same as "Not evil." Lot smart people I wouldn't want to see in congress. The best situation is to have someone who is open-minded and willing to listen without being swayed by PACs.
But that is itself revealing; a human would assume it was gibberish and respond accordingly. The above response is exactly what I'd expect to see from a computer...Hell, it looks like a response from Zork.
I think all it does is prove that its not a black and white area...A simple AI can fool some of the people some of the time. A more complex one can fool more, etc.
Eventually, they'll get to a point where the AI fools everyone all the time, and then we'll call it "true" artificial intelligence.
It's a meaningless question. If you can't tell the difference, it's intelligent. If you can, it's not. There is no magic step beyond which intelligence occurs. Jesus, I've met enough people who couldn't pass a Turing test. If it acts intelligent so well that you can't tell the difference...That's all there is to it.
Just reading the article, I'd say the place this one is going to flop is (like the others) in creativity and in non sequiturs; they're giving it a wide body of "knowledge" but whether it will be able to deploy that "naturally" like a person would is completely up in the air.
The basic HTML may work, but if all it says is, "I'm sorry you need javascript to view this page" I'm not sure what the problem is.
Mind you, this is for specifically dynamic pages, where the entire point is some flashy widget that can only be done with specific technology.
Even where that's not the case, I'm pretty much standards compliant and nothing else...That usualy does include lynx, btw. I'm not primarily a web coder, and I don't have a big staff of people who I can task to do this or that tweak so it looks perfect in some crap browser that has a 1% market share (hello IE 5). Life's too short, and frankly, I don't really care if it looks substandard on a substandard browser.
Eh. I'd bet they'll drop after the end of summer like they usually do. I don't ever foresee it getting "cheap" again though, not until we've got a better alternative...I'm old enough that "cheap" means a dollar a gallon, and we haven't seen that in a long time.
China uses vastly more coal than oil (unfortunately for them) as far as power goes (78%), and we use a decent amount here was well (50%)...Fortunately we have "better" coal (e.g. "black" (anthracite and bituminous) rather than "brown" (lignite or sub-bituminous) coal), but it's still far from clean. The vast majority of petroleum is used by vehicles...Oil is about 35% of the worlds total energy consumption, but only about 7% of the total electrical generation...For the whole world, coal accounts for about 40% of the electrical generation, to give you an idea.
I don't think the current price jumps are artificial though; the oil companies hardly need to do anything, the market is making them rich all by itself. As for taxes, I'm pro gas tax; the easiest way to wean consumers off of their gas guzzlers is to raise the cost to them. Anyway, our taxes are a joke compared to the level of gas taxes they have in europe.
As far as peak oil goes, no one really knows, though everyone claims they know. Some people say it's already happened, some people say it'll be any time now, some people say we've got a century. Lot of the industry groups say we've got ~50 years left, but that doesn't account for changes in consumption.
It will absolutely go back down. That's just supply and demand.
The thing people miss on supply and demand is that demand isn't any more a constant than supply. As the supply shrinks, price soars, and demand drops. People find alternatives...They drive less, carpool more. In the 80's everyone dumped their gas guzzing american cars for more fuel efficient imports. The decrease in demand drove the price back down.
Then in the 90's along comes the SUV craze, so everyone goes back to buying gas guzzlers. Now we're back in the same boat. Eventually the supply will start constricting on the other end (e.g. "Peak Oil") and alternative fuels will become more popular. The increased demand there will push an increase in suppliers, increasing the supply and driving down the price.
Historically, you never see a price go up forever. Either the resource is finite, or the cost drives the adoption of alternatives, which become popular enough to pull demand away from the original resource.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm in favor of that for hard lines, so obviously I think it's great for wireless too. At this point having telecoms owning all of our information architecture is getting pretty scary.
It'd be no different than IPv6, with every node available.
No mistake, in the long run we're going to have to have significant advances in security, because we won't be able to segregate every vulnerable machine behind a big security infrastructure.
Yep.
Heh. No I have no idea; I'd imagine that repeaters would be set up in a lot of places, just to lighten the load on consumer devices. How they'd be funded, I have no idea. It'll all depend on the eventual power consumption, and what parts of the spectrum are used.
Just because someone routes traffic through your node, doesn't mean you can read it. A man in the middle attack across encryption requires that people accept unsecured certificates, which happens often enough, but it's not a slam dunk by any stretch. Theoretically they could try to screw with the PKI, but that would involve breaking their keys, and if you could do that, then stealing someone's bank info would be trivial.
The great thing about public key crypto is that the key that is visible is meant to be.
Encryption still works the same over this sort of network...Doesn't matter if someone in the middle reads your public key, the communication is still encrypted.
Still, I was thinking encryption would be necessary for basic privacy...Something like Tor, where you don't know who is requesting what data. Otherwise it'd be too easy to figure out who was downloading what porn in your neighborhood.
Nothing. Common carrier.
The day when this becomes real will be the day that traditional ISPs die. The only way to reliably monitor the traffic will be some kind of "seeding" where the monitor-er will put out relays that monitor the traffic that passes across them.
I think this is really possible in the long run, but in the short run I don't think most things have sufficient computing or broadcast power to make it a reality. Cool that they're working on it though.
"Do you not get it, lads? The Irish are the blacks of Europe. And Dubliners are the blacks of Ireland. And the Northside Dubliners are the blacks of Dublin. So say it once, say it loud: I'm black and I'm proud."
--Jimmy Rabbitte, The Commitments
Black and proud, baby. Black and proud.
Yes and no. The europeans pulled the pension burden off of their steel industries, so they aren't responsible for the welfare of their workers after they retire, whereas we're still paying pensions from the days when steel industry was vastly more labor intensive than it is today...It's a huge drain on the industry.
U.S Steel hasn't changed the amount of steel it produces in 100 years. It's pathetic.
Meh. It's security theater. Just buy a normal one and keep it in your wallet...That'll keep everyone out. What's the point of securing it only against people who don't really care if they get in it or not?
Depends on whether you left a print on the hard drive when you installed it. =P
The scanners are still foolable. They did it on mythbusters without much trouble...I think they lifted a print, photoshopped it to make it look "cleaner", printed it out, licked the paper, and ran it over the scanner.
Passwords are much more secure at this point. No one is going to steal your password off an old soda bottle.
Yep. The thing that I thought was most interesting was that the laptop scanner was harder to fool than the big sexy security door scanner.
Not that they didn't take both of them down easily, using low tech methods.
I've never seen a fingerprint system that was worth a damn...I was doing consulting at a company a few years back that had the "pad style" thumb readers (rather than the little scanners that are more popular now), and I "hacked" one of them for the company director by taking a deep breath and breathing on it. Warm breath condenses on the previous fingerprint and heats up the temperature sensor, and voila.
Now I had garlic pizza for lunch, so there is more than one reason that would have worked, but the fact that it did work was more than enough to convince me of the worthlessness of the tech. They had a Mythbusters episode a while back where they were fooling fingerprint readers with xeroxes and rubber casts; again, a huge glaring flaw.
At this point, security is still about passwords. I haven't seen any consumer grade biometric I'd trust with my MySpace profile (if I ever make one), more less anything sensitive.
It's definitely a niche ripe to be filled.
The biggest problem with US steel is, appropriately U.S Steel. If we could get some more modern , high-tech, and agile steel producers we could restart the whole industry here. But it's all unions and subsidies and dinosaurs right now, and there is no sign of that changing any time soon.
Just typical market speak. 400% sounds sexier than "a factor of four".
The problem that leaps to my mind is that either you're going to have to collect a huge chunk of routing information so your client can figure out which peers are "close" to you, or a third party is going to have to manage the peering...Neither one of those thrills me, especially since an ISP is pushing the technology, which would make them the obvious third party.
No, actually, that's not what I meant. I've no illusions about my own rightness in all things; sometimes my view isn't going to be the best view. Someone who can listen to all sides and pick the best option is far better than someone who always chooses the same option, regardless of the situation.
And as for PACs...I don't think there is ever a case where I want my congress-critter to be swayed more by money than by the "rightness" of the idea, even if the money would have swayed them in the direction I personally believed in. Once you move in to financial politics, all you get is crap law, because law that benefits everyone is more "expensive" than law that benefits moneyed special interests who are willing to foot the bill.
If he drafts it in assembly it'll probably be more readable than normal legislation.
Surely someone who can code will make a superior congress-critter!
Meh. Smart is not the same as "Not evil." Lot smart people I wouldn't want to see in congress. The best situation is to have someone who is open-minded and willing to listen without being swayed by PACs.
But that is itself revealing; a human would assume it was gibberish and respond accordingly. The above response is exactly what I'd expect to see from a computer...Hell, it looks like a response from Zork.
I think all it does is prove that its not a black and white area...A simple AI can fool some of the people some of the time. A more complex one can fool more, etc.
Eventually, they'll get to a point where the AI fools everyone all the time, and then we'll call it "true" artificial intelligence.
Wouldn't cut it for consciousness because there are no external stimuli. Even if it had the potential, it'd just sit there doing nothing.
It's a meaningless question. If you can't tell the difference, it's intelligent. If you can, it's not. There is no magic step beyond which intelligence occurs. Jesus, I've met enough people who couldn't pass a Turing test. If it acts intelligent so well that you can't tell the difference...That's all there is to it.
Just reading the article, I'd say the place this one is going to flop is (like the others) in creativity and in non sequiturs; they're giving it a wide body of "knowledge" but whether it will be able to deploy that "naturally" like a person would is completely up in the air.
The basic HTML may work, but if all it says is, "I'm sorry you need javascript to view this page" I'm not sure what the problem is.
Mind you, this is for specifically dynamic pages, where the entire point is some flashy widget that can only be done with specific technology.
Even where that's not the case, I'm pretty much standards compliant and nothing else...That usualy does include lynx, btw. I'm not primarily a web coder, and I don't have a big staff of people who I can task to do this or that tweak so it looks perfect in some crap browser that has a 1% market share (hello IE 5). Life's too short, and frankly, I don't really care if it looks substandard on a substandard browser.
Eh. I'd bet they'll drop after the end of summer like they usually do. I don't ever foresee it getting "cheap" again though, not until we've got a better alternative...I'm old enough that "cheap" means a dollar a gallon, and we haven't seen that in a long time.
China uses vastly more coal than oil (unfortunately for them) as far as power goes (78%), and we use a decent amount here was well (50%)...Fortunately we have "better" coal (e.g. "black" (anthracite and bituminous) rather than "brown" (lignite or sub-bituminous) coal), but it's still far from clean. The vast majority of petroleum is used by vehicles...Oil is about 35% of the worlds total energy consumption, but only about 7% of the total electrical generation...For the whole world, coal accounts for about 40% of the electrical generation, to give you an idea.
I don't think the current price jumps are artificial though; the oil companies hardly need to do anything, the market is making them rich all by itself. As for taxes, I'm pro gas tax; the easiest way to wean consumers off of their gas guzzlers is to raise the cost to them. Anyway, our taxes are a joke compared to the level of gas taxes they have in europe.
As far as peak oil goes, no one really knows, though everyone claims they know. Some people say it's already happened, some people say it'll be any time now, some people say we've got a century. Lot of the industry groups say we've got ~50 years left, but that doesn't account for changes in consumption.
It will absolutely go back down. That's just supply and demand.
The thing people miss on supply and demand is that demand isn't any more a constant than supply. As the supply shrinks, price soars, and demand drops. People find alternatives...They drive less, carpool more. In the 80's everyone dumped their gas guzzing american cars for more fuel efficient imports. The decrease in demand drove the price back down.
Then in the 90's along comes the SUV craze, so everyone goes back to buying gas guzzlers. Now we're back in the same boat. Eventually the supply will start constricting on the other end (e.g. "Peak Oil") and alternative fuels will become more popular. The increased demand there will push an increase in suppliers, increasing the supply and driving down the price.
Historically, you never see a price go up forever. Either the resource is finite, or the cost drives the adoption of alternatives, which become popular enough to pull demand away from the original resource.