Generally, I agree with your position here. I don't advocate ripping out windows and replacing it with OSS, I advocate them designing their own minimalist system to suit their specific needs.. You don't want ANY code running on such hardware that doesn't need to be there. For stuff like this KISS is 'the' most effective way to prevent unexpected behavior.
When it comes to things like power plants, if the code is to stay closed and only rarely looked over/maintained, then at least have the brains to keep the control system network off the fucking internet, even if it means the big shots can't monitor their plants from home. Every link should be using some kind of crypto as though it IS on a public net...and the whole system should not be based on some stripped version of a consumer desktop operating system that was never intended to be that secure in the first place. Idiocy like this is how shit gets hacked. I realize the platform is popular, but it's riddled with security issues that are well known and have been for years. You want to talk about people dying?? security issues at a power plant will cause that when some asshole on the internet decides to michael bay a 300kV power transformer for 'teh luls'..
It is irrelevant how much microsoft may or may not have improved their patching process.. if their internal practices were better and their code didn't have to support 15 year old platforms, there wouldn't BE that much to patch in the first place. I don't blame microsoft in this case, I blame whoever made the choice to use their product in sensitive applications like industrial control systems.
As far as control software goes in general, I think it's a good idea to have the source available as well as the ability to at least verify what's running on the chip is what you have in source. Taking your car example, these days politicians and car manufacturers are using computer software to insert their hands between you and the equipment you own/are responsible for. This can result in annoyances (eg inability to self service) to serious safety issues (eg funky electronic throttles), that said manufacturers will just deny exist until forced to by lawsuits. While this might sound like a system with a natural limiter, it's not because the limiter only works on trends.. if the problem exists on some $20k+ can and it only affects a few people, and one of those people is you, then what do you do? well if you have the code, you at least have the option of fixing it yourself (or hiring someone to do it), AND, most importantly, it can be verified by outside sources whether the problem exists in the first place.
I consider that 'routine housekeeping' as a critical component of 'concepts.' Having the understanding of how the computer manages memory (by having to do it yourself with C) affects how one views ANY programming project no matter how big or what language(s) are used. Today's bloated sloooow software is a testament to attitudes like yours. It's sad that it takes longer for an application to load on 3ghz machines than it did for its predecessor running on a pentium 120...with 98% the same functionality.
C is a perfect language to cut teeth on if the goal is to become the best programmer one can be. If C can be mastered at a competent level, then learning other languages such as python is cake. Contrary to what you say, C can be used elegantly to solve any problem that can be solved with a computer. The proof for this is the fact the python interpreter is written in C...
nope.. when I saw the title 'titanic' I assumed it was an action/disaster flick.. instead it was a shitty love story.. even terminator 1 and 2 do not make up for this trash.
I admit the first one is more of a prediction than anything else, but there's plenty of evidence of efforts towards #2,3, and 4. There are plenty of authoritarians (check out the chris dodd article for ex) on both sides who whore out their positions for the interests of lobbyists or want to crush some aspect of liberty to alter culture for the sake of ideology. The right has bible thumpers and the majority of big finance, while the left has a coalition of oppression olympiads that misrepresent facts and manipulate statistics to appear as oppressed as possible for their own gain. These groups have controlling majorities in most of the institutions that run the gateways to success in this country. Hint: they are NOT interested in equality.. at least not the kind of equality that comes from equitable opportunity on objective, relevant terms. otherwise they wouldn't push to bake the kind of systemic bias they claim to oppose right into it, only in the opposite direction. We are a long way past the days of rosa parks and riveter rosie, so why do these groups still operate as though we still live in 1950? Why not? Part of the grab as much as you can mentality.. Can't get elected unless you can promise today++ for tomorrow.
The real problem is that the things both sides get away with because the opposing side doesn't resist (or even joins the bandwagon) are not good for the rest of us. most if not all the draconian legislation passed in the last 10 years had just as much support from the hilary clintons as from the dick cheneys.. their justifications and targets differ slightly perhaps, but there's no real difference in the result.
my statements aren't strawmen, they are based on ideology + bureaucracy + human greed+desire for power. feel free to make up your own about the right. My goal wasn't to troll left wing, but to make you realize neither 'side' offers any real solutions. They're too busy squabbling, only allying to protect their common self-serving interests.
When law enforcement acts like they're supposed to (in the USA), such extremists only get nailed when they start breaking laws.
because it is their right to live according to their beliefs. it's when people start passing laws that shield their beliefs from others that things get messy. things like 'hate speech' for example, do little than create double standards where it is ok to criticize one group but a crime to criticize another, legitimately or fallaciously.
Hey, the left has its own list of inhibitions it wants the state to enforce if/when it gets away with it.
(not all inclusive list)
1. healthcare which will eventually force the state to mandate exercise and eating habits, with passive-aggressive taxation, or force if necessary.
2. favored treatment of any group with sufficient lobbying power. any individual part of one or more of these groups will enjoy preferential treatment at job lotteries, education scholarships and class placement, lighter punishments for crime, and any other situation where the individual is pitted against another who is not part of said group(s).
3. only politically correct expression will be tolerated.. this list will be decided by committees working under the guise of popular vote, but in reality it'll be a bunch of insecure nannies using their power to shield their anxieties from the world. people who violate this will be labeled 'haters' and imprisoned for 'hate crimes.'
4. removal of all risk taking behavior (ie fun) we do in life.. for example, the only acceptable electronic entertainment would be anesthesized television with people expressing their feelings all the time. decisive judgment, rational plotlines, and action sequences will be banned. the only exception is when a protected class individual is taking revenge..basically one long soap...or slumdog millionaire.
"Authoritarian Left" is just a euphemism for "obsessed control freak. Period."
Not entirely. there are some who think being gay/notwhite/female etc gives them the right to cut to the front of the line when it's time for a payout/handout so they can have special seats reserved for 'their kind'. these people are no better than than the censorious politicians backed by censorious social movements, right or left wing. So while I have no problem with people fighting irrational discrimination against them, I draw the line when they start demanding special favors/biases in their favor baked into the system.
tha'ts just it, he's not just talking about gui design, but its larger implications. one person cannot possibly make inroads on a society-wide problem covering whole cross sections of different contexts..
which would be fine if it was a selectable option in the control panel or install time. tablet interfaces suck with a keyboard/mouse, whether it's a powerful cadstation or a student's school computer.
the real problem being that there are two entirely separate use contexts in use at once whose only link is via what used to be the start menu. this asinine design is the root problem.
your bank doesn't make it's principal income from selling your personal info to the highest bidder, though they do some of this indirectly through the big three credit monitors..(afaik), and even they are backed by FDIC and regulation (assuming the feds are trustworthy, another whole debate). 'social' media is nothing like this.. their bread and butter is finding out as much as possible and selling that to others...and if any 'lawful' (lobbied-for access) subpoena comes along, they'll happily oblige... it's not just about today because that info will be there somewhere, even if you 'delete' it, 20 years in the future, judged by current cultural values, and probably taken out of context. you're right that it's a cost/benefit ratio, but as time increases, the more info is collected, and the greater the probability that it will be used against you by someone/anyone who chooses...and the costs are often hidden and passive.. the job not gotten, the insurance rate hike, the job lost, the lease denied, the car loan rejected, the listing on secret 'no-fly' style lists..
as far as this article is concerned, creating ghost profiles is a war of attrition on those who consciously opt out. it's not just that the info is out there somewhere, it's that it's concentrated in one place, in an easily accessible location for all to see, without their consent. The only way to fight it is to claim the profile (thus validating it 'they got you') and lock it down as much as they let you, or to sue and/or make enough noise that it costs them more to keep your profile than to delete it. who has the time for that? it's even worse if the data is isn't flattering.. if you had a messy divorce and I talked about it with a few friends in a restaurant, that's one thing, but it's quite another if I rent billboards, tv ads, and plaster posters all over town based on the gory details of obscure court documents and police reports, all arguably public info. I know google isn't the first one to do this, but those other sites are no better, and, honestly, google is probably better at it. that does concern me.
no it's not, it's also not the point I was making. Most service agreements mandate that anything you upload becomes the property of the service provider. After that, the sky's the limit. There's a difference between trusting a few associates as you occupy a public space, and trusting a distributed database heuristic-analysis operation run by people who don't care about you, only their bottom line and/or political ambitions.
1. what is isn't necessarily what should be, which is the implied debate here.
2. there are limits to what you can do to someone on public (or your own) property. you cannot rape them for instance, or murder them, or steal from them. the issue is over whether personal info is personal property.
3. the data points by themselves may be innocuous, but together, or possibly with enough timeshift and cultural evolution, they could very well become so.
1. all your friends are clueless about the privacy concerns or just don't give a damn for consequences in general.
2. you are the person everyone complains about because he's always too busy playing 'social' rather than BEING social, like actually doing things with his friends.
If you want to bandwagon hop on to every new e-thingie churned out by corpgovX, it's not a huge deal. But please, don't complain if you are judged out of context on information you put up there 10 years ago under completely different life circumstances and cultural status quo. These include judgment by current/potential employers, law enforcement agents, banks, and insurance companies. Just because it's innocuous today does not mean it will always be. I know some people like you, and quite honestly, they're very cavalier about others' personal information, posting pics without permission (fb and google are doing automated face recog or will be soon) and talking about personal issues online for all to see. People like you trade their friends' privacy for personal convenience, and then justify it with little more than a flippant attitude and self-serving arrogance. It's not worth having such people as friends. Using strawman arguments to further your case when pressed does little to bolster the lack of respect you've already engendered.
I'm sure there are lots of situations where personal information ends up public knowledge as a result of normal human interaction, but this is not the same as such data being stored and transmutated in corporate/government databases, accumulating over time, until used by someone who wants control over your behavior in some way, often by misrepresenting facts, much as you've done here.
This G+ thing is a way of forcing those who have conciously opted out to join out of attrition, because now the data will be collected whether they put it there or not. The process will take longer and likely will not be as specific/useful as the accounts owned by morons who post their entire lives online, but the info could still end up damaging. This is true even if it is incorrect because it place the 'ghost' person in a reactionary position of having to fight with the provider to correct it and save face.
Slashdot Mirror
Generally, I agree with your position here. I don't advocate ripping out windows and replacing it with OSS, I advocate them designing their own minimalist system to suit their specific needs.. You don't want ANY code running on such hardware that doesn't need to be there. For stuff like this KISS is 'the' most effective way to prevent unexpected behavior.
When it comes to things like power plants, if the code is to stay closed and only rarely looked over/maintained, then at least have the brains to keep the control system network off the fucking internet, even if it means the big shots can't monitor their plants from home. Every link should be using some kind of crypto as though it IS on a public net...and the whole system should not be based on some stripped version of a consumer desktop operating system that was never intended to be that secure in the first place. Idiocy like this is how shit gets hacked. I realize the platform is popular, but it's riddled with security issues that are well known and have been for years. You want to talk about people dying?? security issues at a power plant will cause that when some asshole on the internet decides to michael bay a 300kV power transformer for 'teh luls'..
It is irrelevant how much microsoft may or may not have improved their patching process.. if their internal practices were better and their code didn't have to support 15 year old platforms, there wouldn't BE that much to patch in the first place. I don't blame microsoft in this case, I blame whoever made the choice to use their product in sensitive applications like industrial control systems.
As far as control software goes in general, I think it's a good idea to have the source available as well as the ability to at least verify what's running on the chip is what you have in source. Taking your car example, these days politicians and car manufacturers are using computer software to insert their hands between you and the equipment you own/are responsible for. This can result in annoyances (eg inability to self service) to serious safety issues (eg funky electronic throttles), that said manufacturers will just deny exist until forced to by lawsuits. While this might sound like a system with a natural limiter, it's not because the limiter only works on trends.. if the problem exists on some $20k+ can and it only affects a few people, and one of those people is you, then what do you do? well if you have the code, you at least have the option of fixing it yourself (or hiring someone to do it), AND, most importantly, it can be verified by outside sources whether the problem exists in the first place.
I consider that 'routine housekeeping' as a critical component of 'concepts.' Having the understanding of how the computer manages memory (by having to do it yourself with C) affects how one views ANY programming project no matter how big or what language(s) are used. Today's bloated sloooow software is a testament to attitudes like yours. It's sad that it takes longer for an application to load on 3ghz machines than it did for its predecessor running on a pentium 120...with 98% the same functionality.
C is a perfect language to cut teeth on if the goal is to become the best programmer one can be. If C can be mastered at a competent level, then learning other languages such as python is cake. Contrary to what you say, C can be used elegantly to solve any problem that can be solved with a computer. The proof for this is the fact the python interpreter is written in C...
it is possible that his comment is supposition based on experience.
sounds like a nice list of reasons to avoid proprietary software for mission critical applications like SCADA...or anything really.
nope.. when I saw the title 'titanic' I assumed it was an action/disaster flick.. instead it was a shitty love story.. even terminator 1 and 2 do not make up for this trash.
european and eastern governments are no better than the US.
I admit the first one is more of a prediction than anything else, but there's plenty of evidence of efforts towards #2,3, and 4. There are plenty of authoritarians (check out the chris dodd article for ex) on both sides who whore out their positions for the interests of lobbyists or want to crush some aspect of liberty to alter culture for the sake of ideology. The right has bible thumpers and the majority of big finance, while the left has a coalition of oppression olympiads that misrepresent facts and manipulate statistics to appear as oppressed as possible for their own gain. These groups have controlling majorities in most of the institutions that run the gateways to success in this country. Hint: they are NOT interested in equality.. at least not the kind of equality that comes from equitable opportunity on objective, relevant terms. otherwise they wouldn't push to bake the kind of systemic bias they claim to oppose right into it, only in the opposite direction. We are a long way past the days of rosa parks and riveter rosie, so why do these groups still operate as though we still live in 1950? Why not? Part of the grab as much as you can mentality.. Can't get elected unless you can promise today++ for tomorrow.
The real problem is that the things both sides get away with because the opposing side doesn't resist (or even joins the bandwagon) are not good for the rest of us. most if not all the draconian legislation passed in the last 10 years had just as much support from the hilary clintons as from the dick cheneys.. their justifications and targets differ slightly perhaps, but there's no real difference in the result.
my statements aren't strawmen, they are based on ideology + bureaucracy + human greed+desire for power. feel free to make up your own about the right. My goal wasn't to troll left wing, but to make you realize neither 'side' offers any real solutions. They're too busy squabbling, only allying to protect their common self-serving interests.
this is meant for just such an occasion when the balance is unbalanced..
pardon me, I meant ad hominem
having an issue with homosexuality does not necessarily make one homophobic.. that is argument ad baculum.
When law enforcement acts like they're supposed to (in the USA), such extremists only get nailed when they start breaking laws.
because it is their right to live according to their beliefs. it's when people start passing laws that shield their beliefs from others that things get messy. things like 'hate speech' for example, do little than create double standards where it is ok to criticize one group but a crime to criticize another, legitimately or fallaciously.
Hey, the left has its own list of inhibitions it wants the state to enforce if/when it gets away with it.
(not all inclusive list)
1. healthcare which will eventually force the state to mandate exercise and eating habits, with passive-aggressive taxation, or force if necessary.
2. favored treatment of any group with sufficient lobbying power. any individual part of one or more of these groups will enjoy preferential treatment at job lotteries, education scholarships and class placement, lighter punishments for crime, and any other situation where the individual is pitted against another who is not part of said group(s).
3. only politically correct expression will be tolerated.. this list will be decided by committees working under the guise of popular vote, but in reality it'll be a bunch of insecure nannies using their power to shield their anxieties from the world. people who violate this will be labeled 'haters' and imprisoned for 'hate crimes.'
4. removal of all risk taking behavior (ie fun) we do in life.. for example, the only acceptable electronic entertainment would be anesthesized television with people expressing their feelings all the time. decisive judgment, rational plotlines, and action sequences will be banned. the only exception is when a protected class individual is taking revenge..basically one long soap...or slumdog millionaire.
"Authoritarian Left" is just a euphemism for "obsessed control freak. Period."
Not entirely. there are some who think being gay/notwhite/female etc gives them the right to cut to the front of the line when it's time for a payout/handout so they can have special seats reserved for 'their kind'. these people are no better than than the censorious politicians backed by censorious social movements, right or left wing. So while I have no problem with people fighting irrational discrimination against them, I draw the line when they start demanding special favors/biases in their favor baked into the system.
because desktop computers != tablets.
tha'ts just it, he's not just talking about gui design, but its larger implications. one person cannot possibly make inroads on a society-wide problem covering whole cross sections of different contexts..
which would be fine if it was a selectable option in the control panel or install time. tablet interfaces suck with a keyboard/mouse, whether it's a powerful cadstation or a student's school computer.
the real problem being that there are two entirely separate use contexts in use at once whose only link is via what used to be the start menu. this asinine design is the root problem.
javascript obviously.
your bank doesn't make it's principal income from selling your personal info to the highest bidder, though they do some of this indirectly through the big three credit monitors..(afaik), and even they are backed by FDIC and regulation (assuming the feds are trustworthy, another whole debate). 'social' media is nothing like this.. their bread and butter is finding out as much as possible and selling that to others...and if any 'lawful' (lobbied-for access) subpoena comes along, they'll happily oblige... it's not just about today because that info will be there somewhere, even if you 'delete' it, 20 years in the future, judged by current cultural values, and probably taken out of context. you're right that it's a cost/benefit ratio, but as time increases, the more info is collected, and the greater the probability that it will be used against you by someone/anyone who chooses...and the costs are often hidden and passive.. the job not gotten, the insurance rate hike, the job lost, the lease denied, the car loan rejected, the listing on secret 'no-fly' style lists..
as far as this article is concerned, creating ghost profiles is a war of attrition on those who consciously opt out. it's not just that the info is out there somewhere, it's that it's concentrated in one place, in an easily accessible location for all to see, without their consent. The only way to fight it is to claim the profile (thus validating it 'they got you') and lock it down as much as they let you, or to sue and/or make enough noise that it costs them more to keep your profile than to delete it. who has the time for that? it's even worse if the data is isn't flattering.. if you had a messy divorce and I talked about it with a few friends in a restaurant, that's one thing, but it's quite another if I rent billboards, tv ads, and plaster posters all over town based on the gory details of obscure court documents and police reports, all arguably public info. I know google isn't the first one to do this, but those other sites are no better, and, honestly, google is probably better at it. that does concern me.
no it's not, it's also not the point I was making. Most service agreements mandate that anything you upload becomes the property of the service provider. After that, the sky's the limit. There's a difference between trusting a few associates as you occupy a public space, and trusting a distributed database heuristic-analysis operation run by people who don't care about you, only their bottom line and/or political ambitions.
what about the mic? if the switch is software it can be remotely accessed. the switches need to be physical.
the pictures are public once you upload them.. google or whoever can choose to do this anytime...
a basket that doesn't protect eggs is useful how?
1. what is isn't necessarily what should be, which is the implied debate here.
2. there are limits to what you can do to someone on public (or your own) property. you cannot rape them for instance, or murder them, or steal from them. the issue is over whether personal info is personal property.
3. the data points by themselves may be innocuous, but together, or possibly with enough timeshift and cultural evolution, they could very well become so.
1. all your friends are clueless about the privacy concerns or just don't give a damn for consequences in general.
2. you are the person everyone complains about because he's always too busy playing 'social' rather than BEING social, like actually doing things with his friends.
If you want to bandwagon hop on to every new e-thingie churned out by corpgovX, it's not a huge deal. But please, don't complain if you are judged out of context on information you put up there 10 years ago under completely different life circumstances and cultural status quo. These include judgment by current/potential employers, law enforcement agents, banks, and insurance companies. Just because it's innocuous today does not mean it will always be. I know some people like you, and quite honestly, they're very cavalier about others' personal information, posting pics without permission (fb and google are doing automated face recog or will be soon) and talking about personal issues online for all to see. People like you trade their friends' privacy for personal convenience, and then justify it with little more than a flippant attitude and self-serving arrogance. It's not worth having such people as friends. Using strawman arguments to further your case when pressed does little to bolster the lack of respect you've already engendered.
I'm sure there are lots of situations where personal information ends up public knowledge as a result of normal human interaction, but this is not the same as such data being stored and transmutated in corporate/government databases, accumulating over time, until used by someone who wants control over your behavior in some way, often by misrepresenting facts, much as you've done here.
This G+ thing is a way of forcing those who have conciously opted out to join out of attrition, because now the data will be collected whether they put it there or not. The process will take longer and likely will not be as specific/useful as the accounts owned by morons who post their entire lives online, but the info could still end up damaging. This is true even if it is incorrect because it place the 'ghost' person in a reactionary position of having to fight with the provider to correct it and save face.