That we have moved from simple reliable BIOS systems that provided a little boot code to get the system going on a ROM, to an advanced re-programable system so that software BUGs can now brick your PC!
If the 'cost' of renting was lower than ownership there would be no rentals. Sure there are some small economies of scale managing multiple properties but that does not explain it. Rentals exist for two reasons.
1) Some people don't want to commit to a large illiquid asset when they know they might want to move in the foreseeable future.
2) As a function of capital. You need a home and do not have / are unable to raise the required capital for a cost lower than the premium a land lord will charge. Possibly you have the capital but do not have the ability to absorb unexpected capital outlays like repairs.
Sports car not muscle; its tough to get fuel injected 2litre to do worse than 17mpg but I try. With my 4.5:1 rear end though i have the fuel economy nearly flat! it will do about the same auto-crossing all day as the highway drive getting there!
Right but that is the hosting and distribution side. Those servers that are just pushing bits down a wire, probably returned from cached memory should not consume much juice doing any specific operation. Remember on that side of the equation its encode once, server many.
Now the 125W CPU you are idling way, but keeping out of low power mode because the decoding has to happen, the 23" monitory that is lighting your moms basement, you are using to display that stream X the other 30,000 viewers is probably quite a bit more power.
The fact is many conservatives love this kind of article because, the very same "progressive" degenerate retard who wags his finger at me for enjoying my 17mpg sports car and tells me I am destroying the earth turns around and "wastes" energy playing at nonsense like bitcoin and watching porn. Its important to remind them they are really terrible people too!
"And operating with Netflix's efficiency would be a best-case scenario for the porn site, Ensmenger believes"
I'd like to know why. I am not fan of the Internet Porn industry, i think its harming society and based on this article the planet but to say, "And operating with Netflix's efficiency would be a best-case scenario for the porn site, Ensmenger believes"
Seems just nakedly prejudiced. I mean does Netflix have the help of data center angels, that don't lend their divine intervention to pornhub? Do you subscribe? I thought Internet porn was almost universally free as in beer? Why would think a pornhub a sophisticated marketing machine that has to derive its revenue primarily form razor thin ad impression payments would be doing anything other than in the most efficient way possible?
But that is only because stuff has been nominally priced in dollars. If we instead had stuff nominally priced in 10th oz gold units, or something you'd make the same argument about accepting dollars.
The fact is gold and silver are stable enough in terms of total supply, liquidity ( in the sense people are willing to part with it ), and distribution, that either could probably work as medium of exchange either directly or backing some paper/electronic system. We can have a debate about if a gold standard would be good for our society not. I see both positives and negatives of that but that is a tangent. It could be made to work through.
Btc on the other hand has some major problems. The total supply is fixed, as a practical matter there will always be more gold to mine, if deflation gets strong enough to justify it; on the other hand all practically discoverable bitcoins will be found at some point. The money supplies growth isn't just limited it essentially has a hard cap. The next problem is because its new its kinda illiquid and forces of volatility, deflation, and block-chain limitations in terms of settlements, isn't helping. People can't gain trust in for trading real tangible property beyond a speculator class. Finally the distribution is entirely to narrow currently with 1000 or so people controlling most of the market. It over incentivized the early adopters.
I don't Btc is ever going be the currency Joe Sixpack, actually buys a six pack with for these reasons. Blockchain tech is her to stay. Some future crypto currency might become ascendant and see wide use, but Btc aint going to be it.
I don't know that its the echo chamber so much as the narrowness of focus. When we interact online we don't know much if anything about the rest of the 'person' only that they agree or disagree with us.
That is different than in 'real life' where usually we see more of each others lives. You see you coworker also drives a.... you see photos of his or her children on their desks doing similar activities you do with your own, you take part in conversations on other subjects where you do agree.
Basically you learn to 'respect' them. When you arrive at a topic you can't agree on, you loose the assumption of hostility. You already have accepted the premise hey this a reasonably individual, who makes the same judgements and reaches the same conclusions I do much of the time. We just differ here.
Online is more like, he disagrees with me, it must be malice or abject stupidity because what else could explain it? Without that personal context its hard for a lot of people to imagine any other possibilities.
Oh please, cut the political crap. Both sides only listen to the 'experts' when they happen to agree with them and only choose the experts they agree with. If Democrats were about economic efficiency you'd be able to pump your own gas thought New England.
You might have to be prepared to 'manage' them a little though. They might not want to get outside their box. They are probably concerned about their careers given the re-org and might be reluctant to do something they could *fail* at.
If they respond with "but I don't know how to do that" be prepared to both tell them "That's alright you have time to figure it out, try somethings blow it away if it does not work and start over.." and to give them that time.
I know lots of people who are holding btc riding this thing up everyday. They think they are protecting themselves with standing sell limit orders and or stops.
I wonder if when the big moves come and everyone tries to transact, if they end up getting wiped out because the exchanges can process transactions, and the other side of the transaction sees what's happening and disappears ahead of the order processing.
Everyone needs to take a step back before going nutz over climate change. Is it problem, yes, but its not the only problem. Was watching nature last night. The high desserts are being destroyed thru habitat disruption. Some of its oil and gas but some of its also wind farms and the service industry around them.
There is no free lunch. Yes the cautionary principle tells us we should limit CO2 emissions when possible but that isn't the only concern. We should also consider the environmental consequences of "renewables" because they are not free from negative impacts either, but so many seem to pretend they are.
Spoken like a non-parent. Look its fine to say all that but the problem comes when Tiny Tim, tells Santa all he wants for Christmas this isa $FADITEM.
Well Tim did work hard in school this year, and he really has been more thoughtful about his little brothers needs like we asked... Why shouldn't Santa reward him? Its not his fault some script kiddie thru a bot together with nokigiri, cleared out Walmart.com and is now holding up Mom and Dad.
As an individual quite possibly as an organization not so much. Right now attackers go after the authentication/authorization server / infrastructure (very often AD but not always). Its the first and primary target because if they can compromise that odds are good some of the following become true:
1) They can authorize some existing account they have access to already 2) They can change the authentication information for an account they want access to 3) They can get the authentication information in bulk, maybe they have to crack it maybe not. 3a) If they have to crack it for a large organization there will be a number of accounts with weak credentials that can be recovered using a dictionary attack of some kind, with some number of GPUs dedicated to the effort.
This really addresses 2,3,3a and could help address one by making authorization changes transnational, and easier to audit..
If the humans are still in charge, they can decide to stop.
Who is "the humans" you can't make for example, me, stop working on AI if I was a determined to do so. At least within our society you could try to get some legislation enacted banning AI research. It would be supper difficult to enforce even if you can convince enough conservatives that it needs banning. You might in the well organized world attempt to convince the UN they should ban AI research, I don't think you have any shot at succeeding there no matter how much propagandizing you do. How do get DPRK to stop doing AI research, or Iran, or.... There are enough pariah states who would not even care about your UN band to keep progress going. Will you go to war? Will you kill people and break things to stop AI development?
You see the barriers to entry on the AI front are still pretty low. Determined states, organizations, and maybe even individuals have the assets required to do meaningful AI development work.
If "the humans" were some monolithic entity, yes we could just decide not build AI, but we are not, and just because you and I choose not to develop AI does not for an instant mean someone else wont. - "The genie is out of the bottle."
Sorry but that question has long been answered. Some people just don't want to face the consequences of the answer however.
What consequences, who is going to stop us? We can do whatever we want on this issue. No reason to think otherwise. Right or wrong is a different question but we *CAN* do whatever we the United States wants.
I would argue that somewhere the responsibility falls on you. Yes a medial professional should as rule "measure don't guess," "trust but verify."
However if you are in an urgent situation where waiting for test results would itself be harmful and you knowingly and wilful provide inaccurate information to your caregiver and their actions based on trusting that information prove harmful to you; I am going to say its not their fault.
Google is having problems laying fiber because they don't want to do it that badly. Google fiber was never really about Google making money selling Internet access to end users. It was to try and force the incumbent ISPs to move to 21st century technologies and bandwidth so google could sell and market new application like streaming video, online games, other things that required bulk content distribution that had to be done on disks in the past when none of us had more than 1.5Mbps at home, and many folks were still doing dialup.
Google was is doing what was good for Google, at the time Google fiber was a solution to growing their ecosystem while not being "evil". Most recognize Google has long left don't be evil, behind. Its all about $$$$ now for them, and monetizing anything they can! Wanna know why Google wants NN so bad? Hint its not why they tell you they want it.
Google wants NN because (1) they know ultimately it will result in a lowest common denominator, which is helpful to some of their properties. (2) It make rules, that startups who have to buy internet access form tier 3 providers much the same way you and I do, have to follow. Google on the other hand is big enough that they can and do peer directly with the transport guys. So they will always have the FAST LANE, and you, me, and your small business won't even have the ability to purchase access at any price. So Google can lock out their competition forever!
The real issue, comes down to communication and taking the next step. Lets face it Financial/modeling planning is actually complex business. It requires deep understanding and often quite a bit of experimentation and iteration over months or years. Once the model is established its less complex to implement. The problem is most tools that IT will want to use for an, entry/transaction -> ETL -> calculate -> ETL -> report, process are not tools that lend themselves to rapid iteration and use by business people. They therefore require that requirements be identified, documented, and finally implemented. The business can't provide the requirements because they don't exist yet.
Excel fills the nice. It lets the finance guy play with his data, and models, it lets him try stuff out on his own. The problem? Eventually it all gets nailed down the model works. A process (often clumsy) of getting and loading data in has been established, some other finance process is now dependent on a very specific report output, etc. You now have a high salary finance guy dicking around with manual data manipulation processes that could be translated into some stored procedures, and report generator, maybe a little CRUD app to allow some variables the business needs to change from time to time. This never happens though. One the reasons is its job security. If only Bob knows how to do the spreedsheet voodo that produces a TPS report, Bob is indispensable.
combined with the complete lack of any published open exploits
There fixed that for you. We have no idea if the 3 letters American or otherwise have known about or have been abusing this for years! Nor do we know if organized crime groups might have been using it.
No as libertarian I think a job with a two dollar an hour wage exists because there is a market for it. Somebody out there is willing to work for $2. Maybe its because they don't see it as 2hr, they see it as taking a gig that involves dropping something off on they way home for the grocery store trip they were making anyway, so for them is a $2/5min job or rather a $24/hr gig for 1/12th of an hour.
The fact that running errands does not pay well enough to do as an occupation isn't a problem. They problem is people think it should and expect to earn a living that way. There are similar jobs that do pay enough to make a living at. They have names like valet, personal shopper, etc. Wanna know what the difference is? I'll tell you those people are actually paid to think! They are expected to know what their client wants or needs, they have some limited at least decision making authority and an expectation they will solve simple problems. Executing instructions delivered by an app which the client had to dream up and craft themselves, and throwing your hands up when something is a miss simply isn't as much value. If instacart had to deliver what worked out to roughly minimum wage, its unlikely there would be many takers.
So here is the real question: Is it better that a few people can make a buck or two on a side gig once and a while and you get an app to request deliveries, or should we live in a society where there is no instacart?
I am 'security guy' but I would agree with Linus most, maybe not all, but certainly most are just bugs.
SQLi is a perfect example. The code does NOT work as intended. If SQLi is possible than code that was supposed to allow the input of a string somewhere does not handle certain strings properly, or does not correctly control the input domain if certain values are not supposed to be allowed! Take your pick.
The first time that name filed for example encounters a name with an apostrophe in it, D'Arcy, or a title, Ivan "The terrible", with some double quotes the software breaks. In any case the code certainly did not intent to allow the query structure to be altered and it can be. Bug/Broken but the bug is in one of the following domains, insufficient input validation, improper string manipulation, incorrect missing escaping/encoding, incorrect API/library use pattern, etc. Its not security specific, but certainly has security consequences.
What I would say to Linus is that there will always be bugs, some will have greater security consequences than others. Placing effort on controlling for bugs that have serious security consequences should take precedence over controlling for bugs in general, given limited resources.
Slashdot Mirror
That we have moved from simple reliable BIOS systems that provided a little boot code to get the system going on a ROM, to an advanced re-programable system so that software BUGs can now brick your PC!
Progress!
That does not mean someone did not create new software using a document supported feature of the product just last week.
Come on that doesn't wash!
If the 'cost' of renting was lower than ownership there would be no rentals. Sure there are some small economies of scale managing multiple properties but that does not explain it. Rentals exist for two reasons.
1) Some people don't want to commit to a large illiquid asset when they know they might want to move in the foreseeable future.
2) As a function of capital. You need a home and do not have / are unable to raise the required capital for a cost lower than the premium a land lord will charge. Possibly you have the capital but do not have the ability to absorb unexpected capital outlays like repairs.
Renting necessarily costs more.
Sports car not muscle; its tough to get fuel injected 2litre to do worse than 17mpg but I try. With my 4.5:1 rear end though i have the fuel economy nearly flat! it will do about the same auto-crossing all day as the highway drive getting there!
Right but that is the hosting and distribution side. Those servers that are just pushing bits down a wire, probably returned from cached memory should not consume much juice doing any specific operation. Remember on that side of the equation its encode once, server many.
Now the 125W CPU you are idling way, but keeping out of low power mode because the decoding has to happen, the 23" monitory that is lighting your moms basement, you are using to display that stream X the other 30,000 viewers is probably quite a bit more power.
The fact is many conservatives love this kind of article because, the very same "progressive" degenerate retard who wags his finger at me for enjoying my 17mpg sports car and tells me I am destroying the earth turns around and "wastes" energy playing at nonsense like bitcoin and watching porn. Its important to remind them they are really terrible people too!
"And operating with Netflix's efficiency would be a best-case scenario for the porn site, Ensmenger believes"
I'd like to know why. I am not fan of the Internet Porn industry, i think its harming society and based on this article the planet but to say, "And operating with Netflix's efficiency would be a best-case scenario for the porn site, Ensmenger believes"
Seems just nakedly prejudiced. I mean does Netflix have the help of data center angels, that don't lend their divine intervention to pornhub? Do you subscribe? I thought Internet porn was almost universally free as in beer? Why would think a pornhub a sophisticated marketing machine that has to derive its revenue primarily form razor thin ad impression payments would be doing anything other than in the most efficient way possible?
But that is only because stuff has been nominally priced in dollars. If we instead had stuff nominally priced in 10th oz gold units, or something you'd make the same argument about accepting dollars.
The fact is gold and silver are stable enough in terms of total supply, liquidity ( in the sense people are willing to part with it ), and distribution, that either could probably work as medium of exchange either directly or backing some paper/electronic system. We can have a debate about if a gold standard would be good for our society not. I see both positives and negatives of that but that is a tangent. It could be made to work through.
Btc on the other hand has some major problems. The total supply is fixed, as a practical matter there will always be more gold to mine, if deflation gets strong enough to justify it; on the other hand all practically discoverable bitcoins will be found at some point. The money supplies growth isn't just limited it essentially has a hard cap. The next problem is because its new its kinda illiquid and forces of volatility, deflation, and block-chain limitations in terms of settlements, isn't helping. People can't gain trust in for trading real tangible property beyond a speculator class. Finally the distribution is entirely to narrow currently with 1000 or so people controlling most of the market. It over incentivized the early adopters.
I don't Btc is ever going be the currency Joe Sixpack, actually buys a six pack with for these reasons. Blockchain tech is her to stay. Some future crypto currency might become ascendant and see wide use, but Btc aint going to be it.
I don't know that its the echo chamber so much as the narrowness of focus. When we interact online we don't know much if anything about the rest of the 'person' only that they agree or disagree with us.
That is different than in 'real life' where usually we see more of each others lives. You see you coworker also drives a .... you see photos of his or her children on their desks doing similar activities you do with your own, you take part in conversations on other subjects where you do agree.
Basically you learn to 'respect' them. When you arrive at a topic you can't agree on, you loose the assumption of hostility. You already have accepted the premise hey this a reasonably individual, who makes the same judgements and reaches the same conclusions I do much of the time. We just differ here.
Online is more like, he disagrees with me, it must be malice or abject stupidity because what else could explain it? Without that personal context its hard for a lot of people to imagine any other possibilities.
Don't know, is the father of two school-age children so presumably a human woman agreed to unprotected sex with him at some point.
That suggests his social skills go far beyond the typical Slashdot poster.
Oh please, cut the political crap. Both sides only listen to the 'experts' when they happen to agree with them and only choose the experts they agree with. If Democrats were about economic efficiency you'd be able to pump your own gas thought New England.
^^THIS^^
You might have to be prepared to 'manage' them a little though. They might not want to get outside their box. They are probably concerned about their careers given the re-org and might be reluctant to do something they could *fail* at.
If they respond with "but I don't know how to do that" be prepared to both tell them "That's alright you have time to figure it out, try somethings blow it away if it does not work and start over.." and to give them that time.
Quickly use the money from the coins to buy even more short orders
You realize that would put in a flow and effectively and potentially create a sqeeze.
I know lots of people who are holding btc riding this thing up everyday. They think they are protecting themselves with standing sell limit orders and or stops.
I wonder if when the big moves come and everyone tries to transact, if they end up getting wiped out because the exchanges can process transactions, and the other side of the transaction sees what's happening and disappears ahead of the order processing.
Everyone needs to take a step back before going nutz over climate change. Is it problem, yes, but its not the only problem. Was watching nature last night. The high desserts are being destroyed thru habitat disruption. Some of its oil and gas but some of its also wind farms and the service industry around them.
There is no free lunch. Yes the cautionary principle tells us we should limit CO2 emissions when possible but that isn't the only concern. We should also consider the environmental consequences of "renewables" because they are not free from negative impacts either, but so many seem to pretend they are.
Spoken like a non-parent. Look its fine to say all that but the problem comes when Tiny Tim, tells Santa all he wants for Christmas this isa $FADITEM.
Well Tim did work hard in school this year, and he really has been more thoughtful about his little brothers needs like we asked... Why shouldn't Santa reward him? Its not his fault some script kiddie thru a bot together with nokigiri, cleared out Walmart.com and is now holding up Mom and Dad.
As an individual quite possibly as an organization not so much. Right now attackers go after the authentication/authorization server / infrastructure (very often AD but not always). Its the first and primary target because if they can compromise that odds are good some of the following become true:
1) They can authorize some existing account they have access to already
2) They can change the authentication information for an account they want access to
3) They can get the authentication information in bulk, maybe they have to crack it maybe not.
3a) If they have to crack it for a large organization there will be a number of accounts with weak credentials that can be recovered using a dictionary attack of some kind, with some number of GPUs dedicated to the effort.
This really addresses 2,3,3a and could help address one by making authorization changes transnational, and easier to audit..
If the humans are still in charge, they can decide to stop.
Who is "the humans" you can't make for example, me, stop working on AI if I was a determined to do so. At least within our society you could try to get some legislation enacted banning AI research. It would be supper difficult to enforce even if you can convince enough conservatives that it needs banning. You might in the well organized world attempt to convince the UN they should ban AI research, I don't think you have any shot at succeeding there no matter how much propagandizing you do. How do get DPRK to stop doing AI research, or Iran, or .... There are enough pariah states who would not even care about your UN band to keep progress going. Will you go to war? Will you kill people and break things to stop AI development?
You see the barriers to entry on the AI front are still pretty low. Determined states, organizations, and maybe even individuals have the assets required to do meaningful AI development work.
If "the humans" were some monolithic entity, yes we could just decide not build AI, but we are not, and just because you and I choose not to develop AI does not for an instant mean someone else wont. - "The genie is out of the bottle."
Sorry but that question has long been answered. Some people just don't want to face the consequences of the answer however.
What consequences, who is going to stop us? We can do whatever we want on this issue. No reason to think otherwise. Right or wrong is a different question but we *CAN* do whatever we the United States wants.
I would argue that somewhere the responsibility falls on you. Yes a medial professional should as rule "measure don't guess," "trust but verify."
However if you are in an urgent situation where waiting for test results would itself be harmful and you knowingly and wilful provide inaccurate information to your caregiver and their actions based on trusting that information prove harmful to you; I am going to say its not their fault.
Google is having problems laying fiber because they don't want to do it that badly. Google fiber was never really about Google making money selling Internet access to end users. It was to try and force the incumbent ISPs to move to 21st century technologies and bandwidth so google could sell and market new application like streaming video, online games, other things that required bulk content distribution that had to be done on disks in the past when none of us had more than 1.5Mbps at home, and many folks were still doing dialup.
Google was is doing what was good for Google, at the time Google fiber was a solution to growing their ecosystem while not being "evil". Most recognize Google has long left don't be evil, behind. Its all about $$$$ now for them, and monetizing anything they can! Wanna know why Google wants NN so bad? Hint its not why they tell you they want it.
Google wants NN because (1) they know ultimately it will result in a lowest common denominator, which is helpful to some of their properties. (2) It make rules, that startups who have to buy internet access form tier 3 providers much the same way you and I do, have to follow. Google on the other hand is big enough that they can and do peer directly with the transport guys. So they will always have the FAST LANE, and you, me, and your small business won't even have the ability to purchase access at any price. So Google can lock out their competition forever!
The real issue, comes down to communication and taking the next step. Lets face it Financial/modeling planning is actually complex business. It requires deep understanding and often quite a bit of experimentation and iteration over months or years. Once the model is established its less complex to implement. The problem is most tools that IT will want to use for an, entry/transaction -> ETL -> calculate -> ETL -> report, process are not tools that lend themselves to rapid iteration and use by business people. They therefore require that requirements be identified, documented, and finally implemented. The business can't provide the requirements because they don't exist yet.
Excel fills the nice. It lets the finance guy play with his data, and models, it lets him try stuff out on his own. The problem? Eventually it all gets nailed down the model works. A process (often clumsy) of getting and loading data in has been established, some other finance process is now dependent on a very specific report output, etc. You now have a high salary finance guy dicking around with manual data manipulation processes that could be translated into some stored procedures, and report generator, maybe a little CRUD app to allow some variables the business needs to change from time to time. This never happens though. One the reasons is its job security. If only Bob knows how to do the spreedsheet voodo that produces a TPS report, Bob is indispensable.
combined with the complete lack of any published open exploits
There fixed that for you.
We have no idea if the 3 letters American or otherwise have known about or have been abusing this for years! Nor do we know if organized crime groups might have been using it.
No as libertarian I think a job with a two dollar an hour wage exists because there is a market for it. Somebody out there is willing to work for $2. Maybe its because they don't see it as 2hr, they see it as taking a gig that involves dropping something off on they way home for the grocery store trip they were making anyway, so for them is a $2/5min job or rather a $24/hr gig for 1/12th of an hour.
The fact that running errands does not pay well enough to do as an occupation isn't a problem. They problem is people think it should and expect to earn a living that way. There are similar jobs that do pay enough to make a living at. They have names like valet, personal shopper, etc. Wanna know what the difference is? I'll tell you those people are actually paid to think! They are expected to know what their client wants or needs, they have some limited at least decision making authority and an expectation they will solve simple problems. Executing instructions delivered by an app which the client had to dream up and craft themselves, and throwing your hands up when something is a miss simply isn't as much value. If instacart had to deliver what worked out to roughly minimum wage, its unlikely there would be many takers.
So here is the real question: Is it better that a few people can make a buck or two on a side gig once and a while and you get an app to request deliveries, or should we live in a society where there is no instacart?
I am 'security guy' but I would agree with Linus most, maybe not all, but certainly most are just bugs.
SQLi is a perfect example. The code does NOT work as intended. If SQLi is possible than code that was supposed to allow the input of a string somewhere does not handle certain strings properly, or does not correctly control the input domain if certain values are not supposed to be allowed! Take your pick.
The first time that name filed for example encounters a name with an apostrophe in it, D'Arcy, or a title, Ivan "The terrible", with some double quotes the software breaks. In any case the code certainly did not intent to allow the query structure to be altered and it can be. Bug/Broken but the bug is in one of the following domains, insufficient input validation, improper string manipulation, incorrect missing escaping/encoding, incorrect API/library use pattern, etc. Its not security specific, but certainly has security consequences.
What I would say to Linus is that there will always be bugs, some will have greater security consequences than others. Placing effort on controlling for bugs that have serious security consequences should take precedence over controlling for bugs in general, given limited resources.