I'm very sorry you did not take security into account to the degree that you should have, and probably did no QA, but the facts are you have to in order to establish the credibility of your system and its data. Everyone else has to.
I am thinking of that recent Twitter AI that turned into a bigot in less than a day because -- lo and behold -- GIGO. If the output must be that all films must look like the demographic national survey rather than how people tend to cluster, you could end up with no end of weird conclusions and data skews. For example, a film with a minority person in a wheel chair in a leadership role may skew the data more than a gay man. Moreover, let us say for instance, the first film is crap and the second one is good, but because he's beaten up as the film's about gay bashing, then might the latter score worse because he's a portrayed as a victim?
Baker had a varied career that included lots of musical theatre and the circus as well as heaps of roles in other productions. I bet he had a million stories to tell.
Who could have imagined that because off the shelf analogue radio controls were so crappy in the 1970s and a series of accidental meetings, it was easier to hire him to steer the inside of the R2D2 Prop. That he was short made him in the Star Wars promotion circuit with kids and so forth.
What a life.
From what I've read, his counterpart Daniels is a 'difficult' personality and the two didn't get along. And from what I've read of that relationship, Baker towered in stature over Daniels as a person.
I realize that this is Slashdot and the centre of gravity for discussion is technology but I really think that storms at sea, fire, mislabeled volatile cargo and other more mundane issues are more likely to affect ships great and small than cyber attacks.
It's tempting to dismiss this as him being wrong by orders of magnitude and then talking down our noses at him by assuming we need to explain what an order of magnitude is, or that he's adopting this stance for transparent political reasons, but let's assume for the moment that he's telling the truth. What would he have to know for that statement to be true?
Have you all forgotten the Snowden revelations yet? How it became known that the US grabbed cell phone encryption standards before the ink was dry on them, how they tapped the lines between Google data centres. If the operational tools for creating for encryption are compromised or at least weakened, it may well be that they have visibility into source code in a lot of industries as well as communications, which is as good *if not better*.
The FBI/DoJ will force the technology industry to move outside of the United States if their request is granted. Moreover, the US government will be on the hook when Apple says 'you owe us an eleven-figure settlement for the loss of our operating system'.
I have a policy that my customers pay me on time. Unfortunately I tend to get strung along for 90 days. Since my policy doesn't have the force of regulation I tend to have to suck it up.
I suspect that the nudie scanner that doesn't work is entering the polygraph zone. The people who buy them want everyone else to believe that these contraptions work. In the TSA's case millions have been spent on these things so I presume some congress critter has decided to make them mandatory to justify the expense.
A short while ago a drone backed out a few city blocks in California after touching power lines. Unlike fixed wing remote controlled aircraft, drones can take off anywhere including street corners. This, of course means they can come down nearby
-- Into traffic -- Powerlines -- Descend vertically into telephony/power equipment, thus bypassing fences.
No one is saying that these are deliberate but accidents do happen and like your driver's licence helps pay for public education regarding the rules of the road, the potential for error, mistakes and oversight means that there's a public good in ensuring safe navigation of the skies. Someone above said that people could therefore could fake your ID at an accident -- well I think the odds of that happening are small relative to the amount of regular accidents that will happen.
Of course people will stomp and yell about 'muh freedumbs' but these things will eventually -- by accident -- cause traffic accidents by uncontrolled descents and so having the infrastructure ready to ensure that people get a modicum of training is hardly the end of the world.
Given the way panicked elected officials think, and the fact that kids of people attracted to life in uniform are of exactly the opposite mindset needed to go into computer science, I'm guessing this is an overblown and over promoted 'grabs text transmitted in the clear' thing that's not designed to do much other than pick the pockets of taxpayers.
Given that physics is a sub set of philosophy and not the other way around, yes. Most people confuse ethics with philosophy. Ethics is a portion of philosophy. Philosophy outside of ethics is about building systems of logic and analysis and that's why it can have such a huge per semester drop out rate.
A friend is in the movie biz and his reaction to any criticism of the recent Star Trek reboots is Rotten Tomatoes is an objective measure. I can forgive him the logical error because he's in the industry and the financials are more important to him than say to you or I. So aggregated movie reviews that drive customer purchases to him indicate success.
However, as far as I know, Rotten Tomatoes never publishes its weighting formula And it's opened by a movie studio.
An issue is that random typically doesn't mean what it's taken to mean in plain language. True randomness is actually hard since you've got to have some mechanism chugging away spitting out numbers. Understanding how (pseudo) random is defined goes a long way to reducing the reducing the size of the haystack in your search for the needle.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm very sorry you did not take security into account to the degree that you should have, and probably did no QA, but the facts are you have to in order to establish the credibility of your system and its data. Everyone else has to.
I am thinking of that recent Twitter AI that turned into a bigot in less than a day because -- lo and behold -- GIGO. If the output must be that all films must look like the demographic national survey rather than how people tend to cluster, you could end up with no end of weird conclusions and data skews. For example, a film with a minority person in a wheel chair in a leadership role may skew the data more than a gay man. Moreover, let us say for instance, the first film is crap and the second one is good, but because he's beaten up as the film's about gay bashing, then might the latter score worse because he's a portrayed as a victim?
Baker had a varied career that included lots of musical theatre and the circus as well as heaps of roles in other productions. I bet he had a million stories to tell.
Who could have imagined that because off the shelf analogue radio controls were so crappy in the 1970s and a series of accidental meetings, it was easier to hire him to steer the inside of the R2D2 Prop. That he was short made him in the Star Wars promotion circuit with kids and so forth.
What a life.
From what I've read, his counterpart Daniels is a 'difficult' personality and the two didn't get along. And from what I've read of that relationship, Baker towered in stature over Daniels as a person.
Thanks for being part of my childhood.
I realize that this is Slashdot and the centre of gravity for discussion is technology but I really think that storms at sea, fire, mislabeled volatile cargo and other more mundane issues are more likely to affect ships great and small than cyber attacks.
It's tempting to dismiss this as him being wrong by orders of magnitude and then talking down our noses at him by assuming we need to explain what an order of magnitude is, or that he's adopting this stance for transparent political reasons, but let's assume for the moment that he's telling the truth. What would he have to know for that statement to be true?
Have you all forgotten the Snowden revelations yet? How it became known that the US grabbed cell phone encryption standards before the ink was dry on them, how they tapped the lines between Google data centres. If the operational tools for creating for encryption are compromised or at least weakened, it may well be that they have visibility into source code in a lot of industries as well as communications, which is as good *if not better*.
>The moment you invent a replicator, money becomes worthless
Not so. Money is at the bottom of all equations and that becomes the fundamental currency evaluation.
In addition to using a random string generator (easy enough to find on-line), add accented characters.
Gosh I hope I cancelled my account before then.
Just sayin'...
The FBI/DoJ will force the technology industry to move outside of the United States if their request is granted. Moreover, the US government will be on the hook when Apple says 'you owe us an eleven-figure settlement for the loss of our operating system'.
Yes, I'm kidding.
Done and dusted.
How often must this be said?
Security is NOT optional and yes, you need to pay for it continually and it doesn't have uniform predictable levels of effort.
I have a policy that my customers pay me on time. Unfortunately I tend to get strung along for 90 days. Since my policy doesn't have the force of regulation I tend to have to suck it up.
I suspect that the nudie scanner that doesn't work is entering the polygraph zone. The people who buy them want everyone else to believe that these contraptions work. In the TSA's case millions have been spent on these things so I presume some congress critter has decided to make them mandatory to justify the expense.
A short while ago a drone backed out a few city blocks in California after touching power lines. Unlike fixed wing remote controlled aircraft, drones can take off anywhere including street corners. This, of course means they can come down nearby
-- Into traffic
-- Powerlines
-- Descend vertically into telephony/power equipment, thus bypassing fences.
No one is saying that these are deliberate but accidents do happen and like your driver's licence helps pay for public education regarding the rules of the road, the potential for error, mistakes and oversight means that there's a public good in ensuring safe navigation of the skies. Someone above said that people could therefore could fake your ID at an accident -- well I think the odds of that happening are small relative to the amount of regular accidents that will happen.
Of course people will stomp and yell about 'muh freedumbs' but these things will eventually -- by accident -- cause traffic accidents by uncontrolled descents and so having the infrastructure ready to ensure that people get a modicum of training is hardly the end of the world.
Given the way panicked elected officials think, and the fact that kids of people attracted to life in uniform are of exactly the opposite mindset needed to go into computer science, I'm guessing this is an overblown and over promoted 'grabs text transmitted in the clear' thing that's not designed to do much other than pick the pockets of taxpayers.
Given that physics is a sub set of philosophy and not the other way around, yes. Most people confuse ethics with philosophy. Ethics is a portion of philosophy. Philosophy outside of ethics is about building systems of logic and analysis and that's why it can have such a huge per semester drop out rate.
Petechial hemorrhages show the direction current travelled.
[Citation]
>Driving is one of those things where your actions can affect others so severely that you have to accept that they're regulated
Thank God that doesn't apply to firearms.
Hi:
No. People in uniform get paid for that.
'Kthnxbye.
Accept no substitutes!
A friend is in the movie biz and his reaction to any criticism of the recent Star Trek reboots is Rotten Tomatoes is an objective measure. I can forgive him the logical error because he's in the industry and the financials are more important to him than say to you or I. So aggregated movie reviews that drive customer purchases to him indicate success.
However, as far as I know, Rotten Tomatoes never publishes its weighting formula
And it's opened by a movie studio.
This seems to me perfect for abuse.
An issue is that random typically doesn't mean what it's taken to mean in plain language. True randomness is actually hard since you've got to have some mechanism chugging away spitting out numbers. Understanding how (pseudo) random is defined goes a long way to reducing the reducing the size of the haystack in your search for the needle.
James Hacker: [reading a speech written for him] "We shall of course be reviewing a ... Bernard, this doesn't say anything.
Bernard Woolley: Oh, thank you , Prime Minister.