The idea that we can create a universal language that everybody will understand by abandoning language and simply making a recognizable symbol for every single concept that anybody might ever want to communicate is stupid.
I saw a documentary where that worked quite well. Oh wait.. that was "Idiocracy".
This happens when business models without steady revenue streams aren't good enough. You somehow have to increase the frequency how often people are forced to buy updates.
Every country wants their laws to apply to everyone else, but doesn't think of the consequences then of having to apply everyone else's laws to themselves.
It's easy to avoid such consequences with a large enough military budget. Or why else would Google filter European search results referring to the DMCA?
Anonymous proof of age online is one of the features of the newfangled electronic ID cards in Germany. But as expected, there isn't much you can do with it besides checking your speeding tickets. Even services that would not require to trust the government that anonymous indeed means anonymous don't use it.
Still haven't read the actual TFA, but from the summary I understood that most of the hack was gaining access to the OS UI by forcing the OS out of the kiosk mode.
I may be wrong, but I'm still in line with the summary.
Point taken. But to my defense, this assumption is firmly grounded in the summary speaking of a Windows XP based device and not an XP embedded based device.
I still doubt if Windows based OS was a good design descision, but if all you have is a bunch of windows developers, you tend to solve every problem with a hammer.
Thanks for the update. From the summary I was expecting some kind of new "lifestyle" safe, like the new entertainment systems they just have to slap into every car no also being a thing on safes.
As I'm earning my living with software development I'm quite aware that there is no bug free software (beyond "hello world"). But I'm also aware that the number of bugs correlates with the software's size and complexity.
That's why you don't use a more complex OS then required. That you mention XP embedded is making it much better, but the summary mentioned a plain XP only.
And then why for heavens sake has it to be a desktop operating system? Does it need to run MS Office or what was the design idea here? It's not like there are especially hardened OSses out there for embedded devices. (Not to mention that this means we have a safe that's running on a x86 architecture)
And after having such a terrible design idea, why have it implemented by a moron using an out of date, unsupported, and buggy OS?
Fooor sure! Any woman who doesn't look good in a dress and expect a slap on the ass once in a while is trouble! Maybe if she'd put on some makeup and hike those little tits up a bit she'd get hired, amirite?
Having nothing to do with ass-slapping or makeup: "Dress for the job you want" is relevant to men, too.
Who cares that she was educated at Cornell and Harvard and is a crazy entrepreneur? If she doesn't learn to stop being so uppity and stop trying to outshine men she'll never make it and really, has only herself to blame!
Well, they either cared enough to interview her despite that picture or (more likely) she had a different profile picture two years ago (or whenever those other 3 times were when she was recruited)
how secure could that actually be as an access control?
I mean, the access control isn't checking your DNA. It is checking if you have access to a genetic profile of someone with matching criteria. Or, as a completly different attack vector: access to body fluids of someone matching the allowed filters. ("whitelisting" gets a whole new meaning here....)
Leaving aside the completely ridiculous assertion that a system composed of people can be debugged in the same manner as code simply because it happens to be called a "code" of law,.
It's not because both is called code. It is because both legal and computer code are both nothing more than a set of rules. And the more complex such sets become, the more unwanted side effects you have. People try to find loopholes in those rules for personal gain are either called lawyers or hackers and for both, best practice of avoiding such loopholes is to keep the rules as simple and exactly worded as possible.
Code injection is a bit of a stretch, though, but in general, programs and laws have a lot in common.
So your solution is NOT to "learn to code" and start with the burger flipping job right away? Any other idea where to get a "sweet 32k/year gig" without college?
Doesn't change anything about you being spot-on right.
But I wish I could give my kids some more reliable career advice than "Drop out of school and become the next Mark Zuckerberg". Well, I know the American Dream where anyone can make it from rags to riches with hard work, but so could anyone get struck by lightning or anyone could win the lottery.
First of all, old SF stuff tell us more about the time they were written in than about the actual future. And with Star Trek, We're talking about about Space race and cold war here.References and stereotypes from those subjects are kind at least understandable, like Stepin Fetchit movies (heard the first time of him today) told us about the actual racism in his time.
But episode one is a piece from the late 90s. If a cartoon character is shown with some possibly racist traits, this is simply sloppiness. Laziness to invent some actual accent, unthoughtfullness of noticing it how the characterizatzon and accent match a stereotype (it probably would have been noted if the role was casted with an actual black actor instead of blue-greyish a computer animation) and general cluelessnes of pushing that lazy, clumsy nuisance into the viewers field of vision at all.
OK, now back to Star Trek and why it can't be compared: The stereotypes in ST aren't (usually...) not Stereotypes used as a lazy way to make easy characterizations (see: James Bond: blonde guy with german accent --> evil, eyepatch: evil or a fake italian accent to depict some guy as 'funny') They're rather allegorys. Yes, Romulans are space russians, but if you want to tell about an utopia about all space races living happily federated together, you need someone to symbolize the warmongering people that has to be coped with, too.
And please note while the Romulans symbolize Cold war russia, it was poor Chekov who had all the stereotypical russian stuff!
And while Star Wars did their happy Science Fiction Fairy Tale, ST actually went onto the subject of racism (Let that be your last battlefield) - in al allegorical way with all stereotypical dead weight removed. So if someone in ST is symbolizing someone back here on earth, it can be done that it is on purpose.
And still my final point stands: If seeing a non-human character with some negative traits triggers some black/white stereotypes, it tells a lot about how deeply rooted these prejudices are within the recipient. (...maybe: too..)
But as a conclusion, I'd like to say the the whole Jar Jar character is SO annoying, and as a whole is a result of bad and uninspired writing, that perceived racist stereotype don't make the top ten on my list of reasons to wish him some unpleasant veneral diseases.
You're intentionally missing the point. there's a cultural history found in movies, tv and books that portray black people as subservient and uneducated stereotypes. This portrayal reinfoced class and racial structures of the day that served to keep black people "in their place". Long tradition of this. summary mentions stepin fetchet. uncle remus. blackface comedy. jar jar is a direct decendent of this line of humor. either you're being purposefully obtuse, or maybe you're from iceland or something and completely unexposed to american culture and history.
So, if you see a subservient and uneducated non-human character on screen, that makes you think of black people?
Interesting. But with such a mindest, I wouldn't complain about other peoples "racism".
the whole Ewok concept, cute funny talking things that can be made into toys that say things like "E-chooda!", because in Lucas's mind, the kids love them.
Intresting coincidence: That's exactly the same what Joghurt says about "Spaceballs - the flame thrower"
I thought it's the advertisers who choose which target user profile their ads should be shown to?
And can you really blame them for trying to keep their advertising costs low by selecting a target profile as narrow as possible to keep "wasted" views, that have to be paid for, too, as low as possible?
I disagree. At least for Star Trek. That setting is wide (not to say bland...) enough to allow for any type of story. Heck, they managed to mash a Picard-Die-Hard-Action-flick and a Back-To-The-Future-comedy into a single movie and it worked!
Each ST series had a unique style and tone. TOS with their "monster of the week" 60's-Sci-Fi, TNG ("we have the moral duty to...") and Ds9 with the longer, almost soap-like story arcs. Add to this the regular oddball-episode dabbling into absolutely non-Science Fiction areas. (VOY combining the worst of the now boring "monster of the week" with Picards worst speeches about moral dilemmas)
You could have made tons of movies and series that could have stood on their own, but in a desperate try to tap into the fanbase by adding charackters with the same name as TOS crew, they went down the "prequel"-trap that rewrites canon an turns a endless, open playground story-universe into a tightly tangled mess of alternative "timelines".
Slashdot Mirror
The idea that we can create a universal language that everybody will understand by abandoning language and simply making a recognizable symbol for every single concept that anybody might ever want to communicate is stupid.
I saw a documentary where that worked quite well. Oh wait.. that was "Idiocracy".
This happens when business models without steady revenue streams aren't good enough. You somehow have to increase the frequency how often people are forced to buy updates.
If a Scotsman commits rape in France, he may be tried in England.
That's probably because the Scots are still under English occupation.
If a Scotsman commits rape in France, he MAY NOT be tried in Turkey. See?
Every country wants their laws to apply to everyone else, but doesn't think of the consequences then of having to apply everyone else's laws to themselves.
It's easy to avoid such consequences with a large enough military budget. Or why else would Google filter European search results referring to the DMCA?
Anonymous proof of age online is one of the features of the newfangled electronic ID cards in Germany. But as expected, there isn't much you can do with it besides checking your speeding tickets. Even services that would not require to trust the government that anonymous indeed means anonymous don't use it.
And porn has the ultimate "Long Tail".
Who else. Literally.
Still haven't read the actual TFA, but from the summary I understood that most of the hack was gaining access to the OS UI by forcing the OS out of the kiosk mode.
I may be wrong, but I'm still in line with the summary.
Point taken. But to my defense, this assumption is firmly grounded in the summary speaking of a Windows XP based device and not an XP embedded based device.
I still doubt if Windows based OS was a good design descision, but if all you have is a bunch of windows developers, you tend to solve every problem with a hammer.
Thanks for the update. From the summary I was expecting some kind of new "lifestyle" safe, like the new entertainment systems they just have to slap into every car no also being a thing on safes.
As I'm earning my living with software development I'm quite aware that there is no bug free software (beyond "hello world"). But I'm also aware that the number of bugs correlates with the software's size and complexity.
That's why you don't use a more complex OS then required. That you mention XP embedded is making it much better, but the summary mentioned a plain XP only.
Why does a safe need an operating system?
And then why for heavens sake has it to be a desktop operating system? Does it need to run MS Office or what was the design idea here? It's not like there are especially hardened OSses out there for embedded devices. (Not to mention that this means we have a safe that's running on a x86 architecture)
And after having such a terrible design idea, why have it implemented by a moron using an out of date, unsupported, and buggy OS?
Fooor sure! Any woman who doesn't look good in a dress and expect a slap on the ass once in a while is trouble! Maybe if she'd put on some makeup and hike those little tits up a bit she'd get hired, amirite?
Having nothing to do with ass-slapping or makeup: "Dress for the job you want" is relevant to men, too.
Who cares that she was educated at Cornell and Harvard and is a crazy entrepreneur? If she doesn't learn to stop being so uppity and stop trying to outshine men she'll never make it and really, has only herself to blame!
Well, they either cared enough to interview her despite that picture or (more likely) she had a different profile picture two years ago (or whenever those other 3 times were when she was recruited)
how secure could that actually be as an access control?
I mean, the access control isn't checking your DNA. It is checking if you have access to a genetic profile of someone with matching criteria. Or, as a completly different attack vector: access to body fluids of someone matching the allowed filters. ("whitelisting" gets a whole new meaning here....)
Maybe different recruiters going through the same data base? (linkedin or such)
This is like asking if maybe telepathy would work better on Uranus.
Keep your dirty mental fingers out of my...!!!
oh.. wait..
Leaving aside the completely ridiculous assertion that a system composed of people can be debugged in the same manner as code simply because it happens to be called a "code" of law,.
It's not because both is called code. It is because both legal and computer code are both nothing more than a set of rules. And the more complex such sets become, the more unwanted side effects you have. People try to find loopholes in those rules for personal gain are either called lawyers or hackers and for both, best practice of avoiding such loopholes is to keep the rules as simple and exactly worded as possible.
Code injection is a bit of a stretch, though, but in general, programs and laws have a lot in common.
So your solution is NOT to "learn to code" and start with the burger flipping job right away? Any other idea where to get a "sweet 32k/year gig" without college?
Doesn't change anything about you being spot-on right.
But I wish I could give my kids some more reliable career advice than "Drop out of school and become the next Mark Zuckerberg". Well, I know the American Dream where anyone can make it from rags to riches with hard work, but so could anyone get struck by lightning or anyone could win the lottery.
But that's Star Trek TOS you're talking about.
First of all, old SF stuff tell us more about the time they were written in than about the actual future. And with Star Trek, We're talking about about Space race and cold war here.References and stereotypes from those subjects are kind at least understandable, like Stepin Fetchit movies (heard the first time of him today) told us about the actual racism in his time.
But episode one is a piece from the late 90s. If a cartoon character is shown with some possibly racist traits, this is simply sloppiness. Laziness to invent some actual accent, unthoughtfullness of noticing it how the characterizatzon and accent match a stereotype (it probably would have been noted if the role was casted with an actual black actor instead of blue-greyish a computer animation) and general cluelessnes of pushing that lazy, clumsy nuisance into the viewers field of vision at all.
OK, now back to Star Trek and why it can't be compared: The stereotypes in ST aren't (usually...) not Stereotypes used as a lazy way to make easy characterizations (see: James Bond: blonde guy with german accent --> evil, eyepatch: evil or a fake italian accent to depict some guy as 'funny') They're rather allegorys. Yes, Romulans are space russians, but if you want to tell about an utopia about all space races living happily federated together, you need someone to symbolize the warmongering people that has to be coped with, too.
And please note while the Romulans symbolize Cold war russia, it was poor Chekov who had all the stereotypical russian stuff!
And while Star Wars did their happy Science Fiction Fairy Tale, ST actually went onto the subject of racism (Let that be your last battlefield) - in al allegorical way with all stereotypical dead weight removed. So if someone in ST is symbolizing someone back here on earth, it can be done that it is on purpose.
And still my final point stands: If seeing a non-human character with some negative traits triggers some black/white stereotypes, it tells a lot about how deeply rooted these prejudices are within the recipient. (...maybe: too..)
But as a conclusion, I'd like to say the the whole Jar Jar character is SO annoying, and as a whole is a result of bad and uninspired writing, that perceived racist stereotype don't make the top ten on my list of reasons to wish him some unpleasant veneral diseases.
It's not like they have white Klingons serving aside the dark skinned ones, etc.
They do not discuss this with outsiders. (see "Trials_and_Tribble-ations")
You're intentionally missing the point. there's a cultural history found in movies, tv and books that portray black people as subservient and uneducated stereotypes. This portrayal reinfoced class and racial structures of the day that served to keep black people "in their place". Long tradition of this. summary mentions stepin fetchet. uncle remus. blackface comedy. jar jar is a direct decendent of this line of humor. either you're being purposefully obtuse, or maybe you're from iceland or something and completely unexposed to american culture and history.
So, if you see a subservient and uneducated non-human character on screen, that makes you think of black people?
Interesting. But with such a mindest, I wouldn't complain about other peoples "racism".
the whole Ewok concept, cute funny talking things that can be made into toys that say things like "E-chooda!", because in Lucas's mind, the kids love them.
Intresting coincidence: That's exactly the same what Joghurt says about "Spaceballs - the flame thrower"
I thought it's the advertisers who choose which target user profile their ads should be shown to?
And can you really blame them for trying to keep their advertising costs low by selecting a target profile as narrow as possible to keep "wasted" views, that have to be paid for, too, as low as possible?
I don't see Google at fault here.
What about strong and fast to stand the black holes both gravitational pull and forces on the hull?
I disagree. At least for Star Trek. That setting is wide (not to say bland...) enough to allow for any type of story. Heck, they managed to mash a Picard-Die-Hard-Action-flick and a Back-To-The-Future-comedy into a single movie and it worked!
Each ST series had a unique style and tone. TOS with their "monster of the week" 60's-Sci-Fi, TNG ("we have the moral duty to...") and Ds9 with the longer, almost soap-like story arcs. Add to this the regular oddball-episode dabbling into absolutely non-Science Fiction areas. (VOY combining the worst of the now boring "monster of the week" with Picards worst speeches about moral dilemmas)
You could have made tons of movies and series that could have stood on their own, but in a desperate try to tap into the fanbase by adding charackters with the same name as TOS crew, they went down the "prequel"-trap that rewrites canon an turns a endless, open playground story-universe into a tightly tangled mess of alternative "timelines".
Intresting plot twist: Do they use some "time-travel"-mechanic to explain how Disney can change the past when something was declared as "canon"?