Why would game company’s shell out billions to build giant gaming centres all across the country when gamers are already willing to pay for the hardware themselves?
And really physics is against them data can only move so fast, as anyone who has tried Steam's in house streaming can testify that is going to depend on the game. A lot of games like simulation or strategy games will work fine over a very low latency network. But just as many games, as in every first person shooter, the slight delay between mouse input and reaction is very real and noticeable.
You don't seem to realize that those stick tickers already back factor in stock splits. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/a... Apple's stock remained resilient as traders came to terms with the death of Steve Jobs, the company's iconic co-founder and chairman. After see-sawing through much of Thursday's session, shares in Apple (AAPL) slipped 0.2 percent, or 88 cents, to close at $377.37.
Your calculation is WAY off. Apple's stock has done good but it hasn't done THAT good.
Yes.
Bitcoin has two contradictory goals. On the one hand it needs everyone to have the same information. The network couldn't work if I think I have 10 coins and you think I have 5. The way this classically works is you just have an authority keep track of it, the bank. You can simply ask the bank how much money you or anyone else has in the account.
But bitcoin doesn't want a central authority so how can it keep track of who owns what and whose paid who? It uses a consensus based on whatever group has the most computing power. And they're rewarded for this work with a few new bitcoins and that reward is called 'mining'.
So 'mining' is simply the act of gathering up all the transactions the network wants to do and 'signing' it with your massive computer power and pushing it out to the world. You can't have transactions with out mining.
However bitcoin scales directly to the mining power on the network, so if everyone just closed up right and only you were left you could run all the transactions on a general purpose CPU if needed. So there is no reason it has to be wasteful, but the way it works is the greater the reward for mining the more it encourages people to waste electricity.
Not really. Since bitcoins specifically ties mining activity to confirming transactions it's fair to link them. Now could it cost a lot less energy to confirm a transaction? Easily, but the design of bitcoin ensures that people will 'waste' as much energy as economically feasible to mine them and thus ensures the energy cost will remain high.
This is epically true since bitcoins whole purpose is to conduct transactions so it would be fair to consider all the computers, network equipment, man hours, etc in the entire system as a direct cost of conducting those transactions.
This wouldn't be any different then looking at all of Visas equipment and energy costs and dividing by the number of transactions it conducts per day to arrive at a 'cost' of swiping your credit card.
Does it matter? The more efficient miners will drive up the complexity not drive down the usage of electricity.
Bitcoin is basically designed to ensure people waste as much electricity as possible.
Stories like this always remind be about how good we are at detecting radioactivity then any real threat from the radiation itself. This detection represents something on the order of 1 billionth a gram of cesium per cubic meter of water.
It's not the cost of the tube, it's the cost of putting a tube across 1000s of peoples land, crossing rivers and mountains with limited access for machinery, and all the other random things you'll find trying to cross large stretches of land.
If you've already set about putting a brand new Maglev train in place; the added cost of simply enclosing it in a large tube isn't likely to be very much in the grand scheme of things.
I always thought it seemed kind of foolish to run the web service and the tor node on the same system. Seems like it would be better to run the tor node on its own system and act as a gateway for the web server (with all appropriate firewall rules to prevent server from talking to anyone besides tor node)
This would not only prevent this kind of attack where local host traffic is semi trusted. But perhaps more significantly it would prevent the webserver from ever leaking it's public address as it can't know what it is.
My 2 cents
Yah; I guess my own language basis got in the way of reading comprehension. Can't ever think of a time of writing a 'where' statement, but in an SQL context that makes perfect sense.
That and while is normally used for loops... 'IF' would have been more appropriate for his example. But since we all got his point the example served its point.
Ahh but the displacement of work by AI is different then the displacement of humans by AI. I would agree that if we create really good AI then there are going to be huge economic impacts. But if you want to take it to the next step and then suppose we as a species are going to be replace by AI and that it is going to be our master or whatever. Then in order for that step you need not only really good AI but a way for AI to replace our bodies as well. If that's the case then the AI would need to then design, one generalized or more likely 100s of specialized, machines and then field them in the millions. I'm not saying it can't happen. It's just that A needs to come before B. And for however long it takes for AI to happen, you then need to take even more time on for the machines to come along after that.
But managing pipelines, traffic light, and ATC systems won't get you much further then the 'killing a lot of humans' stage of any AI take over plan. How would our fledgling AI construct itself a new power plant so it can grow? And then no matter how smart it may be, how does it substantially cut down the time that is actually required to build that power plant? No matter how much fast it maybe able to grow in cyberspace; it's still constrained by very real boundaries in physical space.
We already have protein based self-replicating nanobots... we call them bacteria. Not sure how they can help skynet though. But yes the "infiltrator" model where instead of simply trying to take over upfront terminator style it works behind the scenes stats a business designs some new products and works slowly to take over the world is probably more 'realistic'. But then you've pushed any possible timeline of machine take over out even further then simply the creating of AI, you're looking at probably 20 more years of it consolidating power before it makes it move, and as stupid as humans are you'd have to assume we'd see it coming at that point.
Yah you notice in terminator how they neatly skip over the part from skynet archives consciousness to self sustaining robot factories. I think in the most recent one they had a throw away line about how it enslaved humans to build the factories. Alright fair enough I can give you that. But who runs the power plant? Who's supply fuel to your power plant? Manufacturing replacement parts? Where are the resources coming from? Skynet was based in San Francisco... I wonder how far the closest copper mine is from there? Certainly going to need some iron.... and lets not forget all the rare earth stuff it would need to find. Some forges would also be nice if you actually plan to use any of that.... And of course you need to feed your slaves. some make sure to capture some farmers.
I can't even imagine how many people geographically distributed across the globe you would need to control a modern economic supply chain. Not to mention all those people you didn't manage to enslave would be attempting to stop you. So make sure you take control of a military as well...(of course how you would enslave people that you promptly give guns to is an interesting question)
Even if we are somehow close to creating a strong AI and that's a pretty big IF. What threat could it pose since there is no way for it to get out of the computers. Even if it managed to take over every computer in the world it would still be totally dependent on man to keep it running. If it did something we didn't like we'd simply yank all the fiber and power lines to it and it would be dead. In order to be really a threat an AI needs to be able to effect the physical world and that simply isn't there yet. Nor likely to be there any time soon. Maybe it could open a dam or blow up a pipeline or even worse case get into military systems. But really if an AI could do it; that means any hacker could do it, and I'm much more afraid of that.
Yah that's why the photo caught my eye; I was thinking why would people inside a several foot thick concrete dome need harnesses and fire blankets... whomever is in this room is not having a good day. After knowing what it's called there is an even more amazing article on that very room. http://www.spaceflightnow.com/... They join technicians working on the platform to jump down a chute on the north-side of the platform that connected to the teflon-lined slide that rapidly gets them underground. That 200-foot slide empties into the aptly-named "rubber room" with its rubber floors meant to absorb the impact of the explosion occurring on the pad surface 40 feet above them. Hopping off the landing ramp, the people would scurry to their left into the fallout shelter, a domed room suspended on shock-dampening springs and sealed off with massive blast-proof doors. Inside, the chamber held 20 chairs, a toilet and carbon dioxide scrubbing equipment to keep the occupants alive until rescue teams arrive. AWESOME!
So follow up...(thank you google image search) Wired also is carrying the pictures and actually tells you what they are instead of BS like "Abandoned Secret NASA Complex" http://www.wired.com/2014/11/c... Number 4 is "Shelter Dome, Rubber Room, Launch Pad 39B, Kennedy Space Center, FL, 1996. “Adjoining the Rubber Room was a Shelter Dome room with the floor set on springs to isolate the occupants from whatever conflagration may be occurring above them as they seek shelter.”
What the heck is number 4? Looking at the door it appears to be in a thick concrete dome. With very uncomfortable looking inclined metal seats. (with harnesses) all angled to a center cage with "Fire Blanket" canisters... The title is rather unhelpfully "Abandoned Secret NASA Complex" -roll eyes-
Curiosity is actually 899kg... a lot more than "nearly half a tonne" And technically the viking landers performed a soft landing as well and were not that light; about 600kg each.
So if the other 3 detectors can detect the explosions under ground, under the sea, and in the atmosphere. Where exactly does that leave for a covert test that this gas sampling might miss? Oh I see he thinks we need a world wide network of monitors to confirm what the other 3 sensors pick up. Gee if only there was some way to stick those gas detectors on something mobile..... WC-135 Constant Phoenix
You know nothing. Camouflage doesn't make you invisible but every military still uses it. Why? Because it makes you harder to see. The stealth on the F-22/F-35 is not designed so they can fly at 35,000 feet over Beijing undetected; it is so they can lock their missiles on their target at 50 miles while the enemy has to be 20 miles away to lock it's missiles. Which is pretty damn useful despite your arm chair general's opinion.
2.2 Angriffsmittel und -methoden 15
2.2.1 Spam 15
2.2.2 Schadprogramme 16
2.2.3 Drive-by-Exploits und Exploit-Kits 17
2.2.4 Botnetze 18
2.2.5 Social Engineering 19
2.2.6 Identitätsdiebstahl 20
2.2.7 Denial of Service 20
2.2.8 Advanced Persistent Threats (APT) 21
2.2.9 Nachrichtendienstliche Cyber-Angriffe 22
I can understand Spam but Drive-by-Exploits? Social Engineering? Denial of Service??? Surely there are German words for this? I mean 2.2.4 I'm pretty sure is botnet; which I assume should be a lot harder to give its own German translation than Advanced Persistent Threat...
Slashdot Mirror
Why would game company’s shell out billions to build giant gaming centres all across the country when gamers are already willing to pay for the hardware themselves?
And really physics is against them data can only move so fast, as anyone who has tried Steam's in house streaming can testify that is going to depend on the game. A lot of games like simulation or strategy games will work fine over a very low latency network. But just as many games, as in every first person shooter, the slight delay between mouse input and reaction is very real and noticeable.
You don't seem to realize that those stick tickers already back factor in stock splits.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/a...
Apple's stock remained resilient as traders came to terms with the death of Steve Jobs, the company's iconic co-founder and chairman. After see-sawing through much of Thursday's session, shares in Apple (AAPL) slipped 0.2 percent, or 88 cents, to close at $377.37.
Your calculation is WAY off. Apple's stock has done good but it hasn't done THAT good.
Yes.
Bitcoin has two contradictory goals. On the one hand it needs everyone to have the same information. The network couldn't work if I think I have 10 coins and you think I have 5. The way this classically works is you just have an authority keep track of it, the bank. You can simply ask the bank how much money you or anyone else has in the account.
But bitcoin doesn't want a central authority so how can it keep track of who owns what and whose paid who? It uses a consensus based on whatever group has the most computing power. And they're rewarded for this work with a few new bitcoins and that reward is called 'mining'.
So 'mining' is simply the act of gathering up all the transactions the network wants to do and 'signing' it with your massive computer power and pushing it out to the world. You can't have transactions with out mining.
However bitcoin scales directly to the mining power on the network, so if everyone just closed up right and only you were left you could run all the transactions on a general purpose CPU if needed. So there is no reason it has to be wasteful, but the way it works is the greater the reward for mining the more it encourages people to waste electricity.
Not really. Since bitcoins specifically ties mining activity to confirming transactions it's fair to link them. Now could it cost a lot less energy to confirm a transaction? Easily, but the design of bitcoin ensures that people will 'waste' as much energy as economically feasible to mine them and thus ensures the energy cost will remain high.
This is epically true since bitcoins whole purpose is to conduct transactions so it would be fair to consider all the computers, network equipment, man hours, etc in the entire system as a direct cost of conducting those transactions.
This wouldn't be any different then looking at all of Visas equipment and energy costs and dividing by the number of transactions it conducts per day to arrive at a 'cost' of swiping your credit card.
Does it matter? The more efficient miners will drive up the complexity not drive down the usage of electricity.
Bitcoin is basically designed to ensure people waste as much electricity as possible.
Stories like this always remind be about how good we are at detecting radioactivity then any real threat from the radiation itself. This detection represents something on the order of 1 billionth a gram of cesium per cubic meter of water.
It's not the cost of the tube, it's the cost of putting a tube across 1000s of peoples land, crossing rivers and mountains with limited access for machinery, and all the other random things you'll find trying to cross large stretches of land. If you've already set about putting a brand new Maglev train in place; the added cost of simply enclosing it in a large tube isn't likely to be very much in the grand scheme of things.
I always thought it seemed kind of foolish to run the web service and the tor node on the same system. Seems like it would be better to run the tor node on its own system and act as a gateway for the web server (with all appropriate firewall rules to prevent server from talking to anyone besides tor node) This would not only prevent this kind of attack where local host traffic is semi trusted. But perhaps more significantly it would prevent the webserver from ever leaking it's public address as it can't know what it is. My 2 cents
Ignore my other post... apparently link got striped out
Actually it can, and does tell them everything.
U.S. Postal Service Logging All Mail for Law Enforcement
Actually it can, and does tell them everything.
U.S. Postal Service Logging All Mail for Law Enforcement
Yah; I guess my own language basis got in the way of reading comprehension. Can't ever think of a time of writing a 'where' statement, but in an SQL context that makes perfect sense.
That and while is normally used for loops... 'IF' would have been more appropriate for his example. But since we all got his point the example served its point.
Now we just need it compiled in to a spreadsheet with all the various features indexed across the various boards and life would be good.
Ahh but the displacement of work by AI is different then the displacement of humans by AI.
I would agree that if we create really good AI then there are going to be huge economic impacts.
But if you want to take it to the next step and then suppose we as a species are going to be replace by AI and that it is going to be our master or whatever. Then in order for that step you need not only really good AI but a way for AI to replace our bodies as well.
If that's the case then the AI would need to then design, one generalized or more likely 100s of specialized, machines and then field them in the millions.
I'm not saying it can't happen. It's just that A needs to come before B. And for however long it takes for AI to happen, you then need to take even more time on for the machines to come along after that.
But managing pipelines, traffic light, and ATC systems won't get you much further then the 'killing a lot of humans' stage of any AI take over plan.
How would our fledgling AI construct itself a new power plant so it can grow? And then no matter how smart it may be, how does it substantially cut down the time that is actually required to build that power plant? No matter how much fast it maybe able to grow in cyberspace; it's still constrained by very real boundaries in physical space.
We already have protein based self-replicating nanobots... we call them bacteria. Not sure how they can help skynet though.
But yes the "infiltrator" model where instead of simply trying to take over upfront terminator style it works behind the scenes stats a business designs some new products and works slowly to take over the world is probably more 'realistic'.
But then you've pushed any possible timeline of machine take over out even further then simply the creating of AI, you're looking at probably 20 more years of it consolidating power before it makes it move, and as stupid as humans are you'd have to assume we'd see it coming at that point.
Yah you notice in terminator how they neatly skip over the part from skynet archives consciousness to self sustaining robot factories.
I think in the most recent one they had a throw away line about how it enslaved humans to build the factories.
Alright fair enough I can give you that. But who runs the power plant? Who's supply fuel to your power plant? Manufacturing replacement parts? Where are the resources coming from? Skynet was based in San Francisco... I wonder how far the closest copper mine is from there? Certainly going to need some iron.... and lets not forget all the rare earth stuff it would need to find. Some forges would also be nice if you actually plan to use any of that.... And of course you need to feed your slaves. some make sure to capture some farmers.
I can't even imagine how many people geographically distributed across the globe you would need to control a modern economic supply chain. Not to mention all those people you didn't manage to enslave would be attempting to stop you. So make sure you take control of a military as well...(of course how you would enslave people that you promptly give guns to is an interesting question)
Even if we are somehow close to creating a strong AI and that's a pretty big IF.
What threat could it pose since there is no way for it to get out of the computers. Even if it managed to take over every computer in the world it would still be totally dependent on man to keep it running. If it did something we didn't like we'd simply yank all the fiber and power lines to it and it would be dead.
In order to be really a threat an AI needs to be able to effect the physical world and that simply isn't there yet. Nor likely to be there any time soon.
Maybe it could open a dam or blow up a pipeline or even worse case get into military systems. But really if an AI could do it; that means any hacker could do it, and I'm much more afraid of that.
Yah that's why the photo caught my eye; I was thinking why would people inside a several foot thick concrete dome need harnesses and fire blankets... whomever is in this room is not having a good day.
After knowing what it's called there is an even more amazing article on that very room.
http://www.spaceflightnow.com/...
They join technicians working on the platform to jump down a chute on the north-side of the platform that connected to the teflon-lined slide that rapidly gets them underground.
That 200-foot slide empties into the aptly-named "rubber room" with its rubber floors meant to absorb the impact of the explosion occurring on the pad surface 40 feet above them. Hopping off the landing ramp, the people would scurry to their left into the fallout shelter, a domed room suspended on shock-dampening springs and sealed off with massive blast-proof doors. Inside, the chamber held 20 chairs, a toilet and carbon dioxide scrubbing equipment to keep the occupants alive until rescue teams arrive.
AWESOME!
So follow up...(thank you google image search) Wired also is carrying the pictures and actually tells you what they are instead of BS like "Abandoned Secret NASA Complex"
http://www.wired.com/2014/11/c...
Number 4 is
"Shelter Dome, Rubber Room, Launch Pad 39B, Kennedy Space Center, FL, 1996. “Adjoining the Rubber Room was a Shelter Dome room with the floor set on springs to isolate the occupants from whatever conflagration may be occurring above them as they seek shelter.”
What the heck is number 4? Looking at the door it appears to be in a thick concrete dome. With very uncomfortable looking inclined metal seats. (with harnesses) all angled to a center cage with "Fire Blanket" canisters...
The title is rather unhelpfully "Abandoned Secret NASA Complex" -roll eyes-
Curiosity is actually 899kg... a lot more than "nearly half a tonne"
And technically the viking landers performed a soft landing as well and were not that light; about 600kg each.
So if the other 3 detectors can detect the explosions under ground, under the sea, and in the atmosphere. Where exactly does that leave for a covert test that this gas sampling might miss?
Oh I see he thinks we need a world wide network of monitors to confirm what the other 3 sensors pick up. Gee if only there was some way to stick those gas detectors on something mobile.....
WC-135 Constant Phoenix
You know nothing.
Camouflage doesn't make you invisible but every military still uses it. Why? Because it makes you harder to see.
The stealth on the F-22/F-35 is not designed so they can fly at 35,000 feet over Beijing undetected; it is so they can lock their missiles on their target at 50 miles while the enemy has to be 20 miles away to lock it's missiles. Which is pretty damn useful despite your arm chair general's opinion.
2.2 Angriffsmittel und -methoden 15
2.2.1 Spam 15
2.2.2 Schadprogramme 16
2.2.3 Drive-by-Exploits und Exploit-Kits 17
2.2.4 Botnetze 18
2.2.5 Social Engineering 19
2.2.6 Identitätsdiebstahl 20
2.2.7 Denial of Service 20
2.2.8 Advanced Persistent Threats (APT) 21
2.2.9 Nachrichtendienstliche Cyber-Angriffe 22
I can understand Spam but Drive-by-Exploits? Social Engineering? Denial of Service???
Surely there are German words for this? I mean 2.2.4 I'm pretty sure is botnet; which I assume should be a lot harder to give its own German translation than Advanced Persistent Threat...