Does this mean the alleged NSA taps on major internet links that monitor all traffic would have to be reported as breaches too if an EU ISP discovers (or knowingly installs) one?
If you RTFA you would find out:
There are a few exceptions though – companies will not be required to pass on the data in cases where there are "justified national security reasons", companies like Facebook and Google who fall under Data Protection Direction, companies that take steps such as encryption of data.
Perhaps it is because the vast vast majority of the opposition to genetic engineering is coming from those with no background in agricultural or plant science and thus due to their complete lack of context it seems reasonable to them.
The real problem is "close source food chain" vs. "open source food chain". That is why GM food - Monsanto style - is bad. Really bad. Unfortunately the anti-GM movement has taken a different path of protesting against the science, rather than this very basic fact.
A closed source food chain is a major problem for everyone, except those who hold the patents.
Glorified money laundering is exactly what Yahoo's investment in this app amounts to. It's the tech world equivalent of investing millions of dollars in concept art for the purposes of avoiding tax. Like concept art (Damien Hirst et al), everyone knows it's a crock but the art world keeps the pretence up because the gravy train is too good.
The data should be used to flag up pupils who may be struggling
IANAT and probably don't appreciate everything that being a teacher entails, but whatever happened to engaging with students and knowing who requires extra attention or some other method of engagement to get them motivated?
I'm all for technology, but some problems are human problems and won't be solved by adding new technology to the mix. If anything it will make some situations worse, as we become lazier (rely on the machines to do our job) and further removed from each other.
"Unwritten rule" really? They make cameras now that are so small they can be woven into a coat and you'd never know it's there.
I wasn't referring to targeted covert surveillance. I'm talking about data capture by innocent people wearing Google Glass who are not aware of their actions, with the data being stored in a central location that may be searched later for incriminating behaviour. But this idea seems lost on you, I guess it means you're never doing anything that would warrant attention from the police.
...or one person pretending to text on their phone and taking a picture. The scenario you describe is a people problem, not a technology problem.
This scenario would require targeted, convert behaviour which is always going to be possible.
With Google Glass the problem is more sinister because the glasses are always on and point in whatever random direction the wearer happens to point. Further, the data will most likely be logged with Google which may mean it can be searched by law enforcement agents (now or sometime in the future).
A random person using a video camera is much less likely to upload the data to a central "all seeing" company like Google.
The problem with this technology - if indeed it does feature "always on" data capture - is that it takes just one person in a crowd to ruin it for everyone else.
You are at an event with a large crowd. Some of the behaviour in this crowd may be illegal (concert goers smoking marijuana for example) or at least frowned up by the authorities (dissidents gathering to protest). There is an unwritten rule amongst the participants that no one will film or take photos due to the nature of this group behaviour.
At this point, it takes just one person wearing Google Glass to break the unwritten rule. Most of the participants will be oblivious to the presence of the glasses. Yes this could happen with a handheld camera or similar, but the camera is outwardly very obvious. Goggle Glass is designed to blend in with the wearer and the surroundings.
Hyperbole? Perhaps. Do you want to find out? I certainly don't.
Talk to a musician or scientist: every "inspiration" is the end result of lots of precursor work
I never said anything about not requiring previous effort - someone who has never played an instrument or studied music is hardly going to be inspired to write a song, are they?
The main point is that disengaging the mind from the task for which inspiration is sought (be it a tricky development problem or writing a new song) will help, and that it's not necessarily a requirement to be away from all electronic devices. For example, you maybe using your smartphone or iPad or whatever to read a technical manual, when an apparently inconsequential piece of information helps everything fall in to place and you are then inspired to fix a previously difficult, unrelated problem.
If we're instead talking about people who only use smart phones and iPads and do so only for light entertainment, and are never bored enough to learn a new skill such as playing guitar, that's another story entirely and I agree it would be a problem - but I don't see that happening any more now than it did in the past. That is a motivational problem, rather than one of "boredom".
Is inspiration more or less likely to strike if your mind is occupied?
The creative people I speak to (musicians, mostly) say that going for a walk outside is the best source of inspiration, closely followed by listening to songs by other people and I tend to agree with this.
If cooped up indoors, disengaging the mind is helpful but it takes some practice. Meditation works really well, but it can also be done by playing a simple game on a handheld device or mindlessly scrolling through the Facebook timeline.
It's perfectly possible to be "bored" while using an iPhone or iPad or whatever smart device you prefer.
I think point missed by this type of research is assuming that everyone is actively engaged by the device when idly surfing Facebook or Slashdot. In this situation the user may simply be waiting for inspiration to strike (when that happens is unpredictable, otherwise we'd milk it for all it's worth).
Obviously this doesn't apply to everyone in every situation, but to suggest that having access to smart phones is killing creativity is a bit of a stretch.
There are over 25 million known open DNS resolvers that can be used in DNS amplification attacks. Directly contacting the administrators of all the servers used in the attack is not a tractable problem
It sounds like the solution is to send out a huge amount of unsolicited email.
Running an open DNS resolver isn't itself always a problem, but it looks like people are enabling neither source address verification nor rate limiting.
One has to wonder if this is caused by negligence, or if it's more a case of "oopsie, we left this door open, oh well" - which would be a great way to set up nodes around the 'net specifically to allow these types of attacks to occur.
Not saying that is right or wrong - asking a genuine question.
A book written by a committee will be a painful read.
If you want to do something useful, create one of those single plastic sheet two page guides to the language. Boiling the language down to two pages of small type with a few diagrams is a useful exercise. More useful than another thousand page book of blithering.
So let me get this straight.
1. This is Slashdot, where we routinely see articles decrying expensive textbooks required for university courses 2. A professor and a group of students are actually DOING SOMETHING to address this problem by writing text book for C++ 3. The aim is to make this book freely available via the web, or as an easily affordable hardback 4. The contents of the book are basically open and may be revised at any point without expensive publishing costs 5. You have come here to day to complain that this initiative is a waste of time
No. Way too try-hard to be funny to anyone who isn't mumbling about their torrent speeds to their mother while she picks sticky socks up off the floor.
Your mom is doing a terrible job if the socks get to the point of being sticky - I'd sack her this instant!
Election at any cost, screw Australia. Reality and what's even good or necessary for this country to 'move forward' are irrelevant to this woman who's twice got into the role via a backdoor.
Absolutely! Because the alternative in our 2-party system - Mr. Tony Abbott, the budgie smuggler - is going to be a clear improvement for all Australians.
For some development problems it is far quicker to search sites like Stackoverflow for a question / answer / example relevant to your specific case than it is to read the official (often poor) documentation and figure out exactly how it is "supposed" to work.
Basically, someone else did the work - possibly found some "gotchas" - and shared the fruits of their labour. Remind me how is that a bad thing? Isn't this exactly what the World Wide Web was designed for?:-/
(I think) everyone is well aware of this. If not, they bloody well should be in 2013:)
So hardcore pirates will always find a way. It's the casual pirates that they're targeting, the people who would normally buy a CD/DVD/game/app if no other source is readily available, and it's this middle group that is a significant source of "lost sales".
Slashdot Mirror
Does this mean the alleged NSA taps on major internet links that monitor all traffic would have to be reported as breaches too if an EU ISP discovers (or knowingly installs) one?
If you RTFA you would find out:
There are a few exceptions though – companies will not be required to pass on the data in cases where there are "justified national security reasons", companies like Facebook and Google who fall under Data Protection Direction, companies that take steps such as encryption of data.
Perhaps it is because the vast vast majority of the opposition to genetic engineering is coming from those with no background in agricultural or plant science and thus due to their complete lack of context it seems reasonable to them.
The real problem is "close source food chain" vs. "open source food chain". That is why GM food - Monsanto style - is bad. Really bad. Unfortunately the anti-GM movement has taken a different path of protesting against the science, rather than this very basic fact.
A closed source food chain is a major problem for everyone, except those who hold the patents.
Peace,
Andy.
and I've tried to keep 555-1212 private for so long...
Jenny 8675309 says this is not a new problem!
But first, let me get some pop corn ... /sarcasm
Unlike the experiment, I predict a great deal of energy will be expended by lay people chiming in.
Like the experiment, I proclaim this energy to be perpetual while at the same time achieving nothing. ;-)
Glorified money laundering is exactly what Yahoo's investment in this app amounts to. It's the tech world equivalent of investing millions of dollars in concept art for the purposes of avoiding tax. Like concept art (Damien Hirst et al), everyone knows it's a crock but the art world keeps the pretence up because the gravy train is too good.
Peace,
Andy.
Just let it go. It's not worth the time or the hassle.
The data should be used to flag up pupils who may be struggling
IANAT and probably don't appreciate everything that being a teacher entails, but whatever happened to engaging with students and knowing who requires extra attention or some other method of engagement to get them motivated?
I'm all for technology, but some problems are human problems and won't be solved by adding new technology to the mix. If anything it will make some situations worse, as we become lazier (rely on the machines to do our job) and further removed from each other.
Just my 2 cents.
Peace,
Andy.
Read my replies to the other posters in this thread who made the same comment.
"Unwritten rule" really? They make cameras now that are so small they can be woven into a coat and you'd never know it's there.
I wasn't referring to targeted covert surveillance. I'm talking about data capture by innocent people wearing Google Glass who are not aware of their actions, with the data being stored in a central location that may be searched later for incriminating behaviour. But this idea seems lost on you, I guess it means you're never doing anything that would warrant attention from the police.
...or one person pretending to text on their phone and taking a picture. The scenario you describe is a people problem, not a technology problem.
This scenario would require targeted, convert behaviour which is always going to be possible.
With Google Glass the problem is more sinister because the glasses are always on and point in whatever random direction the wearer happens to point. Further, the data will most likely be logged with Google which may mean it can be searched by law enforcement agents (now or sometime in the future).
A random person using a video camera is much less likely to upload the data to a central "all seeing" company like Google.
The problem with this technology - if indeed it does feature "always on" data capture - is that it takes just one person in a crowd to ruin it for everyone else.
You are at an event with a large crowd. Some of the behaviour in this crowd may be illegal (concert goers smoking marijuana for example) or at least frowned up by the authorities (dissidents gathering to protest). There is an unwritten rule amongst the participants that no one will film or take photos due to the nature of this group behaviour.
At this point, it takes just one person wearing Google Glass to break the unwritten rule. Most of the participants will be oblivious to the presence of the glasses. Yes this could happen with a handheld camera or similar, but the camera is outwardly very obvious. Goggle Glass is designed to blend in with the wearer and the surroundings.
Hyperbole? Perhaps. Do you want to find out? I certainly don't.
Peace,
Andy.
Wait... Slashdot was great once?
Yes, once. Shortly after lunch, on the 27th of June 1996.
You'll be back, just like the rest of us: slaves to some long distant memory of a once great site ;-)
Talk to a musician or scientist: every "inspiration" is the end result of lots of precursor work
I never said anything about not requiring previous effort - someone who has never played an instrument or studied music is hardly going to be inspired to write a song, are they?
The main point is that disengaging the mind from the task for which inspiration is sought (be it a tricky development problem or writing a new song) will help, and that it's not necessarily a requirement to be away from all electronic devices. For example, you maybe using your smartphone or iPad or whatever to read a technical manual, when an apparently inconsequential piece of information helps everything fall in to place and you are then inspired to fix a previously difficult, unrelated problem.
If we're instead talking about people who only use smart phones and iPads and do so only for light entertainment, and are never bored enough to learn a new skill such as playing guitar, that's another story entirely and I agree it would be a problem - but I don't see that happening any more now than it did in the past. That is a motivational problem, rather than one of "boredom".
Peace,
Andy.
Is inspiration more or less likely to strike if your mind is occupied?
The creative people I speak to (musicians, mostly) say that going for a walk outside is the best source of inspiration, closely followed by listening to songs by other people and I tend to agree with this.
If cooped up indoors, disengaging the mind is helpful but it takes some practice. Meditation works really well, but it can also be done by playing a simple game on a handheld device or mindlessly scrolling through the Facebook timeline.
Peace,
Andy.
It's perfectly possible to be "bored" while using an iPhone or iPad or whatever smart device you prefer.
I think point missed by this type of research is assuming that everyone is actively engaged by the device when idly surfing Facebook or Slashdot. In this situation the user may simply be waiting for inspiration to strike (when that happens is unpredictable, otherwise we'd milk it for all it's worth).
Obviously this doesn't apply to everyone in every situation, but to suggest that having access to smart phones is killing creativity is a bit of a stretch.
Peace,
Andy.
There are over 25 million known open DNS resolvers that can be used in DNS amplification attacks. Directly contacting the administrators of all the servers used in the attack is not a tractable problem
It sounds like the solution is to send out a huge amount of unsolicited email.
Oh, wait ...
Running an open DNS resolver isn't itself always a problem, but it looks like people are enabling neither source address verification nor rate limiting.
One has to wonder if this is caused by negligence, or if it's more a case of "oopsie, we left this door open, oh well" - which would be a great way to set up nodes around the 'net specifically to allow these types of attacks to occur.
Not saying that is right or wrong - asking a genuine question.
Peace,
Andy.
I couldn't care less about that nonsense. I'm waiting for the day they use this system to hunt humans. Dissenters, etc...
When this system cannot find any more oil or gas ...
No.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge's_law_of_headlines
;-)
It's really well past its use by date.
A book written by a committee will be a painful read.
If you want to do something useful, create one of those single plastic sheet two page guides to the language. Boiling the language down to two pages of small type with a few diagrams is a useful exercise. More useful than another thousand page book of blithering.
So let me get this straight.
1. This is Slashdot, where we routinely see articles decrying expensive textbooks required for university courses
2. A professor and a group of students are actually DOING SOMETHING to address this problem by writing text book for C++
3. The aim is to make this book freely available via the web, or as an easily affordable hardback
4. The contents of the book are basically open and may be revised at any point without expensive publishing costs
5. You have come here to day to complain that this initiative is a waste of time
Have I got that right?
Peace,
Andy.
No. Way too try-hard to be funny to anyone who isn't mumbling about their torrent speeds to their mother while she picks sticky socks up off the floor.
Your mom is doing a terrible job if the socks get to the point of being sticky - I'd sack her this instant!
Election at any cost, screw Australia. Reality and what's even good or necessary for this country to 'move forward' are irrelevant to this woman who's twice got into the role via a backdoor.
Absolutely! Because the alternative in our 2-party system - Mr. Tony Abbott, the budgie smuggler - is going to be a clear improvement for all Australians.
[/sarcasm]
For some development problems it is far quicker to search sites like Stackoverflow for a question / answer / example relevant to your specific case than it is to read the official (often poor) documentation and figure out exactly how it is "supposed" to work.
Basically, someone else did the work - possibly found some "gotchas" - and shared the fruits of their labour. Remind me how is that a bad thing? Isn't this exactly what the World Wide Web was designed for? :-/
Peace,
Andy.
This game of blocking the sites cannot be won.
(I think) everyone is well aware of this. If not, they bloody well should be in 2013 :)
So hardcore pirates will always find a way. It's the casual pirates that they're targeting, the people who would normally buy a CD/DVD/game/app if no other source is readily available, and it's this middle group that is a significant source of "lost sales".
Peace,
Andy.