1) Never before has there been so many things one could hack and in so many different ways. There is more online presence today than ever, thus more opportunity. 2) Many of those online, do not take security seriously, just look are large recent examples. This culture will change eventually, however for now it's the wild west.
Take those two, add the fact that there are more people online with more computer knowlege than ever before (perhaps not as a ratio of the whole, but in shear numbers yes), and all one has to do is pick off the low hanging fruit. Targeted hacking might be tough still if they actually have any security, however Citibank and Sony has shown that even large institutions show a blatant disregard for basic security. Even with great security, it can always be circumvented by insiders either intentionally for gain, or unintentionally through stupidity (bad practices or human engineering).
Yes if it is handled badly it will be a farce. Anyone can make something with Notepad, let alone any sort of programming language environment.
However I do recall back in my university days seeing things like VML (Virus Mutation Labs or something like that), which were basically just programs that would create virus based on what the user wished to do. Anyone with a mediocre knowlege could use it. This sort of thing is where script kiddies come from. Which is exactly the thing that commercial grade security and antivirus can defeat pretty easily (Norton and the rest).
Most other "hacker" tools such as "sniffers", and other network inspection tools have legitimate uses also and should not be targeted. To be honest, I don't anything they do will be of much deterrence to an actual hacker, as their knowlege is actually their weapon, not some tool or suite. Realistically many of the hackers probably work within a related field such as security or networking and as such would have ample tools and knowlege to do as they please.
This would likely help reduce the nuisance script kiddies, but really they are not the problem that is trying to be addressed, so then why even bother.
You could say the same thing, or make a more powerful argument for Religion over Reason.
What single purpose has pitted groups of people to dominate, absorb, convert, other groups in the entire world. Nations perhaps. One could simply look at "government" or nations as the biological extension of the individual will to dominate its neighbors and protect like advantages.
Besides, different languages are better at different things. I bet Assembly is a heck of a lot faster than C++, but I wouldn't want to try coding many of the applications that use C++ into Assembly.
Banks make all their money through debt now anyway, why should they give a flying fsck about personal banking security? Heck they should have less security, so that "hackers" (I use that word liberally) can take out fake loans and money in other people's name, and than city bank can sell those debts to another back for big profits. What could possibly go wrong?
If only we had some method of regulating temperature on earth... to use a farming analogy, when winter comes, have some sort of greenhouse like ability...
Your argument is flawed. Killing yourself isn't illegal, or even if it is, there isn't a whole lot that they can do about it...
Assisting someone else is. So its the doctor that takes the flack not the person trying to die. I don't think there is anywhere the enshrined right to help kill someone else.
Well we also eat animals, and kill them in a host of different unpleasant ways.
While I won't disagree that religion has a role, I think it could more accurately say that MORALITY has a much larger role, and that religion as a large influence on that.
I think the big think is the cognitive ability and emotional attachment. Consider the following cases:
A) A Human Being. B) A cute puppy dog C) A fish.
I am pretty sure the fish is fucked. Though in some cultures, so would the dog. So much of this is regional and linked to the culture and morality that it imposes.
While I agree with you about primary businesses, most software isn't developed for the software industry. For example, where I work might not have the primary business of programming, however they still do it in house and to a larger extent outsource it. The outsource WILL have their primary business as programming, however they will be subject to the unreasonable demands of the corporation. Which usually means features fall off the table at the sake of cost, etc... So by extension, being at the behest of their employers those shops still have the same problems and pressures dealing with the same managers.
The problem is the inability of consumers or managers to understand the 3 part rule. Speed, Quality, Cost, pick two.
I think the best analogy for this is furniture.
Mennonites make great furniture. It takes a long time, and is very expensive. It is a craft, and they are craftsmen.
IKEA makes some pretty shitty furniture but is good enough for many applications. It is cheap, and fast.
What most consumers and managers want, is the quality and hand craftsmanship of the Mennonites, at the speed and cost of IKEA.
Problem is, that is impossible for the most part, particularly when you start looking at very large scale applications. So when managers hire people they want the IKEA drones, and expect them to produce Mennonite quality very quickly. Bottom line is short cuts are taken, managers "risk manage", and in the end you get buggy code that is not clean at all. Particularly when you have a work force that is treated like replaceable parts, in many cases you are dealing with someone else's mess, why should you try and code cleaner?
Anyway, none of this is new, and I am sure on small applications were individuals have more control, cleaner code is possible, however in the corporate world, given the outlook by most, I can see it being problematic.
Slashdot Mirror
Even if you used "Elseif" I would still think you strange. Seriously was the "se" just too many letters to type out?
Waiting for confirmation please...
You mean like some sort of "subscription" for "protection"...
Sounds a lot like Norton to me.
What an awesome quote!
I have 60GB cap in cable. DSL alternative is like 25GB... Horrible.
LOL
The only problem is that companies want to charge 1-3$ a GB... I get 60GB and after that I pay 1.5$ a GB...
Me: I need to do this in order to do my job. ...
Them: Sorry we can't let you do that.
Me: Give me an alternative method to do that then.
Them:
The other is not doing anything by cost/time.
Manager: I wish to create this application.
Them: It will cost 5 million dollars and take 5 years to complete.
Manager: Forget about it.
Though this is often times complicated by some just saying they can do the same thing for 50,000 and 6 months.
In my experience Managers rarely like to hear this word "NO", nor things like "risk", "cost", "time". They just want it done and now!
Astronaut 1: "And you thought drinking your own recycled pee was bad... Ha!"
1) Never before has there been so many things one could hack and in so many different ways. There is more online presence today than ever, thus more opportunity.
2) Many of those online, do not take security seriously, just look are large recent examples. This culture will change eventually, however for now it's the wild west.
Take those two, add the fact that there are more people online with more computer knowlege than ever before (perhaps not as a ratio of the whole, but in shear numbers yes), and all one has to do is pick off the low hanging fruit. Targeted hacking might be tough still if they actually have any security, however Citibank and Sony has shown that even large institutions show a blatant disregard for basic security. Even with great security, it can always be circumvented by insiders either intentionally for gain, or unintentionally through stupidity (bad practices or human engineering).
Yes if it is handled badly it will be a farce. Anyone can make something with Notepad, let alone any sort of programming language environment.
However I do recall back in my university days seeing things like VML (Virus Mutation Labs or something like that), which were basically just programs that would create virus based on what the user wished to do. Anyone with a mediocre knowlege could use it. This sort of thing is where script kiddies come from. Which is exactly the thing that commercial grade security and antivirus can defeat pretty easily (Norton and the rest).
Most other "hacker" tools such as "sniffers", and other network inspection tools have legitimate uses also and should not be targeted. To be honest, I don't anything they do will be of much deterrence to an actual hacker, as their knowlege is actually their weapon, not some tool or suite. Realistically many of the hackers probably work within a related field such as security or networking and as such would have ample tools and knowlege to do as they please.
This would likely help reduce the nuisance script kiddies, but really they are not the problem that is trying to be addressed, so then why even bother.
You could say the same thing, or make a more powerful argument for Religion over Reason.
What single purpose has pitted groups of people to dominate, absorb, convert, other groups in the entire world. Nations perhaps. One could simply look at "government" or nations as the biological extension of the individual will to dominate its neighbors and protect like advantages.
XI) Thou shalt not cripple games with DRM
XII) Thou shalt allow for co-op mode in multiplayer
US have a unique advantage here they could simply expand upon.
US Corp of Engineers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Army_Corps_of_Engineers
Simply boost incentives and expand the service. Bam, more enrollment in schools. In 5-6 years problem solved.
Besides, different languages are better at different things. I bet Assembly is a heck of a lot faster than C++, but I wouldn't want to try coding many of the applications that use C++ into Assembly.
Banks make all their money through debt now anyway, why should they give a flying fsck about personal banking security? Heck they should have less security, so that "hackers" (I use that word liberally) can take out fake loans and money in other people's name, and than city bank can sell those debts to another back for big profits. What could possibly go wrong?
Ah ya beat me to it.
If only we had some method of regulating temperature on earth... to use a farming analogy, when winter comes, have some sort of greenhouse like ability...
Your argument is flawed. Killing yourself isn't illegal, or even if it is, there isn't a whole lot that they can do about it...
Assisting someone else is. So its the doctor that takes the flack not the person trying to die. I don't think there is anywhere the enshrined right to help kill someone else.
Well we also eat animals, and kill them in a host of different unpleasant ways.
While I won't disagree that religion has a role, I think it could more accurately say that MORALITY has a much larger role, and that religion as a large influence on that.
I think the big think is the cognitive ability and emotional attachment. Consider the following cases:
A) A Human Being.
B) A cute puppy dog
C) A fish.
I am pretty sure the fish is fucked. Though in some cultures, so would the dog. So much of this is regional and linked to the culture and morality that it imposes.
As to mining dangers, I am not sure you are aware of where Uranium comes from? Not unicorns or faeries I assure you.
Touche. But you get the idea.
While I agree with you about primary businesses, most software isn't developed for the software industry. For example, where I work might not have the primary business of programming, however they still do it in house and to a larger extent outsource it. The outsource WILL have their primary business as programming, however they will be subject to the unreasonable demands of the corporation. Which usually means features fall off the table at the sake of cost, etc... So by extension, being at the behest of their employers those shops still have the same problems and pressures dealing with the same managers.
LOL too true!
Usually that one is "Cost" in my experience.
The problem is the inability of consumers or managers to understand the 3 part rule. Speed, Quality, Cost, pick two.
I think the best analogy for this is furniture.
Mennonites make great furniture. It takes a long time, and is very expensive. It is a craft, and they are craftsmen.
IKEA makes some pretty shitty furniture but is good enough for many applications. It is cheap, and fast.
What most consumers and managers want, is the quality and hand craftsmanship of the Mennonites, at the speed and cost of IKEA.
Problem is, that is impossible for the most part, particularly when you start looking at very large scale applications. So when managers hire people they want the IKEA drones, and expect them to produce Mennonite quality very quickly. Bottom line is short cuts are taken, managers "risk manage", and in the end you get buggy code that is not clean at all. Particularly when you have a work force that is treated like replaceable parts, in many cases you are dealing with someone else's mess, why should you try and code cleaner?
Anyway, none of this is new, and I am sure on small applications were individuals have more control, cleaner code is possible, however in the corporate world, given the outlook by most, I can see it being problematic.
Is that the IT-Powered Smart Grid is ACTUALLY powered by out of work IT professionals. A large hamster wheel has been constructed towards this end.