I don't think that's true at all. The two are often congruent but neither is essential to the existence of the other. Maybe you just need a basic respect for people as human beings--something that I do think Coulter lacks for "other types" of people--but there's no need to condone someone's choices in life in order to love them.
I think quite often we love people in spite of their choices, not because we somehow appreciate them.
Wrong tack to take. Any operation like this is going to be pretty complex, right? Lots of things can go wrong from an operational perspective and result in mission failure.
So given the choice between two options:
1. Hide the bomb in plain sight by manipulating what you think are a bunch of random strangers' perceptions, etc.; or 2. Hide it behind a bush, where nobody can see it,
Which one do you think you would pick? The first has a huge risk of detection compared to the second.
The first principle of any operation: K-I-S-S! All these guys saying stuff like "Oh! Now I know how to plant a bomb where you are!" are just wanking--in reality, the odds that they could fool EVERYONE into ignoring their device are vanishingly small, and the very idea is based on the assumption that he is smarter than a lab full of biologists:)
The Fall of the Roman Empire and the subsequent dark ages had a lot more to do with secular forces than with what you call "the old religion," (the old NEW religion?)and it was the monks who preserved the received learning to hand off to the thinkers of the Enlightenment.
And...corrupt society? The Romans were no better or worse than any other society on earth before or since; it's not a great metric for figuring out why they "fell."
Awful arguments on that page--his conclusion is contained within his premise.
And the conclusions themselves are garbage:
You have an ISP. You have an IP address. You have an email address. All three of those elements can quite simply reveal the when and the what of who you are -- so why not just confess from the start who you are and why you are here and there and the everywhere?
Well, you got me. I got an ISP. My IP...? Well, there are several layers of TOR between me and you. E-mail? Come on, aren't we talking about fake names right now? Does he really think my name is "Biggus Dickus?"
This guy might want to stick to anonymity or at least use a nom de plume.
ICANN, in fact, can write policy to which member nations agree that would cause you to lose all of your domains unless you arrange some method by which you can be contacted.
Say your domain is found to be hosting the malware-du-jour. Tons of people are complaining, but you don't know about it, because you put fake info into your registration. The first you find out about it is when your ISP pulls the plug. Does this sound like a good idea to you?
I think you're generally right. AV needs to evolve, and fast, to continue providing value to customers. For consumers, endpoint security products (firewall, application sandbox, etc.) seem far more important today.
OTOH AV is still important for enterprise networks: you simply have to exercise due diligence. Or you can try explaining to the shareholders why it was possible for some doofus intern to bring Welchia in on a diskette and cripple operations for a couple of days.
Youporn did not bother with this and so had an unfair advantage.
Interesting to note that this was more about economic competition than "Save the Children!"
I've been living and working in Germany for about a month now and this economy doesn't really like "competition" or anything like that. Anyone selling you anything (car, TV, apartment) first asks you how much you are willing to spend; you have to pay all kinds of outrageous extra fees for really no service (it's not uncommon for the realtor/property manager who finds you a place to demand ~3000 euro for their 1 day of work); and businesses collude to keep prices up (nobody is "allowed" to sell for lower prices).
So it's not suprising to me that that this was an issue of halting "competition" rather than protecting young minds.
Because back in high school you and I stood up for ourselves, then went on to make ridiculous amounts of money. Now the football player/cheerleader couple's spawn would be proud to be "geeky like us."
I live on a foreign economy and my 120k USD is not so great in Europe. Back home it was fine. I think salaries calculated in the US, on the US economy, take imports into consideration.
With all the layers of abstraction, I don't think you can really say you're interacting with foreign economies just because your iPod was build in China. Now, if you BUY it in China, that's different.
You're totally right that people don't think out the long-term, far-reaching implications of their actions.
For example, the Russian Business Network is getting money from somewhere. Probably their #1 tool for doing so are botnets comprised of home users. RBN makes a lot of money extorting companies which eventually pass the (lack of) savings on to the consumer.
So, no, you don't need to hire a security consultant, but it would help to listen to them now and again.
When AvP came out (or maybe it was AvP 2) in addition to assorted guns you could use a welder. So, initially I thought how neat it would be, if you're stuck in some industrial setting, how you could seal off or open areas and that would affect how the aliens can pursue you, how you can escape or approach different objectives.
Instead, it was another shooter on rails, with enemies that "spawn," and where the extra tool was only used at specific points. So if you sealed a door, the plot "told" you that you had staved them off, and then later the plot "tells" you that they eventually got through your barricade. Why can't it "really" happen that way?
There's a scene in Bioshock where you're holed up in an office defending it against several waves of attackers. At one point you are ordered to "seal the doors" by flipping a switch, in order to "slow down" the bad guys. Well, their attack doesn't even start until you flip the switch, and then they cut open the doors and come through. An interesting scripted sequence to watch, but that's about all it is. The entire game is like that, unfortunately:\
Think about it. You're not just running, ducking and shooting. I mean, that's all you're actually DOING, but what you're "doing" in the game is...frog blasting the vent core or transporting Darth Vader's balls to Tatooine in order to pick up the level 12 lightsaber so you can finally defeat the rancor and level up.
They ARE a race to the bottom because they are entirely deterministic. You go from set piece to ambush to inevitable plot point (some of which don't even matter to the flow of the game--see Doom3), all on rails. But there's a layer of separation between "plot" and "action" which hasn't been bridged yet IMO.
So with Pong (or, say, simply playing against bots) the action and the plot are the same thing (or, there really is no plot). Those are the fun games to me. Bioshock was enjoyable and pretty but not really "fun"...the plot was neat, but what you're supposedly doing all these complex tasks which boil down to "run, shoot, zap, hide, shoot, flip switch."
"Hey, my bag came out way after all those people, and I paid the fee." "Sir, sometimes our system fails to deliver your bag on time..." "Well, give me my fee back. You didn't give me the service I paid for." "Our policy is not to return any monies..."
I always wondered about the "Our policy is..." nonsense. "Our policy allows us to take your money and not give you anything in return; we know this because we wrote the policy." At some point it has to become absolute bullshit.
It must be nice to simply dismiss all of your critics as crazy Luddites.
Personally, I think any position which does not take into account the fact that we are IN and OF the biosphere, and not outside of it, is intellectually and morally bankrupt.
There could be a way to test the new theory. The Large Hadron Collider being constructed at CERN in Geneva might just be capable of making microscopic black holes - or, if Vachaspati is right, black stars.
Goody. This should end well.
Unlike the large, long-lived black holes in space, these microscopic objects would evaporate fast. The spread of energies in their radiation might reveal whether or not an event horizon forms.
What exactly does "evaporate" mean when referring to black holes (stars)?
So, as the above example leads us to suspect, modern human societies are just not as complex as our egos would lead us to believe.
I do not think that word means what you think it means.
One person probably operates under severe constraints. But it does not follow that the behavior of society, then, is merely the aggregate of the observed behaviors, or that you can model it as a group of individuals. This is also why modeling the behavior of an ant colony is not that same as modeling one ant one hundred times: there's emergent behavior that "you don't see until you see." That is, interaction effects don't reveal themselves until you have some interaction to observe.
Also to consider is that we use different concepts and language to describe what is happening at different levels of the complexity hierarchy; how we experience and talk about individual experiences is different from how we experience and talk about group experiences, and it is not always useful to describe group phenomena as an aggregate of individuals. I explain this to my students as follows: on some level it's useful to discuss a platoon of soldiers as 30 individuals. But on another level that platoon is atomic, and it becomes less useful--exactly as it becomes irrelevant to discuss the meaning of "half a rifleman" (except when discussing a particularly gory shoot-'em-up movie).
It rather sounds like you're thinking in terms of thermodynamics (stability) rather than information theory. I always got the impression that complexity theory was over Asimov's head--it's why the Foundation series is so simple (but a good read nonetheless).
So, you get taxed when you are given money; Then you are taxed twice when you buy something--once for the privilege of buying something, and again for the privilege of paying for it.
Gosh, I don't know why anyone would have a problem with a system like that:)
Now everyone can "experience" the cucumber. I'm sure some people will use this manufactured sensory input to prove or disprove the existence of the cucumber...so maybe the cucumber is now a fact, because I drew something you recognize as a "cucumber." Then again, now that it's been drawn (and can be reproduced), who needs cucumbers anymore?
Up until recently I was getting AV intercepts constantly, because where I was working we weren't allowed to configure or patch boxes. There was always a message about the AV product zapping a downloader before it was written to disk, or somesuch. You're right in that knowledge keeps you safe better than software, but sometimes your knowledge isn't going to help:)
Slashdot Mirror
Love includes respect.
I don't think that's true at all.
The two are often congruent but neither is essential to the existence of the other. Maybe you just need a basic respect for people as human beings--something that I do think Coulter lacks for "other types" of people--but there's no need to condone someone's choices in life in order to love them.
I think quite often we love people in spite of their choices, not because we somehow appreciate them.
Wrong tack to take.
:)
Any operation like this is going to be pretty complex, right? Lots of things can go wrong from an operational perspective and result in mission failure.
So given the choice between two options:
1. Hide the bomb in plain sight by manipulating what you think are a bunch of random strangers' perceptions, etc.; or
2. Hide it behind a bush, where nobody can see it,
Which one do you think you would pick? The first has a huge risk of detection compared to the second.
The first principle of any operation: K-I-S-S! All these guys saying stuff like "Oh! Now I know how to plant a bomb where you are!" are just wanking--in reality, the odds that they could fool EVERYONE into ignoring their device are vanishingly small, and the very idea is based on the assumption that he is smarter than a lab full of biologists
The Fall of the Roman Empire and the subsequent dark ages had a lot more to do with secular forces than with what you call "the old religion," (the old NEW religion?)and it was the monks who preserved the received learning to hand off to the thinkers of the Enlightenment.
And...corrupt society? The Romans were no better or worse than any other society on earth before or since; it's not a great metric for figuring out why they "fell."
And the conclusions themselves are garbage:Well, you got me. I got an ISP. My IP...? Well, there are several layers of TOR between me and you. E-mail? Come on, aren't we talking about fake names right now? Does he really think my name is "Biggus Dickus?"
This guy might want to stick to anonymity or at least use a nom de plume.
ICANN, in fact, can write policy to which member nations agree that would cause you to lose all of your domains unless you arrange some method by which you can be contacted.
Say your domain is found to be hosting the malware-du-jour. Tons of people are complaining, but you don't know about it, because you put fake info into your registration. The first you find out about it is when your ISP pulls the plug. Does this sound like a good idea to you?
Having consulted for an antivirus vendor...
I think you're generally right. AV needs to evolve, and fast, to continue providing value to customers. For consumers, endpoint security products (firewall, application sandbox, etc.) seem far more important today.
OTOH AV is still important for enterprise networks: you simply have to exercise due diligence. Or you can try explaining to the shareholders why it was possible for some doofus intern to bring Welchia in on a diskette and cripple operations for a couple of days.
Nah. That post is 10% personal observations and 90% anecdotes from longterm expats.
Eventually I'll get used to the absolute lack of motivation around here, and then I won't be so frustrated.
Youporn did not bother with this and so had an unfair advantage.
Interesting to note that this was more about economic competition than "Save the Children!"
I've been living and working in Germany for about a month now and this economy doesn't really like "competition" or anything like that. Anyone selling you anything (car, TV, apartment) first asks you how much you are willing to spend; you have to pay all kinds of outrageous extra fees for really no service (it's not uncommon for the realtor/property manager who finds you a place to demand ~3000 euro for their 1 day of work); and businesses collude to keep prices up (nobody is "allowed" to sell for lower prices).
So it's not suprising to me that that this was an issue of halting "competition" rather than protecting young minds.
Probably not, but I wouldn't worry so much. It'll increase demand for homegrown goods eventually.
:)
Most of us techs could stand to lose a little secretary butt
Because back in high school you and I stood up for ourselves, then went on to make ridiculous amounts of money. Now the football player/cheerleader couple's spawn would be proud to be "geeky like us."
We're victims of our own success. Cue Dershowitz!
Er, not so much.
I live on a foreign economy and my 120k USD is not so great in Europe. Back home it was fine. I think salaries calculated in the US, on the US economy, take imports into consideration.
With all the layers of abstraction, I don't think you can really say you're interacting with foreign economies just because your iPod was build in China. Now, if you BUY it in China, that's different.
Honestly I don't think consumer satisfaction is a big issue with Microsoft; the vast majority of their clients are locked in anyway.
You're totally right that people don't think out the long-term, far-reaching implications of their actions.
For example, the Russian Business Network is getting money from somewhere. Probably their #1 tool for doing so are botnets comprised of home users. RBN makes a lot of money extorting companies which eventually pass the (lack of) savings on to the consumer.
So, no, you don't need to hire a security consultant, but it would help to listen to them now and again.
Yeah, I pretty much agree.
:\
When AvP came out (or maybe it was AvP 2) in addition to assorted guns you could use a welder. So, initially I thought how neat it would be, if you're stuck in some industrial setting, how you could seal off or open areas and that would affect how the aliens can pursue you, how you can escape or approach different objectives.
Instead, it was another shooter on rails, with enemies that "spawn," and where the extra tool was only used at specific points. So if you sealed a door, the plot "told" you that you had staved them off, and then later the plot "tells" you that they eventually got through your barricade. Why can't it "really" happen that way?
There's a scene in Bioshock where you're holed up in an office defending it against several waves of attackers. At one point you are ordered to "seal the doors" by flipping a switch, in order to "slow down" the bad guys. Well, their attack doesn't even start until you flip the switch, and then they cut open the doors and come through. An interesting scripted sequence to watch, but that's about all it is. The entire game is like that, unfortunately
Think about it. You're not just running, ducking and shooting. I mean, that's all you're actually DOING, but what you're "doing" in the game is...frog blasting the vent core or transporting Darth Vader's balls to Tatooine in order to pick up the level 12 lightsaber so you can finally defeat the rancor and level up.
They ARE a race to the bottom because they are entirely deterministic. You go from set piece to ambush to inevitable plot point (some of which don't even matter to the flow of the game--see Doom3), all on rails. But there's a layer of separation between "plot" and "action" which hasn't been bridged yet IMO.
So with Pong (or, say, simply playing against bots) the action and the plot are the same thing (or, there really is no plot). Those are the fun games to me. Bioshock was enjoyable and pretty but not really "fun"...the plot was neat, but what you're supposedly doing all these complex tasks which boil down to "run, shoot, zap, hide, shoot, flip switch."
Yep.
"Hey, my bag came out way after all those people, and I paid the fee."
"Sir, sometimes our system fails to deliver your bag on time..."
"Well, give me my fee back. You didn't give me the service I paid for."
"Our policy is not to return any monies..."
I always wondered about the "Our policy is..." nonsense. "Our policy allows us to take your money and not give you anything in return; we know this because we wrote the policy." At some point it has to become absolute bullshit.
Uh, yeah. That Bruce Schneier fellow is a total n00b.
It must be nice to simply dismiss all of your critics as crazy Luddites.
Personally, I think any position which does not take into account the fact that we are IN and OF the biosphere, and not outside of it, is intellectually and morally bankrupt.
Nah.
:)
HD Broadcast + MythTV. THAT is the best way to go
From TFA:
There could be a way to test the new theory. The Large Hadron Collider being constructed at CERN in Geneva might just be capable of making microscopic black holes - or, if Vachaspati is right, black stars.
Goody. This should end well.
Unlike the large, long-lived black holes in space, these microscopic objects would evaporate fast. The spread of energies in their radiation might reveal whether or not an event horizon forms.
What exactly does "evaporate" mean when referring to black holes (stars)?
So, as the above example leads us to suspect, modern human societies are just not as complex as our egos would lead us to believe.
I do not think that word means what you think it means.
One person probably operates under severe constraints. But it does not follow that the behavior of society, then, is merely the aggregate of the observed behaviors, or that you can model it as a group of individuals. This is also why modeling the behavior of an ant colony is not that same as modeling one ant one hundred times: there's emergent behavior that "you don't see until you see." That is, interaction effects don't reveal themselves until you have some interaction to observe.
Also to consider is that we use different concepts and language to describe what is happening at different levels of the complexity hierarchy; how we experience and talk about individual experiences is different from how we experience and talk about group experiences, and it is not always useful to describe group phenomena as an aggregate of individuals. I explain this to my students as follows: on some level it's useful to discuss a platoon of soldiers as 30 individuals. But on another level that platoon is atomic, and it becomes less useful--exactly as it becomes irrelevant to discuss the meaning of "half a rifleman" (except when discussing a particularly gory shoot-'em-up movie).
It rather sounds like you're thinking in terms of thermodynamics (stability) rather than information theory. I always got the impression that complexity theory was over Asimov's head--it's why the Foundation series is so simple (but a good read nonetheless).
So, you get taxed when you are given money;
:)
Then you are taxed twice when you buy something--once for the privilege of buying something, and again for the privilege of paying for it.
Gosh, I don't know why anyone would have a problem with a system like that
...who is this abomination of a movie designed to appeal to? What demographic wants to see this? Who wants to see Kirk played by anyone but Shatner?
People other than you, obviously. So fortunate that you are not forced to watch.
But you're going to anyway, aren't you?
I can show you a drawing of a cucumber.
Now everyone can "experience" the cucumber. I'm sure some people will use this manufactured sensory input to prove or disprove the existence of the cucumber...so maybe the cucumber is now a fact, because I drew something you recognize as a "cucumber." Then again, now that it's been drawn (and can be reproduced), who needs cucumbers anymore?
Up until recently I was getting AV intercepts constantly, because where I was working we weren't allowed to configure or patch boxes. There was always a message about the AV product zapping a downloader before it was written to disk, or somesuch. You're right in that knowledge keeps you safe better than software, but sometimes your knowledge isn't going to help :)