You say the completely opposite of my post, but you provide no arguments why your position is correct and mine is wrong.
You did not deal with the most important point:
Every system has some level of connection to the Internet today.
This is simply unavoidable. It might be air gapped, but it will still have an indirect connection in the form of USB sticks or other media transfers. And since that is the case, the old way of working is no longer an option.
Why would you use a fairly lousy symmetric encryption algorithm when AES is freely available? The rest of your post works just as well with AES as it does with Enigma, and AES not have Enigmas flaws.
That is one thing I don't really get about the US grid. Why is the ground fault interrupt protection in the device? It seems more rational to implement them for the entire house at once.
Attacks on substations and power lines mean that you actually have to be physically nearby. Despite Putin's efforts, it is also easier to identify men in green uniforms with tools to do such acts than it is to say for sure that e.g. Israel made Stuxnet.
Everything just scales better when you automate it.
Designing control systems with the view that they are disconnected from the Internet leads the developers to become lazy.
Every system has some level of connection to the Internet today. If nothing else, the software needs updating, and those updates will almost certainly be fetched over the Internet.
Control system developers need to deal with this reality. That means getting patches installed immediately after they become available -- tricky, because today most serious SCADA installations rely on in-house testing for days or weeks before deploying to production. It also means designing protocols to be safe when used over hostile infrastructure, and having authentication that does not just rely on IP addresses or supposedly-secure networks.
The IBM vs. Compaq case about BIOS would almost certainly have gone the other way today if it had not by itself set a precedent.
At the time, copyright was a more limited concept, and a work had to show artistic merit to be protected. It was decided that the mere functionality of a program did not have artistic merit, only the particular expression, and Compaq only copied the functionality without copying the particular expression. Today the same applies in theory, but the standards for what is required for sufficient artistic merit to be worthy of copyright protection have slipped to the point where pretty much anything goes.
The outcome of Oracle vs. Google is going to be extremely interesting and potentially very damaging to the software industry.
Wasp is a 1957 science fiction novel by English author Eric Frank Russell. Terry Pratchett (author of the Discworld series of fantasy books) stated that he "can't imagine a funnier terrorists' handbook." Wasp is generally considered Russell's best novel.
i mean, honestly, there was a time when all that CO2 was in the air...
No, there was not. Not at the same time, anyway. The carbon was bound in minerals, inaccessible to the biosphere.
If we wait long enough, that will happen again. Volcanic activity brings limestone into contact with water or air, and CO2 is bound until the level is lower. Alas, "long enough" means at least millennia.
If it is so easy to find billions of high quality correlations, surely someone can come up with an example?
Misunderstanding of how often seeming "high quality" correlations can occur is the fundamental reason for so many of those metastudies recently that say, "Gee, so we tried to replicate 100 of the top studies in field X, and most of them failed to replicate."
No. The primary reason for those problems is human error. Misuse of statistics, experimental problems, hand-picking of data, that kind of thing.
That site reinforces my point. Its examples of correlations suffer from way too few data points, and even then most of the correlations have a really lousy r-value.
I have never seen a high quality spurious correlation without fraud or misuse of statistics being involved. The lectures you can find on correlation vs. causation use horrible ones that wouldn't survive 5 minutes of scrutiny.
If correlation does not equal causation, why can't someone find a good counter-example?
1) There's no problem 2) There might be a problem, but some say it isn't a problem, so let's wait and see 3) There's a problem, but other things are more important 4) There's a problem, but it's way too expensive to fix 5) There's a problem, but it's too late to fix
I think you underestimate people. Anyway, I have no influence on the argument. If the reality is that something bad will happen in 50-100 years, then that is what we have to tell people. What else could we do, lie to them?
Not that I think the problems are 50 years away. Rainwater flooding was practically unknown in Denmark 15 years ago, now it happens every year.
It isn't about theory and science, it is about the reality of people's daily lives. You simply cannot ask people to turn their lives upside down because of this. They won't do it. You'll have a revolt on your hands.
There are hundreds of millions of lives on the line. People will have their lives turned upside down either way. They may not choose the smaller upheaval now to avoid the larger upheaval later, but that does not mean we should stop trying to convince them.
Telling them not to worry, the Titanic is unsinkable is a disservice.
You don't contribute to charity while you are carrying a balance on your credit cards...
Really? If you live your life in such a way that you waste your money, you solve the problem not by reigning in your own excesses, but by taking from the poorest?
The vast majority of high quality correlations are also causations. Sometimes a common cause for both can confuse matters, but in the vast majority of cases you can trust a correlation to be a causation. This is not true if the correlation was either falsified or just not there in the first place, obviously. The causation can also go in the opposite direction of what you expect, but it seems unlikely that falling crime leads to the banning of leaded petrol.
The correlation between phasing out leaded petrol and falling crime holds in many countries which banned lead at different times. It is highly unlikely that some other cause happened at the right time in all the countries.
The causality itself is also quite uncontroversial: It is known that exposure to lead means lower average IQ, and lower average IQ means more violence.
If water were such a great solvent for organic compounds, then I'd be very afraid to drink any...
Selection bias. Water is an almost universal solvent. Everything we see is stuff that is left behind after water dissolves the rest, so to us, water does not seem very potent.
"They who can give up essential Liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty not safety."
Benjamin Franklin is commenting on those who will give up the liberty to tax a rich family just because that rich family donates weapons to the ongoing war.
It is interesting that Benjamin Franklin considered government taxation not just a liberty, but an essential one.
The problem with using a laser weapon to heat up someone else is that you are likely to need much more cooling at the weapon end than at the target end. Getting 50%+ efficiency out of a laser while dumping 100% of the laser energy into the target is challenging.
"This will hurt me more than it will hurt you" will finally be true...
Slashdot Mirror
You say the completely opposite of my post, but you provide no arguments why your position is correct and mine is wrong.
You did not deal with the most important point:
Every system has some level of connection to the Internet today.
This is simply unavoidable. It might be air gapped, but it will still have an indirect connection in the form of USB sticks or other media transfers. And since that is the case, the old way of working is no longer an option.
Why would you use a fairly lousy symmetric encryption algorithm when AES is freely available? The rest of your post works just as well with AES as it does with Enigma, and AES not have Enigmas flaws.
That is one thing I don't really get about the US grid. Why is the ground fault interrupt protection in the device? It seems more rational to implement them for the entire house at once.
The common wisdom is twice a year.
The common wisdom of a site recommending homeopathy. Good luck with that.
It is, however, extremely useful. Having a remote console and the ability to reset the computer over the network is great.
Attacks on substations and power lines mean that you actually have to be physically nearby. Despite Putin's efforts, it is also easier to identify men in green uniforms with tools to do such acts than it is to say for sure that e.g. Israel made Stuxnet.
Everything just scales better when you automate it.
Designing control systems with the view that they are disconnected from the Internet leads the developers to become lazy.
Every system has some level of connection to the Internet today. If nothing else, the software needs updating, and those updates will almost certainly be fetched over the Internet.
Control system developers need to deal with this reality. That means getting patches installed immediately after they become available -- tricky, because today most serious SCADA installations rely on in-house testing for days or weeks before deploying to production. It also means designing protocols to be safe when used over hostile infrastructure, and having authentication that does not just rely on IP addresses or supposedly-secure networks.
We are very far from this today.
The IBM vs. Compaq case about BIOS would almost certainly have gone the other way today if it had not by itself set a precedent.
At the time, copyright was a more limited concept, and a work had to show artistic merit to be protected. It was decided that the mere functionality of a program did not have artistic merit, only the particular expression, and Compaq only copied the functionality without copying the particular expression. Today the same applies in theory, but the standards for what is required for sufficient artistic merit to be worthy of copyright protection have slipped to the point where pretty much anything goes.
The outcome of Oracle vs. Google is going to be extremely interesting and potentially very damaging to the software industry.
This post is shamelessly stolen from sehlat, http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...
It was posted under the article "Credible" Bomb Threat Closes, Evacuates All Los Angeles Public Schools, but it is at least equally relevant for this article.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Wasp is a 1957 science fiction novel by English author Eric Frank Russell. Terry Pratchett (author of the Discworld series of fantasy books) stated that he "can't imagine a funnier terrorists' handbook." Wasp is generally considered Russell's best novel.
The Martian infiltrators do it to ensure that Mars invasion plans never succeed.
Only spacecraft/landers which are guaranteed not to spot anything suspicious are allowed to reach Mars.
i mean, honestly, there was a time when all that CO2 was in the air...
No, there was not. Not at the same time, anyway. The carbon was bound in minerals, inaccessible to the biosphere.
If we wait long enough, that will happen again. Volcanic activity brings limestone into contact with water or air, and CO2 is bound until the level is lower. Alas, "long enough" means at least millennia.
If it is so easy to find billions of high quality correlations, surely someone can come up with an example?
Misunderstanding of how often seeming "high quality" correlations can occur is the fundamental reason for so many of those metastudies recently that say, "Gee, so we tried to replicate 100 of the top studies in field X, and most of them failed to replicate."
No. The primary reason for those problems is human error. Misuse of statistics, experimental problems, hand-picking of data, that kind of thing.
That site reinforces my point. Its examples of correlations suffer from way too few data points, and even then most of the correlations have a really lousy r-value.
I have never seen a high quality spurious correlation without fraud or misuse of statistics being involved. The lectures you can find on correlation vs. causation use horrible ones that wouldn't survive 5 minutes of scrutiny.
If correlation does not equal causation, why can't someone find a good counter-example?
1) There's no problem
2) There might be a problem, but some say it isn't a problem, so let's wait and see
3) There's a problem, but other things are more important
4) There's a problem, but it's way too expensive to fix
5) There's a problem, but it's too late to fix
The 5 stages of denial...
There are 10 data points in most of those. They are not high quality correlations. Give me something with a few hundred data points at least.
And yes, everything Firethorn wrote.
I think you underestimate people. Anyway, I have no influence on the argument. If the reality is that something bad will happen in 50-100 years, then that is what we have to tell people. What else could we do, lie to them?
Not that I think the problems are 50 years away. Rainwater flooding was practically unknown in Denmark 15 years ago, now it happens every year.
Absolutely, climate engineering will almost certainly be implemented. It is unfortunately infeasible to make a working space solar shade.
Unfortunately climate engineering is unlikely to solve ocean acidification, and it will likely alter weather patterns dramatically.
There have been previous brief (1000 year) warming periods with temperatures 3 to7 degrees warmer than today. such as the period 300 to 1100 AD.
No. No there has not. Not for the global temperature, in the time that humans have been around.
It isn't about theory and science, it is about the reality of people's daily lives. You simply cannot ask people to turn their lives upside down because of this. They won't do it. You'll have a revolt on your hands.
There are hundreds of millions of lives on the line. People will have their lives turned upside down either way. They may not choose the smaller upheaval now to avoid the larger upheaval later, but that does not mean we should stop trying to convince them.
Telling them not to worry, the Titanic is unsinkable is a disservice.
You don't contribute to charity while you are carrying a balance on your credit cards...
Really? If you live your life in such a way that you waste your money, you solve the problem not by reigning in your own excesses, but by taking from the poorest?
The vast majority of high quality correlations are also causations. Sometimes a common cause for both can confuse matters, but in the vast majority of cases you can trust a correlation to be a causation. This is not true if the correlation was either falsified or just not there in the first place, obviously. The causation can also go in the opposite direction of what you expect, but it seems unlikely that falling crime leads to the banning of leaded petrol.
The correlation between phasing out leaded petrol and falling crime holds in many countries which banned lead at different times. It is highly unlikely that some other cause happened at the right time in all the countries.
The causality itself is also quite uncontroversial: It is known that exposure to lead means lower average IQ, and lower average IQ means more violence.
If water were such a great solvent for organic compounds, then I'd be very afraid to drink any...
Selection bias. Water is an almost universal solvent. Everything we see is stuff that is left behind after water dissolves the rest, so to us, water does not seem very potent.
The quote is actually:
"They who can give up essential Liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty not safety."
Benjamin Franklin is commenting on those who will give up the liberty to tax a rich family just because that rich family donates weapons to the ongoing war.
It is interesting that Benjamin Franklin considered government taxation not just a liberty, but an essential one.
The problem with using a laser weapon to heat up someone else is that you are likely to need much more cooling at the weapon end than at the target end. Getting 50%+ efficiency out of a laser while dumping 100% of the laser energy into the target is challenging.
"This will hurt me more than it will hurt you" will finally be true...
Then nobody else in the world, or at least nobody that matters, will say a single word when we proceed to bomb them back into the stone age.
Except Russia. They matter, sadly.