Or maybe your education system should add "on-line media", if order to add a tiny bit of critical thinking to all the "pulse-enabled meat-bags" that go through it ?
Does the Surface 2's power input and/or battery support a stronger power supply?
From what I gather, the laptop uses a USB-C connector to charge, which is defined by the USB Power Delivery standard. (I can't get information is the Surface Connector can be used for charging and if it follows the same standards and limitations).
USB PD, in its most recent revision supports up to 100W of power (by using thick wires able to hold 5A and using 20V).
So no, the 105W total consumption of the laptop in "Performance" settings, cannot be catered to by any currently available USB-C charger.
They should have : - provided a special high-power charging solution (like any normal bigger laptop). - or provided multiple USB-C charging port (clumsy, not recommended by standards maker) - or provided a proprietary extension that enable Microsoft laptops and migros soft chargers to carry 125W (e.g.: able to negociate a special mode at 25V)
If you take a minute to look at the bulk of major incidents in the last year, it's mostly poorly configured Mongodb and S3 buckets.
Which, among other, is also due to the fact that :
- most of the major incident happen over the internet, and target huge online services where server hold gazillions of juicy information.
- Mongodb is an exemple of technology that is widely deployed online (so chances are it run on the targetted server, unlike say, an obscure piece of home grown PHP code on your own homepage), and that is relatively new, immature and thus still have plenty of exploitable bugs to get discovered (in addition to the fact that it is still in "let's add more feature" phase of development, instead of "maybe we should start paying a bit of attention toward security") and thus is a likely target (As opposed to the linux kernel, which is very likely to be also running on the server, but has a little bit more maturity, and a lot more scrutinity to it).
- thus mongodb is likely to show up a lot in major incidents.
No SQL Server, MS Exchange or IIS in the list.
Sorry, waht are thes ?I have been hear about them yet ?~
Some new modules for Node.js ?~ Could you point me to their Github ?~
There's the occasional ransomware but given the market share of Microsoft products, it's not bad at all.
By "markter share" you mean "got completely obliterated out of the cloud/bigdata/server market" ? Outside of the desktoip, and a few corporate on-site servers, Microsoft has become completely irrelevant.
Most specifically, it has nothing to *directly* do with the kind of big data caches that are attacked during "major incident", except maybe running one of the cloud service - Azure - that they might run on. Thus of course, you'll rarely find them mentioned on the big data leaks.
Microsoft is still dominant on the (office) desk and office server. - you'll find it targetted a lot by ransomware, etc. but that not a big major incident, just a huge constant flow of lots of small/mid incidents. - it might play a role in stealing critical document from 1 specific user (e.g.: credentials or documents necessary to forge a successful social engineering attack), which then eventually could lead to a massive data breach.
1. get better (and ultimately total) visibility into private communications of its citizens
Why so ? Skype has always (even pre-Microsoft buyout) been clear that they'll collaborate with local law enforcement as required by local law when asked through the official legal channels. Even better (for China) : since the overtake by Microsoft, Skype has been progressively moved to a more centralized architecture : - supernodes have been replaced by actual servers - latest versions of smartphone apps and Linux client are basically just standard web apps (so much more easy for China to Man-in-the-Middle)
It's not WhatsApp (end-to-end encryption) or worse SlientCircle, Signal, Matrix, etc. (E2E too, but with audited clients against exploits).
2. pave the way for a local competitor to take that market share and enable the flow of graft to government patrons
THAT is much more likely. PRC is just blocking competition to favor some local upcoming product.
Actually, your second question answers the first one:
Not to mention whom to hit in a pinch. The child crossing the street, the ambulance, a lamp post, or the school bus? Also, why Volvo XC-90s? {...} Better off with Priuses or even straight electric cars.
That's why the Volvo (as opposed to one of the current popular electric car brands). The current fleet of Volvos actually on the streets (which are already street-legal, in production, and driving around your city) have among the best forward collision avoidance systems (FCAS) currently on the market, and have been for quite a few years.
In case of child/ambulance/lamp/post/school bus, FCAS will slam the break in time and try to stop before hitting the obstacle, or at least to decelerate as much as physically possible, to hit it with the lowest velocity if a complete stop cannot happen within the remaining time/distance to collision. (That is, unless the driver actively tries to override the vehicle's decision by flooring the accelerator. But even if the driver does something stupid like this, the car still sounds a loud alarm and flashes alert light on the wind shield)
Volvos have, year after year, had the best track record of such security features. They even still slightly out-class what's available currently from Tesla (which has a few situation where the car didn't reliably detect a truck trailer, or didn't take the decision to stop before hitting a curb). That's most probably due to Volvos packing even more sensors : in addition to forward facing cameras, sonars and a radar (like Tesla), they also feature a lidar laser which is able to cover a few extra situations.
If you're going to try experiment with some dangerous new technology like adding a pilot-less hardware platform, better add it to a car that has already reliably been able to stop before an accident could happen.
As opposed to what's on offer safety wise with popular electric car brands :
- Tesla have also a lots of bells and whistles, but although they to get stellar security review regarding their survivability in case of crash, they still don't have Volvo's track record of avoid to get into a crash since almost 2 decade. Also Tesla is a direct competitor of Uber in the realm of startups aiming for pilotless drive.
- Renault Zoe are hugely popular electric cars in Europe (due to their very low prices). But currently, they're the only range of cars to feature NO options for FCAS at all. (Also Renault is currently working on experimental pilot-less platforms, and thus might be percieved as a competitor by Uber).
- VW has FCAS as a standard on its whole range, including even the fucking dead cheapest "UP!" cars (and thus also on electric variants like e-UP! and e-Golf), but ti's a much simpler and cheaper (Lidar only "City Safety"-style). (And also they're working on their own auto-pilot for their upcoming "e-" version rebirth of their clasical mini van).
I keep getting redirected to mob rule, group think, and mass hysteria.
Yeah, that's why Switzerland never survived past their first vote... no, wait !
(You, know perhaps making you think that direct democracy couldn't ever be effectively put into practice, *is also* "exactly what those in power want, they just want the exclusive ability to manipulate", as stated by the parent poster.)
Even more complex you may not know what rules the AI is using to evaluate something.
Just as the old doctor with 30 years of experience, won't actually know how/why/which neuron are firing up when he gets his hunch.
But he can then Sherlock it to gets a reasonable justification why he should trust his hunch.
The same here : the AI give its best idea about the X-ray. Then the doctor who's seeing the patient will combine this information with what the rest (patient's complaints, etc.) and make a diagnostic and take a therapeutic decision.
Maybe the AI's diagnostic makes 0% clinical sense, in which case the doctor will ignore it and switch to something else.
The things that they teach you at med school, are mostly rule of thumb. Simple algorithms that you can learn so you can get through your job without killing too many patients.
Which, by the way, is going to be an irony completely lost on the "replace occurence of 'AI' with 'algorithm' and complain loudly" trolls that invariably pop-up on each machine learning article.
In, this case, it's the fresh med-school graduate who's using "an algorithm", and the AI which is most definitely relying on the intrinsic pattern-finding properties of any neural network / brain (be it in a biological real-world brain or a simulated one).
It's becoming increasingly clear that no human can possibly have a functional grasp of all the knowledge required to make accurate diagnosis across all possible conditions.
No, it's much more subtle than that.
The things that they teach you at med school, are mostly rule of thumb. Simple algorithms that you can learn so you can get through your job without killing too many patients. To diagnose pneumonia, there's a check list of things that you learn to look for and which allow you to say with some relative certainty whether or not the thing you're seeing is pneumonia.
Then there's the "clinical" experience. After seeing things for thousands of times, you start recognizing them automatically. Like looking at an X-Ray picture and immediately "feeling" that there's "something funny" without even needing to start going through any checklist. It's your old family doctor who can automatically guess the problem just be looking at how you walk like entering his office, or just based on the noises he hears outside, from the waiting room. (Of course, there's some part of Sherlockian lightning fast thinking and deducting going on and a strong focus on very small otherwise imperceptible details. But there's also some part of instinctive almost-sub-conscious gut feeling - how else would you know on *which* of the thousands of small imperceptible details to focus your inner Sherlock on ?)
That not something that you can learn by rote memorization during medical studies. That's something that comes slowly over time with practice.
The big advantage of neural nets, is that you can simulate all this experience inside a computer, by "simply" throwing hundreds of thousands of pictures at the neural into in a huge computational batches on the cluster.
AI systems able to access comprehensive libraries of information are better at this type of work. Sure, I'd want an expert who can tailor search terms, accurately describe symptoms in a consistent manner, but for a number of years now I've been cheering every AI advance in clinical diagnosis. Can't come soon enough.
In the end, as any other advances in the artificial intelligence field, you'll still need human oversight in the foreseeable future. AI currently isn't replacing the job of actual doctors, as it is in providing more information faster to help taking the decision while taking all other informations on the way. (Just like ECG able to propose diagnostic didn't cause the cardiologist specialist to disappear over-night).
To be considered trained, the radiologist usually have to go through several dozen of hundreds of MRIs, CTs and Xrays. (They are not litteraly counted one by one. It's just accepted estimation that by the time the medical doctor finishes 5 years intership, he'll have seen enough example to be considered trained enough to have his radiologist certification).
The big advantage of the machine, is that instead of taking 5 years of internship training, you can have the neural net train by going through the 100'000 in one big computational jobs on the cluster.
There's this folk saying (Started by Malcolm Gladwell) that you need 10'000 hours of practice to become a master of anything. The big benefits of AI is that these 10'000 hours don't need to happen in real-time anymore but can be simulated in a computer.
Then shut the fuck up, stop complaining here, and join the rest of Rust developers in trying to write a full operating system (RedOx) instead of bitching and moaning about the language that the majority of the world has settled upon.
- most often in general consumer products (like their speakers, headsets, and some keyboard and mouses) they tend to use Bluetooth for general purpose compatibility. (But you're still better off using the packaged-in bluetooth transceiver, because of Logitech's attention to details making sure that their products work together, unlike the crappy bluetooth implementation in your no-name chinese tablet)
- most often in gamer oriented products, they tend to use their own proprietary 2.4Ghz tech, which is derived of the defunct "Wireless USB" wannabe bluetooth-competitor.
- Specially now that the Bluetooth LE (a.k.a Smart) variant has arrived with lower battery requirement, similar to Logitech's proprietary tech, there are a few products (like the MX Master mouse) which support BOTH protocols simultaneously. (You can either pair the mouse with a Bluetooth LE/Smart enabled device, or with a "Logitech Unifying Reciever").
FWIW, what logitech does for keyboards and mice has a very specific data pattern.
This isn't relevant.
The relevant part is that Logitech manufactures both the device and the receiver. And as a company with Swiss roots (R&D is still done in Lausanne) they are attentive to the details and make sure that they implementation works.
Fun fact : a sizeable part of Logitech's devices (most frequently the non-gamer fraction) do use some variation of Bluetooth (instead of their proprietary protocol) and work just as well. Mainly for the exact same reason : Logitech is providing both the dongle and the device and has paid attention to the details.
Bluetooth, on the other hand, can create a true layer 2 transport. There is a huge amount of overhead in being flexible.
As are Logitech's own receivers, too. Logitech basically phagocyted the defunct Wireless USB standard that wanted to be competitor to Bluetooth. They are more or less comparable in what they can achieve, even if in Logitech's case, it is more often under utilized (lots of their product only use it for HID).
The logitech controllers, while great for their purpose, are absolutely shitty at doing much of anything else (AFAIK). Can they send high def stereo audio out to wireless headphones?
Actually, you'd be surprised, but yes. There are a few among all of the Logitech wireless headsets which don't use Bluetooth but Logitech's own proprietary 2.4Ghz technology (i.e.: their rebranded Wireless USB). In these cases, Logitech's device are litterally sending high-def multichannel audio over the same proprietary 2.4Ghz tech that is used in their HID devices.
But again, being the maker of the sender AND the receiver helps making sure that basic quality standards are met.
Bluetooth is just as ok as any other tech.
Bluetooth is, most significantly, just a standard.
It's up to the individual companies to implement it correctly (e.g.: Logitech. Or Ericsson - being the initiator of the technology. Or the former Palm. Etc.) Or do an excruciatingly shitty job at it (e.g.: lots of no-name Asian USB dongles, lots of poor phone implementation in cheap smartphones, etc.)
Well said and very true, however we'll never reach this state because an easily manipulated population is exactly what those in power want, they just want the exclusive ability to manipulate.
Except for situations where "those in power" happen to *actually be* the population.
There's this term "direct democracy". You should research it.
Yeah, but he's one of Google customers. And this definitely doesn't provide him with relevant results to his searches.
That is, he's an advertiser, and this doesn't provide more eyeballs to his search trying to find the most appropriate victims to inflict his ads upon.
(None of the customer gives a shit if the "product", i.e "the users owning the above-mentioned eyeballs" is having a better time... This fucking article must be yet another campain by PETA about fair treatment of farm animals...)
the best option is to completely abandon the manufacturer, unlock the bootloader and install a different operating system in the hopes it will remain better supported.
Example of a different operating system with commercial support : Sailfish X (for Sony Xperia X) by Jolla, the former Nokia engineer who were working on Maemo/Meego for the N700/N800/N900/N9 series before Elop and Microsoft happened to them.
That's another alternative possibility to the usual suspects (like LineageOS, etc.)
Regarding phones fromOnePlus, Jolla doesn't currently have an official line of products, but there's a vibrant community so a community port might show up in talk.maemo.org
We're most likely to consume electronic media (though in my case, more frequently e-books than netflix) while in the train on our way to some work-related conference / meeting / etc. (which still somewhat counts as "work"), than when at home with direct access to significant other (leading to much more interesting real-life home activities than consuming some media on some screen).
You mean the separate ARM cpu (on each x86 machine) to administer any machines remotely is an improvement over Wakej-on-LAN?
For an admin? Yes it's definitely an improvement. For an end-user? It's your worst nightmares slowly coming to life one after the other.
Wake-On-LAN have that capability too.
TL;DR: ME and IPMI enable an admin to remotely debug a machine that doesn't even want to turn on. It goes much beyond what WOL offers. It's more comparable to a network-enabled-KVM, and even goes a bit further (some kind of network-enabled-KVM that could even tap into the motherboard's DIP switches, back when those still existed).
For Wake-on-LAN to be useful:
- the machine must be able to actually boot. +- Which involves a few very low-level stuff. Like BIOS settings (hardware parameters) making the machine able to turn on stably (e.g.: correct RAM timings and CPU clock setting. A badly/unreliably overclocked machine might crash and catch fire right after receiving the WOL magic packet) +- like the BIOS set to boot on an actual boot device (harddisk), etc. (e.g.: UEFI set to load the signed shim that start grub. Not hanging with "no boot device deteted")
- the OS must be able to actually boot. +- Which involves a few more higher level stuff, like an OS actually being installed +- Drivers, etc. able to bring the devices up and have the OS run stably (Windows is a bitch whenever the hardware changes a tiny bit).
- you need some remote access to the OS +- Linux : SSH with your login keys. +- Windows : some VNC stuff ?
- you need some specific software +- e.g.: to flash the BIOS.
If anything along this chain breaks, you need to go in place and check the details of what doesn't work.
With ME and IPMI :
- the small embed MINIX / Linux running on the ARM core in the chipset is running some kind of VNC-like server that is able to directly tap into the shared RAM/VRAM of the GPU core inside the same chipset.
This gives similar access as a network-enabled KVM : even if the machine doesn't boot, you can remotely see what's on the screen, and remotely take over with your keyboard and mouse to do the necessary admin step to get the OS bootable and functionnal.
- this VNC variant supports some form of USB-forwarding. Meaning that you can simulate remotely plugged in floppies or DVD-ROMs using local images on your own admin console. You can use it to install Linux from an.ISO you have. You can use it to upgrade the firmware of a problematic SAS/SCSI PCIe card using an.IMG that you made of the floppy disk.
All this, again, requires ZERO cooperation of the target machine. You don't need to have a working PXE network booting setup. Given that the VNC even works already during the BIOS settings screen, you can use it *TO* setup a working PXE net boot.
- ME and IPMI even have direct access to the BIOS it self. Means you can change some low-level settings that currently prevent the machine from even booting. Means a PC with broken RAM timings settings that cannot reliably boot, you can correct those settings, all from the comfort of a web pages that you access from your admin console. Means that, while the machine is currently shut down, you could even flash a new BIOS / UEFI firmware. And if the flash breaks and the machine becomes unbootable, you can still use ME / IPMI to reflash a correct firmware.
For an admin, that's a godsend : short from an actually literally burnt motherboard, there isn't a single situation that you cannot debug remotely with this, all this without even needing expensive equipment like network-enabled KVM (and a discreet EEPROM programmer for busted BIOSes).
For an user, that's a horrendous nightmare. Even when your computer is shut down and merely just plugged into power and network, it could be hacked at a BIOS-level or even deeper level whenever an exploit in ME or IPMI is found.
while I doubt fitbit is getting rich from that "some guy did 6,800 steps today" money.
Remember that a lot of countries still don't have universal true healthcare (unlike a sizeable chunk of Europe, Canada, etc.) and that includes the US (and a few other developed countries aren't quite there yet like Switzerland).
There, healthcare is still managed by for-profit companies.
Their main concern sadly isn't to spread the cost across an as large population as possible to diminish the financial hit of an individual having an unexpected medical problem (that's the whole purpose of an actual, real insurance), their main concern is generating as much profits as possible (like any for-profit company), and dividends for their share-holders (if it's publicly traded).
They mostly do it by trying to reject as many applicants as possible who have risks of having actual health problem, and trying to attract as many healthy people that will never get sick ever in their entire life.
The kind of data gathered by sports-tracker can be used to feed whatever complex big-data analysis pipeline they use to help them predict which are the cheapest clients. Meaning that they are ready to pay quite a lot of money to Fitbit, Apple, etc. in exchange of collaborations in data gathering.
(And give something stupid and shiny, like a 10% of the monthly fee of the health plan, or even a one-time 50% of the smartwatch's price, to persuade the client to sign and accept health data sharing with the health insurance company)
So yeah, in the end Fitbit *CAN* get rich from that "some guy definitely isn't doing a lot of steps on a regular basis", by reselling it to health insurance companies.
People can receive measurable health benefits from wearables
(BTW, how much it benefits health and if it actually measurable isn't clearly proven yet.)
And now that modern CPUs from Intel are running MINIX to run the microcode, you simply no longer know what is happening.
Technically, Intel ME, (and IPMI) run on a separate core inside the chipset. You can power off your CPU, lights-out management is still running (that's the whole point of the thing, so the IT department in your business can admin the desktops remotely without even needing to turn them on).
But what is the wireless range of the devices? 30ft or so?
Bluetooth devices are sorted into classes depending on radio power and thus range. Your random USB bluetooth dongle is usually a Class 2 device with a range of ~10m (about 30ft) There are USB dongle that are Class 1 devices with a rande of ~100m (about 300ft).
Also keep in mind that most walls (except steel reinforced concrete) are transparent to the frequency range used by Bluetooth/Wifi/ Wireless-USB/etc.
So by using off-the-shelf parts, an attacker could hack the toys from the street in front of the house.
And that's just the off-the-shelf dongle. The you can basically watch any computer security conference and see people boosting range of various wireless gizmos (RFID/NFC dongles, etc.) to crazy distance. Cue in demos of mass-hacking use a pringles can-tenna. (an attacker could scan the whole street using a simple modified bluetooth setup).
A Burglar want to see which houses on a street are potentially empty ? Just mass-scan all the unsecured IoT thingy (Bluetooth enabled toys, Wifi enabled surveillance, etc.) and see which of those only register silence or no visual motion.
PCL is fine, as an output language. It's often interpreted faster than Postscript, which means you get your print jobs quicker. But it's absolutely mandatory that a printer speak at least PCL if not also Postscript, and not just some bullshit proprietary language for which there's no support.
Yup. In my opinion :
Best option: - Postscript (and some printer can even accept the specific variant of postscript on which PDF is based) It's the most widespread and tested. That's the case of HP and lot of rebadged laser printers.
Best alternative : - PCL It very well supported. (It was the useful fall back on our multifunction Canon)
Then : - horrible proprietary bullshit. E.g.: UFR-II (the native bullshit of said multifunction Canon. Canon officially provides some half functional code for Linux consisting of a proprietary blob and the code source of a broken wrapper that can half work if you beat it enough with a compiler). The weirdest part is that the embed server handles PDF very well for everything else (e.g.: for storing scans), but not for printing. It's either the proprietary bullshit or PCL.
You're much more likely to find the former on network connections (LPD, IPP, sometime even an embed webserver that can accept PDF uploads) You can find either PS or PCL on parallel ports of laser printers. You'll most definitely find bullshit format on USB ports, specially on inkjet printers (which anyway won't make any sense economically, once you factor in the price of cartridges, so forget about them)
I've looked at other solutions and none is cheaper than my piece of shit inkjet/scanner combo.
...until your ink cartridge runs out. (Which will happen after only 3 weeks, because why pack full-capacity inks cartridge, when you can pack demo cartridges. Also, the whole "color" cartridge needs replacement, even if only one ink ran out. Also, the ink in question is yellow, because fuck you US with your yellow dot coding. Also, the ink didn't exactly run out, but the counter chip with DRM on it decided it's time to give up). Then suddenly it seems cheaper to replace the whole printer than buy new cartridges.
(Or else you're in for a messy business of trying to refill your own cartridges at home. Or hope that the local cartdiges refurbishment shop does a nice job).
You're better off investing into a :
- indeed, multifunction with printer/scanner combo is a good bet for your usecase.
- *laser* printer (check the toner cartridges price : they are usually MUCH cheaper in the long run due to minuscule per-page cost).
- wired printer, best over Ethernet (it's just a plain network printer cue. Works without driver on most OSes)
- check that the printer supports standard language like Post-Script (completely driverless in most OSes) or at least PCL (There are a few Cannon printers that lack PS, and only speak PCL or some useless proprietary shit).
- check that the printer has a USB port (so you can scan to a USB stick, if you don't want to scan to e-mail or scan to samba share)
Now for the specific situation of signing document, you might instead set your workflow to add a scanned signature on the document and burn it as an image and re-send it as PDF with JBIG images embed. But don't forget to sign your e-mail (or PDFs) cryptographically for security.
You can write a.ko that will be loaded by the kernel to handle your device (used on most Linux for a few things where speed matters, like mass storage, network. or for booting simplicity like mouse/keyboard/bluetooth)
Or you can write an user space device that communicates with the raw USB device using libusb. (used on the huge variant zoo of non critical USB devices, like scanners, firmware upgrader, etc.)
Slashdot Mirror
Or maybe your education system should add "on-line media", if order to add a tiny bit of critical thinking to all the "pulse-enabled meat-bags" that go through it ?
Does the Surface 2's power input and/or battery support a stronger power supply?
From what I gather, the laptop uses a USB-C connector to charge, which is defined by the USB Power Delivery standard.
(I can't get information is the Surface Connector can be used for charging and if it follows the same standards and limitations).
USB PD, in its most recent revision supports up to 100W of power (by using thick wires able to hold 5A and using 20V).
So no, the 105W total consumption of the laptop in "Performance" settings, cannot be catered to by any currently available USB-C charger.
They should have :
- provided a special high-power charging solution (like any normal bigger laptop).
- or provided multiple USB-C charging port (clumsy, not recommended by standards maker)
- or provided a proprietary extension that enable Microsoft laptops and migros soft chargers to carry 125W (e.g.: able to negociate a special mode at 25V)
If you take a minute to look at the bulk of major incidents in the last year, it's mostly poorly configured Mongodb and S3 buckets.
Which, among other, is also due to the fact that :
- most of the major incident happen over the internet, and target huge online services where server hold gazillions of juicy information.
- Mongodb is an exemple of technology that is widely deployed online (so chances are it run on the targetted server, unlike say, an obscure piece of home grown PHP code on your own homepage), and that is relatively new, immature and thus still have plenty of exploitable bugs to get discovered (in addition to the fact that it is still in "let's add more feature" phase of development, instead of "maybe we should start paying a bit of attention toward security") and thus is a likely target
(As opposed to the linux kernel, which is very likely to be also running on the server, but has a little bit more maturity, and a lot more scrutinity to it).
- thus mongodb is likely to show up a lot in major incidents.
No SQL Server, MS Exchange or IIS in the list.
Sorry, waht are thes ?I have been hear about them yet ?~
Some new modules for Node.js ?~ Could you point me to their Github ?~
There's the occasional ransomware but given the market share of Microsoft products, it's not bad at all.
By "markter share" you mean "got completely obliterated out of the cloud/bigdata/server market" ?
Outside of the desktoip, and a few corporate on-site servers, Microsoft has become completely irrelevant.
Most specifically, it has nothing to *directly* do with the kind of big data caches that are attacked during "major incident", except maybe running one of the cloud service - Azure - that they might run on.
Thus of course, you'll rarely find them mentioned on the big data leaks.
Microsoft is still dominant on the (office) desk and office server.
- you'll find it targetted a lot by ransomware, etc. but that not a big major incident, just a huge constant flow of lots of small/mid incidents.
- it might play a role in stealing critical document from 1 specific user (e.g.: credentials or documents necessary to forge a successful social engineering attack), which then eventually could lead to a massive data breach.
1. get better (and ultimately total) visibility into private communications of its citizens
Why so ?
Skype has always (even pre-Microsoft buyout) been clear that they'll collaborate with local law enforcement as required by local law when asked through the official legal channels.
Even better (for China) : since the overtake by Microsoft, Skype has been progressively moved to a more centralized architecture :
- supernodes have been replaced by actual servers
- latest versions of smartphone apps and Linux client are basically just standard web apps (so much more easy for China to Man-in-the-Middle)
It's not WhatsApp (end-to-end encryption) or worse SlientCircle, Signal, Matrix, etc. (E2E too, but with audited clients against exploits).
2. pave the way for a local competitor to take that market share and enable the flow of graft to government patrons
THAT is much more likely. PRC is just blocking competition to favor some local upcoming product.
I use Mingo, so notnear as much bloat.
Note that this is now called "Skype Lite".
Actually, your second question answers the first one :
Not to mention whom to hit in a pinch. The child crossing the street, the ambulance, a lamp post, or the school bus?
Also, why Volvo XC-90s? {...} Better off with Priuses or even straight electric cars.
That's why the Volvo (as opposed to one of the current popular electric car brands).
The current fleet of Volvos actually on the streets (which are already street-legal, in production, and driving around your city) have among the best forward collision avoidance systems (FCAS) currently on the market, and have been for quite a few years.
In case of child/ambulance/lamp/post/school bus, FCAS will slam the break in time and try to stop before hitting the obstacle, or at least to decelerate as much as physically possible, to hit it with the lowest velocity if a complete stop cannot happen within the remaining time/distance to collision.
(That is, unless the driver actively tries to override the vehicle's decision by flooring the accelerator. But even if the driver does something stupid like this, the car still sounds a loud alarm and flashes alert light on the wind shield)
Volvos have, year after year, had the best track record of such security features. They even still slightly out-class what's available currently from Tesla (which has a few situation where the car didn't reliably detect a truck trailer, or didn't take the decision to stop before hitting a curb). That's most probably due to Volvos packing even more sensors : in addition to forward facing cameras, sonars and a radar (like Tesla), they also feature a lidar laser which is able to cover a few extra situations.
If you're going to try experiment with some dangerous new technology like adding a pilot-less hardware platform, better add it to a car that has already reliably been able to stop before an accident could happen.
As opposed to what's on offer safety wise with popular electric car brands :
- Tesla have also a lots of bells and whistles, but although they to get stellar security review regarding their survivability in case of crash, they still don't have Volvo's track record of avoid to get into a crash since almost 2 decade. Also Tesla is a direct competitor of Uber in the realm of startups aiming for pilotless drive.
- Renault Zoe are hugely popular electric cars in Europe (due to their very low prices). But currently, they're the only range of cars to feature NO options for FCAS at all. (Also Renault is currently working on experimental pilot-less platforms, and thus might be percieved as a competitor by Uber).
- VW has FCAS as a standard on its whole range, including even the fucking dead cheapest "UP!" cars (and thus also on electric variants like e-UP! and e-Golf), but ti's a much simpler and cheaper (Lidar only "City Safety"-style). (And also they're working on their own auto-pilot for their upcoming "e-" version rebirth of their clasical mini van).
etc.
I keep getting redirected to mob rule, group think, and mass hysteria.
Yeah, that's why Switzerland never survived past their first vote... no, wait !
(You, know perhaps making you think that direct democracy couldn't ever be effectively put into practice, *is also* "exactly what those in power want, they just want the exclusive ability to manipulate", as stated by the parent poster.)
Even more complex you may not know what rules the AI is using to evaluate something.
Just as the old doctor with 30 years of experience, won't actually know how/why/which neuron are firing up when he gets his hunch.
But he can then Sherlock it to gets a reasonable justification why he should trust his hunch.
The same here : the AI give its best idea about the X-ray.
Then the doctor who's seeing the patient will combine this information with what the rest (patient's complaints, etc.) and make a diagnostic and take a therapeutic decision.
Maybe the AI's diagnostic makes 0% clinical sense, in which case the doctor will ignore it and switch to something else.
The things that they teach you at med school, are mostly rule of thumb. Simple algorithms that you can learn so you can get through your job without killing too many patients.
Which, by the way, is going to be an irony completely lost on the "replace occurence of 'AI' with 'algorithm' and complain loudly" trolls that invariably pop-up on each machine learning article.
In, this case, it's the fresh med-school graduate who's using "an algorithm", and the AI which is most definitely relying on the intrinsic pattern-finding properties of any neural network / brain (be it in a biological real-world brain or a simulated one).
It's becoming increasingly clear that no human can possibly have a functional grasp of all the knowledge required to make accurate diagnosis across all possible conditions.
No, it's much more subtle than that.
The things that they teach you at med school, are mostly rule of thumb. Simple algorithms that you can learn so you can get through your job without killing too many patients.
To diagnose pneumonia, there's a check list of things that you learn to look for and which allow you to say with some relative certainty whether or not the thing you're seeing is pneumonia.
Then there's the "clinical" experience. After seeing things for thousands of times, you start recognizing them automatically.
Like looking at an X-Ray picture and immediately "feeling" that there's "something funny" without even needing to start going through any checklist.
It's your old family doctor who can automatically guess the problem just be looking at how you walk like entering his office, or just based on the noises he hears outside, from the waiting room.
(Of course, there's some part of Sherlockian lightning fast thinking and deducting going on and a strong focus on very small otherwise imperceptible details.
But there's also some part of instinctive almost-sub-conscious gut feeling - how else would you know on *which* of the thousands of small imperceptible details to focus your inner Sherlock on ?)
That not something that you can learn by rote memorization during medical studies. That's something that comes slowly over time with practice.
The big advantage of neural nets, is that you can simulate all this experience inside a computer, by "simply" throwing hundreds of thousands of pictures at the neural into in a huge computational batches on the cluster.
AI systems able to access comprehensive libraries of information are better at this type of work. Sure, I'd want an expert who can tailor search terms, accurately describe symptoms in a consistent manner, but for a number of years now I've been cheering every AI advance in clinical diagnosis. Can't come soon enough.
In the end, as any other advances in the artificial intelligence field, you'll still need human oversight in the foreseeable future.
AI currently isn't replacing the job of actual doctors, as it is in providing more information faster to help taking the decision while taking all other informations on the way.
(Just like ECG able to propose diagnostic didn't cause the cardiologist specialist to disappear over-night).
Volume also plays a role in training too.
To be considered trained, the radiologist usually have to go through several dozen of hundreds of MRIs, CTs and Xrays.
(They are not litteraly counted one by one. It's just accepted estimation that by the time the medical doctor finishes 5 years intership, he'll have seen enough example to be considered trained enough to have his radiologist certification).
The big advantage of the machine, is that instead of taking 5 years of internship training, you can have the neural net train by going through the 100'000 in one big computational jobs on the cluster.
There's this folk saying (Started by Malcolm Gladwell) that you need 10'000 hours of practice to become a master of anything.
The big benefits of AI is that these 10'000 hours don't need to happen in real-time anymore but can be simulated in a computer.
Then shut the fuck up, stop complaining here, and join the rest of Rust developers in trying to write a full operating system (RedOx) instead of bitching and moaning about the language that the majority of the world has settled upon.
Um, you realise logictec use Bluetooth for that?
Actually Logitech make use of both protocols :
- most often in general consumer products (like their speakers, headsets, and some keyboard and mouses) they tend to use Bluetooth for general purpose compatibility.
(But you're still better off using the packaged-in bluetooth transceiver, because of Logitech's attention to details making sure that their products work together, unlike the crappy bluetooth implementation in your no-name chinese tablet)
- most often in gamer oriented products, they tend to use their own proprietary 2.4Ghz tech, which is derived of the defunct "Wireless USB" wannabe bluetooth-competitor.
- Specially now that the Bluetooth LE (a.k.a Smart) variant has arrived with lower battery requirement, similar to Logitech's proprietary tech, there are a few products (like the MX Master mouse) which support BOTH protocols simultaneously. (You can either pair the mouse with a Bluetooth LE/Smart enabled device, or with a "Logitech Unifying Reciever").
FWIW, what logitech does for keyboards and mice has a very specific data pattern.
This isn't relevant.
The relevant part is that Logitech manufactures both the device and the receiver.
And as a company with Swiss roots (R&D is still done in Lausanne) they are attentive to the details and make sure that they implementation works.
Fun fact : a sizeable part of Logitech's devices (most frequently the non-gamer fraction) do use some variation of Bluetooth (instead of their proprietary protocol) and work just as well. Mainly for the exact same reason : Logitech is providing both the dongle and the device and has paid attention to the details.
Bluetooth, on the other hand, can create a true layer 2 transport. There is a huge amount of overhead in being flexible.
As are Logitech's own receivers, too.
Logitech basically phagocyted the defunct Wireless USB standard that wanted to be competitor to Bluetooth.
They are more or less comparable in what they can achieve, even if in Logitech's case, it is more often under utilized (lots of their product only use it for HID).
The logitech controllers, while great for their purpose, are absolutely shitty at doing much of anything else (AFAIK). Can they send high def stereo audio out to wireless headphones?
Actually, you'd be surprised, but yes.
There are a few among all of the Logitech wireless headsets which don't use Bluetooth but Logitech's own proprietary 2.4Ghz technology (i.e.: their rebranded Wireless USB).
In these cases, Logitech's device are litterally sending high-def multichannel audio over the same proprietary 2.4Ghz tech that is used in their HID devices.
But again, being the maker of the sender AND the receiver helps making sure that basic quality standards are met.
Bluetooth is just as ok as any other tech.
Bluetooth is, most significantly, just a standard.
It's up to the individual companies to implement it correctly (e.g.: Logitech. Or Ericsson - being the initiator of the technology. Or the former Palm. Etc.)
Or do an excruciatingly shitty job at it (e.g.: lots of no-name Asian USB dongles, lots of poor phone implementation in cheap smartphones, etc.)
Well said and very true, however we'll never reach this state because an easily manipulated population is exactly what those in power want, they just want the exclusive ability to manipulate.
Except for situations where "those in power" happen to *actually be* the population.
There's this term "direct democracy". You should research it.
Yeah, but he's one of Google customers.
And this definitely doesn't provide him with relevant results to his searches.
That is, he's an advertiser, and this doesn't provide more eyeballs to his search trying to find the most appropriate victims to inflict his ads upon.
(None of the customer gives a shit if the "product", i.e "the users owning the above-mentioned eyeballs" is having a better time...
This fucking article must be yet another campain by PETA about fair treatment of farm animals...)
the best option is to completely abandon the manufacturer, unlock the bootloader and install a different operating system in the hopes it will remain better supported.
Example of a different operating system with commercial support : Sailfish X (for Sony Xperia X) by Jolla, the former Nokia engineer who were working on Maemo/Meego for the N700/N800/N900/N9 series before Elop and Microsoft happened to them.
That's another alternative possibility to the usual suspects (like LineageOS, etc.)
(Note: NOT Android based at all - except for the platform drivers, it's still GNU/Linux under the hood like back when at Nokia).
Regarding phones fromOnePlus, Jolla doesn't currently have an official line of products, but there's a vibrant community so a community port might show up in talk.maemo.org
We're most likely to consume electronic media (though in my case, more frequently e-books than netflix) while in the train on our way to some work-related conference / meeting / etc. (which still somewhat counts as "work"), than when at home with direct access to significant other (leading to much more interesting real-life home activities than consuming some media on some screen).
You mean the separate ARM cpu (on each x86 machine) to administer any machines remotely is an improvement over Wakej-on-LAN?
For an admin? Yes it's definitely an improvement.
For an end-user? It's your worst nightmares slowly coming to life one after the other.
Wake-On-LAN have that capability too.
TL;DR: ME and IPMI enable an admin to remotely debug a machine that doesn't even want to turn on. It goes much beyond what WOL offers. It's more comparable to a network-enabled-KVM, and even goes a bit further (some kind of network-enabled-KVM that could even tap into the motherboard's DIP switches, back when those still existed).
For Wake-on-LAN to be useful:
- the machine must be able to actually boot.
+- Which involves a few very low-level stuff. Like BIOS settings (hardware parameters) making the machine able to turn on stably (e.g.: correct RAM timings and CPU clock setting. A badly/unreliably overclocked machine might crash and catch fire right after receiving the WOL magic packet)
+- like the BIOS set to boot on an actual boot device (harddisk), etc. (e.g.: UEFI set to load the signed shim that start grub. Not hanging with "no boot device deteted")
- the OS must be able to actually boot.
+- Which involves a few more higher level stuff, like an OS actually being installed
+- Drivers, etc. able to bring the devices up and have the OS run stably (Windows is a bitch whenever the hardware changes a tiny bit).
- you need some remote access to the OS
+- Linux : SSH with your login keys.
+- Windows : some VNC stuff ?
- you need some specific software
+- e.g.: to flash the BIOS.
If anything along this chain breaks, you need to go in place and check the details of what doesn't work.
With ME and IPMI :
- the small embed MINIX / Linux running on the ARM core in the chipset is running some kind of VNC-like server that is able to directly tap into the shared RAM/VRAM of the GPU core inside the same chipset.
This gives similar access as a network-enabled KVM : even if the machine doesn't boot, you can remotely see what's on the screen, and remotely take over with your keyboard and mouse to do the necessary admin step to get the OS bootable and functionnal.
- this VNC variant supports some form of USB-forwarding. Meaning that you can simulate remotely plugged in floppies or DVD-ROMs using local images on your own admin console. You can use it to install Linux from an .ISO you have. You can use it to upgrade the firmware of a problematic SAS/SCSI PCIe card using an .IMG that you made of the floppy disk.
All this, again, requires ZERO cooperation of the target machine. You don't need to have a working PXE network booting setup.
Given that the VNC even works already during the BIOS settings screen, you can use it *TO* setup a working PXE net boot.
- ME and IPMI even have direct access to the BIOS it self.
Means you can change some low-level settings that currently prevent the machine from even booting. Means a PC with broken RAM timings settings that cannot reliably boot, you can correct those settings, all from the comfort of a web pages that you access from your admin console.
Means that, while the machine is currently shut down, you could even flash a new BIOS / UEFI firmware.
And if the flash breaks and the machine becomes unbootable, you can still use ME / IPMI to reflash a correct firmware.
For an admin, that's a godsend : short from an actually literally burnt motherboard, there isn't a single situation that you cannot debug remotely with this, all this without even needing expensive equipment like network-enabled KVM (and a discreet EEPROM programmer for busted BIOSes).
For an user, that's a horrendous nightmare. Even when your computer is shut down and merely just plugged into power and network, it could be hacked at a BIOS-level or even deeper level whenever an exploit in ME or IPMI is found.
while I doubt fitbit is getting rich from that "some guy did 6,800 steps today" money.
Remember that a lot of countries still don't have universal true healthcare (unlike a sizeable chunk of Europe, Canada, etc.)
and that includes the US (and a few other developed countries aren't quite there yet like Switzerland).
There, healthcare is still managed by for-profit companies.
Their main concern sadly isn't to spread the cost across an as large population as possible to diminish the financial hit of an individual having an unexpected medical problem (that's the whole purpose of an actual, real insurance),
their main concern is generating as much profits as possible (like any for-profit company), and dividends for their share-holders (if it's publicly traded).
They mostly do it by trying to reject as many applicants as possible who have risks of having actual health problem, and trying to attract as many healthy people that will never get sick ever in their entire life.
The kind of data gathered by sports-tracker can be used to feed whatever complex big-data analysis pipeline they use to help them predict which are the cheapest clients. Meaning that they are ready to pay quite a lot of money to Fitbit, Apple, etc. in exchange of collaborations in data gathering.
(And give something stupid and shiny, like a 10% of the monthly fee of the health plan, or even a one-time 50% of the smartwatch's price, to persuade the client to sign and accept health data sharing with the health insurance company)
So yeah, in the end Fitbit *CAN* get rich from that "some guy definitely isn't doing a lot of steps on a regular basis", by reselling it to health insurance companies.
People can receive measurable health benefits from wearables
(BTW, how much it benefits health and if it actually measurable isn't clearly proven yet.)
And now that modern CPUs from Intel are running MINIX to run the microcode, you simply no longer know what is happening.
Technically, Intel ME, (and IPMI) run on a separate core inside the chipset.
You can power off your CPU, lights-out management is still running (that's the whole point of the thing, so the IT department in your business can admin the desktops remotely without even needing to turn them on).
But what is the wireless range of the devices? 30ft or so?
Bluetooth devices are sorted into classes depending on radio power and thus range.
Your random USB bluetooth dongle is usually a Class 2 device with a range of ~10m (about 30ft)
There are USB dongle that are Class 1 devices with a rande of ~100m (about 300ft).
Also keep in mind that most walls (except steel reinforced concrete) are transparent to the frequency range used by Bluetooth/Wifi/ Wireless-USB/etc.
So by using off-the-shelf parts, an attacker could hack the toys from the street in front of the house.
And that's just the off-the-shelf dongle. The you can basically watch any computer security conference and see people boosting range of various wireless gizmos (RFID/NFC dongles, etc.) to crazy distance.
Cue in demos of mass-hacking use a pringles can-tenna.
(an attacker could scan the whole street using a simple modified bluetooth setup).
A Burglar want to see which houses on a street are potentially empty ? Just mass-scan all the unsecured IoT thingy (Bluetooth enabled toys, Wifi enabled surveillance, etc.) and see which of those only register silence or no visual motion.
PCL is fine, as an output language. It's often interpreted faster than Postscript, which means you get your print jobs quicker. But it's absolutely mandatory that a printer speak at least PCL if not also Postscript, and not just some bullshit proprietary language for which there's no support.
Yup. In my opinion :
Best option:
- Postscript (and some printer can even accept the specific variant of postscript on which PDF is based)
It's the most widespread and tested.
That's the case of HP and lot of rebadged laser printers.
Best alternative :
- PCL
It very well supported.
(It was the useful fall back on our multifunction Canon)
Then :
- horrible proprietary bullshit. E.g.: UFR-II
(the native bullshit of said multifunction Canon. Canon officially provides some half functional code for Linux consisting of a proprietary blob and the code source of a broken wrapper that can half work if you beat it enough with a compiler).
The weirdest part is that the embed server handles PDF very well for everything else (e.g.: for storing scans), but not for printing. It's either the proprietary bullshit or PCL.
You're much more likely to find the former on network connections (LPD, IPP, sometime even an embed webserver that can accept PDF uploads)
You can find either PS or PCL on parallel ports of laser printers.
You'll most definitely find bullshit format on USB ports, specially on inkjet printers (which anyway won't make any sense economically, once you factor in the price of cartridges, so forget about them)
I've looked at other solutions and none is cheaper than my piece of shit inkjet/scanner combo.
...until your ink cartridge runs out.
(Which will happen after only 3 weeks, because why pack full-capacity inks cartridge, when you can pack demo cartridges.
Also, the whole "color" cartridge needs replacement, even if only one ink ran out.
Also, the ink in question is yellow, because fuck you US with your yellow dot coding.
Also, the ink didn't exactly run out, but the counter chip with DRM on it decided it's time to give up).
Then suddenly it seems cheaper to replace the whole printer than buy new cartridges.
(Or else you're in for a messy business of trying to refill your own cartridges at home.
Or hope that the local cartdiges refurbishment shop does a nice job).
You're better off investing into a :
- indeed, multifunction with printer/scanner combo is a good bet for your usecase.
- *laser* printer (check the toner cartridges price : they are usually MUCH cheaper in the long run due to minuscule per-page cost).
- wired printer, best over Ethernet (it's just a plain network printer cue. Works without driver on most OSes)
- check that the printer supports standard language like Post-Script (completely driverless in most OSes) or at least PCL (There are a few Cannon printers that lack PS, and only speak PCL or some useless proprietary shit).
- check that the printer has a USB port (so you can scan to a USB stick, if you don't want to scan to e-mail or scan to samba share)
Now for the specific situation of signing document, you might instead set your workflow to add a scanned signature on the document and burn it as an image and re-send it as PDF with JBIG images embed. But don't forget to sign your e-mail (or PDFs) cryptographically for security.
Actually it's both.
You can write a .ko that will be loaded by the kernel to handle your device
(used on most Linux for a few things where speed matters, like mass storage, network.
or for booting simplicity like mouse/keyboard/bluetooth)
Or you can write an user space device that communicates with the raw USB device using libusb.
(used on the huge variant zoo of non critical USB devices, like scanners, firmware upgrader, etc.)