A chum of mine used to set the device name on this bluetooth PDA to the name of the local police force cyber-terrorist squad and then did a device discovery in the bar/trainstation.
Soon saw the people who did not realise they had devices with bluetooth and it was turned on go pale as they thought the cops were on to them!
There are several different forms of the TCP protocol. Most of them deal with the way that congestion is managed or deal with networks that either have very high or very low latency or reliability.
They are "new" in that they have not been around for very long and people are still researching them. They are not really revisions thought, it is not like there will be a TCP 2.5 specification in the future. The individual protocol used will be different for different links.
To carry your analogy on, I could look at the vault but would I have a clue if the lock was any good or not? Not unless I was a locksmith and physical security expert.
I rely on others to tell me how secure the source code for my OS is.
I accept and understand your point on the various roles. However you say:
"to have privacy is a form of freedom"
So all people should have all freedoms? Should I therefore free to walk into your house and eat your food, sleep (or worse!) in your bed?
Freedom is great, and I am very much for it, but all things must be reasonable. You opinion may result in more harm being done, by resulting in a higher than necessary crime rate or truancy rate. Given the choice of tagging everyone and preventing 911 or carrying on as we are which you choose? (Note I am not saying that tagging would have prevented it, the effectiveness of tagging as a preventative measure is another very moot point). The fact that I disagree with your opinion, does not mean I think you should not have it, you MUST be free to think as you want!
I very much believe in the right to privacy, as I said there are certain things that should not be revealed to anyone, however, I do not see that an individual's location is one of these things, particularly from law enforcement agencies, bound by due process, and oversight.
P.S. You say you would surrender your right if a court told you to, your faith in the court system is admirable if perhaps slightly opposed to the rest of your position on this, the court interprets the law, if a law is changed, does it become correct. In your 19th century analogy, would you enslave yourself if a court order said you should?
You were actually being sarcastic but I that's fine.
I would disagree with you on the purpose of the police, I would say that there role has a large element of symbology, and police cars patrolling or "bobbys on the beat", as Brits might say, provide a large amount of reassurance to people. Intersting that my local police force's motto is "reducing crime, disorder and fear", not just "fighting crime"
If tracking everyone were effective at fighting crime I would not object to it, indeed we do track some criminals in the UK rather than giving them a custodial sentance (although not with RFID per se). I am never entirely clear why people are, the idea that you should have this right of privacy seems strange to me. It is only recently as cities have grown to a resonable size that this is possible, in a small village such as mine, I can't walk down the street without most people knowing where I am becuase everyone knows everyone else.
There are things that I think should remain private, as an example my medical history should be private to you, quite important that my doctor knows it when prescribing treatment. I still do not see why a child not attending school should remain private, from the instituion or from law enforcement, and it would seem neither do you.
Slight stawman on your part. The police's job is to patrol the streets. A teachers is to impart knowledge, not to be ensure that pupils are present and correct. You are confusing them with prison wardens.
The primary job should be to teach but they must have a concept of in loco parentis surely? Otherwise why have any rules other than you have to go to class, shut up and pay attention?
There is no getting away from the duty of care that they must have. Without it who is at fault when a 6 year old is electrocuted due to faulty wiring
So rather than have someone who is underpaid, overworked and likely to have low motivation carry out a labour intensive task like taking a rollcall, we automate it.
Someone tell me the problem (other than it uses the paranoid's current bête noire of RFID)
In evolution there is concept of mutation. A creature who has undergone a mutation of some kind may have enhanced abilities to perform some deed.
For example the mutation may create a efficient predator who can catch more food and so prosper at the expense of its un-mutated siblings. Eventually these new form will be come dominant and the unaltered species will die out.
The difference is that in there is no way for the mutation of correct article to gain a competitive advantage, it can be reverted to falsehood very simply. The "evolution" will therefore stall.
And that is the key problem the article is referring to, without a gatekeeper who maintains the standards?
It is not a question of expertise in a subject matter, but the ability to communicate your experience to others, a skill which if find lacking in many editors for the Wikipedia.
By having a centralised editing function (assuming this has the requisite skills), in the same way that/. and most other news outlets do, a level of undistinguished writing can be eliminated, improving the overall output. If the moderation of content is done by all it quality must be asymptotic.
I think you have stumbled, however inadvertently, on the essential point that the article is making.
The vast majority of everything ever written is utter tripe, and of very little value, particularly when used outside of its temporal frame of reference. The reason for this is that unfortunately the majority of people writing are, by definition, average.
To create any piece of work that is noteworthy for its excellence requires discrimination to separate the wheat from the chaff, otherwise it descends into a mire of mediocrity.
I take this second point. However, this what not the one your originally made. In your original article you asked to use the slow down in increase of HDD capacity as evidence to disprove Moore's Observation.
This is akin to asking if the increase in the penetrationn of broadband enforces Morres' observation. The two things while interesting are not related to the number of transistors, the subject of Gordons paper.
I hardly thing the gradual deteriation of/. posts is an arguement for poor science.
The reason they don't is they have an investment in the newer masks, better FABs and louder marketing campaigns for P4s and 64bit chips that requires a return. They also have to prove to Wall Street that they will continue to grow in size, despite the fact that there markets are becoming very close to saturation point.
Think about it, would you rather sell 10 things at £10 or 10 things at £1000? Despite the arguements about margin level the latter looks far better when you are trying to appear bigger and more successful than your rival.
The day I passed my driving test was the first day I had ever driven a car on my own. It was not long after I had got my 1 litre rust bucket over 100mph that I realised I had never tried a hand-brake turn.....
Driving down a quiet country lane I thought I would give this a go and so as I crested a hill I wrenched back on the handbrake, I was doing around 70mph.
It did stop the car, although I did end up with the front wheels in a ditch! Ah the halcon days of youth.
Linux is not invulnerable, but it's not "just as susuptable" either
If you are using susceptable as an alternative word of vulnerable then they are probably right, it is as likely that these vulnerabilities exist, just they are not known / published / exploited in the same way as Windows vulnerabilies are.
Linux is immune to those [windows attacks]
There of course the case of Winux that also refutes this but that is just being churlish.
Re:Own a computer, own a car
on
Security Alert
·
· Score: 1
No consquences until they borrow your credit card for a brief spending spree!!
Slashdot Mirror
A chum of mine used to set the device name on this bluetooth PDA to the name of the local police force cyber-terrorist squad and then did a device discovery in the bar/trainstation.
Soon saw the people who did not realise they had devices with bluetooth and it was turned on go pale as they thought the cops were on to them!
I hope your kids don't read /. or there will not be much of surprise for them come christmas day ;)
There are several different forms of the TCP protocol. Most of them deal with the way that congestion is managed or deal with networks that either have very high or very low latency or reliability.
They are "new" in that they have not been around for very long and people are still researching them. They are not really revisions thought, it is not like there will be a TCP 2.5 specification in the future. The individual protocol used will be different for different links.
It looks like people like Christopher Reeve are walking again
No, the dead are still pretty much motionless.
What do you mean I'm sick?
To carry your analogy on, I could look at the vault but would I have a clue if the lock was any good or not? Not unless I was a locksmith and physical security expert.
I rely on others to tell me how secure the source code for my OS is.
The internet has been shut down??
So all these pages that appear in my browser are being generated by my PC! I'm like that guy in electric dreams!!!
FTFA before posting dickhead
Sorry I was repling to your autosignature that I thought was specifically part of your comment.
It will take you far longer than you imagine to get over your last election.
The mockery I refered to was your bizare electoral college system, the blantant corruption and cases of distortion and obsufication of the vote.
I accept and understand your point on the various roles. However you say:
"to have privacy is a form of freedom"
So all people should have all freedoms? Should I therefore free to walk into your house and eat your food, sleep (or worse!) in your bed?
Freedom is great, and I am very much for it, but all things must be reasonable. You opinion may result in more harm being done, by resulting in a higher than necessary crime rate or truancy rate. Given the choice of tagging everyone and preventing 911 or carrying on as we are which you choose? (Note I am not saying that tagging would have prevented it, the effectiveness of tagging as a preventative measure is another very moot point). The fact that I disagree with your opinion, does not mean I think you should not have it, you MUST be free to think as you want!
I very much believe in the right to privacy, as I said there are certain things that should not be revealed to anyone, however, I do not see that an individual's location is one of these things, particularly from law enforcement agencies, bound by due process, and oversight.
P.S. You say you would surrender your right if a court told you to, your faith in the court system is admirable if perhaps slightly opposed to the rest of your position on this, the court interprets the law, if a law is changed, does it become correct. In your 19th century analogy, would you enslave yourself if a court order said you should?
You were actually being sarcastic but I that's fine.
I would disagree with you on the purpose of the police, I would say that there role has a large element of symbology, and police cars patrolling or "bobbys on the beat", as Brits might say, provide a large amount of reassurance to people. Intersting that my local police force's motto is "reducing crime, disorder and fear", not just "fighting crime"
If tracking everyone were effective at fighting crime I would not object to it, indeed we do track some criminals in the UK rather than giving them a custodial sentance (although not with RFID per se). I am never entirely clear why people are, the idea that you should have this right of privacy seems strange to me. It is only recently as cities have grown to a resonable size that this is possible, in a small village such as mine, I can't walk down the street without most people knowing where I am becuase everyone knows everyone else.
There are things that I think should remain private, as an example my medical history should be private to you, quite important that my doctor knows it when prescribing treatment. I still do not see why a child not attending school should remain private, from the instituion or from law enforcement, and it would seem neither do you.
Slight stawman on your part. The police's job is to patrol the streets. A teachers is to impart knowledge, not to be ensure that pupils are present and correct. You are confusing them with prison wardens.
Why should truancy be a private matter?
The primary job should be to teach but they must have a concept of in loco parentis surely? Otherwise why have any rules other than you have to go to class, shut up and pay attention?
There is no getting away from the duty of care that they must have. Without it who is at fault when a 6 year old is electrocuted due to faulty wiring
Subdural implants will solve this minor issue!!
So rather than have someone who is underpaid, overworked and likely to have low motivation carry out a labour intensive task like taking a rollcall, we automate it.
Someone tell me the problem (other than it uses the paranoid's current bête noire of RFID)
Surely factually correct is what it is supposed to be?
BTW. Not all of us gave a damm about some former colony's mockery of the democratic process.
I think it's more like Genetic Algorithms
In evolution there is concept of mutation. A creature who has undergone a mutation of some kind may have enhanced abilities to perform some deed.
For example the mutation may create a efficient predator who can catch more food and so prosper at the expense of its un-mutated siblings. Eventually these new form will be come dominant and the unaltered species will die out.
The difference is that in there is no way for the mutation of correct article to gain a competitive advantage, it can be reverted to falsehood very simply.
The "evolution" will therefore stall.
And that is the key problem the article is referring to, without a gatekeeper who maintains the standards?
/. and most other news outlets do, a level of undistinguished writing can be eliminated, improving the overall output. If the moderation of content is done by all it quality must be asymptotic.
It is not a question of expertise in a subject matter, but the ability to communicate your experience to others, a skill which if find lacking in many editors for the Wikipedia.
By having a centralised editing function (assuming this has the requisite skills), in the same way that
I think you have stumbled, however inadvertently, on the essential point that the article is making.
The vast majority of everything ever written is utter tripe, and of very little value, particularly when used outside of its temporal frame of reference. The reason for this is that unfortunately the majority of people writing are, by definition, average.
To create any piece of work that is noteworthy for its excellence requires discrimination to separate the wheat from the chaff, otherwise it descends into a mire of mediocrity.
I take this second point. However, this what not the one your originally made. In your original article you asked to use the slow down in increase of HDD capacity as evidence to disprove Moore's Observation.
/. posts is an arguement for poor science.
This is akin to asking if the increase in the penetrationn of broadband enforces Morres' observation. The two things while interesting are not related to the number of transistors, the subject of Gordons paper.
I hardly thing the gradual deteriation of
Perhaps if they started thinking about thinking about developing it.
Can you spell WMD? never mind find them!
The reason they don't is they have an investment in the newer masks, better FABs and louder marketing campaigns for P4s and 64bit chips that requires a return. They also have to prove to Wall Street that they will continue to grow in size, despite the fact that there markets are becoming very close to saturation point.
Think about it, would you rather sell 10 things at £10 or 10 things at £1000? Despite the arguements about margin level the latter looks far better when you are trying to appear bigger and more successful than your rival.
The day I passed my driving test was the first day I had ever driven a car on my own. It was not long after I had got my 1 litre rust bucket over 100mph that I realised I had never tried a hand-brake turn.....
Driving down a quiet country lane I thought I would give this a go and so as I crested a hill I wrenched back on the handbrake, I was doing around 70mph.
It did stop the car, although I did end up with the front wheels in a ditch! Ah the halcon days of youth.
Linux is not invulnerable, but it's not "just as susuptable" either
If you are using susceptable as an alternative word of vulnerable then they are probably right, it is as likely that these vulnerabilities exist, just they are not known / published / exploited in the same way as Windows vulnerabilies are.
Linux is immune to those [windows attacks]
There of course the case of Winux that also refutes this but that is just being churlish.
No consquences until they borrow your credit card for a brief spending spree!!