I'm the very model of a modern Tesla technician, I've information technical, electrical, mechanical, I know the latest models, and I quote designs historical, From Model X to Model 3, in order categorical; I'm very well acquainted, too, with matters mathematical, I understand transmissions, both continuous and manual, I'm bullish on the stock reports and teeming with a lot o' news, With many cheerful facts about executive option issues.
Windows 7 gets free security updates until some time in 2020, according to the linked article. The 2015 date is for desktop support. Plus the Windows 7 embedded manufacturers get 10 years of support after the end-of-lifetime for the OS (not sure when that was).
Windows XP and Windows 7 applied patches on a schedule and rebooted on a schedule. This was just fine. Yeah, sometimes I left an app open and I came in during the morning with the "do you want to save?" prompt up and the patch not applied. No problem, my bad, I'll save before I go to bed tonight then I'll get the patch.
Windows 10 now has 3 different places to configure the schedule, and most of the patches ignore it anyway. Automatic updates has a configurable time in the system control panel, then there's a "metro" style control panel where I configure working hours, then there's a popup in the notification area that tells me that it wants to apply a patch and it asks me the time. And despite all that, I still get notifications during the day asking me when it can apply a patch.
Most recently, I saw a message in the notification area telling me that it didn't notify me about a reboot because I was playing a game. *facepalm* Why did they make it this complicated?
In this example, the attack requires knowing the IP address of the camera, not the router. Although to your point, they could probably get it right in 256 guesses.
I don't understand how DNS rebinding works on a local device. How would the attacker at nesttb.com know the internal IP address of my IoT device? And how did they know I am the one making the DNS request at all since my DNS request really went to my ISP's DNS server, who then made the DNS request on my behalf?
The story talks about the Chinese "social credit system," yet the only concrete information provided points to the parent's "financial" credit problem. So is this a case of the student loan being turned down for "financial" credit issues, or the student being turned down for "social" credit issues? I don't even know if Chinese students are expected to pay for college or not. The only details the article provides about the father's credit is the following statement:
he may not be able to attend because of his father's poor credit standing — the father owed 200,000 RMB (about $30,000) to a local bank
I had to confirm that one, but you are correct. Google: 5th amendment safe combination The 5th amendment protects you from being compelled to produce a combination. So yeah, if this ever got to the Supreme court and they decided digitally-entered combinations are different, then it would be clear that the real reason behind that decision is not a matter of constitutional principle, but about the fact that they can get around it with a real safe. I betcha this will make it there eventually.
It's too bad that the Supreme court can't proactively seek out cases like this an intervene. This process where cases have to come up, be dropped, get conflicting rulings in different courts, then wait for just the right defendant -- before the matter is truly settled - seems to take too long and lead to injustice in the mean time.
Thank you for the informative reply. I still have one point of confusion,
However, more specifically this case dealt with whether the TSA was a law enforcement organization, because law enforcement officers are not immune to tort claims; they are specifically exempted from FTCA protection.
I think you meant "they are specifically exempted from FTCA liability" because the FTCA doesn't grant them protection, it states who does not have protection.
So... is there a criminal charge that can be applied here?
I am browsing the site just to see what is on it. It is really really slow. Was it always like this? I wonder if various groups are hitting it en-mass to download the articles. There's only 2 days before it goes down. If it is really so valuable, I am surprised they aren't selling it. Hopefully someone in the medical field will chime-in here.
"I'm a negotiator like you folks, we are negotiators," Trump said, drawing laughter before pivoting to how he would renegotiate the Iran deal. "Is there anybody that doesn't renegotiate deals in this room? This room negotiates them -- perhaps more than any other room I've ever spoken in."
Trump was playing on a Jewish stereotype, one that is often used in a derogatory way. Trump likes to present himself as a dealmaker, so maybe in context it was funny and appropriate. In isolation, we could laugh this off. But we see a lot of statements like this from Trump, and together they create the impression that his view of races and cultures is based on stereotypes and hearsay. He sounds like one of those racists who doesn't even realize they are a racist.
We could stop there, but there are lots of clearer examples than that one. During his campaign, Trump tweeted a phony racist infographic blaming blacks for a large number of homicides. These phony facts are designed to fool people who already have racist stereotypes, and Trump fell for it. Maybe he is not a racist, and he is just dumb? Trump constantly suggested that Barack Obama was a Muslim, intending that to be deragatory. He suggested that Obama's birth certificate stated he is a "muslim" which is of course not something that would be on a birth cerfiticate... so that just feels weird, like how he sees race and religion as something immutable about a person, and something they would want to hide. There's just a lot of stuff like that he does that creates the impression of a racist. You don't have to put on a while hood and march in the streets to be a racist.
Sovereign immunity confuses the heck out of me. The idea that law enforcement is immune to prosecution is preposterous. The very concept seems to violate the 5th amendment to the constitution. Someone needs to hold them accountable.
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
It seems quite obvious to me that someone having the power to hold someone for 18 hours arbitrarily is not someone you want immune from prosecution. I get that the government doesn't want every criminal suing the police because they can, but the current situation seems ripe for abuse. A TSA screener should not hold that kind of power. Maybe we need to permit liability in the event that the person is acquitted or charges dropped, like what happened here?
This article is probably not the best example of AI, but lets talk about this in general, because it keeps coming up here on Slashdot.
That's not AI. That's not machine learning. It's statistical analysis on a large scale.
Much of this "that's not AI" talk is really just moving the goal posts. We thought only an AI could play chess. Now we have machines that play chess, but they are not AI. We thought only AI could differentiate and integrate equations, now software can do that. We thought only AI could win at Jeopardy, diagnose diseases, play Go, beat a human at Quake 3, and drive cars... Now we have computers that do that, but they are not AI.
The problem is AI isn't well-defined and agreed-upon. It's an umbrella term for a lot of mathematical techniques. The cognitive dissonance of this generation of coders is that we are solving problems, with math, that were once considered limited to the realm of the human brain. At the same time, we are confirming the horrid realization that our brains are just "statistical analysis on a large scale." And the upcoming horror is that we can scale data centers so big that the human brain isn't really "large scale" any more.
Terry Pratchett, in his book "The Wee Free Men" says:
It doesn't stop being magic just because you know how it works.
I have this image of the last human, being escorted to their internment camp, telling their robot overlord that it isn't *really* AI.
Sorry, I should have said "16GB internal storage." On a related note, it's annoying that Android doesn't install apps to the SD card very well. It is similar to how Windows was back around '95, when apps put much of their files on the C: drive even if you installed them on D. At some point I'll break down and root the dang thing, delete all the Samsung garbage, and probably double my available internal storage space.
I have a Samsung flagship phone from a few years ago, and after a factory reset with the default apps installed the 16GB memory card has 500MB free. It can't even download updates if I install a single small app. So yes, 150MB wasted is a big deal.
Not to distract from your main point about his successor, which is good, I want to criticize your use of the term "Conservative types" with a capital C.
The Republican party has cognitive dissonance over environmentalism because the party has entrenched big-business interests with very short-term thinking. They have vocally pushed the false story that environmental policy is anti-business.
Toyota made a fortune off environmentally friendly cars. When George W Bush told America that raising fuel economy would cost "millions" of jobs, Toyota bet on the technology anyway. When gas prices rose Americans bought fuel-efficient cars bolstering Toyota. The American auto makers were either buying engines from Toyota or licensing their patents. Environmental tech paid off.
When the US government used thermal imaging to inspect for leaks in large ships, big shipping companies objected. But once they realized that cutting down on engine leaks would save them money, they started enforcing the emissions laws themselves because it was profitable.
Conservatives know that investing in environmental technology is often economically productive. Less fuel consumption means less dependency on foreign resources, less damage to American land and resources, and more technological innovation and leadership.
Is this not a crime? Who perpetrated it? Or did everyone who installed the extension agree to a EULA explaining that it did this? If so, I believe the problem is the existence of a EULA. They are too long and complex, nobody reads them, and so they have all kinds of stuff in them. Since people agree to them automatically, they lose their rights to use the legal system that should be punishing these criminals.
If the bad review contained factual claims that could be proven as false, they I'd agree to removing the posts.
That is what happened.
posts against a San Francisco law firm that a judge determined were defamatory... falsely claiming that her firm failed to communicate with the client, among other things.
So it sounds like the claims were indeed proven false.
The benefit of streaming games is that you don't need high-end hardware. But streaming only works well for slow-paced low-fidelity games. So I see no use for for streaming games at all. The casual ones don't benefit from streaming, and the high-end ones don't work well.
Something which is easy to do in anger, or accidentally, or just out of annoyance....not to get at the people who are determined to kill you no matter what. It's to get at the people who don't, but who with a gun might kill you anyway.
Gun laws don't stop those kinds of crimes because those people obtain guns legally.
FYI: Take Baltimore city, for example. Most of the gun crime in the country is committed by individuals who: * Went out of their way to get a gun illegally ahead of time * Were already criminals * Had a plan in mind before they even obtained the gun * Were committing gang violence
It sounds like you didn't read the article at all. Or even the summary for that matter.
but his spew about politicians making decisions about science rather strongly suggests the majority of his income derives from ExxonMobil or the equivalent Putin-owned company.
I see no such statement in the article. What are you talking about?
One more example of why judges should be required to accept the input of nonlegals like, you know, scientists and software professionals.
He did. The article says:
Alsup brought in the world's leading experts on climate change at an unusual hearing in March that he said was intended to educate him about the science behind the Earth's warming.
Slashdot Mirror
both electrical and mechanical:
Can't.... resist...
I'm the very model of a modern Tesla technician,
I've information technical, electrical, mechanical,
I know the latest models, and I quote designs historical,
From Model X to Model 3, in order categorical;
I'm very well acquainted, too, with matters mathematical,
I understand transmissions, both continuous and manual,
I'm bullish on the stock reports and teeming with a lot o' news,
With many cheerful facts about executive option issues.
Windows 7 gets free security updates until some time in 2020, according to the linked article. The 2015 date is for desktop support. Plus the Windows 7 embedded manufacturers get 10 years of support after the end-of-lifetime for the OS (not sure when that was).
Windows XP and Windows 7 applied patches on a schedule and rebooted on a schedule. This was just fine. Yeah, sometimes I left an app open and I came in during the morning with the "do you want to save?" prompt up and the patch not applied. No problem, my bad, I'll save before I go to bed tonight then I'll get the patch.
Windows 10 now has 3 different places to configure the schedule, and most of the patches ignore it anyway. Automatic updates has a configurable time in the system control panel, then there's a "metro" style control panel where I configure working hours, then there's a popup in the notification area that tells me that it wants to apply a patch and it asks me the time. And despite all that, I still get notifications during the day asking me when it can apply a patch.
Most recently, I saw a message in the notification area telling me that it didn't notify me about a reboot because I was playing a game. *facepalm* Why did they make it this complicated?
In this example, the attack requires knowing the IP address of the camera, not the router. Although to your point, they could probably get it right in 256 guesses.
Thank you for that.
I don't understand how DNS rebinding works on a local device. How would the attacker at nesttb.com know the internal IP address of my IoT device? And how did they know I am the one making the DNS request at all since my DNS request really went to my ISP's DNS server, who then made the DNS request on my behalf?
The story talks about the Chinese "social credit system," yet the only concrete information provided points to the parent's "financial" credit problem. So is this a case of the student loan being turned down for "financial" credit issues, or the student being turned down for "social" credit issues? I don't even know if Chinese students are expected to pay for college or not. The only details the article provides about the father's credit is the following statement:
he may not be able to attend because of his father's poor credit standing — the father owed 200,000 RMB (about $30,000) to a local bank
Does anyone have any clarifying information here?
I had to confirm that one, but you are correct. Google: 5th amendment safe combination The 5th amendment protects you from being compelled to produce a combination. So yeah, if this ever got to the Supreme court and they decided digitally-entered combinations are different, then it would be clear that the real reason behind that decision is not a matter of constitutional principle, but about the fact that they can get around it with a real safe. I betcha this will make it there eventually.
It's too bad that the Supreme court can't proactively seek out cases like this an intervene. This process where cases have to come up, be dropped, get conflicting rulings in different courts, then wait for just the right defendant -- before the matter is truly settled - seems to take too long and lead to injustice in the mean time.
Thank you for the informative reply. I still have one point of confusion,
However, more specifically this case dealt with whether the TSA was a law enforcement organization, because law enforcement officers are not immune to tort claims; they are specifically exempted from FTCA protection.
I think you meant "they are specifically exempted from FTCA liability" because the FTCA doesn't grant them protection, it states who does not have protection.
So... is there a criminal charge that can be applied here?
How is the right for the TSA to perform a search is related to this discussion? I am not aware of anyone questioning that in this discussion.
I am browsing the site just to see what is on it. It is really really slow. Was it always like this? I wonder if various groups are hitting it en-mass to download the articles. There's only 2 days before it goes down. If it is really so valuable, I am surprised they aren't selling it. Hopefully someone in the medical field will chime-in here.
Racism can be subtle, and not even obvious to the individual. Let me give such an example. When Trump addressed the Jewish Coalition he said:
"I'm a negotiator like you folks, we are negotiators," Trump said, drawing laughter before pivoting to how he would renegotiate the Iran deal. "Is there anybody that doesn't renegotiate deals in this room? This room negotiates them -- perhaps more than any other room I've ever spoken in."
Trump was playing on a Jewish stereotype, one that is often used in a derogatory way. Trump likes to present himself as a dealmaker, so maybe in context it was funny and appropriate. In isolation, we could laugh this off. But we see a lot of statements like this from Trump, and together they create the impression that his view of races and cultures is based on stereotypes and hearsay. He sounds like one of those racists who doesn't even realize they are a racist.
We could stop there, but there are lots of clearer examples than that one. During his campaign, Trump tweeted a phony racist infographic blaming blacks for a large number of homicides. These phony facts are designed to fool people who already have racist stereotypes, and Trump fell for it. Maybe he is not a racist, and he is just dumb? Trump constantly suggested that Barack Obama was a Muslim, intending that to be deragatory. He suggested that Obama's birth certificate stated he is a "muslim" which is of course not something that would be on a birth cerfiticate... so that just feels weird, like how he sees race and religion as something immutable about a person, and something they would want to hide. There's just a lot of stuff like that he does that creates the impression of a racist. You don't have to put on a while hood and march in the streets to be a racist.
Sovereign immunity confuses the heck out of me. The idea that law enforcement is immune to prosecution is preposterous. The very concept seems to violate the 5th amendment to the constitution. Someone needs to hold them accountable.
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law ; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
It seems quite obvious to me that someone having the power to hold someone for 18 hours arbitrarily is not someone you want immune from prosecution. I get that the government doesn't want every criminal suing the police because they can, but the current situation seems ripe for abuse. A TSA screener should not hold that kind of power. Maybe we need to permit liability in the event that the person is acquitted or charges dropped, like what happened here?
This article is probably not the best example of AI, but lets talk about this in general, because it keeps coming up here on Slashdot.
That's not AI. That's not machine learning. It's statistical analysis on a large scale.
Much of this "that's not AI" talk is really just moving the goal posts. We thought only an AI could play chess. Now we have machines that play chess, but they are not AI. We thought only AI could differentiate and integrate equations, now software can do that. We thought only AI could win at Jeopardy, diagnose diseases, play Go, beat a human at Quake 3, and drive cars... Now we have computers that do that, but they are not AI.
The problem is AI isn't well-defined and agreed-upon. It's an umbrella term for a lot of mathematical techniques. The cognitive dissonance of this generation of coders is that we are solving problems, with math, that were once considered limited to the realm of the human brain. At the same time, we are confirming the horrid realization that our brains are just "statistical analysis on a large scale." And the upcoming horror is that we can scale data centers so big that the human brain isn't really "large scale" any more.
Terry Pratchett, in his book "The Wee Free Men" says:
It doesn't stop being magic just because you know how it works.
I have this image of the last human, being escorted to their internment camp, telling their robot overlord that it isn't *really* AI.
Sorry, I should have said "16GB internal storage." On a related note, it's annoying that Android doesn't install apps to the SD card very well. It is similar to how Windows was back around '95, when apps put much of their files on the C: drive even if you installed them on D. At some point I'll break down and root the dang thing, delete all the Samsung garbage, and probably double my available internal storage space.
I have a Samsung flagship phone from a few years ago, and after a factory reset with the default apps installed the 16GB memory card has 500MB free. It can't even download updates if I install a single small app. So yes, 150MB wasted is a big deal.
The license only covered the rights to Getty's photograph of the statue -- not the statue itself.
The stamp only contained the photograph of the statue -- not the statue itself.
Not to distract from your main point about his successor, which is good, I want to criticize your use of the term "Conservative types" with a capital C.
Nobody is a more rabid environmentalist than the hunter who wants to protect their land or the fisherman who wants to protect their livelihood. These people are typically conservatives. Conservatives are about preservation and good stewardship. The Republican party does not define what it is to be conservative, and environmentalism is not a liberal or conservative philosophy.
The Republican party has cognitive dissonance over environmentalism because the party has entrenched big-business interests with very short-term thinking. They have vocally pushed the false story that environmental policy is anti-business.
Toyota made a fortune off environmentally friendly cars. When George W Bush told America that raising fuel economy would cost "millions" of jobs, Toyota bet on the technology anyway. When gas prices rose Americans bought fuel-efficient cars bolstering Toyota. The American auto makers were either buying engines from Toyota or licensing their patents. Environmental tech paid off.
When the US government used thermal imaging to inspect for leaks in large ships, big shipping companies objected. But once they realized that cutting down on engine leaks would save them money, they started enforcing the emissions laws themselves because it was profitable.
Conservatives know that investing in environmental technology is often economically productive. Less fuel consumption means less dependency on foreign resources, less damage to American land and resources, and more technological innovation and leadership.
The previous Slashdot story where the bill was gutted linked to a diff of the bill. This article just makes statements about "strong protections." I really like having access to the source code.
Is this not a crime? Who perpetrated it? Or did everyone who installed the extension agree to a EULA explaining that it did this? If so, I believe the problem is the existence of a EULA. They are too long and complex, nobody reads them, and so they have all kinds of stuff in them. Since people agree to them automatically, they lose their rights to use the legal system that should be punishing these criminals.
I prefer the expanded catalog of the DVD/Blu-Ray plan.
If the bad review contained factual claims that could be proven as false, they I'd agree to removing the posts.
That is what happened.
posts against a San Francisco law firm that a judge determined were defamatory... falsely claiming that her firm failed to communicate with the client, among other things.
So it sounds like the claims were indeed proven false.
Wouldn't it make more sense to have the defendant remove or edit the review? Or does Yelp not support amendment a review after it was written?
The benefit of streaming games is that you don't need high-end hardware. But streaming only works well for slow-paced low-fidelity games. So I see no use for for streaming games at all. The casual ones don't benefit from streaming, and the high-end ones don't work well.
Something which is easy to do in anger, or accidentally, or just out of annoyance....not to get at the people who are determined to kill you no matter what. It's to get at the people who don't, but who with a gun might kill you anyway.
Gun laws don't stop those kinds of crimes because those people obtain guns legally.
FYI: Take Baltimore city, for example. Most of the gun crime in the country is committed by individuals who:
* Went out of their way to get a gun illegally ahead of time
* Were already criminals
* Had a plan in mind before they even obtained the gun
* Were committing gang violence
It sounds like you didn't read the article at all. Or even the summary for that matter.
but his spew about politicians making decisions about science rather strongly suggests the majority of his income derives from ExxonMobil or the equivalent Putin-owned company.
I see no such statement in the article. What are you talking about?
One more example of why judges should be required to accept the input of nonlegals like, you know, scientists and software professionals.
He did. The article says:
Alsup brought in the world's leading experts on climate change at an unusual hearing in March that he said was intended to educate him about the science behind the Earth's warming.