The primary benefit a system like this is to defend against a hacker who downloads bulk credentials from a hack, then uses those same credentials on another site. This is how most hacks are done. Even a single character difference defends you in this case. But in your example, you were attacked by an individual who was targeting you. In that case, you need to use a smarter pattern. But most hacks aren't like that.
Yeah, others have questioned if CR has the skills to do this. I hope they hire some real security people. Your "meta check" concept would be pretty weak, but that is the kind of thing they might do.
Airbags and roll cages aren't useful in an aircraft. So there is literally nothing left to re-use between them. The passenger might as well get out of the car, and get into the coptor. Ooh, they can re-use the cupholders and CD-player!
This is great. I've been promoting the idea that independent test labs such as uL, or standards such as the CE mark, should include product security as well. Having consumer ratings include them could significantly increase awareness of security. We, as tecnhologists and consumers, really need to hit hard against companies selling inherently insecure products. With the rise of botnets, insecure products are no longer just a threat to our own networks, but to national security as well.
The problem isn't the mod chip per-se. If you read the ruling it shows that they were providing instructions for how to modify the headers of dumped ROMs so that they could play them. They basically were selling the chip as a way to clone games. What we have seen in the US courts is that, if you provide a service that permits copyright infringement, you have to show that you were actively policing the system to prevent that from happening. But if you basically sell something as "Hey look here, you can download free stuff off the internet here!" then you lose.
In bygone days, I had a modded Nintendo DS, and the homebrew community was very active. There was hardly another device like the DS at the time. Is the Wii homebrew community just as active? Or are the mod chips really just being used for piracy? It seems like there is really nothing special about a Wii that makes it a good target for homebrew development.
We need a a "-5 Insightful, but ad-hominem attack" moderation for posts like the above. A way of saying "I see you are smart and posted something that could have added to the discussion, but then you blew it."
So yeah, try not to think so one-dimensionally; you should have more than one brain cell.
Once again, I am welcomed back to Slashdot.
A. Intelligent comment
B. Intelligent reply
A. Intelligent reply with embedded ad-hominem attack.
I hope you don't behave this way in real-life. This is getting tiring. It's no wonder we have a US president who resorts to name-calling. If intelligent people behave this way, what hope do we have?
But, permit me to ignore your vitriol and continue the discussion: It looks like your reply assumes that only stove manufacturers cut their labor force by 50%. The scenario posed by robots isn't that just one industry is doing this, all industries are doing it. That's why the farm analogy might not work in this century. There were plenty of other jobs that required similar skills and levels of education. What if that changes?
Also, looking at the number of stoves sold is only a part of the picture. Indeed, it could be that the number of stoves sold increases. That's good! But as a result of the unemployment, someone who once could afford a stove, now cannot. Well that's okay, right? Since more stoves were sold overall. Problem: If that person can't find a new job, they not only can't afford a stove, they can't afford *anything*. No number of stoves sold will solve that problem.
Maybe this is the endgame of human evolution. Instead of having 7 billion people, of whom 1% are rich (that's 70 million): perhaps you have a human population of 70 million rich people, and about 7 billion robots? Not so scary if you are one of the 1%. I just don't want to be around during the transition period.
What happens when you pay your workers the same wage and have them work the same hours, but you only employ 50% as many workers?...Mind you, because that stove is only $1,673, the households which historically bought the $1,800 models can now buy your previously-$3,200 model in the same budget (although the $1,800 models will also be cheaper). Most likely, you'll move more product
But now, only 50% of the people have jobs. So there are fewer households that can afford the $1,800 models.
Consider this scenario, then let me tie it into your scenario:
There are 4 farmers. The farmers share their grazing land, but each one keeps the profits from shearing their own sheep. Each farmer starts with 10 sheep. Each farmer asks "should I buy another sheep?" Well, since they keep the profits from the sheep they buy, but share the costs, each farmer decides it is economical to buy another sheep. But now, each farmer found their cost increased by 1 full sheep, not 1/4 of a sheep, but it increased by 1/4 of a sheep for the sheep they bought and 3/4 for the 3 sheep the other farmers bought. Lesson: "Local optimization does not lead to global optimization."
Now in your scenario, the product price dropped because one company cut its labor by 50%. That resulted in fewer households who can afford $1,800. But this is just one employer out of millions. So the resulting reduction from the layoffs does not significantly reduce the number of total households that can afford the $1,800 models. However, what if all the other factories do the same thing? This problem starts to look a lot like the sheep scenario. Each factory saves money by reducing their own labor pool, but they share the customers pool. But if all factories do this same labor and cost reduction, it starts to impact the pool of customers. The short-term winner is the company that can cut costs faster than other companies. But eventually, everyone loses.
I want to make a bot that can answer the quiz. My theory is that, once I have done so successfully, it can make more intelligent comments on the article than the average commenter. At that point, I think I have won my own personal turing test.
Next up: A bot that tells you if the news is fake. Has someone already done that? I imagine something like Microsoft's "clippy" popping up in the corner saying "I see that you are reading complete bu11sh*t. Would you like some help posting vitriolic comments?"
Are you saying the penalty was too low? A DUI = a random dice roll to kill someone.
on a two lane (one lane in each direction - no median)
On a road with no median is about the most dangerous place to drive drunk.
within 2 miles of his house while driving home
The distance from his home is irrelevant.
I have a relative who is an alcoholic, and he got into many accidents "close to home." Each time, there was some excuse for it not being a big deal. It was only a few miles, he was driving slowly, it was the other guys fault, it was just a mailbox, nobody got hurt, that guy was pretending he got hit for money, etc. Don't take DUIs lightly. The police are trying to nip that in the bud.
Under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, apple can claim whatever terms they want. But ultimately, Apple had to prove to the court that the strips were indeed proof of water damage. When they failed to do so, they had to honor the warranty.
Feel free to try again, because what you're referenced doesn't support your claim in any way. And, give proper legal citations next time (statute, regulation or case law),
Let me first state which parts of your post I am refuting. There are 2:
If a belt breaks, they can require you get it repaired at a dealer if you want warranty coverage.
They cannot require it. But they don't have to pay for it if you use a 3rd-party vendor.
if they want to say your engine warranty is voided if you hang fuzzy dice on the mirror, they can. They just have to state so clearly.
They can only do this if they first prove to the FTC that doing so would harm the product. Then, if the customer sues, it goes to the courts. After reading today, it seems that there is some kind of arbitration process. I don't know how that works though.
"Tie-In Sales" Provisions Generally, tie-in sales provisions are not allowed. Such a provision would require a purchaser of the warranted product to buy an item or service from a particular company to use with the warranted product in order to be eligible to receive a remedy under the warranty. The following are examples of prohibited tie-in sales provisions.
In order to keep your new Plenum Brand Vacuum Cleaner warranty in effect, you must use genuine Plenum Brand Filter Bags. Failure to have scheduled maintenance performed, at your expense, by the Great American Maintenance Company, Inc., voids this warranty.
While you cannot use a tie-in sales provision, your warranty need not cover use of replacement parts, repairs, or maintenance that is inappropriate for your product. The following is an example of a permissible provision that excludes coverage of such things.
While necessary maintenance or repairs on your AudioMundo Stereo System can be performed by any company, we recommend that you use only authorized AudioMundo dealers. Improper or incorrectly performed maintenance or repair voids this warranty.
Although tie-in sales provisions generally are not allowed, you can include such a provision in your warranty if you can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the FTC that your product will not work properly without a specified item or service. If you believe that this is the case, you should contact the warranty staff of the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection for information on how to apply for a waiver of the tie-in sales prohibition.
Nope - if they want to say your engine warranty is voided if you hang fuzzy dice on the mirror, they can. They just have to state so clearly.
They can state that, but it is only valid of the person doesn't take them to court over it. If the person does, the company will lose for violating the act.
Years ago, the idea was more about forbidding manufacturers from suing people who made repair manuals and parts. And to stop them from putting DRM into the diagnostic mechanisms. Requiring them to provide documentation might be taking things too far. I dunno.
But the idea that a bipedal robot is going to be able to drive my work truck out to a remote & off-road site and go inside to replace a 9000 volt vacuum or climb up the 1800ft tower to find a loose hanger or air leak is almost as perposterous as the idea that we won't be using high power transmitters anymore. It just ain't gonna happen... And that's exactly why I left the datacenter to find a job like this one which requires hands-on skills.
There is a flaw in your vision of the future, let me explain:
If you watch old sci-fi, a dishwasher was a device with hands that poured soap onto dishes and scrubbed them. People imagined a clothes washer picked up the clothes and rubbed them against a washboard. Automated sci-fi planes had bipedal robots that sat in cockpits, automated sci-fi soldiers carried guns made for human hands. But we now know that this isn't how automation works. I work for a company that builds medical robots, and they do not look like people either.
At some point, some guy probably said "No robot will ever be able to unload these boxes from a truck, and take all the mixed-up samples from the box, stick on the barcode labels, look at each one to see if the liquid is right and if the caps are tight, carry it over to the centrifuge, and put the vials onto the vortexer, etc. That's crazy!" Well that guy doesn't have a job any more. We kinda joke that one day a microbiology lab will be a 5,000 square foot building with no human beings in it at all. That was considered skilled labor 10 years ago. Contrary to expectations, the cleaning staff will probably be the last ones to get replaced.
So lets look at your job: * Drives truck: Already automated. (Tesla, etc.) * Diagnose which part is broken: Somewhat automated. * Orders appropriate part: Already automated. (Current project I'm on) * Climbs up tower and replaces part: ehhhh...you win.
You have me on that last one. Replacing parts still requires a human. For now...
A few years ago there was a tool that did something similar for art: you drew a really rough line-drawing that just gave a sense of scale and position to each object. Then you labeled each object like "cheetah" or "motorcycle" and had one special label for the background, like "desert." Then it ran an image search: it would look for an image tagged with the same label, with roughly the same proportions as the outline. It auto-photoshopped it in, and viola! Instant art! One of the demo pictures was a cheetah chasing a motorcycle, and it was pretty good and kinda funny.
However, I notice that the art industry is largely unaffected.
Also, I don't think it is so easy to just "blur and sharpen" between two areas of code. Maybe something like "content-aware fill" would work here?;-) Not likely.
Not always. But being made in the same factory doesn't mean it is the same product.
Here are some differences between the "real" product and the "after hours" product made in the same factory: * May have lower capacity. Sometimes it labeled as such, but other times it is labeled as having the same capacity. * May have skipped QA testing. * Will not have a warranty. Sometimes they have no serial number, or they all have the same serial number.
Also, I can return a poor quality product to Best Buy more easily than some random Amazon or Newegg seller. And I can rate it poorly on Best Buy, thus discouraging future sales. But making a poor rating on Amazon against FlyByNightCompany74 won't discourage anyone. Once they rack-up enough bad reviews they drop the product and start a new listing for what is essentially the same item, or start a whole new seller.
Slashdot Mirror
The primary benefit a system like this is to defend against a hacker who downloads bulk credentials from a hack, then uses those same credentials on another site. This is how most hacks are done. Even a single character difference defends you in this case. But in your example, you were attacked by an individual who was targeting you. In that case, you need to use a smarter pattern. But most hacks aren't like that.
FYI: Final result, without using --lang, is ~16.3GB (17,595,078,265 bytes) and 4,606 files.
Yeah, others have questioned if CR has the skills to do this. I hope they hire some real security people. Your "meta check" concept would be pretty weak, but that is the kind of thing they might do.
Airbags and roll cages aren't useful in an aircraft. So there is literally nothing left to re-use between them. The passenger might as well get out of the car, and get into the coptor. Ooh, they can re-use the cupholders and CD-player!
But having the feature built-in was a lot more convenient
Convenience or security, take your pick.
Expect it to take a long time though: So far it has downloaded 10GB of files and has >3300 top-level folders. No progress indication. :-(
This is great. I've been promoting the idea that independent test labs such as uL, or standards such as the CE mark, should include product security as well. Having consumer ratings include them could significantly increase awareness of security. We, as tecnhologists and consumers, really need to hit hard against companies selling inherently insecure products. With the rise of botnets, insecure products are no longer just a threat to our own networks, but to national security as well.
So what mass would you raise? Rocks? Dirt? Sand? Salt?
The ultimate end of this thought-experiment is just to use water.
The problem isn't the mod chip per-se. If you read the ruling it shows that they were providing instructions for how to modify the headers of dumped ROMs so that they could play them. They basically were selling the chip as a way to clone games. What we have seen in the US courts is that, if you provide a service that permits copyright infringement, you have to show that you were actively policing the system to prevent that from happening. But if you basically sell something as "Hey look here, you can download free stuff off the internet here!" then you lose.
In bygone days, I had a modded Nintendo DS, and the homebrew community was very active. There was hardly another device like the DS at the time. Is the Wii homebrew community just as active? Or are the mod chips really just being used for piracy? It seems like there is really nothing special about a Wii that makes it a good target for homebrew development.
We need a a "-5 Insightful, but ad-hominem attack" moderation for posts like the above. A way of saying "I see you are smart and posted something that could have added to the discussion, but then you blew it."
So yeah, try not to think so one-dimensionally; you should have more than one brain cell.
Once again, I am welcomed back to Slashdot.
A. Intelligent comment
B. Intelligent reply
A. Intelligent reply with embedded ad-hominem attack.
I hope you don't behave this way in real-life. This is getting tiring. It's no wonder we have a US president who resorts to name-calling. If intelligent people behave this way, what hope do we have?
But, permit me to ignore your vitriol and continue the discussion: It looks like your reply assumes that only stove manufacturers cut their labor force by 50%. The scenario posed by robots isn't that just one industry is doing this, all industries are doing it. That's why the farm analogy might not work in this century. There were plenty of other jobs that required similar skills and levels of education. What if that changes?
Also, looking at the number of stoves sold is only a part of the picture. Indeed, it could be that the number of stoves sold increases. That's good! But as a result of the unemployment, someone who once could afford a stove, now cannot. Well that's okay, right? Since more stoves were sold overall. Problem: If that person can't find a new job, they not only can't afford a stove, they can't afford *anything*. No number of stoves sold will solve that problem.
Maybe this is the endgame of human evolution. Instead of having 7 billion people, of whom 1% are rich (that's 70 million): perhaps you have a human population of 70 million rich people, and about 7 billion robots? Not so scary if you are one of the 1%. I just don't want to be around during the transition period.
I see a flaw:
What happens when you pay your workers the same wage and have them work the same hours, but you only employ 50% as many workers? ...Mind you, because that stove is only $1,673, the households which historically bought the $1,800 models can now buy your previously-$3,200 model in the same budget (although the $1,800 models will also be cheaper). Most likely, you'll move more product
But now, only 50% of the people have jobs. So there are fewer households that can afford the $1,800 models.
Consider this scenario, then let me tie it into your scenario:
There are 4 farmers. The farmers share their grazing land, but each one keeps the profits from shearing their own sheep. Each farmer starts with 10 sheep. Each farmer asks "should I buy another sheep?" Well, since they keep the profits from the sheep they buy, but share the costs, each farmer decides it is economical to buy another sheep. But now, each farmer found their cost increased by 1 full sheep, not 1/4 of a sheep, but it increased by 1/4 of a sheep for the sheep they bought and 3/4 for the 3 sheep the other farmers bought. Lesson: "Local optimization does not lead to global optimization."
Now in your scenario, the product price dropped because one company cut its labor by 50%. That resulted in fewer households who can afford $1,800. But this is just one employer out of millions. So the resulting reduction from the layoffs does not significantly reduce the number of total households that can afford the $1,800 models. However, what if all the other factories do the same thing? This problem starts to look a lot like the sheep scenario. Each factory saves money by reducing their own labor pool, but they share the customers pool. But if all factories do this same labor and cost reduction, it starts to impact the pool of customers. The short-term winner is the company that can cut costs faster than other companies. But eventually, everyone loses.
I want to make a bot that can answer the quiz. My theory is that, once I have done so successfully, it can make more intelligent comments on the article than the average commenter. At that point, I think I have won my own personal turing test.
Next up: A bot that tells you if the news is fake. Has someone already done that? I imagine something like Microsoft's "clippy" popping up in the corner saying "I see that you are reading complete bu11sh*t. Would you like some help posting vitriolic comments?"
I am neither plain, nor simple.
Still went to jail for a week over it
Are you saying the penalty was too low? A DUI = a random dice roll to kill someone.
on a two lane (one lane in each direction - no median)
On a road with no median is about the most dangerous place to drive drunk.
within 2 miles of his house while driving home
The distance from his home is irrelevant.
I have a relative who is an alcoholic, and he got into many accidents "close to home." Each time, there was some excuse for it not being a big deal. It was only a few miles, he was driving slowly, it was the other guys fault, it was just a mailbox, nobody got hurt, that guy was pretending he got hit for money, etc. Don't take DUIs lightly. The police are trying to nip that in the bud.
The AC is correct here. The MMWA requires the manufacturer to prove the warranty isn't valid. Here's an example case where this happened:
Apple claimed, and continues to claim, that they can detect water damage to a phone.
Yet Apple knows that the sensors don't work and paid a settlement over it. Yet they only had to pay the settlement when enough people got together and brought a class-action lawsuit.
Under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, apple can claim whatever terms they want. But ultimately, Apple had to prove to the court that the strips were indeed proof of water damage. When they failed to do so, they had to honor the warranty.
Feel free to try again, because what you're referenced doesn't support your claim in any way. And, give proper legal citations next time (statute, regulation or case law),
LOL! You provided no citations!
Let me first state which parts of your post I am refuting. There are 2:
If a belt breaks, they can require you get it repaired at a dealer if you want warranty coverage.
They cannot require it. But they don't have to pay for it if you use a 3rd-party vendor.
if they want to say your engine warranty is voided if you hang fuzzy dice on the mirror, they can. They just have to state so clearly.
They can only do this if they first prove to the FTC that doing so would harm the product. Then, if the customer sues, it goes to the courts. After reading today, it seems that there is some kind of arbitration process. I don't know how that works though.
Understanding the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act
Emphasis mine:
Nope - if they want to say your engine warranty is voided if you hang fuzzy dice on the mirror, they can. They just have to state so clearly.
They can state that, but it is only valid of the person doesn't take them to court over it. If the person does, the company will lose for violating the act.
Years ago, the idea was more about forbidding manufacturers from suing people who made repair manuals and parts. And to stop them from putting DRM into the diagnostic mechanisms. Requiring them to provide documentation might be taking things too far. I dunno.
But the idea that a bipedal robot is going to be able to drive my work truck out to a remote & off-road site and go inside to replace a 9000 volt vacuum or climb up the 1800ft tower to find a loose hanger or air leak is almost as perposterous as the idea that we won't be using high power transmitters anymore. It just ain't gonna happen... And that's exactly why I left the datacenter to find a job like this one which requires hands-on skills.
There is a flaw in your vision of the future, let me explain:
If you watch old sci-fi, a dishwasher was a device with hands that poured soap onto dishes and scrubbed them. People imagined a clothes washer picked up the clothes and rubbed them against a washboard. Automated sci-fi planes had bipedal robots that sat in cockpits, automated sci-fi soldiers carried guns made for human hands. But we now know that this isn't how automation works. I work for a company that builds medical robots, and they do not look like people either.
At some point, some guy probably said "No robot will ever be able to unload these boxes from a truck, and take all the mixed-up samples from the box, stick on the barcode labels, look at each one to see if the liquid is right and if the caps are tight, carry it over to the centrifuge, and put the vials onto the vortexer, etc. That's crazy!" Well that guy doesn't have a job any more. We kinda joke that one day a microbiology lab will be a 5,000 square foot building with no human beings in it at all. That was considered skilled labor 10 years ago. Contrary to expectations, the cleaning staff will probably be the last ones to get replaced.
So lets look at your job:
* Drives truck: Already automated. (Tesla, etc.)
* Diagnose which part is broken: Somewhat automated.
* Orders appropriate part: Already automated. (Current project I'm on)
* Climbs up tower and replaces part: ehhhh...you win.
You have me on that last one. Replacing parts still requires a human. For now...
A few years ago there was a tool that did something similar for art: you drew a really rough line-drawing that just gave a sense of scale and position to each object. Then you labeled each object like "cheetah" or "motorcycle" and had one special label for the background, like "desert." Then it ran an image search: it would look for an image tagged with the same label, with roughly the same proportions as the outline. It auto-photoshopped it in, and viola! Instant art! One of the demo pictures was a cheetah chasing a motorcycle, and it was pretty good and kinda funny.
However, I notice that the art industry is largely unaffected.
Also, I don't think it is so easy to just "blur and sharpen" between two areas of code. Maybe something like "content-aware fill" would work here? ;-) Not likely.
Not always. But being made in the same factory doesn't mean it is the same product.
Here are some differences between the "real" product and the "after hours" product made in the same factory:
* May have lower capacity. Sometimes it labeled as such, but other times it is labeled as having the same capacity.
* May have skipped QA testing.
* Will not have a warranty. Sometimes they have no serial number, or they all have the same serial number.
Also, I can return a poor quality product to Best Buy more easily than some random Amazon or Newegg seller. And I can rate it poorly on Best Buy, thus discouraging future sales. But making a poor rating on Amazon against FlyByNightCompany74 won't discourage anyone. Once they rack-up enough bad reviews they drop the product and start a new listing for what is essentially the same item, or start a whole new seller.