Obscurity, even opaqueness is part of the value of a product. Yes, I like open source software. There are a few areas, however, where poking and probing shouldn't have to follow the modules in libs or heaven forbid, dot-Net.
Wouldn't you like to know that an avowed enemy of the US DIDN'T get to peek at the source to security software protecting the Pentagon? Security is layers and probabilities. These days, penetrating layers is a big business, and using everything from fuzzing software to weird adjacent memory bit patterns is the order of the day.
The Pentagon has to keep changing and improving, because security software and infrastructure is subject to very high entropy-- especially if you're an important target. To answer your question, yes, they should be constantly evolving it, but doing so requires enormous efforts, disarray, and the inability to move swiftly. The Pentagon is NOT known for moving swiftly and deftly.
Your metaphors are as foolish as you are. Good grief. It's inferred that various actors used Kaspersky's AV-AM to have a full inventory of an NSA contractor's purloined (oh, sure, he was working at home) software.
ArcSight isn't impregnable. Side-channel and other methods of getting the keys to the Pentagon are a VERY BAD IDEA if you're an American.
Remember the Axis of Evil? Do you think that Russia has reformed? What brought you to that conclusion, if so? What HPE did may have been "legal", I'll grant you, because US law is designed to make the legal system rich, not dole justice. This said, sales are omnipotent in the USA, not morality, and certainly not justice. IMHO, a few HPE execs ought to fall on their swords. But that won't happen. And the Pentagon gets one more breach-of-a-thousand-cuts.
That's why side-attacks are so unsuccessful, right? No one could figure out a methodology to spoof the good guys, right? NSA-- never been hacked, right?
This implies Steemit becomes a meritrocracy. What opens is the Pandora's box of bidding for the highest producing posts. That system works for a while until someone comes by with deeper pockets to capture marketshare. The value of its currency then drops down, and supply/demand makes it more difficult, until the market burns itself out for want of customers.
It's intriguing but it's a zero-sum game, ultimately.
I own a tiny hybrid and a HUGE pickup truck. I worry about not seeing small vehicles sometimes while driving the truck. I don't worry much about trucks seeing me.
You worry too much about political statements. We're not all on edge, but you are. Step away from the media. They make money by glueing you to themselves for profit. Rob them of the profit and have a more relaxed life.
Although the list of CVEs is seemingly endless, there are all kinds of moats to use that ensure core assets are protected. The problem in the US is that insufficient moats are employed because they cost real money, both capex and opex, not to mention reasonably smart people. They don't want to spend the money to keep the moats trapping crack attempts.
Their data assets were huge, and made them lots of $$$. But they didn't value them sufficiently because, hey, they can't be sued when they let ALL OF THAT INFORMATION waddle out their webtoobies because of whatever reason.
I don't think he's an idiot, rather, he didn't even listen to his own message because: His own assets aren't on the line if the data the corporation owns trundles off into some Tor site, waiting for the next bulk buy. Why should he care? Sure, there's the moral reason but his corporate shield will keep him from worrying, and his exit package is monstrous now that he's gone into retirement somewhere with a purported $90M exit package. He shrugs. We're screwed. No he's not an idiot, he's rich. What he is: An Asshole.
The flight crew aren't going to search for phones, rather, a contractor being paid min wage would. Less confrontation. But they don't do that, either. They could; they don't.
Dropping the landline call prices would be benevolent.
Cell phone jammers are completely unnecessary and illegal even in this circumstance; cellphones can be detected readily using existing equipment, but no one wants to spend the small amount of money needed to find and confront those that have hidden them.
Just like it's stupid-simple to find those that haven't turned off their phones on an airline flight, no one wants to spend the money and confront passengers because of security theater-- some passengers will actually be federal air marshals and don't want to be 'outed'.
You cite Wikipedia, itself a bastion of meddling. I don't doubt the citation, as I was there. Social media is rife for messaging campaigns full of rancid BS. For that matter, so is Slashdot.
When a preponderance of messaging convinces someone, the bad guys win. For some, any particular message might be bias-side and more readily received, for others, it will take much more convincing depending on their public/private world views.
There is no longer any such thing as "the media". There are sources you can kind of trust, and others that you will not. It has always been this way, and it always will be. It doesn't make evil good, or good evil, rather, your base of knowledge must be built upon trust, and organizations will have to earn your trust, and not screw it up. Even then, you'll question authority. If you don't, you'll just be joining 300,000,000 other sheep in the confines of the USA.
This is sooooo much deeper than protected media content. Read about the privacy and tracking issues involved with a DRM plug-in and how that affects users. It's like having the Samsung HDTV Overlord watching everything you do, just as an example. In my mind, the EFF saw the non-monetary ramifications and acted in decidedly non-corporate way.
Many of us in the tech communities watch the W3C with both awe and respect, and yeah, sometimes shaking our heads over strange misdeeds, take the craziness behind HTML5 in general for an example.
But they violated their own rules, and fed the demons. They could have resisted, and let both the steep privacy issues and the banal big-data-suck get a needed knee-cap. They didn't. Now we know: even the W3C has their price.
The RIAA/MPAA and other rights organizations infect a lot of good work. They're one of the reasons that TOR exists. Were they smarter, none of this would be necessary.... but feeding the draconian legal system in the USA is the usury we must apparently pay.
Sent a very loud message, didn't it? I won't stand with various organizations based on purely ideological grounds, either. It makes the W3C much less effective. It's a good stance to take. Perhaps it will bear some meaning.
There's a significant air barrier for random debris to surmount. The shockwave in front, despite negative pressure, is huge. Any motorcyclist can tell you what it's like passing a semi trailer, even one trailing in the vacuum zone rendered by a convoy of semis. Behind a train in this configuration is another vacuum and vortex. The atmospheric pressure differential might give you the bends, or much worse.
This said, things like tunnel collapse are going to give you more than a lap full of wine.
Gotta love a rubric to punish a specific startup exec whose bad idea and business practices are likely what's screwing his ops and investors.
If he wants to go to the burn, fine. There was WiFi, and cellular data, and even voice service, albeit all three were shaky. So is the service in Cancun around New Year.
The post is about the observations of an abused investor, and not necessarily about responsibility. Nothing to see here. Move on.
The introverts vs the extroverts problem becomes exacerbated when everyone's in close quarters. As an introvert, my strong desire to stuff a rag in someone's mouth becomes really high. I try desperately not to blather. I don't care the race, age, religion, gender, or sexual persuasion of the yammerer-- some do not understand how to STFU, or even how to have a conversational exchange.
It is for this reason, constant, insipid, spewing blather, that I've left organizations; it was a good thing for both of us. They were good enough to wave goodbye. Not a good fit.... and it's a vortex for problems in an open environment. If concentration and focus is revered or needed, I'll find my own brainstorm, thank you.
Unless Apple has something up their sleeves not yet revealed, they blew a huge wad of shareholder dough on yet another bad idea.
Individual pilots are indeed responsible for accidents, there is no doubt of this. Whether fatal stupidity or a suicidal nature, human error is a problem. You can add low pay and long hours, and a lot of other excuses.
And I've been flights where only pilot brilliance means I'm alive. Without going anecdotal, I'll trust humans more than machines. Humans are still in charge, not a coder fighting a simulator for score points. I can't trust an ATM, why should I trust a 100% autopilot?
For a while, I wondered if it was real flesh-and-blood pilots, defending their own gigs, but when you watch a movie like Sulley, the thought of an AI landing in the East River or Hudson doesn't seem like the sort of mission that would turn out the same way.
A long time from now, yes. Not this decade, perhaps not this century. For every entrepreneurial engineer, there is a bored 17 year old kid with a lot of guts and bad judgment.
Before Fly-by-Wire, the pilots could exert tremendous control, averting a few disasters. Putting AI through simulators doesn't enthrall me, because situations can be highly dynamic, second to second, and I don't believe they'll invest the computing power to simulate critical decisions that can execute successfully within a short time frame.
Although humans are hackable, they're less reliably hackable than firmware. One ugly logic step in a human can be successfully overridden by a copilot. But unless their are expensive redundant and very highly flexible systems running it, it's a ride to the earth at high speed when things go wrong.
Slashdot Mirror
Bright people might realize they have problems. Self-identification is part of the cure, not the problem.
Who does Russia supply?
Obscurity, even opaqueness is part of the value of a product. Yes, I like open source software. There are a few areas, however, where poking and probing shouldn't have to follow the modules in libs or heaven forbid, dot-Net.
Wouldn't you like to know that an avowed enemy of the US DIDN'T get to peek at the source to security software protecting the Pentagon? Security is layers and probabilities. These days, penetrating layers is a big business, and using everything from fuzzing software to weird adjacent memory bit patterns is the order of the day.
The Pentagon has to keep changing and improving, because security software and infrastructure is subject to very high entropy-- especially if you're an important target. To answer your question, yes, they should be constantly evolving it, but doing so requires enormous efforts, disarray, and the inability to move swiftly. The Pentagon is NOT known for moving swiftly and deftly.
Your metaphors are as foolish as you are. Good grief. It's inferred that various actors used Kaspersky's AV-AM to have a full inventory of an NSA contractor's purloined (oh, sure, he was working at home) software.
ArcSight isn't impregnable. Side-channel and other methods of getting the keys to the Pentagon are a VERY BAD IDEA if you're an American.
Remember the Axis of Evil? Do you think that Russia has reformed? What brought you to that conclusion, if so? What HPE did may have been "legal", I'll grant you, because US law is designed to make the legal system rich, not dole justice. This said, sales are omnipotent in the USA, not morality, and certainly not justice. IMHO, a few HPE execs ought to fall on their swords. But that won't happen. And the Pentagon gets one more breach-of-a-thousand-cuts.
That's why side-attacks are so unsuccessful, right? No one could figure out a methodology to spoof the good guys, right? NSA-- never been hacked, right?
IMHO, HPE should be hung out to dry.
This implies Steemit becomes a meritrocracy. What opens is the Pandora's box of bidding for the highest producing posts. That system works for a while until someone comes by with deeper pockets to capture marketshare. The value of its currency then drops down, and supply/demand makes it more difficult, until the market burns itself out for want of customers.
It's intriguing but it's a zero-sum game, ultimately.
I own a tiny hybrid and a HUGE pickup truck. I worry about not seeing small vehicles sometimes while driving the truck. I don't worry much about trucks seeing me.
You worry too much about political statements. We're not all on edge, but you are. Step away from the media. They make money by glueing you to themselves for profit. Rob them of the profit and have a more relaxed life.
Idiot? No. Plausible deniability? Yes.
Although the list of CVEs is seemingly endless, there are all kinds of moats to use that ensure core assets are protected. The problem in the US is that insufficient moats are employed because they cost real money, both capex and opex, not to mention reasonably smart people. They don't want to spend the money to keep the moats trapping crack attempts.
Their data assets were huge, and made them lots of $$$. But they didn't value them sufficiently because, hey, they can't be sued when they let ALL OF THAT INFORMATION waddle out their webtoobies because of whatever reason.
I don't think he's an idiot, rather, he didn't even listen to his own message because: His own assets aren't on the line if the data the corporation owns trundles off into some Tor site, waiting for the next bulk buy. Why should he care? Sure, there's the moral reason but his corporate shield will keep him from worrying, and his exit package is monstrous now that he's gone into retirement somewhere with a purported $90M exit package. He shrugs. We're screwed. No he's not an idiot, he's rich. What he is: An Asshole.
The flight crew aren't going to search for phones, rather, a contractor being paid min wage would. Less confrontation. But they don't do that, either. They could; they don't.
Dropping the landline call prices would be benevolent.
Cell phone jammers are completely unnecessary and illegal even in this circumstance; cellphones can be detected readily using existing equipment, but no one wants to spend the small amount of money needed to find and confront those that have hidden them.
Just like it's stupid-simple to find those that haven't turned off their phones on an airline flight, no one wants to spend the money and confront passengers because of security theater-- some passengers will actually be federal air marshals and don't want to be 'outed'.
Didn't read my post, did you? People see what they want to see. I believe that the citation made was fine. Read my post.
Factually, Wikipedia has great stuff, and stuff that is as fictional as Grimm's Fairy Tales, yet purported to be fact.... citations and all.
Who do I trust? Not many. Not you-- you can't even read a post.
You cite Wikipedia, itself a bastion of meddling. I don't doubt the citation, as I was there. Social media is rife for messaging campaigns full of rancid BS. For that matter, so is Slashdot.
When a preponderance of messaging convinces someone, the bad guys win. For some, any particular message might be bias-side and more readily received, for others, it will take much more convincing depending on their public/private world views.
There is no longer any such thing as "the media". There are sources you can kind of trust, and others that you will not. It has always been this way, and it always will be. It doesn't make evil good, or good evil, rather, your base of knowledge must be built upon trust, and organizations will have to earn your trust, and not screw it up. Even then, you'll question authority. If you don't, you'll just be joining 300,000,000 other sheep in the confines of the USA.
You've never played Whack-a-Mole?
Mmmm. Creepy Cameras-- just the thing that took Google Glass and pushed it into The Dead Pool of bad thoughts in consumer electronics devices....
This is sooooo much deeper than protected media content. Read about the privacy and tracking issues involved with a DRM plug-in and how that affects users. It's like having the Samsung HDTV Overlord watching everything you do, just as an example. In my mind, the EFF saw the non-monetary ramifications and acted in decidedly non-corporate way.
Many of us in the tech communities watch the W3C with both awe and respect, and yeah, sometimes shaking our heads over strange misdeeds, take the craziness behind HTML5 in general for an example.
But they violated their own rules, and fed the demons. They could have resisted, and let both the steep privacy issues and the banal big-data-suck get a needed knee-cap. They didn't. Now we know: even the W3C has their price.
The RIAA/MPAA and other rights organizations infect a lot of good work. They're one of the reasons that TOR exists. Were they smarter, none of this would be necessary.... but feeding the draconian legal system in the USA is the usury we must apparently pay.
Sent a very loud message, didn't it? I won't stand with various organizations based on purely ideological grounds, either. It makes the W3C much less effective. It's a good stance to take. Perhaps it will bear some meaning.
W3C sells out, leaves its somewhat democratic origins, succumbs to the payola, jumps the shark. Carry on, EFF. Someone has to.
There's a significant air barrier for random debris to surmount. The shockwave in front, despite negative pressure, is huge. Any motorcyclist can tell you what it's like passing a semi trailer, even one trailing in the vacuum zone rendered by a convoy of semis. Behind a train in this configuration is another vacuum and vortex. The atmospheric pressure differential might give you the bends, or much worse.
This said, things like tunnel collapse are going to give you more than a lap full of wine.
Gotta love a rubric to punish a specific startup exec whose bad idea and business practices are likely what's screwing his ops and investors.
If he wants to go to the burn, fine. There was WiFi, and cellular data, and even voice service, albeit all three were shaky. So is the service in Cancun around New Year.
The post is about the observations of an abused investor, and not necessarily about responsibility. Nothing to see here. Move on.
The introverts vs the extroverts problem becomes exacerbated when everyone's in close quarters. As an introvert, my strong desire to stuff a rag in someone's mouth becomes really high. I try desperately not to blather. I don't care the race, age, religion, gender, or sexual persuasion of the yammerer-- some do not understand how to STFU, or even how to have a conversational exchange.
It is for this reason, constant, insipid, spewing blather, that I've left organizations; it was a good thing for both of us. They were good enough to wave goodbye. Not a good fit.... and it's a vortex for problems in an open environment. If concentration and focus is revered or needed, I'll find my own brainstorm, thank you.
Unless Apple has something up their sleeves not yet revealed, they blew a huge wad of shareholder dough on yet another bad idea.
Individual pilots are indeed responsible for accidents, there is no doubt of this. Whether fatal stupidity or a suicidal nature, human error is a problem. You can add low pay and long hours, and a lot of other excuses.
And I've been flights where only pilot brilliance means I'm alive. Without going anecdotal, I'll trust humans more than machines. Humans are still in charge, not a coder fighting a simulator for score points. I can't trust an ATM, why should I trust a 100% autopilot?
For a while, I wondered if it was real flesh-and-blood pilots, defending their own gigs, but when you watch a movie like Sulley, the thought of an AI landing in the East River or Hudson doesn't seem like the sort of mission that would turn out the same way.
A long time from now, yes. Not this decade, perhaps not this century. For every entrepreneurial engineer, there is a bored 17 year old kid with a lot of guts and bad judgment.
Before Fly-by-Wire, the pilots could exert tremendous control, averting a few disasters. Putting AI through simulators doesn't enthrall me, because situations can be highly dynamic, second to second, and I don't believe they'll invest the computing power to simulate critical decisions that can execute successfully within a short time frame.
Although humans are hackable, they're less reliably hackable than firmware. One ugly logic step in a human can be successfully overridden by a copilot. But unless their are expensive redundant and very highly flexible systems running it, it's a ride to the earth at high speed when things go wrong.