Dating myself, but we had the same issues with calculators when they became programmable. I know a guy who cheated with his HP J7 (I think that was the model) because it knew all the physics formulas, all he had to do was plug numbers in the right boxes. It was obvious to the professors what happened because he never showed anything on paper except for the right answer. Calculators were banned the next semester, but the class provided a couple of the old simple models for those who really needed them.
In Calculus we were told to go ahead, because a calculator really did not help. A "correct" answer was only 1 out of 20 points generally, and the other 19 were the steps to find the answer. No steps was no credit, and you failed.
Today people can do much more with much less device, so the answer is simple. As you and GP both said, ban the device during testing.
Sure, the uneducated give up votes for the best lie and can't measure up front. Sure, the best politicians are the best liars. Sure, money is power so the wealthy exert power in all possible ways. While those things are true, it's also true that revolutions are rarely driven by the uneducated and easily fooled. Revolutions come from the educated middle class. People who are smart enough to see the game, and not quite oppressed enough to be ignorant. These same people are often overlooked and underestimated by the people trying to hoard power.
The founding of the US was not some peasant uprising, it was an educated bunch who wanted to hammer down the top. The French revolutions were much the same, each time led by a different set of intellects. I will say that the Brits are a bit better at relinquishing enough to the masses to stay in power, but the uprisings in Scotland, Ireland, and even the Colonies, were all led by an educated middle.
This is a game of momentum, and at present we are not too far from tipping into a revolt. The people holding power know it and are doing everything they can to maintain control. "Bread and Circuses" can be seen all over, from the current political race to programs like the Obama Phone program. The desire to disarm the populace falls into the exact same reasoning.
I don't own a crystal ball to say when, or even if, something will happen. I will say that when society gets to the point the US is at today, it usually takes something very small to push people into an all out revolt..
Don't listen to just me, several studies and reports have said what I'm about to say, including an Ivy league school. The US has become almost text book fascism as defined by Mussolini. Meaning, you can not separate regulators from Corporations because the regulators work for the corporations. Regulatory capture has occurred in every sector of the economy. It is really easy to see, but you have to at least glance at it.
Main stream media simply works for those same interests. Again, it's easy to see if you care to look. "Money" and "Ratings" are a byproduct of the control the establishment has over the people using media.
I really wish people like this got booted out of office by the fed up constituency. How much tax payer money was just wasted on drafting this piece of worthless paper? I fully realize how fed up and cynical I have become.
Unfortunately it's quite the opposite. As a person who came from extreme poverty, as well as being a student of Economics and Philosophy, I am not blind to the game.
Maybe in your Utopian view welfare is great for an economy, but to many of us it is a method of redistributing some wealth to a poverty class. This has the effect of primarily getting support from that class. It further ensures that the people in poverty remain in poverty and dependent on the political class for support.
Milton Friedman lays this out very well. Time for you to do some homework.
These authoritarians really need to go. At the same time, the fools who allow it need to go with them. Until that time comes, I'm not going to bend for either side.
I seem to remember this book called "The Republic" which talks about this very thing. I also read a whole lot of history about this Republic which was founded because of the same things.
History is always forgotten, so we continue to repeat it...
TFA does not say that 25% feel safe, but that 75% do not. The other 25% contains undecided, and people who just don't care to answer polls as well as those who "feel" safe. The sample size is a whopping 1800 people in a specific geographic location, so you are not really getting a good sample in numbers that low. Was the criteria for the car was defined to all parties, such that it was 100% autonomous with no ability for human intervention, or partial like the Google car? Or more likely it was left open so that people could interpret the technology any way they like.
In fact if you actually bothered to read TFA you would see that in the tiny sample used only 20% claimed to feel "safe" in an autonomous car. Welcome to being manipulated, enjoy your stay.
What is that old quote by Mark Twain... lies.. damn lies, and statistics.
What you just attempted to claim is that a person being able to go find information, is the same thing as having someone broadcasting information to the masses without them taking action It is wrong on such a basic level that you are rather insane if you actually believe such a thing.
The "sagging" media is absolutely distrusted by many of us, but they are pretty good at making them other "news" guys look bad so they still get the spin they want. They happen to be on EVERY TV, EVERY RADIO, and don't require any thought. Self titles like "Political analyst" ensures that the unwary believe in the appeal to authority.
Back on point, you believing that the game is new is simply delusional. I gave you the references and you play the "but I can go find Youtube videos" answer.
Lots to cover but I'll try to keep it as brief as possible.
While I agree with the point on our penal system being broken in many ways, gauging the biggest affront is certainly a matter of perspective. The kid serving life for drug sales because he had no other form of income probably puts recidivism pretty low on the priority scale. A chance of recidivism is not any different than a chance for someone to commit a crime in terms of how it can be treated according to the US Constitution. Contrary to what some people attempt to claim, the Constitution is not "rubber" and always changing. It's a set of very basic rules for a Government. According to the US Constitution, one must be convicted by their peers and found guilty beyond any reasonable doubt for there to be any crime, punishment, or attempt to rehabilitate. The punishment is set for a crime by the Law. Each law has a minimum and maximum associated with it. If the punishment is too little or too much, Law must be changed to reflect the difference.
A "offender list" is merely an extended punishment and extremely harmful (I'll get there). In legal terms it allows the state to stack the deck and creates a huge imbalance. I don't see it any different than "hate crimes" or "gun crime" or "drug crime" in terms of how it _should_ be treated by Law. The State can throw charge after charge on you until something sticks. Your option if that happens is to beg for mercy and take the smallest number an opinion allows. That's not law, it's chaos and tyranny.
Why you might ask? I mean.. for the children and hurting someone because of race is worse than hurting someone because of emotion. It's an easy fallacy to fall for, but in reality the victim of a crime does not receive more or less of that crime because of age, race, or gender. Further, what if you are a guy and were raped. Would you want your assailant to get less of a punishment because you are a man? That fallacy has slowly opened the door to what we have today. Which quite frankly has become a scary system (If you are not scared you could start with "Three Felonies a Day").
How is the offender-list extremely harmful? Simple: Anyone who could have been rehabilitated will not be. This person has been punished and labelled for life. Society has ensured that a person can never have a relationship with the opposite sex, because who want's to date a person on the sex offenders list? Meaning, how can they exert any sexual desire outside of rape? Who is going to be the easiest victim for someone like that, an adult who can fight back or a child? The person won't have a good job so can't afford prostitution, among other things that could keep them from repeat offense.
English/European common law took a couple thousand years to get close to right. In the last 50, we have been slowly flushing it all away. We have done so using the exact means that Marx stated were needed to dupe the public into compliance (and many others expanded on).
Finally, don't misunderstand. Sexual Assault is a serious crime and should be treated as such. If the minimum term does not fit, then the Law needs to be changed to an acceptable level. Once given the ability to make arbitrary punishments the State does not discriminate who they use that ability on. Support the wrong political group, I dare you. The US has already punished people with Government agencies for that. Luckily it was caught _after_the_fact_ so they stopped. For now.
Kitty and her drinking perfume had nothing of course with Bush getting the upper hand right? Good grief, you need to shovel your own head out of the sand before claiming others are with you.
You really need to read up on Negative Advertisements which have been a thing since I was a kid. The only difference I see between Trump and GW Bush (as one example) is who is the liar, who throws the insults, and who silences other voices.
The "media" and "news" did this for decades with pretty good success. For example, ask almost anyone what they know about Ron Paul around the time he was running and they will say "he's crazy" and yet they know nothing about him or his politics. The "News" pulled sound bites and said "That crazy Ron Paul" over and over and over again. The ad hominem was still paid for by the same people who paid for Bush to get into office. Ron Paul's positions and speeches were not shown or heard unless people went out and found them. We got to hear all the negative crap about him, and of course the media mocking people who slipped up in a speech or debate. Bush was made to look better than the other candidates no matter what.
Look at Perot and what happened to him, etc.. etc... Once you start learning what to look for the game is pretty obvious. The hard part is beating the cognitive dissonance.
Trump has been doing all his own without the front man. He does not need the media to introduce "Cruz is a Liar", he did it himself and the media just replays the sound bite.
I have to agree with the top post. Trump and Sanders are both the product of a pissed off populace and wanting something to be done. Most people see "anything" as better than what we have now. Sadly the uneducated fall for the socialist traps too easy, but, that is a different matter.
Broadcast media has been monopolized by 2 mega corporations, which use the same exact source for all news and talking points (AP). A new broadcast company can NOT compete due to Government regulations and fees required to join the club.
Where people often attempt to claim balance is in "Internet blogs" which do not have the same reach and impact as broadcast media. Nobody has to "find" Fox, it's right there on the lowest number of the Cable box (normally). Nobody has to find ABC, NBC, CNN, or MSNBC either. Radio is very similar, where syndicated shows are broadcast over common airwaves that anyone can get anywhere. Rush Limbaugh uses the same stories and byline as other "news" while calling the other guys "idiots" to trick masses into a false belief that he is on the other side. Rush is one example of countless.
Naysayers can always go ahead and try to get an alternative talking point on to broadcast media. If I were you, I'd not hold my breath waiting
People who repeat definitions offend me. Please remove yourself from the Internet and never ever publicly post anything again. Er.. wait.. perhaps my offense at you repeating a definition caused you to be offended. Now what? Yes, it's a slipper slope and the definition you provided should make that fact pretty clear.
The wording in the Constitution is very clear and very intentional. The fact that our Press is no longer free should tell you where we stand as a Country in terms of having a Government honor the Constitution.
Anyway, I don't know what German law says about "hate speech". When I was there, there was no such thing. If you said something stupid people ignored you. But, when I was there we did not have hate speech in the US either. You were either guilty of a crime or not guilty of a crime. This extra penalties because you say or write something someone does not like is new. I am pretty sure the social engineers crafted those to provide the pretense for silencing dissent.
The only reason people could possibly disagree with Electronic voting machines is because "Luddite", and not because there has been a long history of corruption made-easy by these devices.
Since this is the 2nd article in as many days on the same subject, basic math shows that there is no benefit in safety using a Phone vs. an ATM card. Both are a single point of failure, protected by a simple PIN (and last I checked Phones don't require PIN numbers). TFA hints at it: The majority of theft from ATM is by physical attack. It is not easy to install skimmers in reputable places, but it's pretty easy to stick a gun in someone's back and tell them to make a cash withdrawal. You won't hear much about the robbery stuff, small does not generate ratings or help the narrative along.
You increase security by distributing the attack surface and minimizing exposure. Using a phone to generate/receive a timed PIN for your ATM card would be more secure.
I would rather not tie bio metric data to the verification, and, it can not be checked effectively (consider how your body changes every time you eat something different, or use a different soap, etc..etc..). Too many things can go wrong with that, and again you are only changing the surface not extending the surface. "I have, I know" simply becomes "I have, I am".
Good grief, we know this is Slashdot so reading TFA is generally scoffed at, but at least read past the first sentence of a summary. The Subject of my post says it all. It is trivial to set up a proxy so that customer => Cloud service which can't be blocked => TOR. If an ISP blocks a cheap Amazon node's IP they move the service to a different node/vendor. They can't block all of Amazon, all of Azure, etc..
It would take tons of manpower for ISPs to block and unblock addresses the the level needed to have any impact, and even then it's just whack-a-mole.
The Bitglass article want's a sign up, no thanks. The CSO article will have to suffice.
They gave credentials away, then make it sound like 3-5 attempts to login or see something was a big deal, with exposed credentials.
The tracking document is interesting, but outside of that no big deal. I'd have to see what they were able to track to have more than passing interest. I would probably be disappointed though, which is why details were not present for that bit.
Seriously, stop and use your brain for a while. If the Phone is subject to a screen scraper, and the reader is subject to a similar app (think skimmer) then you have just doubled your points of entry for a bad guy. It does not matter how long the code is good for, because telecommunications is fast for bad guys too. Code must be used in X radius is not a huge restriction in a city. Maybe out in the sticks.
I can't stop the ignorant from thinking that on-line is secure, but I'm not going to fall for the gag and lie to people. Want secure? Use CASH! I do this all the time, and it's amazing how little risk I face for card skimmers. You can use on-line all you want, but I want you to pay for the insurance. Want to pay with your phone, go right ahead. Pay the insurance and be responsible for that too.
In fact the technology makes things more secure in that your account details cant be stolen by a card skimmer attached to the ATM.
Impossible, and a BS justification. Okay, a card skimmer is not a problem, but a MITM attack and screen scraper app are possible on your phone and not on a credit/atm card. You are trading risks, and not in favor of the phone. Safer? Not a chance.
Kind of like everything else that goes 100% on line, it's more risk and prone to problems. But, we all get to pay for increased premiums to pay for damages so who cares right?
And those same poor people have money for a smart phone how exactly? Me thinks you are confusing "cash" with credit cards and tech gadgets. Sorry, but it's not safer than a credit card. It's the same as a credit card, while having dependency on some type of connectivity for the Cell.
Rick Allen is a drummer, and a rather incredible story. Drummers, real drummers, see drumming as a pure body effort. This third "robot" arm is no different than using a drum machine. It's no longer the body doing the work, it's a machine.
Watch Mike Portnoy, Mike Mangini, Neil Peart, John Bohnam (videos obviously), etc.. etc.. they use both arms and both legs with incredible precision for an incredible effect. I don't think Rick was ever that caliber drummer (miracles are not that common) but before the accident he used both arms and both legs too. He didn't swap to a drum machine afterward, because he knows what "drumming" is to a "drummer". He retrained his body so that his feet do more than most drummers can do with their hands.
I have played for 45 years myself, so yes I have an opinion and yes I'm biased. I have little respect for bands that use artificial drums. A person with a robotic arm would be a novelty at best, and a joke to a real drummer.
So by your logic anyone who believes and practices based on Pascal's wager is a devout *insert religion* then. Which is bullshit, and I have a feeling you know damn well that it's bullshit.
Your own bias is so blatant it must be a clinically diagnose-able problem.
It has nothing to do with Religion you troll, it has everything to do with power. Hitler for example believed in what ever he could to get power. People claiming he was Religious ignore the fact that he had teams of Mystic's and Astrologers, and was trying to hoard "Magic" artifacts. Artifacts from Tibet, China, Egypt, and India were just as important as those from Judea Christian sources..
How about making it a simple "Brain washing works" statement instead? That statement has historical backing and we can look at not just Nazi Germany but also Russia, China, Cambodia, Argentina, Brazil, Cuba, and wholly shit.. even the US was the product of brain washing and committed atrocities. Don't take my word for it, ask a native American Indian.
Sorry if reality hurts your tiny biased view of the world, but it's reality.
Who said *roughly* "if you repeat it often enough the populace will believe it" and "give me control of the media and I will control the populace".. Dang it... if I could only put my finger on who that was...
Slashdot Mirror
Dating myself, but we had the same issues with calculators when they became programmable. I know a guy who cheated with his HP J7 (I think that was the model) because it knew all the physics formulas, all he had to do was plug numbers in the right boxes. It was obvious to the professors what happened because he never showed anything on paper except for the right answer. Calculators were banned the next semester, but the class provided a couple of the old simple models for those who really needed them.
In Calculus we were told to go ahead, because a calculator really did not help. A "correct" answer was only 1 out of 20 points generally, and the other 19 were the steps to find the answer. No steps was no credit, and you failed.
Today people can do much more with much less device, so the answer is simple. As you and GP both said, ban the device during testing.
Sure, the uneducated give up votes for the best lie and can't measure up front. Sure, the best politicians are the best liars. Sure, money is power so the wealthy exert power in all possible ways. While those things are true, it's also true that revolutions are rarely driven by the uneducated and easily fooled. Revolutions come from the educated middle class. People who are smart enough to see the game, and not quite oppressed enough to be ignorant. These same people are often overlooked and underestimated by the people trying to hoard power.
The founding of the US was not some peasant uprising, it was an educated bunch who wanted to hammer down the top. The French revolutions were much the same, each time led by a different set of intellects. I will say that the Brits are a bit better at relinquishing enough to the masses to stay in power, but the uprisings in Scotland, Ireland, and even the Colonies, were all led by an educated middle.
This is a game of momentum, and at present we are not too far from tipping into a revolt. The people holding power know it and are doing everything they can to maintain control. "Bread and Circuses" can be seen all over, from the current political race to programs like the Obama Phone program. The desire to disarm the populace falls into the exact same reasoning.
I don't own a crystal ball to say when, or even if, something will happen. I will say that when society gets to the point the US is at today, it usually takes something very small to push people into an all out revolt..
Don't listen to just me, several studies and reports have said what I'm about to say, including an Ivy league school. The US has become almost text book fascism as defined by Mussolini. Meaning, you can not separate regulators from Corporations because the regulators work for the corporations. Regulatory capture has occurred in every sector of the economy. It is really easy to see, but you have to at least glance at it.
Main stream media simply works for those same interests. Again, it's easy to see if you care to look. "Money" and "Ratings" are a byproduct of the control the establishment has over the people using media.
I really wish people like this got booted out of office by the fed up constituency. How much tax payer money was just wasted on drafting this piece of worthless paper? I fully realize how fed up and cynical I have become.
Unfortunately it's quite the opposite. As a person who came from extreme poverty, as well as being a student of Economics and Philosophy, I am not blind to the game.
Maybe in your Utopian view welfare is great for an economy, but to many of us it is a method of redistributing some wealth to a poverty class. This has the effect of primarily getting support from that class. It further ensures that the people in poverty remain in poverty and dependent on the political class for support.
Milton Friedman lays this out very well. Time for you to do some homework.
These authoritarians really need to go. At the same time, the fools who allow it need to go with them. Until that time comes, I'm not going to bend for either side.
I seem to remember this book called "The Republic" which talks about this very thing. I also read a whole lot of history about this Republic which was founded because of the same things.
History is always forgotten, so we continue to repeat it...
TFA does not say that 25% feel safe, but that 75% do not. The other 25% contains undecided, and people who just don't care to answer polls as well as those who "feel" safe. The sample size is a whopping 1800 people in a specific geographic location, so you are not really getting a good sample in numbers that low. Was the criteria for the car was defined to all parties, such that it was 100% autonomous with no ability for human intervention, or partial like the Google car? Or more likely it was left open so that people could interpret the technology any way they like.
In fact if you actually bothered to read TFA you would see that in the tiny sample used only 20% claimed to feel "safe" in an autonomous car. Welcome to being manipulated, enjoy your stay.
What is that old quote by Mark Twain... lies.. damn lies, and statistics.
What you just attempted to claim is that a person being able to go find information, is the same thing as having someone broadcasting information to the masses without them taking action It is wrong on such a basic level that you are rather insane if you actually believe such a thing.
The "sagging" media is absolutely distrusted by many of us, but they are pretty good at making them other "news" guys look bad so they still get the spin they want. They happen to be on EVERY TV, EVERY RADIO, and don't require any thought. Self titles like "Political analyst" ensures that the unwary believe in the appeal to authority.
Back on point, you believing that the game is new is simply delusional. I gave you the references and you play the "but I can go find Youtube videos" answer.
Lots to cover but I'll try to keep it as brief as possible.
While I agree with the point on our penal system being broken in many ways, gauging the biggest affront is certainly a matter of perspective. The kid serving life for drug sales because he had no other form of income probably puts recidivism pretty low on the priority scale. A chance of recidivism is not any different than a chance for someone to commit a crime in terms of how it can be treated according to the US Constitution. Contrary to what some people attempt to claim, the Constitution is not "rubber" and always changing. It's a set of very basic rules for a Government. According to the US Constitution, one must be convicted by their peers and found guilty beyond any reasonable doubt for there to be any crime, punishment, or attempt to rehabilitate. The punishment is set for a crime by the Law. Each law has a minimum and maximum associated with it. If the punishment is too little or too much, Law must be changed to reflect the difference.
A "offender list" is merely an extended punishment and extremely harmful (I'll get there). In legal terms it allows the state to stack the deck and creates a huge imbalance. I don't see it any different than "hate crimes" or "gun crime" or "drug crime" in terms of how it _should_ be treated by Law. The State can throw charge after charge on you until something sticks. Your option if that happens is to beg for mercy and take the smallest number an opinion allows. That's not law, it's chaos and tyranny.
Why you might ask? I mean.. for the children and hurting someone because of race is worse than hurting someone because of emotion. It's an easy fallacy to fall for, but in reality the victim of a crime does not receive more or less of that crime because of age, race, or gender. Further, what if you are a guy and were raped. Would you want your assailant to get less of a punishment because you are a man? That fallacy has slowly opened the door to what we have today. Which quite frankly has become a scary system (If you are not scared you could start with "Three Felonies a Day").
How is the offender-list extremely harmful? Simple: Anyone who could have been rehabilitated will not be. This person has been punished and labelled for life. Society has ensured that a person can never have a relationship with the opposite sex, because who want's to date a person on the sex offenders list? Meaning, how can they exert any sexual desire outside of rape? Who is going to be the easiest victim for someone like that, an adult who can fight back or a child? The person won't have a good job so can't afford prostitution, among other things that could keep them from repeat offense.
English/European common law took a couple thousand years to get close to right. In the last 50, we have been slowly flushing it all away. We have done so using the exact means that Marx stated were needed to dupe the public into compliance (and many others expanded on).
Finally, don't misunderstand. Sexual Assault is a serious crime and should be treated as such. If the minimum term does not fit, then the Law needs to be changed to an acceptable level. Once given the ability to make arbitrary punishments the State does not discriminate who they use that ability on. Support the wrong political group, I dare you. The US has already punished people with Government agencies for that. Luckily it was caught _after_the_fact_ so they stopped. For now.
Kitty and her drinking perfume had nothing of course with Bush getting the upper hand right? Good grief, you need to shovel your own head out of the sand before claiming others are with you.
You really need to read up on Negative Advertisements which have been a thing since I was a kid. The only difference I see between Trump and GW Bush (as one example) is who is the liar, who throws the insults, and who silences other voices.
The "media" and "news" did this for decades with pretty good success. For example, ask almost anyone what they know about Ron Paul around the time he was running and they will say "he's crazy" and yet they know nothing about him or his politics. The "News" pulled sound bites and said "That crazy Ron Paul" over and over and over again. The ad hominem was still paid for by the same people who paid for Bush to get into office. Ron Paul's positions and speeches were not shown or heard unless people went out and found them. We got to hear all the negative crap about him, and of course the media mocking people who slipped up in a speech or debate. Bush was made to look better than the other candidates no matter what.
Look at Perot and what happened to him, etc.. etc... Once you start learning what to look for the game is pretty obvious. The hard part is beating the cognitive dissonance.
Trump has been doing all his own without the front man. He does not need the media to introduce "Cruz is a Liar", he did it himself and the media just replays the sound bite.
I have to agree with the top post. Trump and Sanders are both the product of a pissed off populace and wanting something to be done. Most people see "anything" as better than what we have now. Sadly the uneducated fall for the socialist traps too easy, but, that is a different matter.
Broadcast media has been monopolized by 2 mega corporations, which use the same exact source for all news and talking points (AP). A new broadcast company can NOT compete due to Government regulations and fees required to join the club.
Where people often attempt to claim balance is in "Internet blogs" which do not have the same reach and impact as broadcast media. Nobody has to "find" Fox, it's right there on the lowest number of the Cable box (normally). Nobody has to find ABC, NBC, CNN, or MSNBC either. Radio is very similar, where syndicated shows are broadcast over common airwaves that anyone can get anywhere. Rush Limbaugh uses the same stories and byline as other "news" while calling the other guys "idiots" to trick masses into a false belief that he is on the other side. Rush is one example of countless.
Naysayers can always go ahead and try to get an alternative talking point on to broadcast media. If I were you, I'd not hold my breath waiting
People who repeat definitions offend me. Please remove yourself from the Internet and never ever publicly post anything again. Er.. wait.. perhaps my offense at you repeating a definition caused you to be offended. Now what? Yes, it's a slipper slope and the definition you provided should make that fact pretty clear.
The wording in the Constitution is very clear and very intentional. The fact that our Press is no longer free should tell you where we stand as a Country in terms of having a Government honor the Constitution.
Anyway, I don't know what German law says about "hate speech". When I was there, there was no such thing. If you said something stupid people ignored you. But, when I was there we did not have hate speech in the US either. You were either guilty of a crime or not guilty of a crime. This extra penalties because you say or write something someone does not like is new. I am pretty sure the social engineers crafted those to provide the pretense for silencing dissent.
The only reason people could possibly disagree with Electronic voting machines is because "Luddite", and not because there has been a long history of corruption made-easy by these devices.
Since this is the 2nd article in as many days on the same subject, basic math shows that there is no benefit in safety using a Phone vs. an ATM card. Both are a single point of failure, protected by a simple PIN (and last I checked Phones don't require PIN numbers). TFA hints at it: The majority of theft from ATM is by physical attack. It is not easy to install skimmers in reputable places, but it's pretty easy to stick a gun in someone's back and tell them to make a cash withdrawal. You won't hear much about the robbery stuff, small does not generate ratings or help the narrative along.
You increase security by distributing the attack surface and minimizing exposure. Using a phone to generate/receive a timed PIN for your ATM card would be more secure.
I would rather not tie bio metric data to the verification, and, it can not be checked effectively (consider how your body changes every time you eat something different, or use a different soap, etc..etc..). Too many things can go wrong with that, and again you are only changing the surface not extending the surface. "I have, I know" simply becomes "I have, I am".
Good grief, we know this is Slashdot so reading TFA is generally scoffed at, but at least read past the first sentence of a summary. The Subject of my post says it all. It is trivial to set up a proxy so that customer => Cloud service which can't be blocked => TOR. If an ISP blocks a cheap Amazon node's IP they move the service to a different node/vendor. They can't block all of Amazon, all of Azure, etc..
It would take tons of manpower for ISPs to block and unblock addresses the the level needed to have any impact, and even then it's just whack-a-mole.
The Bitglass article want's a sign up, no thanks. The CSO article will have to suffice.
They gave credentials away, then make it sound like 3-5 attempts to login or see something was a big deal, with exposed credentials.
The tracking document is interesting, but outside of that no big deal. I'd have to see what they were able to track to have more than passing interest. I would probably be disappointed though, which is why details were not present for that bit.
Seriously, stop and use your brain for a while. If the Phone is subject to a screen scraper, and the reader is subject to a similar app (think skimmer) then you have just doubled your points of entry for a bad guy. It does not matter how long the code is good for, because telecommunications is fast for bad guys too. Code must be used in X radius is not a huge restriction in a city. Maybe out in the sticks.
I can't stop the ignorant from thinking that on-line is secure, but I'm not going to fall for the gag and lie to people. Want secure? Use CASH! I do this all the time, and it's amazing how little risk I face for card skimmers. You can use on-line all you want, but I want you to pay for the insurance. Want to pay with your phone, go right ahead. Pay the insurance and be responsible for that too.
In fact the technology makes things more secure in that your account details cant be stolen by a card skimmer attached to the ATM.
Impossible, and a BS justification. Okay, a card skimmer is not a problem, but a MITM attack and screen scraper app are possible on your phone and not on a credit/atm card. You are trading risks, and not in favor of the phone. Safer? Not a chance.
Kind of like everything else that goes 100% on line, it's more risk and prone to problems. But, we all get to pay for increased premiums to pay for damages so who cares right?
And those same poor people have money for a smart phone how exactly? Me thinks you are confusing "cash" with credit cards and tech gadgets. Sorry, but it's not safer than a credit card. It's the same as a credit card, while having dependency on some type of connectivity for the Cell.
Rick Allen is a drummer, and a rather incredible story. Drummers, real drummers, see drumming as a pure body effort. This third "robot" arm is no different than using a drum machine. It's no longer the body doing the work, it's a machine.
Watch Mike Portnoy, Mike Mangini, Neil Peart, John Bohnam (videos obviously), etc.. etc.. they use both arms and both legs with incredible precision for an incredible effect. I don't think Rick was ever that caliber drummer (miracles are not that common) but before the accident he used both arms and both legs too. He didn't swap to a drum machine afterward, because he knows what "drumming" is to a "drummer". He retrained his body so that his feet do more than most drummers can do with their hands.
I have played for 45 years myself, so yes I have an opinion and yes I'm biased. I have little respect for bands that use artificial drums. A person with a robotic arm would be a novelty at best, and a joke to a real drummer.
So by your logic anyone who believes and practices based on Pascal's wager is a devout *insert religion* then. Which is bullshit, and I have a feeling you know damn well that it's bullshit.
Your own bias is so blatant it must be a clinically diagnose-able problem.
It has nothing to do with Religion you troll, it has everything to do with power. Hitler for example believed in what ever he could to get power. People claiming he was Religious ignore the fact that he had teams of Mystic's and Astrologers, and was trying to hoard "Magic" artifacts. Artifacts from Tibet, China, Egypt, and India were just as important as those from Judea Christian sources..
How about making it a simple "Brain washing works" statement instead? That statement has historical backing and we can look at not just Nazi Germany but also Russia, China, Cambodia, Argentina, Brazil, Cuba, and wholly shit.. even the US was the product of brain washing and committed atrocities. Don't take my word for it, ask a native American Indian.
Sorry if reality hurts your tiny biased view of the world, but it's reality.
(bet you didn't see that one coming)
Hell no I didn't! Well played! :)
Who said *roughly* "if you repeat it often enough the populace will believe it" and "give me control of the media and I will control the populace".. Dang it... if I could only put my finger on who that was...