I'm trying to think of a readily available reference that's ever been as useful as Wikipedia, and I'm not coming up with anything. Maybe someone can offer a suggestion?
OK; I have a few Youtube accounts. I'm a musician, but I don't depend on that for income (which would make me an independent musician by some definitions). Sometimes I put videos with music I composed myself up on Youtube. I generally write my own music for home videos etc.
So: is Google threatening me that I have to sign up for their commercial service? Or is this purely for independent artists who are attempting to promote their commercial music via music videos on Youtube? How does Google tell the difference -- by checking to see if there's an audio match with something for sale on Amazon or iTunes? By targeting independent publishing labels?
I don't see how this can work out correctly, as it's basically saying that Google doesn't allow independent publication of music videos on YouTube (once you sign with Google, you're not really independent anymore).
Anyway, my first thought was that Vimeo must be enjoying the flood of new content. Depending on how things fall out, I might join them.
With truecrypt images, you give them your public key and have authorized their private key to decrypt. With this situation, you send them cleartext data and a private key; they encrypt your private key against theirs, and then encrypt your data against your private key.
So with the first setup, you've got a chain of reputation, segmentation of authority, and only encrypted data going over the wire. In the second setup, you've got no chain of reputation, only a partial segmentation of authority, credentials in memory on the public system, and cleartext on the wire.
So this isn't about the data being decrypted as much as it is about the security of the data in transit, and the security of the credentials used to secure the data.
Think of it this way: in both cases, in order to publish data the publisher needs access to the private key. In one case, that private key is held in private by the author. In the other case, it is held on a public system, and is accessible by anyone able to scrape memory or by anyone with access to the AWS corporate key.
Think of HFS+ as the equivalent of FAT32 for Macs. Its basically the old file system with support for larger drives and files. Apple latter tacked on journaling in OS X 10.3. I'm surprised Apple didn't push for a replacement file system after the switchover to Intel CPUs.
It's a bit more complicated than that. First off, HFS+ is actually more like a combination of NTFS and exFAT; they got the basic design down at an early stage so that it would be extensible. This means that they didn't fall into the FAT32 trap. Interestingly, although people refer to it as HFS+, the internals refer to the current incarnation as HFSX.
Journaling was added to HFS+ with OS X 10.2.2. This moved the internal name from HFS+ to HFSJ. HFSX was added with 10.3, and introduced optional case sensitivity and made the volume wrapper optional. With 10.4, full ACL support was added to HFSX. 10.5 added hardlinking. 10.6 added optional compression -- which could be where some of the issues being discussed in TFA are from. I used to use STACKER back in the day, until some bad bit flips caused massive data corruption -- I've avoided compressed dynamic storage ever since, until 10.6.
There have been rumours for years of Apple adopting ZFS, and at one point the DP releases of the OS even had it available -- but it has never rolled out into OS X itself.
Instead of tackling "bitrot" head-on, Apple seems to have taken the "make backups easy" approach. This works to some degree, but since the backups use hardlinking, you really only have two copies of the data -- the one on your main drive, and the one on your backup drive. This makes cycling your backup drives even more important than it already was.
I tried to use Azure, but all of my EU-hosted virtual machines geolocated to US, and I wanted none of that.
Well, now you have a random chance of geolocating to the EU (or S America, or somewhere else)....
It would have made more sense for them to use the EU blocks they owned to host Azure EU services, but they just used their US Azure block until it was full.
One other thing this breaks, is that before you could set up a VPN service on local Azure and the world would think you were in the US. Now it's going to be the reverse. This will break any Azure services that are pulling data only allowed to those in the US.
My credit union prints their own cards... which don't have a relief on the printed data... so they can issue them directly from the branch. If you want relief on your card, you have to order it through the mail. So I guess I'm not eating at Chang's tonight
I was handling non-embossed cards 20 years ago -- you know what we did? WE WROTE THE NUMBERS IN. It's not that hard. And paper copy really is the most secure method -- until the slips go through processing, at which point the physical copies go who knows where, and the information still goes via the internet to a database.
The real reason for doing this is that this kind of processing was their cheapest option that contained minimal merchant liability.
When you get to this level, it's not really the FCC's mandate anymore. It's the FTC's mandate, as it has become a federal trade/transport issue. When a municipality can't transport data to another municipality because of a contract with an infrastructure provider who is interstate, that's FTC territory.
Plus, I think you'll find there's only one state where this is illegal; in all the other states, it's just legislatively prohibitive (following the laws, it would cost too much to provide to the community).
Actually, the biggest way Canada has to deal with lawbreakers is that we have more than two political parties, and they tend to break different laws, and the others gang up on the one who broke the laws (so you always have a majority punishing the lawbreaker).
Now for the bureaucratic level, not so much; but the privacy commissioner actually has a few teeth, and there's enough discord that if people are caught, they usually can't become repeat offenders.
Plus, the government is still accountable to the Governor General, who can suspend parliament if (s)he doesn't like how things are going. It's happened a few times, too.
The other bit is that because Canada has a significantly smaller population than the US, people still have some degree of a voice. Oh, and the provinces are answerable to the Federal government; Canada doesn't have independent states (this is both a blessing and a curse).
So in summary, people in Canada might be polite in general, but they turn into a lynch mob when their politicians step too far out of line. Voter turnout is significantly higher than in the USA.
What about pre-release/beta products that aren't commercially available and haven't started shipping yet?
Even better! Really if that's true then the VAR was clearly given too much trust in who it decides to sell pre-release products to. They should go to established customers with a good history of cooperation, not just anyone who asks. All I can say about this story is "and I bet Juniper is doing the same thing".
I'd guess that Cisco is an established customer with a good history of cooperation -- they're definitely not just "anyone who asks."
I'd also guess that the VAR resells Cisco as well as Juniper, and probably supplies Juniper with Cisco's kit as well.
This is why I sometimes download third party copies of an eBook after I've purchased it -- not only is there no DRM, but the "scene" guys get their reputation based on the quality of their releases, so the eBooks are usually properly formatted and proofed.
Humans interact in real time, and we gossip. This introduces an entire checks and balances system that is skipped when an AI does all the work.
Now you could probably federate the AIs, make them gossip, and provide some feedback mechanism to humans -- the federated AI gossip system would probably work much better than the human bit.
For an example, think of the AI that was running the day trading system, and what happened when it glitched -- huge global economic hit in a few seconds, before any person could react. And this was a highly monitored system with, in reality, little impact on humanity.
Now if we imagine that this system was controlling an immunology lab, the waste system for a large city, the disinfecting system for a water supply, etc....
The problem with this is that our laws are not compatible. An AI would have to be able to make the decision as to which laws were more important in each context. This is why we have judges presiding over cases, and why we have higher courts -- of course, an AI could also bubble up these contradictions to the higher courts immediately, and short circuit the entire legal circus we currently enjoy.
"And through our special sauce, we're able to determine how a city moves."'
I guess this is the only way one is going to get In n Out in Boston. But then there's the word "through", so I don't know if I want to know what they're doing.
They're obviously including the millions of bits in their special sauce, and focusing on the bowels of the city.
More likely they were just high. It's ridiculous to think that what works for kids in Florida works for kids in Hawaii, or what works for kids in Arizona works for kids in New York. This kind of data is just meant for tracking, it wouldn't be used to improve a thing.
That's why they include location data.
Really: the goals are pretty good -- use machine learning to get the correlations instead of depending on the all-too-fallible "common sense". The problem is, the goals and the implementation are only loosely related. The researchers are trying to do the right thing, but in the process they're creating a database that can be abused intentionally or inadvertently for other goals. There's a reason HIPAA exists; this system would not just do an end-run around HIPAA, it would do much more. This data would become one of the most valuable assets to many corporations and government agencies in the US (and beyond).
My experience is that people either use the nav system in their head, or they use the one in their car. They have problems doing both at the same time. This means that if you depend on a nav system, you'll always be really new in town, as you'll never learn to associate the instructions with what your eyes actually see out the window.
That means sensitive touch controls with very little lag
No. That means no touch controls. Touch controls force you to look at where you're placing your fingers and what's happening. Actual physical knobs and buttons can be used even without looking.
As can your voice. My car, which is a low-end compact, still has a microphone in the steering wheel and can connect via bluetooth with my portable device. As a result, I can give it commands, and the car stereo system uses voice responses to those commands. I don't need knobs or screens; I just need to give commands and have them be understood. Right now, that last bit is lacking a bit (me: "find pizza hut near me" device: "Playing song named 'be the heart near me,' or even better, 'calling contact Zahuta Earme.'"
Lesson learned: when listening to music, plan your music list before you start your drive. When finding your way to a location, look it up before you drive, and use street view to verify the location was at least correct at some point. Then navigate by keeping those instructions in your head and looking out the window at your surroundings. If you can't see the route, you probably shouldn't be attempting to drive it.
I'm with you 100%. I've just got one thing to add -- what a lot of people portray as "evil" is really just the absence of a moral code -- more accurately called "amoral". An AI system that has no moral code and no ethical code, and purely responds to a limited set of recognized external imputs could ceonceivably kill off humanity -- not through any malicious intent, or even an unemotional decision that humanity is a blight and must be eradicated, but as we become more dependent on AI machinery, it could eliminate us purely through oversight. All that has to happen is for AI to be integrated into some globally effected system of management in a way that if it doesn't understand the input, it can set off the wrong chain of events -- one that a human would never take, but the AI isn't smart enough to understand the consequences of. For example, if an immunology lab was controlled by an AI, and there was a leak of some deadly virus, the AI could end up venting the air to protect the beings alive inside the facility (unlikely, but it's an example -- apply it elsewhere). End result: humanity dies of airborne pathogen, except for those quarantined inside the facility, who starve instead.
I think this is the premise behind much SciFi entertainment too (not all, but some of the better stuff): the core of the issue isn't the inherent malignency of AI, but the inherent fallibility of humanity in designing AI, combined with an always-deficient information set available to AI and the ability of humanity to put faith in that which isn't fully understood.
"Non-commercial RenderMan will be freely available for... developers...," it added.'
Forget the others; they're basically saying anyone not making commercial feature films can use it for free -- which means small software developers can now create excellent animation sequences for free, as long as they can actually do decent animation. This could usher in Pixar-level animation in App-style games, which would be significantly better than the current options.
I think the high motion cams are those ones they did for Fox sports -- 3 industrial cams instead of the four phone cams, likely at 60fps. The downside is that they have to be connected to a computer instead of being standalone.
Unless you looked closely, it would look like a standard antenna, not like some fancy expensive camera. As an added bonus, these are mounted as part of the refit on most police vehicles (including bait cars) and cars with these mounted are often avoided by smart car thieves (not Smart Car thieves).
You could make nifty travel videos with these too; and if they had wireless communication, the days of "oh! Look at that... oh, you missed it" would be gone, as the kids in the back could whip out the iPad and scrub through the footage to see what it was they missed.
but I really cannot deal with the fanboism, cult-like ersatz mystique, and stupidly-high capitalist pricing Apple leave in their wake... My cheal $250 Asus laptop runnin Linux does everything I need it to do. I like simple, ascetically so. Give me a terminal windows and a browser and I'm happy. I don't even really care what DM or WM I use, although preferentially, I still love Window Maker most.
I'm with you on the first two, but Apple is only stupidly-high priced in certain areas, such as cables and memory. And as far as what they announced today -- it's all free. Two OSes, a new programming language integrated into a rock solid IDE, various apps, all for free. Of course, the licensing insists that you either own Apple hardware of some sort or you pay $49 or whatever so you can run it in a VM... but the rest of your argument sounds like something from the turn of the century.
That said, for many people, they can get by with a $250 Asus laptop running a WM Linux -- just fine for any non-graphics tasks that don't stress memory or the CPU. As soon as you get into content creation beyond writing manuscripts though, the Apple hardware/software combo is one of the cheapest solutions with the fewest headaches.
Slashdot Mirror
You obviously didn't check the link....
archive.org is pretty useful too.
I'm trying to think of a readily available reference that's ever been as useful as Wikipedia, and I'm not coming up with anything. Maybe someone can offer a suggestion?
Google?
OK; I have a few Youtube accounts. I'm a musician, but I don't depend on that for income (which would make me an independent musician by some definitions). Sometimes I put videos with music I composed myself up on Youtube. I generally write my own music for home videos etc.
So: is Google threatening me that I have to sign up for their commercial service? Or is this purely for independent artists who are attempting to promote their commercial music via music videos on Youtube? How does Google tell the difference -- by checking to see if there's an audio match with something for sale on Amazon or iTunes? By targeting independent publishing labels?
I don't see how this can work out correctly, as it's basically saying that Google doesn't allow independent publication of music videos on YouTube (once you sign with Google, you're not really independent anymore).
Anyway, my first thought was that Vimeo must be enjoying the flood of new content. Depending on how things fall out, I might join them.
With truecrypt images, you give them your public key and have authorized their private key to decrypt. With this situation, you send them cleartext data and a private key; they encrypt your private key against theirs, and then encrypt your data against your private key.
So with the first setup, you've got a chain of reputation, segmentation of authority, and only encrypted data going over the wire. In the second setup, you've got no chain of reputation, only a partial segmentation of authority, credentials in memory on the public system, and cleartext on the wire.
So this isn't about the data being decrypted as much as it is about the security of the data in transit, and the security of the credentials used to secure the data.
Think of it this way: in both cases, in order to publish data the publisher needs access to the private key. In one case, that private key is held in private by the author. In the other case, it is held on a public system, and is accessible by anyone able to scrape memory or by anyone with access to the AWS corporate key.
Think of HFS+ as the equivalent of FAT32 for Macs. Its basically the old file system with support for larger drives and files. Apple latter tacked on journaling in OS X 10.3. I'm surprised Apple didn't push for a replacement file system after the switchover to Intel CPUs.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
It's a bit more complicated than that. First off, HFS+ is actually more like a combination of NTFS and exFAT; they got the basic design down at an early stage so that it would be extensible. This means that they didn't fall into the FAT32 trap. Interestingly, although people refer to it as HFS+, the internals refer to the current incarnation as HFSX.
Journaling was added to HFS+ with OS X 10.2.2. This moved the internal name from HFS+ to HFSJ.
HFSX was added with 10.3, and introduced optional case sensitivity and made the volume wrapper optional.
With 10.4, full ACL support was added to HFSX.
10.5 added hardlinking.
10.6 added optional compression -- which could be where some of the issues being discussed in TFA are from. I used to use STACKER back in the day, until some bad bit flips caused massive data corruption -- I've avoided compressed dynamic storage ever since, until 10.6.
There have been rumours for years of Apple adopting ZFS, and at one point the DP releases of the OS even had it available -- but it has never rolled out into OS X itself.
Instead of tackling "bitrot" head-on, Apple seems to have taken the "make backups easy" approach. This works to some degree, but since the backups use hardlinking, you really only have two copies of the data -- the one on your main drive, and the one on your backup drive. This makes cycling your backup drives even more important than it already was.
I tried to use Azure, but all of my EU-hosted virtual machines geolocated to US, and I wanted none of that.
Well, now you have a random chance of geolocating to the EU (or S America, or somewhere else)....
It would have made more sense for them to use the EU blocks they owned to host Azure EU services, but they just used their US Azure block until it was full.
One other thing this breaks, is that before you could set up a VPN service on local Azure and the world would think you were in the US. Now it's going to be the reverse. This will break any Azure services that are pulling data only allowed to those in the US.
My credit union prints their own cards... which don't have a relief on the printed data... so they can issue them directly from the branch. If you want relief on your card, you have to order it through the mail. So I guess I'm not eating at Chang's tonight
I was handling non-embossed cards 20 years ago -- you know what we did? WE WROTE THE NUMBERS IN. It's not that hard. And paper copy really is the most secure method -- until the slips go through processing, at which point the physical copies go who knows where, and the information still goes via the internet to a database.
The real reason for doing this is that this kind of processing was their cheapest option that contained minimal merchant liability.
When you get to this level, it's not really the FCC's mandate anymore. It's the FTC's mandate, as it has become a federal trade/transport issue. When a municipality can't transport data to another municipality because of a contract with an infrastructure provider who is interstate, that's FTC territory.
Plus, I think you'll find there's only one state where this is illegal; in all the other states, it's just legislatively prohibitive (following the laws, it would cost too much to provide to the community).
If you committed a murder 3 months ago or 30 years ago, it won't matter. There's always someone dedicated to it. That's not even counting cold cases.
In Canada, ALL cases are cold cases...
Actually, the biggest way Canada has to deal with lawbreakers is that we have more than two political parties, and they tend to break different laws, and the others gang up on the one who broke the laws (so you always have a majority punishing the lawbreaker).
Now for the bureaucratic level, not so much; but the privacy commissioner actually has a few teeth, and there's enough discord that if people are caught, they usually can't become repeat offenders.
Plus, the government is still accountable to the Governor General, who can suspend parliament if (s)he doesn't like how things are going. It's happened a few times, too.
The other bit is that because Canada has a significantly smaller population than the US, people still have some degree of a voice. Oh, and the provinces are answerable to the Federal government; Canada doesn't have independent states (this is both a blessing and a curse).
So in summary, people in Canada might be polite in general, but they turn into a lynch mob when their politicians step too far out of line. Voter turnout is significantly higher than in the USA.
What about pre-release/beta products that aren't commercially available and haven't started shipping yet?
Even better! Really if that's true then the VAR was clearly given too much trust in who it decides to sell pre-release products to. They should go to established customers with a good history of cooperation, not just anyone who asks. All I can say about this story is "and I bet Juniper is doing the same thing".
I'd guess that Cisco is an established customer with a good history of cooperation -- they're definitely not just "anyone who asks."
I'd also guess that the VAR resells Cisco as well as Juniper, and probably supplies Juniper with Cisco's kit as well.
This is why I sometimes download third party copies of an eBook after I've purchased it -- not only is there no DRM, but the "scene" guys get their reputation based on the quality of their releases, so the eBooks are usually properly formatted and proofed.
Exactly ...and without blabbing it to anyone.
Humans interact in real time, and we gossip. This introduces an entire checks and balances system that is skipped when an AI does all the work.
Now you could probably federate the AIs, make them gossip, and provide some feedback mechanism to humans -- the federated AI gossip system would probably work much better than the human bit.
For an example, think of the AI that was running the day trading system, and what happened when it glitched -- huge global economic hit in a few seconds, before any person could react. And this was a highly monitored system with, in reality, little impact on humanity.
Now if we imagine that this system was controlling an immunology lab, the waste system for a large city, the disinfecting system for a water supply, etc....
The problem with this is that our laws are not compatible. An AI would have to be able to make the decision as to which laws were more important in each context. This is why we have judges presiding over cases, and why we have higher courts -- of course, an AI could also bubble up these contradictions to the higher courts immediately, and short circuit the entire legal circus we currently enjoy.
"And through our special sauce, we're able to determine how a city moves."'
I guess this is the only way one is going to get In n Out in Boston. But then there's the word "through", so I don't know if I want to know what they're doing.
They're obviously including the millions of bits in their special sauce, and focusing on the bowels of the city.
More likely they were just high. It's ridiculous to think that what works for kids in Florida works for kids in Hawaii, or what works for kids in Arizona works for kids in New York. This kind of data is just meant for tracking, it wouldn't be used to improve a thing.
That's why they include location data.
Really: the goals are pretty good -- use machine learning to get the correlations instead of depending on the all-too-fallible "common sense". The problem is, the goals and the implementation are only loosely related. The researchers are trying to do the right thing, but in the process they're creating a database that can be abused intentionally or inadvertently for other goals. There's a reason HIPAA exists; this system would not just do an end-run around HIPAA, it would do much more. This data would become one of the most valuable assets to many corporations and government agencies in the US (and beyond).
My experience is that people either use the nav system in their head, or they use the one in their car. They have problems doing both at the same time. This means that if you depend on a nav system, you'll always be really new in town, as you'll never learn to associate the instructions with what your eyes actually see out the window.
That means sensitive touch controls with very little lag
No. That means no touch controls. Touch controls force you to look at where you're placing your fingers and what's happening. Actual physical knobs and buttons can be used even without looking.
As can your voice. My car, which is a low-end compact, still has a microphone in the steering wheel and can connect via bluetooth with my portable device. As a result, I can give it commands, and the car stereo system uses voice responses to those commands. I don't need knobs or screens; I just need to give commands and have them be understood. Right now, that last bit is lacking a bit (me: "find pizza hut near me" device: "Playing song named 'be the heart near me,' or even better, 'calling contact Zahuta Earme.'"
Lesson learned: when listening to music, plan your music list before you start your drive. When finding your way to a location, look it up before you drive, and use street view to verify the location was at least correct at some point. Then navigate by keeping those instructions in your head and looking out the window at your surroundings. If you can't see the route, you probably shouldn't be attempting to drive it.
I'm with you 100%. I've just got one thing to add -- what a lot of people portray as "evil" is really just the absence of a moral code -- more accurately called "amoral". An AI system that has no moral code and no ethical code, and purely responds to a limited set of recognized external imputs could ceonceivably kill off humanity -- not through any malicious intent, or even an unemotional decision that humanity is a blight and must be eradicated, but as we become more dependent on AI machinery, it could eliminate us purely through oversight. All that has to happen is for AI to be integrated into some globally effected system of management in a way that if it doesn't understand the input, it can set off the wrong chain of events -- one that a human would never take, but the AI isn't smart enough to understand the consequences of. For example, if an immunology lab was controlled by an AI, and there was a leak of some deadly virus, the AI could end up venting the air to protect the beings alive inside the facility (unlikely, but it's an example -- apply it elsewhere). End result: humanity dies of airborne pathogen, except for those quarantined inside the facility, who starve instead.
I think this is the premise behind much SciFi entertainment too (not all, but some of the better stuff): the core of the issue isn't the inherent malignency of AI, but the inherent fallibility of humanity in designing AI, combined with an always-deficient information set available to AI and the ability of humanity to put faith in that which isn't fully understood.
Shoot... I think you're right. Oh well :(
Forget the others; they're basically saying anyone not making commercial feature films can use it for free -- which means small software developers can now create excellent animation sequences for free, as long as they can actually do decent animation. This could usher in Pixar-level animation in App-style games, which would be significantly better than the current options.
Here we come, Bendy Luxo apps!
I think the high motion cams are those ones they did for Fox sports -- 3 industrial cams instead of the four phone cams, likely at 60fps. The downside is that they have to be connected to a computer instead of being standalone.
How useful do you think this thing is going to be on your roof (for unobstructed view) after someone steals it?
Actually, I know exactly how I'd mount this... inside one of these: http://telcoantennas.com.au/si...
Unless you looked closely, it would look like a standard antenna, not like some fancy expensive camera. As an added bonus, these are mounted as part of the refit on most police vehicles (including bait cars) and cars with these mounted are often avoided by smart car thieves (not Smart Car thieves).
You could make nifty travel videos with these too; and if they had wireless communication, the days of "oh! Look at that... oh, you missed it" would be gone, as the kids in the back could whip out the iPad and scrub through the footage to see what it was they missed.
but I really cannot deal with the fanboism, cult-like ersatz mystique, and stupidly-high capitalist pricing Apple leave in their wake... My cheal $250 Asus laptop runnin Linux does everything I need it to do. I like simple, ascetically so. Give me a terminal windows and a browser and I'm happy. I don't even really care what DM or WM I use, although preferentially, I still love Window Maker most.
I'm with you on the first two, but Apple is only stupidly-high priced in certain areas, such as cables and memory. And as far as what they announced today -- it's all free. Two OSes, a new programming language integrated into a rock solid IDE, various apps, all for free. Of course, the licensing insists that you either own Apple hardware of some sort or you pay $49 or whatever so you can run it in a VM... but the rest of your argument sounds like something from the turn of the century.
That said, for many people, they can get by with a $250 Asus laptop running a WM Linux -- just fine for any non-graphics tasks that don't stress memory or the CPU. As soon as you get into content creation beyond writing manuscripts though, the Apple hardware/software combo is one of the cheapest solutions with the fewest headaches.