I think TV actually makes things more dull. Video scenes go at a glacial speed compared to reading and leave out great many details (such as most if not all internal monologue). One can read for example Alice in Wonderland in about half-to-three quarters the time of the movie adaptations and in the process, obtain a lot more details about the motivations. A 'detailed' movie adaption of an average sized book should be split in two or three movies or even a TV show season.
The Volvo I had had a clutch as well (different drivers licenses for manual and automatic) but it was unnecessary to use to switch gears, the controls were electronic. My more recent Volkswagen also has a fully electronic gear box although it is a full automatic, the parking brake is electronic. I thought even manuals would've switched to at least full electronic controls.
You have a quarter billion (more if you include business) tax returns, most PIN being the birth year of the individual (common practice amongst accountants) or something equally stupid (1234, 0000). Since it is only used once a year, most people don't use a custom PIN like a bank card.
You have been mislead by the banks. They want you to believe that chip transactions are safe. The problem is the mag strips still exists and the chip usually contains a full, unencrypted copy of the mag stripe data. You can test this yourself by buying a programmable or USB chip reader.
The chip does have the capacity to have a card without stripe and even fully encrypt its data and even do simple crypto on chip but to date, many merchant banks (even big ones like Walmart) do not work with an encrypted chip.
IF the chip even does anything useful, the only data that is safe is what is on the wires between the chip reader and the bank. Chips could have easily been replaced by requiring strong TLS encryption and a custom key in the mag stripe.
Additionally, by the time the chip was declared ready to be used (a decade ago) the (homegrown) crypto was already outdated and researchers published papers on how an attack could be executed because those little chips don't have the compute power for anything better, it reuses keys generated with a very poor PRNG. By now, it is feasible to clone encrypted chips and force it to do weak, crackable crypto (with a bit of time on a decent computer). Once banks get around to go chip-only (another decade or even 2), I think it will be feasible to put the entire hack into one of those skimmers.
The Dutch natives, like the French, Belgian and British natives are getting fed up with European law though. NL had great freedom of information laws, when companies like the RIAA pushed for anti-piracy taxation on media, the Dutch said "ok, but then copying music on them is legal". The EU recently destroyed that exception in favor of the media industry.
That is just one example, the EU has been overthrowing a lot of legal culture (legalized squatting, immigration requirements and limits, taxation on foreign businesses, copyright, patents, even drug laws) in an effort to make an all-powerful federal-style government instead of a UN-style role it originally was going to be.
I have a manual shifted in my Volvo about 2 decades ago but no clutch. Not sure whether other manufacfurers have followed suit, but it wouldn't surprise me if a lot of modern "manuals" are actually semi-automatic.
First of all, we're not talking about Python 3 (or 4 or 5), we're talking about Python 1.2 & 2.0 when ECMAScript and VBScript fought it out.
When every byte counts (remember, 56k modems), how do you minify the spaces? Python has a lot more issues than just it's spacing though. Unicode support wasn't there (not sure if it's still defaulting to ASCII strings) while JavaScript defaults to UTF-16. Besides that, the learning curve for Python is a bit higher than JS, type coercion is available in Python 2 but it is a bit... buggy to say the least while JavaScript (like PHP) is a lot more promiscuous which, if you don't know how to program "Integer vs Float... I just want a number, JS conveniently treats all numbers as Floats".
That is just the language issues, there are/were political issues as well with Guido, I remember being a bit of a pain to work with when it came to controversial features and 'reworking' the languages caused Python 1-2-3 to be practically different languages. JavaScript from the early era still works just as well in current browsers as modern JavaScript and doesn't need individual interpreters.
Exactly, the EU zone has only been beneficial to business and the Soviet Bloc countries (business moving there for cheap labor and eventually even further east was the whole objective for the forming of the EU). Before the EU and even now, similar business-friendly arrangements have been made amongst European and even Asian countries without any EU government involvement. The EU and later on the Euro destroyed the sovereignty of individual nations (now only nations by name only for traditions' sake), the Brits were at least smart enough to maintain some of their distance when the Euro came along. The EU socialized the losses of its members on a continental scale (Greece etc) while the affluent Western Europe had their middle class evaporate to pay for it and many of those countries (Netherlands, Belgium and France) will soon follow the UK.
It's as simple as that. Hospitals, like (or due to) governments often go for the cheapest option where security is an afterthought. Once you are embedded with the cheapest vendor, you are locked in forever because the contract never demands open hardware or software and thus once the install is done, the vendor disappears and the sub-par it staff has no clue what to do to make anything work besides just opening the entire thing up.
If you go with a big-name vendor and actually contract support for a device with the likes of Siemens or GE or Philips, they will often install their own gateways right into your network for remote technician access. They are likewise, poorly secured since changing protocols or passwords is often inconvenient (again, sub par it staff on either side) and anyone gaining access to any point of the network will often have unauthenticated access to a number of institutions.
So you're moving the factory closer to home, there is a reason Domino's, Pizza Hut etc doesn't do that, mainly cost and scale.
The "robots" (or food processing conveyor systems as they are known) are easily obtained, a number of companies make them but they could make an entire day of pizza for an outlet in under an hour, it's more economical to have the place to make all your pizza's in a central location, ship it and have a $10/h monkey put it in the oven.
You don't have to freeze it, you could vacuum pack them (which is what Pizza Hut does). The problem with Domino's or any other outlet is not the fact that it was frozen, it's just that they use the low(est) quality ingredients, you can't make 2 large pizza's for $10 at your home with high quality ingredients (tried it, using quality cheese and meat alone costs $10), let alone have them delivered somewhere for $1.
Hell, ever been to a Pizza Hut and looked in the back? The pizzas are mostly made by robots as well, the only thing the people on-site do is put special toppings on, but if you order a 'regular menu item', you're most likely getting a pizza out of a package. McDonalds and pretty much any fast food chain does it as well, after reading the article, $18 seems a bit pricey for a simple pizza.
There are plenty of factories that make pizza's using robots, there is nothing new about that and there are a handful of companies that will sell you a custom 'robot' (or as they used to call it, a conveyor belt). Given the amount of time and money spent (employee cost, prototyping etc) reinventing the wheel, I'm not sure whether it would be a good investment to go into business with such morons.
Java isn't slow (although library creep quickly makes big programs slow as molasses) but it's still a magnitude slower than C/C++. In recent benchmarks Rust performs as good (or bad) as Java, Haskell and Go and the programs also compile to much (two times) larger binaries. Although that's "okay" for most desktop software (is it?) to be significantly slower, imagine Google, Apple or Amazon suddenly requiring 10-20% more data centers worldwide or instead of the 64k chip, having to purchase the 128k chip for a few million of embedded devices.
The problem with Rust and Java, even though they are safer they are also a lot slower. If you want something to be successful, you need to be able to take existing code and compile it with all the checks and balances of Rust/Java checked during compilation, not runtime. Testing is useful but not quite broad enough, on the other hand, I don't want to insert or be forced to insert a number of runtime range checks when I'm dealing with realtime code on a closed platform.
That's what I meant by CC companies. VISA, MC etc. They have no incentive to create systems that would prevent fraud. The fine is 50k for the lowest level. I think the fines go up to 500k/month for higher compliance levels.
Fraudulent checks, chargeback on PayPal accounts etc. The scammer gets the product and you're out of money. Others are of the "let us trade", but the trade is worthless (fake products etc). They then resell it elsewhere. There are others that simply rob you when you make the appointment.
That's the scams I've seen. There may be others but those would be more obvious scams and less people fall for the "give me cash for this overvalued check".
The transactions are successful, it's only later when people check their statements that the charges are flagged as fraudulent and charged back. The customer has 30 days after receiving their statement to dispute a transaction. It could take in the worst case 60-90 days before a merchant gets a chargeback.
The problem here is that CC companies simply do not give any protection against fraud. They have no incentive either, the CC company gets their transaction fees AND a chargeback fee AND issue a $50k/month fine to whoever lost the information (because they aren't PCI compliant) AND get to send in their expensive auditors and higher transaction fees to whoever lost the information (highest level of PCI compliance).
Making money... Duh. They want to sell new systems and their contract states they should've stopped using this package by now. They are completely free to go with another vendor or do it themselves, but this vendor wants their money. Regardless of whether or what they want to replace, it is mostly irrelevant, the vendor has stated that for renewal of the contract it will cost A$x and the hospital system doesn't want to pay it. The "cost" of software is not just a license cost, it is also maintenance and upgrades.
They decided to go with a closed source, locked in, short term license, the cost is whatever the company decides for you. If they want you to upgrade, you should've known that they can make you do that. The alternative is stop using "their" software and next decision you make, make sure it's "your" software.
Yes, that was what Flash was intended for. But many sites sprung up that were pure flash. They were 50-500kb monstrosities that took forever to load. There were a few animated sites that took advantage but the promises of Flash were not just animations but also video and hell, video conferencing. None of that ever took place.
Flash was never a "standard". I've always recommended clients to get rid of Flash sites because it wasn't a standard and not everyone could use it. When Flash was first introduced, a large number of people were still on dial-up and Flash sites were a big no-no because by then we already knew that people would click away if their site didn't load in 5s or less. Flash was then marketed towards people marketing towards broadband (video and interactive sites and DHTML were going to be all the rage once everyone got broadband).
When everyone started getting broadband, companies like Google sprang up (or rather, became embedded in the culture) and "SEO" became the buzzword, Google wasn't Flash-aware or compatible, Flash was dead as a 'standard' platform for 'broadband' because no 3rd party company (outside Macromedia and later Adobe) wanted to support it.
It eventually got taken over by Adobe and it was dead then because nobody trusted Adobe to fix it. It had many security issues already and many compatibility issues even within it's own tools. Adobe never fixed it, they just kind of half-integrated it with the rest of their suite but they effectively put it on life support. When Apple released the iPhone, Flash was dead and now it's just being this zombie process you know you have to get rid of at some point, but you don't really want to because maybe you may need it in some obscure corner of the web.
HIPAA means nothing and does not restrict putting the data online. HIPAA doesn't even enforce or require encryption, hell, you could even put it on the linux.org FTP servers, as long as you make sure nobody downloads it, it would be fine to HIPAA.
The way your hospital(s) handle the data, as much as they are compliant with HIPAA is atrocious from a security viewpoint.
There are already many platforms (even some workstation/desktop class) that have IPMI or similar remote support. There are similar constructs in the "standard" ACPI (after all, Microsoft made it). If you could hack those chips, yes, you could run whatever you wanted on them and it's a real threat. This is not a feature that Intel is 'hiding', it's actually advertising the feature.
Slashdot Mirror
I think TV actually makes things more dull. Video scenes go at a glacial speed compared to reading and leave out great many details (such as most if not all internal monologue). One can read for example Alice in Wonderland in about half-to-three quarters the time of the movie adaptations and in the process, obtain a lot more details about the motivations. A 'detailed' movie adaption of an average sized book should be split in two or three movies or even a TV show season.
The Volvo I had had a clutch as well (different drivers licenses for manual and automatic) but it was unnecessary to use to switch gears, the controls were electronic. My more recent Volkswagen also has a fully electronic gear box although it is a full automatic, the parking brake is electronic. I thought even manuals would've switched to at least full electronic controls.
You have a quarter billion (more if you include business) tax returns, most PIN being the birth year of the individual (common practice amongst accountants) or something equally stupid (1234, 0000). Since it is only used once a year, most people don't use a custom PIN like a bank card.
Plenty of mules willing to work on their own dime for a promise of a 10% return.
You have been mislead by the banks. They want you to believe that chip transactions are safe. The problem is the mag strips still exists and the chip usually contains a full, unencrypted copy of the mag stripe data. You can test this yourself by buying a programmable or USB chip reader.
The chip does have the capacity to have a card without stripe and even fully encrypt its data and even do simple crypto on chip but to date, many merchant banks (even big ones like Walmart) do not work with an encrypted chip.
IF the chip even does anything useful, the only data that is safe is what is on the wires between the chip reader and the bank. Chips could have easily been replaced by requiring strong TLS encryption and a custom key in the mag stripe.
Additionally, by the time the chip was declared ready to be used (a decade ago) the (homegrown) crypto was already outdated and researchers published papers on how an attack could be executed because those little chips don't have the compute power for anything better, it reuses keys generated with a very poor PRNG. By now, it is feasible to clone encrypted chips and force it to do weak, crackable crypto (with a bit of time on a decent computer). Once banks get around to go chip-only (another decade or even 2), I think it will be feasible to put the entire hack into one of those skimmers.
The Dutch natives, like the French, Belgian and British natives are getting fed up with European law though. NL had great freedom of information laws, when companies like the RIAA pushed for anti-piracy taxation on media, the Dutch said "ok, but then copying music on them is legal". The EU recently destroyed that exception in favor of the media industry.
That is just one example, the EU has been overthrowing a lot of legal culture (legalized squatting, immigration requirements and limits, taxation on foreign businesses, copyright, patents, even drug laws) in an effort to make an all-powerful federal-style government instead of a UN-style role it originally was going to be.
I have a manual shifted in my Volvo about 2 decades ago but no clutch. Not sure whether other manufacfurers have followed suit, but it wouldn't surprise me if a lot of modern "manuals" are actually semi-automatic.
First of all, we're not talking about Python 3 (or 4 or 5), we're talking about Python 1.2 & 2.0 when ECMAScript and VBScript fought it out.
When every byte counts (remember, 56k modems), how do you minify the spaces? Python has a lot more issues than just it's spacing though. Unicode support wasn't there (not sure if it's still defaulting to ASCII strings) while JavaScript defaults to UTF-16. Besides that, the learning curve for Python is a bit higher than JS, type coercion is available in Python 2 but it is a bit ... buggy to say the least while JavaScript (like PHP) is a lot more promiscuous which, if you don't know how to program "Integer vs Float ... I just want a number, JS conveniently treats all numbers as Floats".
That is just the language issues, there are/were political issues as well with Guido, I remember being a bit of a pain to work with when it came to controversial features and 'reworking' the languages caused Python 1-2-3 to be practically different languages. JavaScript from the early era still works just as well in current browsers as modern JavaScript and doesn't need individual interpreters.
Exactly, the EU zone has only been beneficial to business and the Soviet Bloc countries (business moving there for cheap labor and eventually even further east was the whole objective for the forming of the EU). Before the EU and even now, similar business-friendly arrangements have been made amongst European and even Asian countries without any EU government involvement. The EU and later on the Euro destroyed the sovereignty of individual nations (now only nations by name only for traditions' sake), the Brits were at least smart enough to maintain some of their distance when the Euro came along. The EU socialized the losses of its members on a continental scale (Greece etc) while the affluent Western Europe had their middle class evaporate to pay for it and many of those countries (Netherlands, Belgium and France) will soon follow the UK.
It's as simple as that. Hospitals, like (or due to) governments often go for the cheapest option where security is an afterthought. Once you are embedded with the cheapest vendor, you are locked in forever because the contract never demands open hardware or software and thus once the install is done, the vendor disappears and the sub-par it staff has no clue what to do to make anything work besides just opening the entire thing up.
If you go with a big-name vendor and actually contract support for a device with the likes of Siemens or GE or Philips, they will often install their own gateways right into your network for remote technician access. They are likewise, poorly secured since changing protocols or passwords is often inconvenient (again, sub par it staff on either side) and anyone gaining access to any point of the network will often have unauthenticated access to a number of institutions.
So you're moving the factory closer to home, there is a reason Domino's, Pizza Hut etc doesn't do that, mainly cost and scale.
The "robots" (or food processing conveyor systems as they are known) are easily obtained, a number of companies make them but they could make an entire day of pizza for an outlet in under an hour, it's more economical to have the place to make all your pizza's in a central location, ship it and have a $10/h monkey put it in the oven.
You don't have to freeze it, you could vacuum pack them (which is what Pizza Hut does). The problem with Domino's or any other outlet is not the fact that it was frozen, it's just that they use the low(est) quality ingredients, you can't make 2 large pizza's for $10 at your home with high quality ingredients (tried it, using quality cheese and meat alone costs $10), let alone have them delivered somewhere for $1.
Hell, ever been to a Pizza Hut and looked in the back? The pizzas are mostly made by robots as well, the only thing the people on-site do is put special toppings on, but if you order a 'regular menu item', you're most likely getting a pizza out of a package. McDonalds and pretty much any fast food chain does it as well, after reading the article, $18 seems a bit pricey for a simple pizza.
There are plenty of factories that make pizza's using robots, there is nothing new about that and there are a handful of companies that will sell you a custom 'robot' (or as they used to call it, a conveyor belt). Given the amount of time and money spent (employee cost, prototyping etc) reinventing the wheel, I'm not sure whether it would be a good investment to go into business with such morons.
Java isn't slow (although library creep quickly makes big programs slow as molasses) but it's still a magnitude slower than C/C++. In recent benchmarks Rust performs as good (or bad) as Java, Haskell and Go and the programs also compile to much (two times) larger binaries. Although that's "okay" for most desktop software (is it?) to be significantly slower, imagine Google, Apple or Amazon suddenly requiring 10-20% more data centers worldwide or instead of the 64k chip, having to purchase the 128k chip for a few million of embedded devices.
The problem with Rust and Java, even though they are safer they are also a lot slower. If you want something to be successful, you need to be able to take existing code and compile it with all the checks and balances of Rust/Java checked during compilation, not runtime. Testing is useful but not quite broad enough, on the other hand, I don't want to insert or be forced to insert a number of runtime range checks when I'm dealing with realtime code on a closed platform.
That's what I meant by CC companies. VISA, MC etc. They have no incentive to create systems that would prevent fraud. The fine is 50k for the lowest level. I think the fines go up to 500k/month for higher compliance levels.
Fraudulent checks, chargeback on PayPal accounts etc. The scammer gets the product and you're out of money. Others are of the "let us trade", but the trade is worthless (fake products etc). They then resell it elsewhere. There are others that simply rob you when you make the appointment.
That's the scams I've seen. There may be others but those would be more obvious scams and less people fall for the "give me cash for this overvalued check".
The transactions are successful, it's only later when people check their statements that the charges are flagged as fraudulent and charged back. The customer has 30 days after receiving their statement to dispute a transaction. It could take in the worst case 60-90 days before a merchant gets a chargeback.
The problem here is that CC companies simply do not give any protection against fraud. They have no incentive either, the CC company gets their transaction fees AND a chargeback fee AND issue a $50k/month fine to whoever lost the information (because they aren't PCI compliant) AND get to send in their expensive auditors and higher transaction fees to whoever lost the information (highest level of PCI compliance).
Making money... Duh. They want to sell new systems and their contract states they should've stopped using this package by now. They are completely free to go with another vendor or do it themselves, but this vendor wants their money. Regardless of whether or what they want to replace, it is mostly irrelevant, the vendor has stated that for renewal of the contract it will cost A$x and the hospital system doesn't want to pay it. The "cost" of software is not just a license cost, it is also maintenance and upgrades.
They decided to go with a closed source, locked in, short term license, the cost is whatever the company decides for you. If they want you to upgrade, you should've known that they can make you do that. The alternative is stop using "their" software and next decision you make, make sure it's "your" software.
Although the Queen could probably do that, most common law countries these days have protections against the government simply seizing property.
Yes, that was what Flash was intended for. But many sites sprung up that were pure flash. They were 50-500kb monstrosities that took forever to load. There were a few animated sites that took advantage but the promises of Flash were not just animations but also video and hell, video conferencing. None of that ever took place.
Flash was never a "standard". I've always recommended clients to get rid of Flash sites because it wasn't a standard and not everyone could use it. When Flash was first introduced, a large number of people were still on dial-up and Flash sites were a big no-no because by then we already knew that people would click away if their site didn't load in 5s or less. Flash was then marketed towards people marketing towards broadband (video and interactive sites and DHTML were going to be all the rage once everyone got broadband).
When everyone started getting broadband, companies like Google sprang up (or rather, became embedded in the culture) and "SEO" became the buzzword, Google wasn't Flash-aware or compatible, Flash was dead as a 'standard' platform for 'broadband' because no 3rd party company (outside Macromedia and later Adobe) wanted to support it.
It eventually got taken over by Adobe and it was dead then because nobody trusted Adobe to fix it. It had many security issues already and many compatibility issues even within it's own tools. Adobe never fixed it, they just kind of half-integrated it with the rest of their suite but they effectively put it on life support. When Apple released the iPhone, Flash was dead and now it's just being this zombie process you know you have to get rid of at some point, but you don't really want to because maybe you may need it in some obscure corner of the web.
HIPAA means nothing and does not restrict putting the data online. HIPAA doesn't even enforce or require encryption, hell, you could even put it on the linux.org FTP servers, as long as you make sure nobody downloads it, it would be fine to HIPAA.
The way your hospital(s) handle the data, as much as they are compliant with HIPAA is atrocious from a security viewpoint.
There are already many platforms (even some workstation/desktop class) that have IPMI or similar remote support. There are similar constructs in the "standard" ACPI (after all, Microsoft made it). If you could hack those chips, yes, you could run whatever you wanted on them and it's a real threat. This is not a feature that Intel is 'hiding', it's actually advertising the feature.
Most browsers these days are WebKit based so they'll support just as much HTML5 as Safari does.