I was not criticizing the paper, but the story and the comment from one of the authors (who apparently has no clue how this works in actual reality, and also seems to be unaware of the discrete logarithm problem). But I guess clueless posturing without even having read the posting you are criticizing is pretty common on Slashdot.
First, pre-scalers have been around forever. You just drop one sample, adjust scale and interpolate the missing sample. Easy and effective. And second, no, you _cannot_ take the modulo of an analog signal. All your analog parts still need to be able to cope with the full signal amplitude or _they_ will clip. And guess what? A pre-scaler is an analog part.
This is one more instance of no-understanding bad tech reporting, nothing else.
My boss recently got an ESL certificate from a reputable tier-1 vendor. The validation was a complete joke: A guy with bad English asked him some questions over the phone that anybody could have found the answers to with a bit of work. The only security in place for ESL certs is that they are not that cheap, but that does not help against a targeted attack, because they are not really expensive either.
The bottom line is that certificates weakly ensure one thing: You are still talking to the same site on the next visit. They also ensure that small-time criminals will find it somewhat difficult to eavesdrop. And that is about it. In many cases, self-signed certificates will be more secure than that. The whole certificate-system is a bad joke, created by the utterly incompetent with too much trust and then corrupted by state-sponsored malicious actors. Incidentally, this is not a surprise. Basically all what is broken with the system now was predicted by perceptive people decades ago.
Wrong. And that is exactly the faulty argument used last time. Fist thing is that creating a spec that can actually be synthesized is significantly _more_ effort than directly writing code from a rough spec. Second thing is that even with an exact spec, you cannot synthesize good software for it. Seriously, have a look into the literature before claiming complete BS, and I do not mean the popular press by this.
The money argument is pretty bogus as well and just shows you do not understand how things actually work. Chip design is not automatized because humans cannot hack it. It is automatized to be more flexible. Humans can still hack it and consistently produce better layouts than machines. They just need longer for it and for some applications that is a factor. Again, have a look into the literature. This has been well-known for something like 20 years or so and it has not changed.
Incidentally, routing, layouting, software synthesis are all not AI tasks. They fall under "compilers".
That "AI coder" is not going to happen anytime soon, if ever. The current attempts to do this are the 3rd (or 4th?) attempt to do so and all those before have not failed because of lack of computing power. The basic mistake is seeing coding as "commodity" and not the creative engineering task it is. Current weak AI will not do anything here, it cannot synthesize things, it can only do statistical classification. And while it is bigger and faster and that moves some problems within its grasp, coding will not be one of them, what it can fundamentally do has not changed at all in the last 2 decades or so. And strong AI (the only one with actual intelligence) is not even on the distant horizon.
I was talking about the stream of victims for this particular scam, of course. Scams will always be around, and so will be people falling for them. But the "easily learn to code" scam is hurting society as a whole far more than other scams, because it holds back the development of coding as an engineering task that is difficult, needs talent, needs a real education and needs to be paid well. Before we reach that, software will continue to suck, and that comes with huge costs for society.
Well, to be fait, Win7 was mostly ok if you have limited expectations and only wanted to do things like gaming or using Office with it. But it really went steeply downhill from there again.
At least in part, yes. Sure, for some things you basically still have to use Windows (gaming), but all the people that are happy with this POS are massive Stockholm Syndrome sufferers.
They could. But they will not as their business-model is now thoroughly focused on shafting their customers in any way possible. Incidentally, you will have something like SVGA fallback, because of virtualization and installation when graphics drivers are not yet present. But forget about higher resolution VESA modes.
Oh, we have 400K users that are NOT going to Windows 10 (It was decided last week).
I know of one 70k employee enterprise that that also has decided early this year to replace Win7 with web-terminals eventually instead of going to Win10. They already have an all web-apps application landscape and Office was not enough to convince them to move to the mess that Win10 is.
That was pretty obvious right from the beginning. This time it is not MS having technological issues doing the right thing, it is MS intentionally and with determination doing the wrong thing. I am already planning to have a Win10 PC only for gaming and a Linux-Box (with wirtualized Win10 with not network access for Office) for everything else. The only other set-up that I am considering after Win7 stops getting security patches is fully virtualized Win10 for Gaming, and that needs secure GPU passthrough or Vulcan passthrough. That is not quite there yet. But I will never, under any circumstances let Win10 see my email or my browsing habits.
"Usually", yes, but not exclusively. Relevant research is for example Dunning, Kruger: "Unskilled and Unaware of It". The short of it is that really competent people usually know they are really competent, but are still more careful than really dumb people in assuming that they can do things.
Up next: UK Internet to be separated from the "pool of filth" that the worldwide Internet is. To be replaced by "clean, healthy and non-degenerate UK contents". Also, UK borders to be closed in both direction and to be secured by mine-fields and auto-guns (know-how comes from former GDR experts) to protect UK people from wandering into dangerous rest-of-the world areas.
Slashdot Mirror
You focusing on a cosmetic detail? Wow, that means you really had an in-dept look and give a qualified opinion!
If you cannot deal with such a minor quirk (and yes, it is somewhat quirky), then you should probably stay away from coding altogether.
I was not criticizing the paper, but the story and the comment from one of the authors (who apparently has no clue how this works in actual reality, and also seems to be unaware of the discrete logarithm problem). But I guess clueless posturing without even having read the posting you are criticizing is pretty common on Slashdot.
First, pre-scalers have been around forever. You just drop one sample, adjust scale and interpolate the missing sample. Easy and effective. And second, no, you _cannot_ take the modulo of an analog signal. All your analog parts still need to be able to cope with the full signal amplitude or _they_ will clip. And guess what? A pre-scaler is an analog part.
This is one more instance of no-understanding bad tech reporting, nothing else.
My boss recently got an ESL certificate from a reputable tier-1 vendor. The validation was a complete joke: A guy with bad English asked him some questions over the phone that anybody could have found the answers to with a bit of work. The only security in place for ESL certs is that they are not that cheap, but that does not help against a targeted attack, because they are not really expensive either.
The bottom line is that certificates weakly ensure one thing: You are still talking to the same site on the next visit. They also ensure that small-time criminals will find it somewhat difficult to eavesdrop. And that is about it. In many cases, self-signed certificates will be more secure than that. The whole certificate-system is a bad joke, created by the utterly incompetent with too much trust and then corrupted by state-sponsored malicious actors. Incidentally, this is not a surprise. Basically all what is broken with the system now was predicted by perceptive people decades ago.
Wrong. And that is exactly the faulty argument used last time. Fist thing is that creating a spec that can actually be synthesized is significantly _more_ effort than directly writing code from a rough spec. Second thing is that even with an exact spec, you cannot synthesize good software for it. Seriously, have a look into the literature before claiming complete BS, and I do not mean the popular press by this.
The money argument is pretty bogus as well and just shows you do not understand how things actually work. Chip design is not automatized because humans cannot hack it. It is automatized to be more flexible. Humans can still hack it and consistently produce better layouts than machines. They just need longer for it and for some applications that is a factor. Again, have a look into the literature. This has been well-known for something like 20 years or so and it has not changed.
Incidentally, routing, layouting, software synthesis are all not AI tasks. They fall under "compilers".
That "AI coder" is not going to happen anytime soon, if ever. The current attempts to do this are the 3rd (or 4th?) attempt to do so and all those before have not failed because of lack of computing power. The basic mistake is seeing coding as "commodity" and not the creative engineering task it is. Current weak AI will not do anything here, it cannot synthesize things, it can only do statistical classification. And while it is bigger and faster and that moves some problems within its grasp, coding will not be one of them, what it can fundamentally do has not changed at all in the last 2 decades or so. And strong AI (the only one with actual intelligence) is not even on the distant horizon.
So no, that is not going to happen.
I was talking about the stream of victims for this particular scam, of course. Scams will always be around, and so will be people falling for them. But the "easily learn to code" scam is hurting society as a whole far more than other scams, because it holds back the development of coding as an engineering task that is difficult, needs talent, needs a real education and needs to be paid well. Before we reach that, software will continue to suck, and that comes with huge costs for society.
I think you have some reading disability.
I really don't think
You got that part right.
And the stream of victims is drying up now. Good.
Well, to be fait, Win7 was mostly ok if you have limited expectations and only wanted to do things like gaming or using Office with it. But it really went steeply downhill from there again.
Stockholm syndrome.
At least in part, yes. Sure, for some things you basically still have to use Windows (gaming), but all the people that are happy with this POS are massive Stockholm Syndrome sufferers.
They could. But they will not as their business-model is now thoroughly focused on shafting their customers in any way possible. Incidentally, you will have something like SVGA fallback, because of virtualization and installation when graphics drivers are not yet present. But forget about higher resolution VESA modes.
That really is the only sane conclusion.
That would be the thing...
You have a point.
You seem to be unclear on my historic reference and that in particular the GRD border was entirely designed to keep people in.
You seem to be a "happy slave", the most dangerous enemy of freedom.
Oh, we have 400K users that are NOT going to Windows 10 (It was decided last week).
I know of one 70k employee enterprise that that also has decided early this year to replace Win7 with web-terminals eventually instead of going to Win10. They already have an all web-apps application landscape and Office was not enough to convince them to move to the mess that Win10 is.
That was pretty obvious right from the beginning. This time it is not MS having technological issues doing the right thing, it is MS intentionally and with determination doing the wrong thing. I am already planning to have a Win10 PC only for gaming and a Linux-Box (with wirtualized Win10 with not network access for Office) for everything else. The only other set-up that I am considering after Win7 stops getting security patches is fully virtualized Win10 for Gaming, and that needs secure GPU passthrough or Vulcan passthrough. That is not quite there yet. But I will never, under any circumstances let Win10 see my email or my browsing habits.
"Usually", yes, but not exclusively. Relevant research is for example Dunning, Kruger: "Unskilled and Unaware of It". The short of it is that really competent people usually know they are really competent, but are still more careful than really dumb people in assuming that they can do things.
Whenever I can ignore them. That is what I usually do. Although the sheer extremity of the displayed stupidity still gets to me sometimes.
I do not have a MySpace account! Try to hack that....
Up next: UK Internet to be separated from the "pool of filth" that the worldwide Internet is. To be replaced by "clean, healthy and non-degenerate UK contents". Also, UK borders to be closed in both direction and to be secured by mine-fields and auto-guns (know-how comes from former GDR experts) to protect UK people from wandering into dangerous rest-of-the world areas.
Possibly. But that would also mean he has not really tried to find things out and is just assuming things.