It used to be that you had the option to only install security patches, but with Win10, not anymore. MS routinely breaks things by adding functionality now. The push UI changes some people do not want and that can also break things.
If anybody needs to change something here, it is Microsoft. First, they should stop writing really bad software. And second, they should stop forcing people to accept functionality-changes bundled with security patches.
As to the Google car: I had some contact with the very cutting-edge research in self-driving cars around 1995. From that, it is absolutely not surprise to me that this is still not solved today. On the other hand, warehouses were beginning to be automated back then, and it is no surprise that this works even better today and we see the start of significant job-losses in that area. My point is that for each area of automation, you have to understand the actual state-of-the-art and what the problems are and general predictions are pretty worthless. The root-cause for that is that strong/true AI is not available and will not be anytime soon. Unlike strong AI, automation has to be custom-designed for each specific task and that slows things down.
However, a lot of automation is becoming mature enough for test-deployments at the moment and a lot more is in some final stage of research (i.e. will likely be ready for real-world tests in 5...20 years). It will not be the obvious things and it will be a process over decades, but quite a few jobs will be going away permanently and they will not get replaced. In other areas, it is unknown. For example, will people accept fully or mostly automated fast-food offerings? Some are already there and are doing well, but they are still in niches. Sure, all of these things will be in the low-skill/low-insight area, but there are a lot of jobs in these and these people need to eat and live as well.
Now, there are historic examples like the automated loom, where no job-loss occurred. But the conditions back then were a lot different. For example, the market had a lot of growth-potential, and people could upgrade their education for newer jobs (often illiterate to literate). That is not the situation today, especially the education angle. Most people today already get close to the maximum amount and quality of education they can sustain today. They just do not have what it takes to get more, so that road is barred. Also, we are mostly not automating for market-growth, we are replacing workers with automation while retaining business volume.
As to your "plumber" example, I do agree. These jobs will remain. Craftsmen, engineers and scientists that are good at what they do are pretty safe from automation. Same for artists, entertainers and educators. But much of the rest is not and that is a lot of people.
I do not think the sky will be falling though. Any country that wants to avoid massive civil unrest will find some way to deal with this. A UBI is the most promising way here. I just hope not too many will go the traditional way of starting a war to get rid of all those young men that do not have a job and are causing problems because of that. (The young women can then be kept busy producing more young men to feed to that war...) Fortunately, globalization makes that option not very attractive economically, but it is still in use and could see a renaissance.
Given the universally observable incompetence, the simulation environment running this universe is probably running on something in the same class as Windows XP. Create too many exceptions like the one in this experiment (ordinary things are clearly not simulated at this detail...) and you may just crash the whole thing. That may be bad.
I know that. But whoever designed and bought that equipment knew _back_ _then_ that XP will not get security patches at some point anymore. That is gross negligence or intent right there. And running this equipment non-quarantined today is just the same.
To me it seems that the NHS had XP machines just normally connected to their LAN, no firewall, no separate network, nothing.
I know that the attackers have a large share of the blame, but they are most certainly not the only ones here.
Probably not. Nor do I think they will ever, because unless these criminals are utterly dumb, they will stay away from those BC wallets and any communication with victims like the plague. The global reaction and "success" of their campaign is just too much, they are now targets themselves.
Incidentally, the 5-day 8-hour work-week was identified as the best for overall productivity back by Henry Ford and others and they certainly did not want to do nice tings for their employees. Ignoring facts does not make them go away.
CP/M? The UNIX family was created in 1969 and is again the Nr 1 OS in the world these days, and that is for good reason. You seem to be lacking in knowledge of computing history. And even MULTICS, continually developed for the intermediate time would have blown anything away that MS ever had or ever will have.
Or more likely person with an agenda that stands to profit from distributing alternate facts. 86 months is just 7 years and _not_ a long-term trend that can be used to predict what is going to happen in 5, 10, 20 or 50 years. Also, much of what is already used in automation these days is in an experimental phase or in its first, limited deployment.
Anybody that believes "new" jobs will replace the ones lost to automation long-term is completely disconnected from reality and deeply stupid. Of course, there are many people around that are adequately described by these two characteristics.
Bank robbers are the most stupid of the stupid, because everyone at least a little bit smart knows that a) they get little money out of it and b) basically all get caught.
So yes, for most practical purposes it has eliminated the threat from bank-robbers. They are a nuisance today at best and all of them are morons.
I would also like to point out that bank robbers never ever did anywhere near the damage that these people just did.
Indeed. Even amateur criminals stop high-risk crime if it turns out to not pay. Professional criminals would never do such a thing in the first place. Far too high profile, far too high damage and hence far too high change to piss off some people that can actually do something about it.
Criminal enterprises of some sophistication that have been around for a while want one thing most: To stay in the shadows and quietly do their thing. It is good criminal practice to stay under the radar by being not more than an annoyance. This attack has none of the characteristics attractive to such an enterprise or rational single criminals. When the evil scum that did this (definition of evil used: accept huge damage to somebody else for a moderate personal gain) get caught, we will see this is one or a very small group of losers.
And I think this time, they will get caught if at all possible. They did huge damage and disabled critical infrastructure on a scale that terrorists can only dream of.
Not if you did about 10'000... 100'000 of that in damage and have a lot of angry people after you. And they have not even got that money yet, because one point where they could get caught is when they try to get that money out of the BC valet. BC is not really anonymous, despite what the press likes to claim.
A rough estimation would be between $100M and $1B at this time. That should be plenty of incentive to catch these people.
But that so few payed is actually a good thing, because it means this type of crime does not pay in comparison to the risk the perpetrators take. Hence it kind of _is_ the point.
The good thing here is that people have apparently gotten the message to not ever pay these people. Given that they will be completely destroyed if ever caught and that there is a lot of incentive to catch them, I hope this problem will just vanish over time.
And the funny thing is that when too young, children just do not care about porn (so no harm done), and when not too young anymore, they manage to get access to it anyways (with, as far as science can determine, no harm done). What is pushed here is a fundamental religious agenda, that is not based on actual facts. There is no scientific evidence that porn does harm to children. The only thing that is needed is for parents to put it into context, i.e. explain that these are models and athletes and that no, real people do not perform like that or have an anatomy like that and real sex works a bit differently. That done, any possible harm vanishes.
There really is something mentally broken in the people that want to ban porn.
It is basically a Victorian agenda with zero scientific evidence as a basis. The one thing it shows is the utterly evil nature of those that push this agenda, nothing else. And of course, this is just the preparation step for full censorship. The UK is already half a police-state, and that universally (if not stopped decisively) devolves into a full police state and ultimately full-blown fascism. The strange thing is that a lot of people in the UK seem to be cheering this process onwards, just like if it never happened in history.
There are pretty strict limits on monitoring employees in Europe. These are not merely in place to protect human rights. As it turns out, employees monitored permanently are under more significantly stress, perform worse, make more mistakes, have more sick days and have about zero loyalty to their employer. Pretty much the same reason why slave-labor is usually of low quality, quality too low for modern jobs.
As is typical for them, a Microsoft "innovation" makes things worse for everybody. Microsoft just does not have it. They are fundamentally lacking any understanding of how the world actually works. No surprise for a company that owes the single reason why they are big to a historical accident.
While I agree, this was still not a targeted attack and the hospitals hit share a large part of the blame. One thing is that MS fixed this about 2 months ago, so why did they not patch? And running XP networked these days in a hospital? I cannot imaging negligence getting more gross.
Indeed. When recently the EU started phasing out 500 EUR bills "to fight terrorism", the lie was made immediately obvious when the Swiss National Bank made a statement that they a) saw no reason to phase out 1000 CHF notes (around 900 EUR) and that b) 1000 CHF bills had various legitimate use for example when buying a car with cash or when buying livestock.
The whole phasing out of cash is just an attempt to remove power from the citizens.
Slashdot Mirror
It used to be that you had the option to only install security patches, but with Win10, not anymore. MS routinely breaks things by adding functionality now. The push UI changes some people do not want and that can also break things.
If anybody needs to change something here, it is Microsoft. First, they should stop writing really bad software. And second, they should stop forcing people to accept functionality-changes bundled with security patches.
Nice quote!
As to the Google car: I had some contact with the very cutting-edge research in self-driving cars around 1995. From that, it is absolutely not surprise to me that this is still not solved today. On the other hand, warehouses were beginning to be automated back then, and it is no surprise that this works even better today and we see the start of significant job-losses in that area. My point is that for each area of automation, you have to understand the actual state-of-the-art and what the problems are and general predictions are pretty worthless. The root-cause for that is that strong/true AI is not available and will not be anytime soon. Unlike strong AI, automation has to be custom-designed for each specific task and that slows things down.
However, a lot of automation is becoming mature enough for test-deployments at the moment and a lot more is in some final stage of research (i.e. will likely be ready for real-world tests in 5...20 years). It will not be the obvious things and it will be a process over decades, but quite a few jobs will be going away permanently and they will not get replaced. In other areas, it is unknown. For example, will people accept fully or mostly automated fast-food offerings? Some are already there and are doing well, but they are still in niches. Sure, all of these things will be in the low-skill/low-insight area, but there are a lot of jobs in these and these people need to eat and live as well.
Now, there are historic examples like the automated loom, where no job-loss occurred. But the conditions back then were a lot different. For example, the market had a lot of growth-potential, and people could upgrade their education for newer jobs (often illiterate to literate). That is not the situation today, especially the education angle. Most people today already get close to the maximum amount and quality of education they can sustain today. They just do not have what it takes to get more, so that road is barred. Also, we are mostly not automating for market-growth, we are replacing workers with automation while retaining business volume.
As to your "plumber" example, I do agree. These jobs will remain. Craftsmen, engineers and scientists that are good at what they do are pretty safe from automation. Same for artists, entertainers and educators. But much of the rest is not and that is a lot of people.
I do not think the sky will be falling though. Any country that wants to avoid massive civil unrest will find some way to deal with this. A UBI is the most promising way here. I just hope not too many will go the traditional way of starting a war to get rid of all those young men that do not have a job and are causing problems because of that. (The young women can then be kept busy producing more young men to feed to that war...) Fortunately, globalization makes that option not very attractive economically, but it is still in use and could see a renaissance.
I do actually understand how that works and what its limits are. You do not. You are not the only one though.
Given the universally observable incompetence, the simulation environment running this universe is probably running on something in the same class as Windows XP. Create too many exceptions like the one in this experiment (ordinary things are clearly not simulated at this detail...) and you may just crash the whole thing. That may be bad.
I know that. But whoever designed and bought that equipment knew _back_ _then_ that XP will not get security patches at some point anymore. That is gross negligence or intent right there. And running this equipment non-quarantined today is just the same.
To me it seems that the NHS had XP machines just normally connected to their LAN, no firewall, no separate network, nothing.
I know that the attackers have a large share of the blame, but they are most certainly not the only ones here.
Probably not. Nor do I think they will ever, because unless these criminals are utterly dumb, they will stay away from those BC wallets and any communication with victims like the plague. The global reaction and "success" of their campaign is just too much, they are now targets themselves.
Thanks.
Incidentally, the 5-day 8-hour work-week was identified as the best for overall productivity back by Henry Ford and others and they certainly did not want to do nice tings for their employees. Ignoring facts does not make them go away.
CP/M? The UNIX family was created in 1969 and is again the Nr 1 OS in the world these days, and that is for good reason. You seem to be lacking in knowledge of computing history. And even MULTICS, continually developed for the intermediate time would have blown anything away that MS ever had or ever will have.
Or more likely person with an agenda that stands to profit from distributing alternate facts. 86 months is just 7 years and _not_ a long-term trend that can be used to predict what is going to happen in 5, 10, 20 or 50 years. Also, much of what is already used in automation these days is in an experimental phase or in its first, limited deployment.
Anybody that believes "new" jobs will replace the ones lost to automation long-term is completely disconnected from reality and deeply stupid. Of course, there are many people around that are adequately described by these two characteristics.
Bank robbers are the most stupid of the stupid, because everyone at least a little bit smart knows that a) they get little money out of it and b) basically all get caught.
So yes, for most practical purposes it has eliminated the threat from bank-robbers. They are a nuisance today at best and all of them are morons.
I would also like to point out that bank robbers never ever did anywhere near the damage that these people just did.
Not really. You can make this little money with conventional fraud in a few months at most, with nowhere near the risk of getting caught.
Indeed. Even amateur criminals stop high-risk crime if it turns out to not pay. Professional criminals would never do such a thing in the first place. Far too high profile, far too high damage and hence far too high change to piss off some people that can actually do something about it.
Criminal enterprises of some sophistication that have been around for a while want one thing most: To stay in the shadows and quietly do their thing. It is good criminal practice to stay under the radar by being not more than an annoyance. This attack has none of the characteristics attractive to such an enterprise or rational single criminals. When the evil scum that did this (definition of evil used: accept huge damage to somebody else for a moderate personal gain) get caught, we will see this is one or a very small group of losers.
And I think this time, they will get caught if at all possible. They did huge damage and disabled critical infrastructure on a scale that terrorists can only dream of.
Not if you did about 10'000 ... 100'000 of that in damage and have a lot of angry people after you. And they have not even got that money yet, because one point where they could get caught is when they try to get that money out of the BC valet. BC is not really anonymous, despite what the press likes to claim.
A rough estimation would be between $100M and $1B at this time. That should be plenty of incentive to catch these people.
But that so few payed is actually a good thing, because it means this type of crime does not pay in comparison to the risk the perpetrators take. Hence it kind of _is_ the point.
The good thing here is that people have apparently gotten the message to not ever pay these people. Given that they will be completely destroyed if ever caught and that there is a lot of incentive to catch them, I hope this problem will just vanish over time.
That would probably be a good idea. Unworkable in practice though.
And the funny thing is that when too young, children just do not care about porn (so no harm done), and when not too young anymore, they manage to get access to it anyways (with, as far as science can determine, no harm done). What is pushed here is a fundamental religious agenda, that is not based on actual facts. There is no scientific evidence that porn does harm to children. The only thing that is needed is for parents to put it into context, i.e. explain that these are models and athletes and that no, real people do not perform like that or have an anatomy like that and real sex works a bit differently. That done, any possible harm vanishes.
There really is something mentally broken in the people that want to ban porn.
It is basically a Victorian agenda with zero scientific evidence as a basis. The one thing it shows is the utterly evil nature of those that push this agenda, nothing else. And of course, this is just the preparation step for full censorship. The UK is already half a police-state, and that universally (if not stopped decisively) devolves into a full police state and ultimately full-blown fascism. The strange thing is that a lot of people in the UK seem to be cheering this process onwards, just like if it never happened in history.
Indeed. This is beyond stupid.
Because there are a lot of bad people in the world that crave power over others. Of course, their willing suppliers (Microsoft here) are even worse.
There are pretty strict limits on monitoring employees in Europe. These are not merely in place to protect human rights. As it turns out, employees monitored permanently are under more significantly stress, perform worse, make more mistakes, have more sick days and have about zero loyalty to their employer. Pretty much the same reason why slave-labor is usually of low quality, quality too low for modern jobs.
As is typical for them, a Microsoft "innovation" makes things worse for everybody. Microsoft just does not have it. They are fundamentally lacking any understanding of how the world actually works. No surprise for a company that owes the single reason why they are big to a historical accident.
While I agree, this was still not a targeted attack and the hospitals hit share a large part of the blame. One thing is that MS fixed this about 2 months ago, so why did they not patch? And running XP networked these days in a hospital? I cannot imaging negligence getting more gross.
Indeed. When recently the EU started phasing out 500 EUR bills "to fight terrorism", the lie was made immediately obvious when the Swiss National Bank made a statement that they a) saw no reason to phase out 1000 CHF notes (around 900 EUR) and that b) 1000 CHF bills had various legitimate use for example when buying a car with cash or when buying livestock.
The whole phasing out of cash is just an attempt to remove power from the citizens.