What you say is superficially reasonable and my work the first time around. Once it is known what flavor/distro is used in these voting machines, APTs will insert hard to detect flaws to be exploited.
Let's be honest, they were annihilated BY the Spanish.
They were annihilated by disease that Spanish accidentally brought over from Europe. I am certain Spanish killed some, but not 19 million people from multiple centralized and established nations that were stable prior to their arrival. The reason Spaniards had such astonishing success in conquests is because natives were in the midst of extremely fatal epidemic.
Millions dead, poverty, and started rebuilding by making cheap goods for the West. If not for Nixon's mistake, China still would be a third-word country.
Would the same level of abuse be possible with Apple iOS, or is this intrinsic flaw in open-sourced Android where it is possible to modify OS functionality without it becoming obvious?
While holding on to a paid-off car is sensible, I don't think your numbers are quite right. IHS states average is 79.3 month (~7 years), and this is data coming out of recession.
Much bigger problem is that it isn't against the law for private corporations to censor. While we rightfully condemn China Mobile for blocking NYT, there is no law preventing, for example, AT&T from doing the same.
Why do you think there will be fewer cars on the road once we have driverless cars? We could possibly remove freight traffic by moving it to operate at night. However, this will be offset by empty cars moving to pick up people.
I can see while there will be fewer cars total. This doesn't mean there will be fewer cars on the road, especially at peak commute hours. For example, in the morning there will be cars dropping people off at work (what we have now) and empty cars returning to pick up next wave of people (what we don't have now, as cars are parked outside of offices and are not on the road).
I am not interested in this model, because at its core is renter model. You don't own the car, as such you don't have any say in how it operates. So things like mandatory in-car advertising, sub-optimal routes to save fuel, or even whims of corporate policies and posturing (e.g. shuttle man last, because everything is a fault of patriarchy).
You are also foolish to think that costs will be lower in the long term. Once alternatives (i.e. personally owner car) are rare you will pay exactly as much as market can support for personal transportation. So you will still have monthly payments that are comparable to what you pay now.
You could have the best intentions with such system, but result will be setting neighbors against each other. There is zero chance this won't be weaponized in some form to settle scores.
However, I really don't like laptops that are being offered today. Most of them went for miniaturization, it is hard to get something like what I have. For some reason underlying assumption by laptop manufacturers that people want smaller laptops. I personally don't.
My i7 Haswell based laptop is within 95% performance of a comparably priced brand new machine. Only one still works, after keyboard was replaced under extended warranty. It is now on third battery. Why would I bother upgrading?
This goes much deeper than "some people are just wrong and they don't know it".
First, right and wrong are not always binary or universal. It might not even be possible to know what is right for some situations. Instead, we ought to look at epistemology of one's beliefs. How well-justified one belief ought to determine its validity. Second, people might be committed to a certain beliefs in more than intellectual way. It could be part of their personal and group identity. It might be part of their upbringing. Changing your mind on something always have costs. If these costs are too high, such as reevaluating your associations and past decisions, individual is likely to hold to discredited ideas by deploying confirmation bias. More so, self-view also plays into this - admitting to being wrong have costs to your self-esteem. Third, ideas are fundamentally predictive models of the world. They don't have to be entirely correct to be accurate predictors. In this way, biologically and evolutionary, it isn't necessary to be correct all the time, rather it is necessary to not be too slow to respond. As such, simpler but flawed is heavily preferred over complex and accurate. We take all kinds of shortcut and heuristics in our thinking, it is natural and fundamental part of our thinking.
Unfortunately, doxing is a thing regardless of how you behave. There are plenty of rational, civil, and well-meaning people that were dragged by a social mob. It is almost arbitrary on who gets targeted and why.
Acting rationally and civilly is a handicap if your goal is to advance your ideas. Slogans and soundbites, shaming and insulting, and marginalization and uncharitable vilification of opposing views is by far more effective.
This isn't how it should be, but this is how it is. Our society and norms are not designed for instant, global, and non-individual communication.
The value of the company like Instagram is what they know about you, not what they do.
Instagram knows about you a lot more than Boeing, and if Instagram went bankrupt A LOT of data would be sold to the highest bidder. Consequences of such data release would be unpredictable.
Academia is absolutely the wrong way to go if you want quality of life. As a new PhD your fate is underpaid and overworked adjunct with no job security or at best publish-or-perish hell for 10 years. Tenured professors are minority of academia, and getting to that from fresh PhD is like winning a lottery.
What you say is superficially true. However, lets frame this question in 'quality of life'. Can you optimize it by changing locations or lowering your standards? Absolutely. However, having to do work is very hard to avoid. You must be willing to live in a cave or cardboard box to completely move away from doing any work.
What you say is true - anyone has an ability to kill you if they are sufficiently determined. What you should ask is what happens next, once person reaches "nothing to lose" state. Is it going to be peaceful surrender or a start of a killing spree?
Deceased made wrong assumption - that you could resolve arguments and reach understanding with all people. This is just not true.
Additionally, Internet is unlike person-to-person communication in a way that you don't screen your audience for sanity and you don't get non-verbal clues giving you an early warning that someone is about to blow the lid.
More so, once people made up their mind it is virtually impossible to change their mind with logic. People change their behavior and convictions due to pain (social or otherwise) and not due to being convinced by evidence and reason.
As such, the only rational approach to online and social media discourse is to act pseudonymously and acrimoniously.
Old timer, this is no longer the case. It may have been true when you were young, but these days it is IT, gigs, or unemployment. Too many people in a globally connected world competing for the same few jobs.
It is very nice to be independently wealthy and not have to worry about getting a paycheck, but for the rest of us we have to do it for a paycheck or face homelessness and possibly starvation.
If all available work is under such conditions, is that really a choice?
Tech work culture is seriously broken when 80 hour weeks and never going on vacation for any reason is encouraged and celebrated. Burnout under such conditions is inevitable.
If not this one, maybe the next bug of this kind will finally put illusion of VM separation to rest. If you are running something in the cloud, there is no way to secure it. Start bringing important stuff back in-house, and better use dedicated hardware. Yes, these old-fashioned blade servers were in the access-controlled server room for a reason.
Slashdot Mirror
What you say is superficially reasonable and my work the first time around. Once it is known what flavor/distro is used in these voting machines, APTs will insert hard to detect flaws to be exploited.
It is quite possible to intentionally introduce an exploitable bug without it looking like sabotage.
Let's be honest, they were annihilated BY the Spanish.
They were annihilated by disease that Spanish accidentally brought over from Europe. I am certain Spanish killed some, but not 19 million people from multiple centralized and established nations that were stable prior to their arrival. The reason Spaniards had such astonishing success in conquests is because natives were in the midst of extremely fatal epidemic.
Millions dead, poverty, and started rebuilding by making cheap goods for the West. If not for Nixon's mistake, China still would be a third-word country.
Reagan have done the same thing with Star Wars program. BS and infeasible plans to make USSR waste time on a dead-end research.
This is just like that.
Would the same level of abuse be possible with Apple iOS, or is this intrinsic flaw in open-sourced Android where it is possible to modify OS functionality without it becoming obvious?
Well, sort of a simplistic retort, isn't it?
Twitter is not the right medium to have an in-depth discussion on anything. By design.
While holding on to a paid-off car is sensible, I don't think your numbers are quite right. IHS states average is 79.3 month (~7 years), and this is data coming out of recession.
Much bigger problem is that it isn't against the law for private corporations to censor. While we rightfully condemn China Mobile for blocking NYT, there is no law preventing, for example, AT&T from doing the same.
Why do you think there will be fewer cars on the road once we have driverless cars? We could possibly remove freight traffic by moving it to operate at night. However, this will be offset by empty cars moving to pick up people.
I can see while there will be fewer cars total. This doesn't mean there will be fewer cars on the road, especially at peak commute hours. For example, in the morning there will be cars dropping people off at work (what we have now) and empty cars returning to pick up next wave of people (what we don't have now, as cars are parked outside of offices and are not on the road).
I am not interested in this model, because at its core is renter model. You don't own the car, as such you don't have any say in how it operates. So things like mandatory in-car advertising, sub-optimal routes to save fuel, or even whims of corporate policies and posturing (e.g. shuttle man last, because everything is a fault of patriarchy).
You are also foolish to think that costs will be lower in the long term. Once alternatives (i.e. personally owner car) are rare you will pay exactly as much as market can support for personal transportation. So you will still have monthly payments that are comparable to what you pay now.
Absolutely. This times 100.
You could have the best intentions with such system, but result will be setting neighbors against each other. There is zero chance this won't be weaponized in some form to settle scores.
Obviously, if I am forced to upgrade I would.
However, I really don't like laptops that are being offered today. Most of them went for miniaturization, it is hard to get something like what I have. For some reason underlying assumption by laptop manufacturers that people want smaller laptops. I personally don't.
My i7 Haswell based laptop is within 95% performance of a comparably priced brand new machine. Only one still works, after keyboard was replaced under extended warranty. It is now on third battery. Why would I bother upgrading?
The way I see it, the fact that toasters run any OS in any form is an issue.
This goes much deeper than "some people are just wrong and they don't know it".
First, right and wrong are not always binary or universal. It might not even be possible to know what is right for some situations. Instead, we ought to look at epistemology of one's beliefs. How well-justified one belief ought to determine its validity.
Second, people might be committed to a certain beliefs in more than intellectual way. It could be part of their personal and group identity. It might be part of their upbringing. Changing your mind on something always have costs. If these costs are too high, such as reevaluating your associations and past decisions, individual is likely to hold to discredited ideas by deploying confirmation bias. More so, self-view also plays into this - admitting to being wrong have costs to your self-esteem.
Third, ideas are fundamentally predictive models of the world. They don't have to be entirely correct to be accurate predictors. In this way, biologically and evolutionary, it isn't necessary to be correct all the time, rather it is necessary to not be too slow to respond. As such, simpler but flawed is heavily preferred over complex and accurate. We take all kinds of shortcut and heuristics in our thinking, it is natural and fundamental part of our thinking.
Unfortunately, doxing is a thing regardless of how you behave. There are plenty of rational, civil, and well-meaning people that were dragged by a social mob. It is almost arbitrary on who gets targeted and why.
Acting rationally and civilly is a handicap if your goal is to advance your ideas. Slogans and soundbites, shaming and insulting, and marginalization and uncharitable vilification of opposing views is by far more effective.
This isn't how it should be, but this is how it is. Our society and norms are not designed for instant, global, and non-individual communication.
The value of the company like Instagram is what they know about you, not what they do.
Instagram knows about you a lot more than Boeing, and if Instagram went bankrupt A LOT of data would be sold to the highest bidder. Consequences of such data release would be unpredictable.
Academia is absolutely the wrong way to go if you want quality of life. As a new PhD your fate is underpaid and overworked adjunct with no job security or at best publish-or-perish hell for 10 years. Tenured professors are minority of academia, and getting to that from fresh PhD is like winning a lottery.
What you say is superficially true. However, lets frame this question in 'quality of life'. Can you optimize it by changing locations or lowering your standards? Absolutely. However, having to do work is very hard to avoid. You must be willing to live in a cave or cardboard box to completely move away from doing any work.
What you say is true - anyone has an ability to kill you if they are sufficiently determined. What you should ask is what happens next, once person reaches "nothing to lose" state. Is it going to be peaceful surrender or a start of a killing spree?
Deceased made wrong assumption - that you could resolve arguments and reach understanding with all people. This is just not true.
Additionally, Internet is unlike person-to-person communication in a way that you don't screen your audience for sanity and you don't get non-verbal clues giving you an early warning that someone is about to blow the lid.
More so, once people made up their mind it is virtually impossible to change their mind with logic. People change their behavior and convictions due to pain (social or otherwise) and not due to being convinced by evidence and reason.
As such, the only rational approach to online and social media discourse is to act pseudonymously and acrimoniously.
It's a big world with lots of opportunity.
Old timer, this is no longer the case. It may have been true when you were young, but these days it is IT, gigs, or unemployment. Too many people in a globally connected world competing for the same few jobs.
It is very nice to be independently wealthy and not have to worry about getting a paycheck, but for the rest of us we have to do it for a paycheck or face homelessness and possibly starvation.
If all available work is under such conditions, is that really a choice?
Tech work culture is seriously broken when 80 hour weeks and never going on vacation for any reason is encouraged and celebrated. Burnout under such conditions is inevitable.
If not this one, maybe the next bug of this kind will finally put illusion of VM separation to rest. If you are running something in the cloud, there is no way to secure it. Start bringing important stuff back in-house, and better use dedicated hardware. Yes, these old-fashioned blade servers were in the access-controlled server room for a reason.