'France needs Google more than Google needs France'. Google makes around a billion dollars a year from French users. This is only a percent or so or US profits.
The question is not if france needs google more than google needs france. It's if google needs a billion dollars more than the slight reduction in profit elsewhere due to users boycotting google.
Machine guns - or rather the smoothbore muskets of the time of the framers was not really a personal weapon at all. They were more dispersed artillery used not in an aimed manner, but only at large bodies of troops. Pistols were clearly personal armament.
Citation needed. Is, in principle this possible - sure.
I would suggest based on past history that you should expect this extra data you have opted to share to leak in ways big and small, from the individual leak, to wholesale compromise of companies databases. You should expect inadequately tested rolled out drivers to brick certain device configurations until someone skilled can fix it. You should expect the 'automated' things to be increasingly harder to fix if that automatic service goes wrong. Increased opaqueness to the general user - random changes in user interface to hide or eliminate features which 'most' users are not using. And all other sorts of things.
Microsoft et al do not care about the 10% of users that this may make things awkward for - they care about the nebulous users that it may win, or retain by simplifying and making their lives easier. The few for which life is made hard or impossible - well - maybe for a few months you'll be able to find ways to revert to the old behaviour.
I strongly object 'do not even conceptually know'. Zero days are hardly ever fundamentally novel attacks. Inadequate input sanitisation, buffer overflows,... http://www.zerodayinitiative.c... - for example
None of the first several I looked at looked particularly novel, even compared with attacks of a decade or two ago.
It is not in principle insane. The atmosphere contains a large amount of very light gas, and plutos mass is low. This means that the atmosphere is quite 'puffed up' - meaning you can skim the planet and get quite a decent brake. The required large aerosurface due to the low density makes it 'interesting'. It requires detailed knowledge of the atmosphere.
"If any exoplanets were outweighed by something else in the same orbit, we would have detected that other thing first"
This is not correct in many cases. For example, for Kepler - planets are found by looking at the dimming star as the planet comes in front of the sun. If Kepler detects a planet, it is entirely insensitive to small objects in the same orbit, even if there are a _LOT_ of them. It is also insensitive to objects outside the plane of the system (apart from timing transit variation for really large bodies)
Similarly - radial velocity is going to be entirely insensitive to multiple small bodies in an orbit. It's worth noting that Kepler has detected exactly 0 earth-like planets in earth-like orbits around sun-like stars. There are lots of holes in the data due to insufficient signal-noise.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... Makes the case that saturn and jupiter cleared earths orbit of 'hot jupiters' as they migrated in, causing collisional cascades and the remnants of those condensed into the terrestrial planets.
Pluto as a planet doesn't really make much sense, without including others. Eris, for example. While currently three times the distance of pluto from the sun, at times (next ~2800AD) it is actually closer than pluto to the sun, as well as more massive. There is no real inarguable set.
The problem is that you pretty much can't pick another. The trajectory chosen was to reduce mission time. If you have 9 years, then pretty much the only way you can do a pluto probe is blasting past at >10km/s.
If you try to make the trajectory more gentle, then yes, you can do this - a hohmann transfer - but this will take literally a hundred years. There is nothing close to pluto that can slow you down meaningfully at all with a gravitational assist.
Nuclear powered ion engines, nuclear rockets (dusty fission rocket), and aerobraking are all in principle possible, but they all have their own risks.
Well, yes, everyone knows that would be awesome. Some rough numbers I did indicate that to stop New Horizons (It is only 400kg) at pluto would take a Delta V heavy. That is - around 500 tons. A launch campaign to launch 500 tons to pluto is likely to need several thousand rockets. Stopping is hard.
I was more meaning the circumstances - just because you find a GPLV2 'Copying' file in the file-tree does not mean that the whole thing can be distributed, as you have no way of knowing what the authors intent was. If I put a COPYING file in my windows source tree, it doesn't make windows open-source unless I have the authority, legal clearance, and intent to release that code.
Especially if computers are not your life, but something you want to - say - weekly - write letters on. Once you drop the frequency you're doing something, learning gets lots harder, even for the young.
Slashdot Mirror
What happens if personal advertising gets so good that some people are known to be not worth advertising to?
Certainly. And do you really think 1% of users care that much?
'France needs Google more than Google needs France'.
Google makes around a billion dollars a year from French users.
This is only a percent or so or US profits.
The question is not if france needs google more than google needs france.
It's if google needs a billion dollars more than the slight reduction in profit elsewhere due to users boycotting google.
It's only wrong if you're not married.
You do know that dolphins are mammals, and have vaginas?
Well, the female ones, anyway.
Researcher leaves academia and gets a job at Ashely Madison.
Your drone is first flown into your face at maximum forward velocity.
It is then dropped on your head from 30m, powered off.
Machine guns - or rather the smoothbore muskets of the time of the framers was not really a personal weapon at all.
They were more dispersed artillery used not in an aimed manner, but only at large bodies of troops.
Pistols were clearly personal armament.
Citation needed.
Is, in principle this possible - sure.
I would suggest based on past history that you should expect this extra data you have opted to share to leak in ways big and small, from the individual leak, to wholesale compromise of companies databases.
You should expect inadequately tested rolled out drivers to brick certain device configurations until someone skilled can fix it.
You should expect the 'automated' things to be increasingly harder to fix if that automatic service goes wrong.
Increased opaqueness to the general user - random changes in user interface to hide or eliminate features which 'most' users are not using.
And all other sorts of things.
Microsoft et al do not care about the 10% of users that this may make things awkward for - they care about the nebulous users that it may win, or retain by simplifying and making their lives easier.
The few for which life is made hard or impossible - well - maybe for a few months you'll be able to find ways to revert to the old behaviour.
I strongly object 'do not even conceptually know'. ...
Zero days are hardly ever fundamentally novel attacks.
Inadequate input sanitisation, buffer overflows,
http://www.zerodayinitiative.c... - for example
None of the first several I looked at looked particularly novel, even compared with attacks of a decade or two ago.
Hasn't anyone seen 'Red Dawn' ?
It's still obsolete if it meets specs, and you can't maintain it if it breaks because it's too old.
" I'd my damned device, unless it's me and only me who can initiate the wipe."
Where do you get a 100% reliable device that never ever fails?
It is not in principle insane.
The atmosphere contains a large amount of very light gas, and plutos mass is low.
This means that the atmosphere is quite 'puffed up' - meaning you can skim the planet and get quite a decent brake.
The required large aerosurface due to the low density makes it 'interesting'.
It requires detailed knowledge of the atmosphere.
"If any exoplanets were outweighed by something else in the same orbit, we would have detected that other thing first"
This is not correct in many cases.
For example, for Kepler - planets are found by looking at the dimming star as the planet comes in front of the sun.
If Kepler detects a planet, it is entirely insensitive to small objects in the same orbit, even if there are a _LOT_ of them.
It is also insensitive to objects outside the plane of the system (apart from timing transit variation for really large bodies)
Similarly - radial velocity is going to be entirely insensitive to multiple small bodies in an orbit.
It's worth noting that Kepler has detected exactly 0 earth-like planets in earth-like orbits around sun-like stars.
There are lots of holes in the data due to insufficient signal-noise.
"has cleared"
This is at best debatable.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Makes the case that saturn and jupiter cleared earths orbit of 'hot jupiters' as they migrated in, causing collisional cascades and the remnants of those condensed into the terrestrial planets.
Pluto as a planet doesn't really make much sense, without including others.
Eris, for example. While currently three times the distance of pluto from the sun, at times (next ~2800AD) it is actually closer than pluto to the sun, as well as more massive.
There is no real inarguable set.
The problem is that you pretty much can't pick another.
The trajectory chosen was to reduce mission time.
If you have 9 years, then pretty much the only way you can do a pluto probe is blasting past at >10km/s.
If you try to make the trajectory more gentle, then yes, you can do this - a hohmann transfer - but this will take literally a hundred years. There is nothing close to pluto that can slow you down meaningfully at all with a gravitational assist.
Nuclear powered ion engines, nuclear rockets (dusty fission rocket), and aerobraking are all in principle possible, but they all have their own risks.
Well, yes, everyone knows that would be awesome.
Some rough numbers I did indicate that to stop New Horizons (It is only 400kg) at pluto would take a Delta V heavy. That is - around 500 tons.
A launch campaign to launch 500 tons to pluto is likely to need several thousand rockets.
Stopping is hard.
NASA is _terrible_ at designing rockets.
They do it at great expense and time.
http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/586023...
Page 9 - Spacex tool ~440M to develop falcon 9. A more typical NASA approach might take 1.4 billion.
Likely well north of half a billion.
No, really, this isn't someone that's just stolen their bag at an airport.
I was more meaning the circumstances - just because you find a GPLV2 'Copying' file in the file-tree does not mean that the whole thing can be distributed, as you have no way of knowing what the authors intent was.
If I put a COPYING file in my windows source tree, it doesn't make windows open-source unless I have the authority, legal clearance, and intent to release that code.
I can't find details of exactly what licence, and how this aspect was found not relevant.
Especially if computers are not your life, but something you want to - say - weekly - write letters on.
Once you drop the frequency you're doing something, learning gets lots harder, even for the young.