Why not just make Symantec products such bloated resource hogs they slow down western computers, reducing US productivity as workers wait for their cursor to follow every mouse movement?
4) Nervous(perhaps because they are trying to do something illegal and murderous)
Lots of people are nervous flyers, and their apprehension starts to build as soon as they get to the airport. Profiling based on appearance (tough-looking guys who appear nervous, for example) doesn't work, either. A fear of flying is just as likely to affect a tough 35-year-old biker type as it is a frail 92-year-old lady.
What's more, if they decide nervous-looking passengers with a middle-eastern appearance are worth extra attention, that would probably be almost all of them. Anyone who looks remotely middle eastern probably feels like everyone in a uniform, every security camera, and half the Caucasian-American passengers are staring at them.
Behavioral profiling is an inexact science in the best situations; in a huge, hectic place like an airport, it's like playing roulette (but without the calming C-major chimes from the nearby slots).
What nefarious character is going to draw attention to themselves when trying to get away with something evil?
Possibly one of the nefarious characters who show up on "America's Dumbest Crooks" or similar shows. According to news reports after the first World Trade Center bombing (1993 or 1994, I think - Ryder truck in the basement, no significant structural damage), the bomber tried to get his deposit back on the rental truck the next day--and used his real name to rent the truck.
The people who run terrorist organizations may be careful planners, but the people who they send into oblivion aren't always the sharpest scissors in the checked baggage.
I'm sorry, but Mythbusters != Science. Mythbusters == staged entertainment.
It's unfortunate that the mod type showing on this comment is 'Flamebait' rather than 'Insightful'. Mythbusters does a very good job of demonstrating that a 'myth' can be proven or disproved within a very specific set of circumstances on the one trial that they choose to represent their 'proof', but it only resembles science on an incredibly superficial level.
The best example I've seen in the last while (although I rarely watch the show) was trying to prove that an object launched backward off a moving vehicle, at the speed of the vehicle, will fall straight down. They designed a launcher that could propel a bowling ball at a consistent speed, then drove the vehicle at that speed and started their trials. They showed four failed trials before they finally achieved one where the ball fell straight down. Their conclusion was that they proved that an object will fall straight down when launched at the speed of the vehicle--despite four of the five trials they showed (and who knows how many others that were cut) disproving their intended result. They didn't even mention the concept of wake turbulence affecting the ball's path.
On the other hand, I wonder how much corporate-funded science resembles Mythbusters (in this respect) more than it resembles legitimate science.
Also, lasers don't bounce back at the attacker they way they do in fiction.
The most effective reflective armor wouldn't attempt to bounce the beam back (the Wobbuffet defense). If you had highly reflective armor placed at a very low angle, the beam would strike a much larger area, reducing the concentration of energy in addition to reflecting it away.
Of course, the problem would be that you now have a powerful laser beam aimed at an angle into the air--less concentrated than it was, but still enough to damage any of your planes that may be in the area.
I studied this issue in the early 00's. The company I worked for had delayed buying any new client hardware to the point where we had administrative users on nine-year-old Dells and AutoCAD users on five-year-old machines. So of course we needed to buy new machines for everyone, and we wanted to find the cheapest solution. Well, management wanted the cheapest solution; users wanted to get some work done, rather than waiting until lunch time for their computer to log in.
In our case, including licensing and server upgrades (which were minor, because we had excess server capacity due to a shrinking company), it would have been cheaper to use a thin client system--but only for the administrative users. AutoCAD was not supported in a thin client environment (is it, even today?), and our service technicians absolutely hated using Citrix to access the ERP system. (Logging into the west coast from China, Germany, or even the midwest was ridiculous, waiting half a minute for your cursor to move across the screen.)
I finally managed to convince my boss, who loved the thin client concept, that because of remote users and AutoCAD users, it was best for us to kill off our Citrix system altogether. The power users got fast new workstations, the administrative users got shiny new PCs, our server room was leaned out and less prone to overheating, and everyone lived happily ever after--until the company folded 18 months later due to incompetent management.
Does anyone remember Myst? Great story, superb graphics (navigating through stills to provide high res scenes), and great use of Quicktime mini-windows for animation in the days before full 3D rendering. I finished that game many times.
Then came Riven. Five CDs full of that immersing world, and a storyline better and more complex than the first. I finished that game quite a few times as well, even though it was much longer.
By the time Uru: Ages Beyond Myst came out, other companies had begun producing fully rendered 3D universes that were as good or better, but I bought it because it was a Myst sequel. I played through the first part, solving the challenges, then picked up the expansion packs.
When I got to the last part, there was a challenge I couldn't figure out. After spending hours going back and forth through the section, trying to find what I had missed, I gave up and went to a walkthrough site. There it was revealed that, in order to progress further, I had to stand in one place for exactly fifteen minutes and catch a pebble that was dropped from a mechanism. I couldn't just leave and come back in approximately 15 minutes though, or the pebble would time out and leave me stranded for another 15 minutes.
I don't know whether the game creators were trying to enforce some sort of RSI break to compensate for the carpal tunnel syndrome their games may have induced, but I felt cheated. Every other part of the series to that point I had solved myself, but how could anyone be expected to figure out that solving this last challenge required standing around doing nothing for as long as many games require you to complete an entire level?
I turned off the game, uninstalled it, and have not played anything from those game developers since.
...I hate it when the media has such a hay-day over something...
I used to think it was just my ex who misused this expression, but it seems to be everywhere these days.
The media had a field day with this article.
Newspapers were the medium of choice back in their heyday, before television news became popular.
Heyday refers to the time when something was especially popular or prevalent. A field day is what you have when you're able to enjoy something tremendously for a short time.
Okay, I know what the OP means now. I would think twice before going through a private sale that used the Amazon portal.
When I sell things, I prefer to use Craigslist and keep it local. No shipping hassles, and the transaction happens face to face, in cash, so you're not worrying about electronic payment mishaps.
I generally trust Amazon more than I do the small fry sites they 'affiliate' with.
What exactly do you mean? When someone clicks on one of the recommended books on my Amazon affiliate page*, they are taken to Amazon.ca where they can buy the book directly from Amazon. I don't handle any of their transactions, or ship any books; all my affiliate page does is give me a commission on any book that a visitor to my site may purchase if they access Amazon.ca through the links on my site. There's no additional 'trust' needed.
*which I am not going to link here, because that would be affiliate link spam. My site is in my sig if anyone wants more information on responsible products.
They should lose their contracts for failing to wipe the data off the hard drives.
What's so ridiculous is how easy it is to destroy data without investing in ultra-super-duper-mil-spec data destruction software. When I destroyed hard drives for my old company, I'd pull out the drive, take it down to the shop floor, and watch as one of our fabricators put a 1/2-inch hole through the platters with a drill press. It's theoretically possible that an expert who really, really wanted our data could have read something from the partial platters, but I guarantee that none of our drives ever showed up in use anywhere else.
And with the old IBM death stars, pretty much any possibility of data recovery was eliminated when those glass platters shattered inside the case as the drill went through.
Of course, this technique requires you to have a drill press or a good, sturdy hand drill somewhere on your site, but I think Northrop Grumman could afford one of those.
The Government does not grant rights! The government is granted rights by the people...
I think it's a semantic difference, but for all practical purposes, the freedom to exercise rights depends on who has the power to decide whether or not rights can be exercised.
In a western democracy, the people have a great deal of power. Even the most powerful, corrupt government can only do so much to erode those rights, as we're seeing in the USA right now. In a totalitarian society, whether or not certain rights can be exercised is controlled by the rulers - as long as their rule remains stable.
And the rulers don't have to be selected by the people of that country. If a stronger country invades a weaker country, the rights of the conquered people are determined by the outside force that invaded them.
Since we in the west tend to believe that free speech is a right that cannot/shouldn't every be given away, many are willing to help the Iranians that are not willing to accept Iranian control over speech.
Exactly. At the moment, Iranians don't have that right, for all practical purposes. But there are many people inside and outside the country who believe they should, and they are doing everything they can to support that perceived right.
Whether or not that right is granted depends on how much pressure comes to bear on Iran's leadership. Of course, pressure can have different effects. It can be released in a controlled manner if the leadership accedes to the will of a sufficiently large number of people, or it can explode if the leaders order a harsh crackdown.
That's what the world is watching for right now. If Iran's leadership perceives that the majority of the pressure is internal, it is somewhat more likely to accede to change. If it perceives that it's a western plot, a crackdown is more likely.
But until the situation changes, Iranians only have the rights their government permits them to exercise.
Notice I'm not saying they shouldn't have the same rights we enjoy in the west, but that they do not currently have them.
...obviously no one has a right to anything in terms of it not being taken away from you (incl. your life), but it is a right in the sense that any modern legal framework should support it and concerned citizens have an obligation to support those rights for other citizens when they are clearly being infringed.
Of course, the problem is that many countries do not have what we would consider a modern legal framework. And within those 'backward' legal frameworks, our concept of rights does not exist.
It's like a serf in medieval Europe saying that he has the right to criticize his lord. The ruler could say "Sure, say what you want; what do I care what a peasant thinks?" or he could say "No you don't; off with your head!"
As long as his subjects have their meat and mead, and they're not being killed in their sleep by nightly bandit raids - and they're treated to the periodic entertainment of the public beheading of anyone silly enough to question his power - he doesn't need to grant them any more rights than he feels like giving them.
And if he doesn't grant those rights, for all practical purposes, the people don't have them.
Next question for the class: In our modern, western society, do you have the right to a certain quality of life?
On the contrary, my argument says that you have to keep asserting your rights en masse or they'll gradually disappear.
Look at the constant Slashdot stories about warrantless searches, unlawful search & seizure, oppression of free speech, and other denials of rights that are codified, but not respected by those in power. If it weren't for citizens fighting to protect these rights, and bring such infringements to court, they would disappear.
The Constitution is not a magic wand. It won't ensure the perpetual existence of your rights if you don't defend them.
But in countries that don't have such documents, those rights simply don't exist, and they won't until the people are able to convince the government to grant them.
If a supreme ruler can ensure that those selected for the police, the courts, and the army share his beliefs, and maintain the right balance of fear and contentment among the people, it doesn't really matter what rights the powerless believe they have. If that balance is destabilized, however, as may currently be happening in Iran, that's when things change.
Actually it's "Do no evil." So you can be as evil as you want, as long as you don't act on it. Even Dick Cheney could work for Google if he stopped... um, well... breathing.
Slashdot Mirror
Why not just make Symantec products such bloated resource hogs they slow down western computers, reducing US productivity as workers wait for their cursor to follow every mouse movement?
Um... How long has Symantec had ties to China?
Lots of people are nervous flyers, and their apprehension starts to build as soon as they get to the airport. Profiling based on appearance (tough-looking guys who appear nervous, for example) doesn't work, either. A fear of flying is just as likely to affect a tough 35-year-old biker type as it is a frail 92-year-old lady.
What's more, if they decide nervous-looking passengers with a middle-eastern appearance are worth extra attention, that would probably be almost all of them. Anyone who looks remotely middle eastern probably feels like everyone in a uniform, every security camera, and half the Caucasian-American passengers are staring at them.
Behavioral profiling is an inexact science in the best situations; in a huge, hectic place like an airport, it's like playing roulette (but without the calming C-major chimes from the nearby slots).
Possibly one of the nefarious characters who show up on "America's Dumbest Crooks" or similar shows. According to news reports after the first World Trade Center bombing (1993 or 1994, I think - Ryder truck in the basement, no significant structural damage), the bomber tried to get his deposit back on the rental truck the next day--and used his real name to rent the truck.
The people who run terrorist organizations may be careful planners, but the people who they send into oblivion aren't always the sharpest scissors in the checked baggage.
It's "Don't be evil, not don't buy evil.
It's unfortunate that the mod type showing on this comment is 'Flamebait' rather than 'Insightful'. Mythbusters does a very good job of demonstrating that a 'myth' can be proven or disproved within a very specific set of circumstances on the one trial that they choose to represent their 'proof', but it only resembles science on an incredibly superficial level.
The best example I've seen in the last while (although I rarely watch the show) was trying to prove that an object launched backward off a moving vehicle, at the speed of the vehicle, will fall straight down. They designed a launcher that could propel a bowling ball at a consistent speed, then drove the vehicle at that speed and started their trials. They showed four failed trials before they finally achieved one where the ball fell straight down. Their conclusion was that they proved that an object will fall straight down when launched at the speed of the vehicle--despite four of the five trials they showed (and who knows how many others that were cut) disproving their intended result. They didn't even mention the concept of wake turbulence affecting the ball's path.
On the other hand, I wonder how much corporate-funded science resembles Mythbusters (in this respect) more than it resembles legitimate science.
The most effective reflective armor wouldn't attempt to bounce the beam back (the Wobbuffet defense). If you had highly reflective armor placed at a very low angle, the beam would strike a much larger area, reducing the concentration of energy in addition to reflecting it away.
Of course, the problem would be that you now have a powerful laser beam aimed at an angle into the air--less concentrated than it was, but still enough to damage any of your planes that may be in the area.
Scene: A cloud against a blue sky background. A yellow title emerges from the cloud.
Cue vocals: "The Bin-Laaaa-dennnns"
I, for one, welcome our cheap, 3D-sensing, X-Box playing, Johnny 5-worshiping overlords.
I studied this issue in the early 00's. The company I worked for had delayed buying any new client hardware to the point where we had administrative users on nine-year-old Dells and AutoCAD users on five-year-old machines. So of course we needed to buy new machines for everyone, and we wanted to find the cheapest solution. Well, management wanted the cheapest solution; users wanted to get some work done, rather than waiting until lunch time for their computer to log in.
In our case, including licensing and server upgrades (which were minor, because we had excess server capacity due to a shrinking company), it would have been cheaper to use a thin client system--but only for the administrative users. AutoCAD was not supported in a thin client environment (is it, even today?), and our service technicians absolutely hated using Citrix to access the ERP system. (Logging into the west coast from China, Germany, or even the midwest was ridiculous, waiting half a minute for your cursor to move across the screen.)
I finally managed to convince my boss, who loved the thin client concept, that because of remote users and AutoCAD users, it was best for us to kill off our Citrix system altogether. The power users got fast new workstations, the administrative users got shiny new PCs, our server room was leaned out and less prone to overheating, and everyone lived happily ever after--until the company folded 18 months later due to incompetent management.
Does anyone remember Myst? Great story, superb graphics (navigating through stills to provide high res scenes), and great use of Quicktime mini-windows for animation in the days before full 3D rendering. I finished that game many times.
Then came Riven. Five CDs full of that immersing world, and a storyline better and more complex than the first. I finished that game quite a few times as well, even though it was much longer.
By the time Uru: Ages Beyond Myst came out, other companies had begun producing fully rendered 3D universes that were as good or better, but I bought it because it was a Myst sequel. I played through the first part, solving the challenges, then picked up the expansion packs.
When I got to the last part, there was a challenge I couldn't figure out. After spending hours going back and forth through the section, trying to find what I had missed, I gave up and went to a walkthrough site. There it was revealed that, in order to progress further, I had to stand in one place for exactly fifteen minutes and catch a pebble that was dropped from a mechanism. I couldn't just leave and come back in approximately 15 minutes though, or the pebble would time out and leave me stranded for another 15 minutes.
I don't know whether the game creators were trying to enforce some sort of RSI break to compensate for the carpal tunnel syndrome their games may have induced, but I felt cheated. Every other part of the series to that point I had solved myself, but how could anyone be expected to figure out that solving this last challenge required standing around doing nothing for as long as many games require you to complete an entire level?
I turned off the game, uninstalled it, and have not played anything from those game developers since.
Restrictions on mobile devices are probably in order as well:
PFC Campbell is approaching the insurgents camp.
PFC Campbell is just a little downwind. They can't see a thing.
PFC Campbell this is going to be good, they have no idea we're here!
PFC Campbell is that a Blackberry that insurgent is holding?
PFC Campbell ohshit
I used to think it was just my ex who misused this expression, but it seems to be everywhere these days.
The media had a field day with this article.
Newspapers were the medium of choice back in their heyday, before television news became popular.
Heyday refers to the time when something was especially popular or prevalent. A field day is what you have when you're able to enjoy something tremendously for a short time.
Okay, I know what the OP means now. I would think twice before going through a private sale that used the Amazon portal.
When I sell things, I prefer to use Craigslist and keep it local. No shipping hassles, and the transaction happens face to face, in cash, so you're not worrying about electronic payment mishaps.
What exactly do you mean? When someone clicks on one of the recommended books on my Amazon affiliate page*, they are taken to Amazon.ca where they can buy the book directly from Amazon. I don't handle any of their transactions, or ship any books; all my affiliate page does is give me a commission on any book that a visitor to my site may purchase if they access Amazon.ca through the links on my site. There's no additional 'trust' needed.
*which I am not going to link here, because that would be affiliate link spam. My site is in my sig if anyone wants more information on responsible products.
Actually, I think he meant to say that taxes would not go up 95% for Americans.
What do you mean? An African or European swallow?
You mean 'scorched'.
What's so ridiculous is how easy it is to destroy data without investing in ultra-super-duper-mil-spec data destruction software. When I destroyed hard drives for my old company, I'd pull out the drive, take it down to the shop floor, and watch as one of our fabricators put a 1/2-inch hole through the platters with a drill press. It's theoretically possible that an expert who really, really wanted our data could have read something from the partial platters, but I guarantee that none of our drives ever showed up in use anywhere else.
And with the old IBM death stars, pretty much any possibility of data recovery was eliminated when those glass platters shattered inside the case as the drill went through.
Of course, this technique requires you to have a drill press or a good, sturdy hand drill somewhere on your site, but I think Northrop Grumman could afford one of those.
Of course not. And there's no way you'll stare at Slashdot long enough to read through the deep investigative long form reporting we get here...
I think it's a semantic difference, but for all practical purposes, the freedom to exercise rights depends on who has the power to decide whether or not rights can be exercised.
In a western democracy, the people have a great deal of power. Even the most powerful, corrupt government can only do so much to erode those rights, as we're seeing in the USA right now. In a totalitarian society, whether or not certain rights can be exercised is controlled by the rulers - as long as their rule remains stable.
And the rulers don't have to be selected by the people of that country. If a stronger country invades a weaker country, the rights of the conquered people are determined by the outside force that invaded them.
Exactly. At the moment, Iranians don't have that right, for all practical purposes. But there are many people inside and outside the country who believe they should, and they are doing everything they can to support that perceived right.
Whether or not that right is granted depends on how much pressure comes to bear on Iran's leadership. Of course, pressure can have different effects. It can be released in a controlled manner if the leadership accedes to the will of a sufficiently large number of people, or it can explode if the leaders order a harsh crackdown.
That's what the world is watching for right now. If Iran's leadership perceives that the majority of the pressure is internal, it is somewhat more likely to accede to change. If it perceives that it's a western plot, a crackdown is more likely.
But until the situation changes, Iranians only have the rights their government permits them to exercise.
Notice I'm not saying they shouldn't have the same rights we enjoy in the west, but that they do not currently have them.
Of course, the problem is that many countries do not have what we would consider a modern legal framework. And within those 'backward' legal frameworks, our concept of rights does not exist.
It's like a serf in medieval Europe saying that he has the right to criticize his lord. The ruler could say "Sure, say what you want; what do I care what a peasant thinks?" or he could say "No you don't; off with your head!"
As long as his subjects have their meat and mead, and they're not being killed in their sleep by nightly bandit raids - and they're treated to the periodic entertainment of the public beheading of anyone silly enough to question his power - he doesn't need to grant them any more rights than he feels like giving them.
And if he doesn't grant those rights, for all practical purposes, the people don't have them.
Next question for the class: In our modern, western society, do you have the right to a certain quality of life?
Yes, but that would ruin the joke! :P
On the contrary, my argument says that you have to keep asserting your rights en masse or they'll gradually disappear.
Look at the constant Slashdot stories about warrantless searches, unlawful search & seizure, oppression of free speech, and other denials of rights that are codified, but not respected by those in power. If it weren't for citizens fighting to protect these rights, and bring such infringements to court, they would disappear.
The Constitution is not a magic wand. It won't ensure the perpetual existence of your rights if you don't defend them.
But in countries that don't have such documents, those rights simply don't exist, and they won't until the people are able to convince the government to grant them.
If a supreme ruler can ensure that those selected for the police, the courts, and the army share his beliefs, and maintain the right balance of fear and contentment among the people, it doesn't really matter what rights the powerless believe they have. If that balance is destabilized, however, as may currently be happening in Iran, that's when things change.
Actually it's "Do no evil." So you can be as evil as you want, as long as you don't act on it. Even Dick Cheney could work for Google if he stopped... um, well... breathing.