The question specifically mentions businesses and things that need to be secure (like email, banking, etc.). Clearly, your website does not need to be secure and is thus not at all related to the topic at hand.
Most businesses don't offer encryption because their customers don't demand it. Most users don't demand it because there is no penalty for not using it.
Sure, not using encryption can result in identity theft, someone sniffing your password, someone getting into your financial info, etc. But how often does this really happen? Most users perceive the benefit to be non-existent. "I haven't had a problem before, why should I change now?". Having your financial information ruined is something that always happens to "other people".
Companies have a financial incentive to discourage encryption because it costs them money (regardless of how little) to implement it. They also have financial incentives to poorly protect and secure their customers' data and to lie to customers when their data is leaked.
Oh, all of our customer's credit card numbers, names, addresses, and other personal information is now available on the internet because someone lost a laptop that should never have been taken outside of the building? Let's just cover it up. Someone leaked to the press that we had a security breach? Let's lie and say that there's no risk to customers. People are now having their identity stolen because of the leak? let's sue to keep people quiet and offer tiny settlements with NDAs.
We're not going to see encryption become widespread until: 1. Customers demand it. (Which won't happen anytime soon, see above) 2. A bunch of congressmen have their personal info leaked because of a fuckup and they pass some laws about securing personal info.
Well it's quite obvious. They couldn't find anything illegal or wrong whatsoever. So of course they're going to make up bullshit "the student needs counseling" and "he violated school policies" to make it sound like they aren't a bunch of incompetent shitheads.
This happens all the time with terror suspects, like that guy who was puking in the bathroom on the plane a few weeks ago. He was labeled a "terrorist" because of the color of his skin and yet the government and the racist airline employee managed to come out looking like heroes. How? They spew this bullshit about "have to be cautious" and "he was suspicious" and they imply there was actually danger "we were lucky it was a false alarm".
The problem with holding people accountable to false alarms is that then real alarms don't get raised. They weigh their self interest and decide that it's better to err on the side of "caution", which actually involves putting people at risk when something bad comes along.
That's pretty much it, at least according to wikipedia. Most people hear "emp comes from nuclear bomb" an immediately assume that it only works if the bomb is detonated on the ground.
Not much. The metal shell of the robot would work quite well to do this anyway. Look up "faraday cage". You can actually make one at home. Wrap your cell phone in aluminum foil, tada, it's shielded from EMP.
Not necessarily. Heavy weapons doesn't imply indiscriminate firepower. A soldier can't be expected to haul two Gatling cannons into battle, but a robot can. They can be aimed as precisely as a rifle. No one is saying that we need to equip every robot with 102 mm cannons and howitzers and things that can level a building.
You are aware that the mars rovers have been active for many YEARS now, right? It would be very possible to make a robot stay active longer than a week without maintenance.
The difference is that it is a big fucking pain in the ass to collect landmines after you're through with them and there's no benefit to the enemy to retrieve them.
No country with the ability to produce combat robots in their right mind would ever leave combat robots lying around. That would be handing enemies our technology on a silver platter to reverse engineer and turn against us. Same thing with things like attack helicopters. If one goes down then they fly some mechanics out to fix it. If they can't fix it then they remove the classified parts (most of the circuit boards and probably some other things that they don't disclose), pile it on the nose of the chopper, and light up a termite grenade on top of it.
If the helicopter goes down in such a way that the entire crew is dead and the chopper can't be reached by mechanics then they bomb it.
"And how can a fully autonomous killing machine discriminate between soldiers and civilians."
Why does this come up in every fucking robotics discussion? Yes, it's hard to tell the difference NOW. Give it 10 years and image processing an AI will have evolved to such a level that it may be possible.
Obviously there are some technical hurdles. If there weren't then we'd have the technology NOW.
"Humans will always be better than machines at killing humans (unfortunately), machines can only simulate our thinking..."
I disagree. What robots lack up for in creativity they make up for in the ability to withstand orders of magnitude more damage than humans. I mean, blow a robot's leg clean off and its weapon systems still work. It doesn't pass out from blood loss or pain. Put a few bullets though it and chances are it's still going to be up and running. No human can do that.
They won't be creative, but everything is going to be directed by human commanders located in a semi-remote facility, so it's a non-issue. Any new threat will be adapted to by the humans controlling the robots.
Furthermore, humans need to be creative to avoid getting killed. That really isn't an issue with robots. One dead soldier is a very bad thing, 50 dead robots isn't good but no one is going to lose any sleep over it. If you kill half of a human squad, they're probably not going to advance any further. Wipe out half a fleet of robotic killing machines and they'll keep marching right on in.
Sure, the usual thief doesn't give a shit about the data. What you need to worry about are the thieves that are after your laptop because of the data on it. They'll certainly care about it. I lock my door at night because I'm concerned about the small number of people that would break in with the intention of harming me, not the 99.9% of people that wouldn't do anything even if the door was wide open.
The fact that most of the laptops being stolen are falling into the hands of idiots is no excuse for failing to protect them from the real threats.
Sure, SA was eliminated. But the US bitched about the Galileo system that the EU is making until they changed the frequency to one that was farther away from what GPS uses. The reason was because if they used the same frequency it would be impossible to jam Galileo without also jamming GPS. The US threatened to launch against Galileo satellites if they didn't change frequencies. The point being, if they were this pissed off about not being able to jam Galileo then they obviously have a way to jam Galileo if they deem it "necessary". It doesn't make sense to jam Galileo and at the same time run GPS at full accuracy, so they obviously also have a way to jam non-military GPS receivers. It might not be called SA anymore, but they have some method of jamming it.
I'd like color. I'd like to use it for my textbooks, most of which have fuckloads of color in them. You'd be surprised, but 3-d colored graphs of calculus-related formulas are quite helpful. Same with physics. Color makes graphs, tables, and images much more readable.
I've studied some BIO a couple years ago and remembering it helping immensely as well.
Have you ever actually seen an e-ink display? I agree that they're overpriced, one of the reasons I don't own one, but they are a lot better than an LCD. My friend has one and it looks almost like real paper. At first it's slightly easier to read than an LCD but if you want to sit down for a few hours to read it it'll save you one hell of a headache.
"the delay on an e-reader is probably more noticeable because you're waiting for it. If you're turning the page of a book, you have something to do to keep you busy until it's done, so it doesn't matter if it takes a while. If your only interaction with the device is to press a "next page" button, you have nothing to do except wait for the display to refresh. Time seems to go much slower if you have nothing to do..."
Look, we're talking about the time it takes to TURN A BLOODY PAGE. It's not a significant length of time. Jesus christ, how could you be so impatient as to need something to do while the page turns????
"The other issue with refresh is simply the Internet." You're aware that there exists a device that is designed for such a purpose, yes? It's called a laptop. You might as well bitch about the small screen size or lack of a full keyboard on your internet-enabled phone. The e-ink is designed to be easy to read, it looks almost like actual paper. Much easier on the eyes than a monitor. It's designed for READING, not for video, not for internet, not for making your coffee in the morning, etc.
As for flipping multiple pages, you can type in the page number and it'll take you there. Yeah, it's a little harder to flip through it to find a page, but there's built in bookmarking functionality so it's a minor issue.
I don't understand these complaints about the response times for the screens on e-readers. They're designed to be easy to read for the purpose of replacing paper books, not replacing LCD TVs or computer monitors. A real book doesn't have instant page turn times and there's a bit of "flicker" as the page flips up and over the current page. I've used a kindle before and it takes longer to turn a real page than for the kindle to refresh so I don't see a problem here.
Seems like people are really bitching that e-readers can't be used for video. My question is why did you buy an e-READER if you wanted to watch VIDEO? You should have bought a laptop.
I've also seen this in every home depot I've ever been in. Although, I'm not sure if they're used anymore. When I was little I used to see them used and get jammed on a regular basis so I suspect they may have stopped using them but don't want to spend the money to remove them.
More to the point, what in the hell do they use at YOUR bank? When you drive up to the teller station that doesn't use the drawer (the one built into the bank wall), how does the money get from you to the teller? The ONLY solution I've EVER seen is pneumatic tubes.
Where is "here"? Your list of codes seems like a large pain in the ass. These are not USB devices we're talking about, they're things about the size of a pack of gum (the ones with 5 sticks (that's five, not the brand 5)) with an LCD on them. They display a random number and a little bar that decreases over the course of a minute or so. Every minute, new code.
You realize that's impossible, right? 0K (abs. 0) is -273C.
I don't know if you were trying to make a joke or not, but the humor is going to be lost on pretty much anyone that knows anything about chemistry or physics. Furthermore, the unit snafu wasn't NASA, it was Lockheed Martin. NASA just got the blame for it because no one really bothered to actually look up what happened.
Slashdot Mirror
No one is saying you should.
The question specifically mentions businesses and things that need to be secure (like email, banking, etc.). Clearly, your website does not need to be secure and is thus not at all related to the topic at hand.
Most businesses don't offer encryption because their customers don't demand it. Most users don't demand it because there is no penalty for not using it.
Sure, not using encryption can result in identity theft, someone sniffing your password, someone getting into your financial info, etc. But how often does this really happen? Most users perceive the benefit to be non-existent. "I haven't had a problem before, why should I change now?". Having your financial information ruined is something that always happens to "other people".
Companies have a financial incentive to discourage encryption because it costs them money (regardless of how little) to implement it. They also have financial incentives to poorly protect and secure their customers' data and to lie to customers when their data is leaked.
Oh, all of our customer's credit card numbers, names, addresses, and other personal information is now available on the internet because someone lost a laptop that should never have been taken outside of the building? Let's just cover it up.
Someone leaked to the press that we had a security breach? Let's lie and say that there's no risk to customers.
People are now having their identity stolen because of the leak? let's sue to keep people quiet and offer tiny settlements with NDAs.
We're not going to see encryption become widespread until:
1. Customers demand it. (Which won't happen anytime soon, see above)
2. A bunch of congressmen have their personal info leaked because of a fuckup and they pass some laws about securing personal info.
That's his entire POINT. He didn't say it was a good adaptation, he just said it was AN adaptation.
Well it's quite obvious. They couldn't find anything illegal or wrong whatsoever. So of course they're going to make up bullshit "the student needs counseling" and "he violated school policies" to make it sound like they aren't a bunch of incompetent shitheads.
This happens all the time with terror suspects, like that guy who was puking in the bathroom on the plane a few weeks ago. He was labeled a "terrorist" because of the color of his skin and yet the government and the racist airline employee managed to come out looking like heroes. How? They spew this bullshit about "have to be cautious" and "he was suspicious" and they imply there was actually danger "we were lucky it was a false alarm".
The problem with holding people accountable to false alarms is that then real alarms don't get raised. They weigh their self interest and decide that it's better to err on the side of "caution", which actually involves putting people at risk when something bad comes along.
That's pretty much it, at least according to wikipedia. Most people hear "emp comes from nuclear bomb" an immediately assume that it only works if the bomb is detonated on the ground.
Not much. The metal shell of the robot would work quite well to do this anyway. Look up "faraday cage". You can actually make one at home. Wrap your cell phone in aluminum foil, tada, it's shielded from EMP.
Not necessarily. Heavy weapons doesn't imply indiscriminate firepower. A soldier can't be expected to haul two Gatling cannons into battle, but a robot can. They can be aimed as precisely as a rifle. No one is saying that we need to equip every robot with 102 mm cannons and howitzers and things that can level a building.
You are aware that the mars rovers have been active for many YEARS now, right? It would be very possible to make a robot stay active longer than a week without maintenance.
The difference is that it is a big fucking pain in the ass to collect landmines after you're through with them and there's no benefit to the enemy to retrieve them.
No country with the ability to produce combat robots in their right mind would ever leave combat robots lying around. That would be handing enemies our technology on a silver platter to reverse engineer and turn against us. Same thing with things like attack helicopters. If one goes down then they fly some mechanics out to fix it. If they can't fix it then they remove the classified parts (most of the circuit boards and probably some other things that they don't disclose), pile it on the nose of the chopper, and light up a termite grenade on top of it.
If the helicopter goes down in such a way that the entire crew is dead and the chopper can't be reached by mechanics then they bomb it.
"And how can a fully autonomous killing machine discriminate between soldiers and civilians."
Why does this come up in every fucking robotics discussion? Yes, it's hard to tell the difference NOW. Give it 10 years and image processing an AI will have evolved to such a level that it may be possible.
Obviously there are some technical hurdles. If there weren't then we'd have the technology NOW.
Thank god I've got Old Glory robot insurance. I'm fully covered in case of attacks from robots.
"Humans will always be better than machines at killing humans (unfortunately), machines can only simulate our thinking..."
I disagree. What robots lack up for in creativity they make up for in the ability to withstand orders of magnitude more damage than humans. I mean, blow a robot's leg clean off and its weapon systems still work. It doesn't pass out from blood loss or pain. Put a few bullets though it and chances are it's still going to be up and running. No human can do that.
They won't be creative, but everything is going to be directed by human commanders located in a semi-remote facility, so it's a non-issue. Any new threat will be adapted to by the humans controlling the robots.
Furthermore, humans need to be creative to avoid getting killed. That really isn't an issue with robots. One dead soldier is a very bad thing, 50 dead robots isn't good but no one is going to lose any sleep over it. If you kill half of a human squad, they're probably not going to advance any further. Wipe out half a fleet of robotic killing machines and they'll keep marching right on in.
Sure, the usual thief doesn't give a shit about the data. What you need to worry about are the thieves that are after your laptop because of the data on it. They'll certainly care about it. I lock my door at night because I'm concerned about the small number of people that would break in with the intention of harming me, not the 99.9% of people that wouldn't do anything even if the door was wide open.
The fact that most of the laptops being stolen are falling into the hands of idiots is no excuse for failing to protect them from the real threats.
Sure, SA was eliminated. But the US bitched about the Galileo system that the EU is making until they changed the frequency to one that was farther away from what GPS uses. The reason was because if they used the same frequency it would be impossible to jam Galileo without also jamming GPS. The US threatened to launch against Galileo satellites if they didn't change frequencies. The point being, if they were this pissed off about not being able to jam Galileo then they obviously have a way to jam Galileo if they deem it "necessary". It doesn't make sense to jam Galileo and at the same time run GPS at full accuracy, so they obviously also have a way to jam non-military GPS receivers. It might not be called SA anymore, but they have some method of jamming it.
I'd like color. I'd like to use it for my textbooks, most of which have fuckloads of color in them. You'd be surprised, but 3-d colored graphs of calculus-related formulas are quite helpful. Same with physics. Color makes graphs, tables, and images much more readable.
I've studied some BIO a couple years ago and remembering it helping immensely as well.
Have you ever actually seen an e-ink display? I agree that they're overpriced, one of the reasons I don't own one, but they are a lot better than an LCD. My friend has one and it looks almost like real paper. At first it's slightly easier to read than an LCD but if you want to sit down for a few hours to read it it'll save you one hell of a headache.
"the delay on an e-reader is probably more noticeable because you're waiting for it. If you're turning the page of a book, you have something to do to keep you busy until it's done, so it doesn't matter if it takes a while. If your only interaction with the device is to press a "next page" button, you have nothing to do except wait for the display to refresh. Time seems to go much slower if you have nothing to do..."
Look, we're talking about the time it takes to TURN A BLOODY PAGE. It's not a significant length of time. Jesus christ, how could you be so impatient as to need something to do while the page turns????
"The other issue with refresh is simply the Internet."
You're aware that there exists a device that is designed for such a purpose, yes? It's called a laptop. You might as well bitch about the small screen size or lack of a full keyboard on your internet-enabled phone. The e-ink is designed to be easy to read, it looks almost like actual paper. Much easier on the eyes than a monitor. It's designed for READING, not for video, not for internet, not for making your coffee in the morning, etc.
As for flipping multiple pages, you can type in the page number and it'll take you there. Yeah, it's a little harder to flip through it to find a page, but there's built in bookmarking functionality so it's a minor issue.
I don't understand these complaints about the response times for the screens on e-readers. They're designed to be easy to read for the purpose of replacing paper books, not replacing LCD TVs or computer monitors. A real book doesn't have instant page turn times and there's a bit of "flicker" as the page flips up and over the current page. I've used a kindle before and it takes longer to turn a real page than for the kindle to refresh so I don't see a problem here.
Seems like people are really bitching that e-readers can't be used for video. My question is why did you buy an e-READER if you wanted to watch VIDEO? You should have bought a laptop.
I've also seen this in every home depot I've ever been in. Although, I'm not sure if they're used anymore. When I was little I used to see them used and get jammed on a regular basis so I suspect they may have stopped using them but don't want to spend the money to remove them.
More to the point, what in the hell do they use at YOUR bank? When you drive up to the teller station that doesn't use the drawer (the one built into the bank wall), how does the money get from you to the teller? The ONLY solution I've EVER seen is pneumatic tubes.
Where is "here"? Your list of codes seems like a large pain in the ass. These are not USB devices we're talking about, they're things about the size of a pack of gum (the ones with 5 sticks (that's five, not the brand 5)) with an LCD on them. They display a random number and a little bar that decreases over the course of a minute or so. Every minute, new code.
400 passwords that you use, or 400 that you've used at one time or another in the past 10 years. There's a little bit of a difference.
I'm going to call bullshit and say that you don't use more than 20 passwords or codes on a weekly basis.
You realize that's impossible, right? 0K (abs. 0) is -273C.
I don't know if you were trying to make a joke or not, but the humor is going to be lost on pretty much anyone that knows anything about chemistry or physics. Furthermore, the unit snafu wasn't NASA, it was Lockheed Martin. NASA just got the blame for it because no one really bothered to actually look up what happened.