Yes, engineers that specialize in thermodynamics and combustion know how to get less smoke out of wood. Their work results in newer, more efficient stove designs. That's kind of what the entire article is about.
That said, the new requirements are mandating technology that was brand new a hell of a long time ago. They aren't mandating brand spanking new, super-duper, mega-expensive stoves. They're mandating stuff that's been in the stores for many, many decades at this point.
What the fuck are you talking about? You bet your ass that renters care what they pay for heating and AC. Do you seriously think that renters don't care how much money they spend?
Because of laws that prevent the government from doing anything themselves. Everything has to be contracted out because a bunch of politicians think that the free market is magic. Of course, contractors have financial incentives to deliver projects that take longer than advertised because they get paid for that extra time spent. Having competent people means that the project is finished quickly, so hiring idiots is financially beneficial. Of course, the contractor also gets paid for all the maintenance they do when fixing the system when it breaks down due to all the bugs they put into it.
URGENT! URGENT! URGENT! DISTRIBUTION: ALL STATIONS MESSAGE READS: IT guys fix their spotty wireless coverage by installing the proper antennas. END URGENT MESSAGE
Wow, thank God for that. Good thing that we have slashdot to tell us that a university installed some standard equipment on their campus. Be sure to run an article when MIT replaces a couple of their switches next month.
The list of possible flags is also filled with useless information. The *only* flag that means anything is "getting user to go to a fake URL". The rest of them are questions like "who handles your trash collection?" and "who stocks the vending machines?". That information is entirely useless and most of it is even publicly available. Concealing this information provides obscurity at best and a false sense of security at worst.
These aren't even attack vectors. Any idiot can walk into a company and say "hi there, I've from your trash collection company, let me into your server room please!" What matters is how the company actually handles these situations which, of course, wasn't actually tested.
How about simply not making it easier for people to take their eyes off the road while they're supposed to be driving? The last thing we need to add to vehicles is the ability to use apps while driving.
They're only faster because the stores shut down the manned lines! Next time, wait to use a manned line. Once you're through, complain about the long wait time to a manager. When they suggest the self-checkout machine tell them that you aren't interested in working for free.
Oh no, you don't! No way in hell am I going to let those fuckers into space. They've voted against funding NASA since the end of the Cold War and have recently shut down NASA (and everything else) entirely. They get to stay here on boring old Earth while the rest of us get to have an awesome party on the ISS.
This is going to be the newest thing that every special little snowflake on the internet self-diagnoses with in order to get some attention. It's the next OCD.
The summary can be further summarized as "Army wants computer to know when humans are being dishonest." This is going to go one of two ways: 1. It's going to lock everyone out all the time for false positives. 2. It's not going to detect suspicious behavior.
It will probably start out as one and then progress to 2 as they relax standards or the system "learns" to ignore certain behaviors. Either way, the system isn't going to work. It will, however, cost an absurd amount of money. That much is certain.
The folks over at Yahoo expected people to be sending more than 2 emails a day, your office didn't. Yahoo expected people to be logging in via VPN almost every day, your office didn't.
I said "Yahoo discovered..." you you said "well, MY office..." It doesn't matter what the fuck your office does because I'm not talking about your fucking office. I was talking about Yahoo so all that matters is whether those metrics are relevant to Yahoo, not your office.
If you couldn't see this to begin with then you're a fucking idiot.
This decision might not be as stupid as it sounds. In a lot of cases, "telecommuting" actually means "not working". It's easy enough to stay on top of one or two people who like to work from home a lot, but it's almost impossible to manage several employees remotely. Didn't Yahoo eliminate telecommuting recently, as well? I believe their decision was done, partially, because the IT guys discovered that many employees were only sending one or two emails per day (average employees sent way more) and often never logged in via VPN for multiple days in a row. Obviously, there's work that can be done without a connection to the company network, but there isn't three days worth of it each week. Far too many people think that working from home means that one should act like they're at home when, in fact, they should be acting like they're sitting in a very odd looking room down the hall from their regular office.
Also, face-to-face meetings are a good way of getting things done. Yes, conference calls and email are great, but being in the same room as everyone else can make certain meetings a lot easier. They're open to abuse, but so are conference calls and email. In fact, I find that conference calls tend to be even worse than in-person meetings because everyone has to dick around with calling into the system, figuring out who is on the line, trying to mute/unmute their phones, figuring out who is making all the noise, etc.
It's not even dumb that they announced this before they had desk space for these people. If they tried to buy the cube farms first then people would be criticizing HP for spending money on useless desk space. Also, investors might get word of new desk space and freak out over "secret plans for [something]". Obviously, HP doesn't expect everyone to stop telecommuting tomorrow. It's going to be phased in over some time.
That sounded really good until you mentioned that GPS receivers could compromise the plane's GPS. You didn't just shoot yourself in the foot, you blew your entire God damn leg off. GPS receivers RECEIVE GPS signals and don't emit anything. They also don't use heterodyne, so don't try and play that card. You sounded like you knew what you were talking about, but clearly you don't.
Lockheed gets to lay off a bunch of employees while blaming the government even though the government shutdown doesn't actually affect them. That's brilliant PR. Now the employees will be angry at the government for shutting down instead of Lockheed executives laying off thousands of people in order to pad their own back pockets.
Having worked in government offices, I can tell you this is the real problem.
Because there are so many laws about making the government use contractors instead of hiring employees (because private sector is allegedly so much more efficient), damn near everything has to be contracted out. Then the contractors fail to deliver, they go over budget and come in way behind schedule. The government has no choice but to pay them and accept their useless work, again, due to more laws about "helping the private sector".
There's no way to fire a contractor or even to hold them to their original contract. They agreed to do something for a certain price? Too bad, they're going to sue the government and use those biased laws in order to deliver less than half of what they promised at more than 3 times the price they quoted and agreed to.
Is this information released in a machine comprehensible format? If not, then there would be additional time for a person to communicate the information to a computer. This might be as simple as a single keystroke, but that still takes about a second to do.
Are we sure that there isn't something more to the story than a simple 7 ms?
The difference is that a ride sharing program has a driver who is not licensed to drive taxis or limos, is not properly insured, and is not required to maintain their car. You're entirely correct that these ride sharing programs are nothing but an end-run around the regulations for taxis and limos. We need to regulate them for the exact same reasons we need to regulate taxis.
You raise a good point, and there's actually a lot of evidence proving you correct. There have been more than a few security vulnerabilities that have persisted in the code for various widely-used pieces of open-source software for years. One was even found and patched but then quickly reverted without anyone noticing.
What people fail to understand is that proper security reviews are more than "let's just take a look at the code and make sure that it's not sending email to the NSA." You also can't perform a proper review with a bunch of hobbyist coders, you need highly-trained experts. Every single line of code needs to be checked, double checked, and triple checked against every single other line in the code to make sure that there isn't anything that could possibly compromise the security of the system. These failures are always subtle and usually unintentional.
This is best summed up with an example. Any idiot can look at the code and say "wait a second, this code copies the decryption key and sends an email to the NSA!" Only a very methodical search with a lot of people can say "hey, we've determined that this implementation of this specific part of this specific algorithm probably doesn't have a large amount of randomness over a long period of time. It likely decays such that the complexity is reduced to such and such a number of bits after such and such an amount of time and in these specific situations. This is a problem!"
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, engineers that specialize in thermodynamics and combustion know how to get less smoke out of wood. Their work results in newer, more efficient stove designs. That's kind of what the entire article is about.
That said, the new requirements are mandating technology that was brand new a hell of a long time ago. They aren't mandating brand spanking new, super-duper, mega-expensive stoves. They're mandating stuff that's been in the stores for many, many decades at this point.
What the fuck are you talking about? You bet your ass that renters care what they pay for heating and AC. Do you seriously think that renters don't care how much money they spend?
Because of laws that prevent the government from doing anything themselves. Everything has to be contracted out because a bunch of politicians think that the free market is magic. Of course, contractors have financial incentives to deliver projects that take longer than advertised because they get paid for that extra time spent. Having competent people means that the project is finished quickly, so hiring idiots is financially beneficial. Of course, the contractor also gets paid for all the maintenance they do when fixing the system when it breaks down due to all the bugs they put into it.
URGENT! URGENT! URGENT!
DISTRIBUTION: ALL STATIONS
MESSAGE READS:
IT guys fix their spotty wireless coverage by installing the proper antennas.
END URGENT MESSAGE
Wow, thank God for that. Good thing that we have slashdot to tell us that a university installed some standard equipment on their campus. Be sure to run an article when MIT replaces a couple of their switches next month.
Yep. It's not so much brute forcing as it is a crossword puzzle.
The list of possible flags is also filled with useless information. The *only* flag that means anything is "getting user to go to a fake URL". The rest of them are questions like "who handles your trash collection?" and "who stocks the vending machines?". That information is entirely useless and most of it is even publicly available. Concealing this information provides obscurity at best and a false sense of security at worst.
These aren't even attack vectors. Any idiot can walk into a company and say "hi there, I've from your trash collection company, let me into your server room please!" What matters is how the company actually handles these situations which, of course, wasn't actually tested.
How about simply not making it easier for people to take their eyes off the road while they're supposed to be driving? The last thing we need to add to vehicles is the ability to use apps while driving.
They're only faster because the stores shut down the manned lines! Next time, wait to use a manned line. Once you're through, complain about the long wait time to a manager. When they suggest the self-checkout machine tell them that you aren't interested in working for free.
Oh no, you don't! No way in hell am I going to let those fuckers into space. They've voted against funding NASA since the end of the Cold War and have recently shut down NASA (and everything else) entirely. They get to stay here on boring old Earth while the rest of us get to have an awesome party on the ISS.
This is going to be the newest thing that every special little snowflake on the internet self-diagnoses with in order to get some attention. It's the next OCD.
The summary can be further summarized as "Army wants computer to know when humans are being dishonest." This is going to go one of two ways:
1. It's going to lock everyone out all the time for false positives.
2. It's not going to detect suspicious behavior.
It will probably start out as one and then progress to 2 as they relax standards or the system "learns" to ignore certain behaviors. Either way, the system isn't going to work. It will, however, cost an absurd amount of money. That much is certain.
The folks over at Yahoo expected people to be sending more than 2 emails a day, your office didn't.
..." you you said "well, MY office ..." It doesn't matter what the fuck your office does because I'm not talking about your fucking office. I was talking about Yahoo so all that matters is whether those metrics are relevant to Yahoo, not your office.
Yahoo expected people to be logging in via VPN almost every day, your office didn't.
I said "Yahoo discovered
If you couldn't see this to begin with then you're a fucking idiot.
Did you miss the point where it was Yahoo and not HP? Did you also miss the fact that it was one example in which it WAS a relevant metric?
That was one example. Your situation isn't directly comparable and thus has nothing to do with my point at all.
This decision might not be as stupid as it sounds. In a lot of cases, "telecommuting" actually means "not working". It's easy enough to stay on top of one or two people who like to work from home a lot, but it's almost impossible to manage several employees remotely. Didn't Yahoo eliminate telecommuting recently, as well? I believe their decision was done, partially, because the IT guys discovered that many employees were only sending one or two emails per day (average employees sent way more) and often never logged in via VPN for multiple days in a row. Obviously, there's work that can be done without a connection to the company network, but there isn't three days worth of it each week. Far too many people think that working from home means that one should act like they're at home when, in fact, they should be acting like they're sitting in a very odd looking room down the hall from their regular office.
Also, face-to-face meetings are a good way of getting things done. Yes, conference calls and email are great, but being in the same room as everyone else can make certain meetings a lot easier. They're open to abuse, but so are conference calls and email. In fact, I find that conference calls tend to be even worse than in-person meetings because everyone has to dick around with calling into the system, figuring out who is on the line, trying to mute/unmute their phones, figuring out who is making all the noise, etc.
It's not even dumb that they announced this before they had desk space for these people. If they tried to buy the cube farms first then people would be criticizing HP for spending money on useless desk space. Also, investors might get word of new desk space and freak out over "secret plans for [something]". Obviously, HP doesn't expect everyone to stop telecommuting tomorrow. It's going to be phased in over some time.
That sounded really good until you mentioned that GPS receivers could compromise the plane's GPS. You didn't just shoot yourself in the foot, you blew your entire God damn leg off. GPS receivers RECEIVE GPS signals and don't emit anything. They also don't use heterodyne, so don't try and play that card. You sounded like you knew what you were talking about, but clearly you don't.
Lockheed gets to lay off a bunch of employees while blaming the government even though the government shutdown doesn't actually affect them. That's brilliant PR. Now the employees will be angry at the government for shutting down instead of Lockheed executives laying off thousands of people in order to pad their own back pockets.
Having worked in government offices, I can tell you this is the real problem.
Because there are so many laws about making the government use contractors instead of hiring employees (because private sector is allegedly so much more efficient), damn near everything has to be contracted out. Then the contractors fail to deliver, they go over budget and come in way behind schedule. The government has no choice but to pay them and accept their useless work, again, due to more laws about "helping the private sector".
There's no way to fire a contractor or even to hold them to their original contract. They agreed to do something for a certain price? Too bad, they're going to sue the government and use those biased laws in order to deliver less than half of what they promised at more than 3 times the price they quoted and agreed to.
Car executive says that his car catching fire is no big deal. What a shocker.
Yeah, this will definitely survive a first amendment challenge. /s
So Amazon just connects you with a dealer? How is this any different than a phone book?
Is this information released in a machine comprehensible format? If not, then there would be additional time for a person to communicate the information to a computer. This might be as simple as a single keystroke, but that still takes about a second to do.
Are we sure that there isn't something more to the story than a simple 7 ms?
That law was responsible for the great short-shorts heist of 1987.
The difference is that a ride sharing program has a driver who is not licensed to drive taxis or limos, is not properly insured, and is not required to maintain their car. You're entirely correct that these ride sharing programs are nothing but an end-run around the regulations for taxis and limos. We need to regulate them for the exact same reasons we need to regulate taxis.
You raise a good point, and there's actually a lot of evidence proving you correct. There have been more than a few security vulnerabilities that have persisted in the code for various widely-used pieces of open-source software for years. One was even found and patched but then quickly reverted without anyone noticing.
What people fail to understand is that proper security reviews are more than "let's just take a look at the code and make sure that it's not sending email to the NSA." You also can't perform a proper review with a bunch of hobbyist coders, you need highly-trained experts. Every single line of code needs to be checked, double checked, and triple checked against every single other line in the code to make sure that there isn't anything that could possibly compromise the security of the system. These failures are always subtle and usually unintentional.
This is best summed up with an example. Any idiot can look at the code and say "wait a second, this code copies the decryption key and sends an email to the NSA!" Only a very methodical search with a lot of people can say "hey, we've determined that this implementation of this specific part of this specific algorithm probably doesn't have a large amount of randomness over a long period of time. It likely decays such that the complexity is reduced to such and such a number of bits after such and such an amount of time and in these specific situations. This is a problem!"