Or simply gain a foothold inside vital companies, energy distribution and other essential systems. They could then sabotage their operation as an act of (covert) war.
Poppycock! We've already seen a worst case scenario for energy distribution systems play out in the US and military systems were not impacted.
I hope those Iranian hackers were not trying to sabotage American factories.
That would be small potatoes and retardedly shortsighted. It's far more likely that they were seeking to get credentials to get deeper access into the workplaces of the targets to copy intellectual property which can cost millions to develop.
It already exists. Just move your server onto the darknet with Tor.
Hardly! Too easy to track and block.
Access to Tor has not been blocked and that's the point.
It's all about the tech now, so that nobody can "own the medium".
The site is the medium and yes, people definitely own them.
Speech doesn't "infect" anybody that doesn't want to be "infected".
Again, it doesn't impact the psychologically stable and educated individuals but rather the significant contingent of humanity that is unstable and/or uneducated and impressionable. However, when these messages of hate reaches a vulnerable person then it's a memetic exploit just like any computer worm. Many books have been written on the topic and you would do well to read one of them.
There is no right to regulate it, outside that derived from the might of heavy weaponry.
I'm not suggesting regulating speech, I'm suggesting owners of sites have the right to do whatever they want with their sites because it belongs to them, not you. The fact that they allowed you post to it does not mean you have the right to post to it.
The greatest threat to India is Pakistan and you don't need a orbital satellite to spy on India when you are next door to it. It would be more effective and less expensive to just launch a weather balloon with a ballast system.
Honestly, these eggheads deserve more than just an award for having passed Turing Test. Scientists are real people too (and they have the Turing Awards to prove it)!;)
The point remains: under the right circumstances, colocation is the efficient solution. Implementing the solution produces a surplus, which can be shared in some way between the participants.
The problem here is that you have failed to consider that improving the service and efficiency of Netflix (and other services) erodes their own cable broadcast model and thus their market position. If it were possible for a startup to provide internet connectivity and suffer no consequence for not having their own cable broadcast agreements then significant inroads could be made from every part of the country to dislodge their monopoly positions.
Bandwidth is cheap and market share is expensive. Do the math because this isn't rocket science.
My ISP is 1000 km from the nearest Netflix data center.
There is literally no where on the planet that Netflix is offered where they have relay servers that far away.
For the smart solution to happen, there have to be incentives for Netflix and the ISP to do it.
Yes, if they want to be functional and responsive to requests, Netflix will need to not do what you propose in you burning strawman argument. Your ISP doesn't have to do anything at all.
Your approach to the issue is naive to say the least because you think companies are trying to provide services in exchange for money. The truth is companies are trying to maximize profits and doesn't give a shit about their customers, so long as they keep paying money. Don't believe me? Just look at how many complaints Comcast has against it, how many times it's abused it's market position and how many settlements it's made to avoid taking responsibility for it's own actions.
No matter how much you want to believe something, it will not change reality.
It'll die in the Senate, on the plus side this puts the Republicans on record as opposing Net Neutrality.
Exactly... and that's the point.
they have to win both chambers and probably the presidency to.
2020 is coming along with another blue wave.
OTOH, I'm pretty sure it's a minor issue for even a lot of the folks on this forum; and whatever the GOP is selling outweighs the value of NN.
Fear, hate and tax cuts for the rich is what they are selling. However, they changed the intensity from being subliminal and liminal to being superliminal which has had diminishing returns.
because they don't have two spacesuits that fit the female astronauts
These do have two spacesuits that fit the female astronauts, just not ones that are tooled for this particular mission.
"Two mediums existed on the ISS, but only one was prepped for a spacewalk. Instead of devoting extensive crew time to make the extra medium-sized suit space-worthy by Friday, NASA decided to restaff"
I think it's equally important to recognize that both NASA and the astronauts are putting the mission first.
I dunno why these Michigan bros are so excited. I mean, I talked to a homeless guy that told me all about how he had fillings that had microphones, their own power source and wireless transmitter. On top of that, they were installed over a decade ago. Seriously, these guys are behind the curve.;)
It's not even worth discussing. It's a stupid argument.
LOL! Sure seems like you don't have a leg to stand on.
It's not for you or anybody else to decide who can use the medium.
Actually, it's up to the people who own the medium.
Hopefully we will find the bulletproof tech to circumvent the tyrants, and that will be the end of it.
It already exists. Just move your server onto the darknet with Tor. People don't care what they are discussing but they do care if they are trying to infect other people on the internet under the guise of legitimacy.
The company simultaneously reiterated the narrow scope of ShadowHammer, noting that the malware targeted a "very small and specific user group." It's believed to be an Advanced Persistent Threat -- that is, a state-backed assault against organizations rather than everyday users.
Well are they going to notify the victims of the attack or just pretend the problem is solved?!
No, the question is, how do we protect ourselves from "these people" that are unstable and/or impressionable?
You aren't wrong but if your solution isn't to prevent them from being preyed upon then you are not talking about a democracy. If you continue to allow them to be preyed upon then the only realistic solution to protecting everyone else is to exclude them from the political process. Ergo, solutions that don't protect them are undemocratic.
And who gets to decide who is psychologically stable and sufficiently educated?
Objective reality decides. If you are unable to tell fact from fiction despite having the tools needed to determine the difference then you have failed.
You can train your NN with as much data as you want and you will never achieve autonomous driving.
That's not true at all. It's likely to reach a point where it's better than a human driver and yet there will still be collisions. What you are expecting is perfection which is far beyond human capability.
That is what Tesla-nuts don't understand: NN work NOTHING like the human brain does.
You seem to have made the false assumption that the human brain is the most optimal mechanism for driving. In case you hadn't noticed, neural networks have greatly exceeded human capability at performing some tasks already.
It's important that distinctions be made when referring to self-driving cars. There are five levels of autonomy and I can only say that this claim that it's "years away" only applies to level five because Waymo has already demonstrated a level four autonomous vehicle.
Level 3 - "In the right conditions, the car can manage most aspects of driving, including monitoring the environment. The system prompts the driver to intervene when it encounters a scenario it can’t navigate." <-- Tesla is here
Level 4 - "The car can operate without human input or oversight but only under select conditions defined by factors such as road type or geographic area." <-- Waymo is here
Level 5 - "The driverless car can operate on any road and in any conditions a human driver could negotiate." - the absolute highest of bars
While it may or may not be true that level five autonomy is still be years off, that doesn't negate the fact that we have level three already deployed and level four in development.
free and anonymous connectivity is not the problem
When it comes to psychologically stable and educated individuals, this is correct. However, this is a significant contingent of humanity that is unstable and/or impressionable. With this segment of the population, free and anonymous connectivity can be weaponized to amplify their misinformation/disinformation. It can be used to rally people to focus their feelings of living an unfulfilling life on to a scapegoat.
Scapegoating has in fact been a highly successful engagement strategy for media outlets and politicians, which have in turn convinced many that education is elitist and to distrust experts thus further exacerbating the issue.
The question is really, how do we protect our society from those who would take advantage of these people?
I actually took a look at what they've did and it's a significant development. I think the best way to explain it is that they developed a set of basic building blocks that can be slapped together. It's basically the difference between building logic circuits using standard set of analog components and using various refined metals: either way it's possible but one is far easier than the other.
In this case they have developed DNA "tiles" which are an arrangement of 42 biological nucleobases (G, A, T and C). They made a set of 355 tiles which can be orchestrated to build what you want.
It's an indirect effect. NDAs ensure that hobbyist communities (which are basically free advertisement, support and software development) are DOA. Being well supported is what really matters, so the onus falls entirely on the chip maker. Generally chip makers have really shitty support compared to communities and Intel is no exception.
Slashdot Mirror
Or simply gain a foothold inside vital companies, energy distribution and other essential systems. They could then sabotage their operation as an act of (covert) war.
Poppycock! We've already seen a worst case scenario for energy distribution systems play out in the US and military systems were not impacted.
I hope those Iranian hackers were not trying to sabotage American factories.
That would be small potatoes and retardedly shortsighted. It's far more likely that they were seeking to get credentials to get deeper access into the workplaces of the targets to copy intellectual property which can cost millions to develop.
It already exists. Just move your server onto the darknet with Tor.
Hardly! Too easy to track and block.
Access to Tor has not been blocked and that's the point.
It's all about the tech now, so that nobody can "own the medium".
The site is the medium and yes, people definitely own them.
Speech doesn't "infect" anybody that doesn't want to be "infected".
Again, it doesn't impact the psychologically stable and educated individuals but rather the significant contingent of humanity that is unstable and/or uneducated and impressionable. However, when these messages of hate reaches a vulnerable person then it's a memetic exploit just like any computer worm. Many books have been written on the topic and you would do well to read one of them.
There is no right to regulate it, outside that derived from the might of heavy weaponry.
I'm not suggesting regulating speech, I'm suggesting owners of sites have the right to do whatever they want with their sites because it belongs to them, not you. The fact that they allowed you post to it does not mean you have the right to post to it.
The greatest threat to India is Pakistan and you don't need a orbital satellite to spy on India when you are next door to it. It would be more effective and less expensive to just launch a weather balloon with a ballast system.
Honestly, these eggheads deserve more than just an award for having passed Turing Test. Scientists are real people too (and they have the Turing Awards to prove it)! ;)
The point remains: under the right circumstances, colocation is the efficient solution. Implementing the solution produces a surplus, which can be shared in some way between the participants.
The problem here is that you have failed to consider that improving the service and efficiency of Netflix (and other services) erodes their own cable broadcast model and thus their market position. If it were possible for a startup to provide internet connectivity and suffer no consequence for not having their own cable broadcast agreements then significant inroads could be made from every part of the country to dislodge their monopoly positions.
Bandwidth is cheap and market share is expensive. Do the math because this isn't rocket science.
I have a straw man to burn.
FTFY.
My ISP is 1000 km from the nearest Netflix data center.
There is literally no where on the planet that Netflix is offered where they have relay servers that far away.
For the smart solution to happen, there have to be incentives for Netflix and the ISP to do it.
Yes, if they want to be functional and responsive to requests, Netflix will need to not do what you propose in you burning strawman argument. Your ISP doesn't have to do anything at all.
Without net neutrality, it could work:
Yeah, we've seen how it works without net neutrality. It's pretty simple, they prevent you from doing business until they get a cut.
Your approach to the issue is naive to say the least because you think companies are trying to provide services in exchange for money. The truth is companies are trying to maximize profits and doesn't give a shit about their customers, so long as they keep paying money. Don't believe me? Just look at how many complaints Comcast has against it, how many times it's abused it's market position and how many settlements it's made to avoid taking responsibility for it's own actions.
No matter how much you want to believe something, it will not change reality.
It'll die in the Senate, on the plus side this puts the Republicans on record as opposing Net Neutrality.
Exactly... and that's the point.
they have to win both chambers and probably the presidency to.
2020 is coming along with another blue wave.
OTOH, I'm pretty sure it's a minor issue for even a lot of the folks on this forum; and whatever the GOP is selling outweighs the value of NN.
Fear, hate and tax cuts for the rich is what they are selling. However, they changed the intensity from being subliminal and liminal to being superliminal which has had diminishing returns.
Why would you think such blatant disinformation would succeed here? Do you really think so little of people?
because they don't have two spacesuits that fit the female astronauts
These do have two spacesuits that fit the female astronauts, just not ones that are tooled for this particular mission.
"Two mediums existed on the ISS, but only one was prepped for a spacewalk. Instead of devoting extensive crew time to make the extra medium-sized suit space-worthy by Friday, NASA decided to restaff"
I think it's equally important to recognize that both NASA and the astronauts are putting the mission first.
I dunno why these Michigan bros are so excited. I mean, I talked to a homeless guy that told me all about how he had fillings that had microphones, their own power source and wireless transmitter. On top of that, they were installed over a decade ago. Seriously, these guys are behind the curve. ;)
Well it certainly doesn't help their argument of having "no backdoors" in their 5G equipment.
It's not even worth discussing. It's a stupid argument.
LOL! Sure seems like you don't have a leg to stand on.
It's not for you or anybody else to decide who can use the medium.
Actually, it's up to the people who own the medium.
Hopefully we will find the bulletproof tech to circumvent the tyrants, and that will be the end of it.
It already exists. Just move your server onto the darknet with Tor. People don't care what they are discussing but they do care if they are trying to infect other people on the internet under the guise of legitimacy.
The company simultaneously reiterated the narrow scope of ShadowHammer, noting that the malware targeted a "very small and specific user group." It's believed to be an Advanced Persistent Threat -- that is, a state-backed assault against organizations rather than everyday users.
Well are they going to notify the victims of the attack or just pretend the problem is solved?!
since when was anonymous speech on the internet a right?
You teach them to protect themselves.
You can (try to) do that for the next generation but that still leaves many who are easy prey.
Just because our concern may seem hypocritical doesn't mean it's an insignificant matter. It's still very much something that needs to be dealt with.
This new trend of blocking things that reality disagrees with is just wrong,
FTFY. If you are promoting information that is factually incorrect then it should be blocked for the benefit of society. Sorry, not sorry.
No, the question is, how do we protect ourselves from "these people" that are unstable and/or impressionable?
You aren't wrong but if your solution isn't to prevent them from being preyed upon then you are not talking about a democracy. If you continue to allow them to be preyed upon then the only realistic solution to protecting everyone else is to exclude them from the political process. Ergo, solutions that don't protect them are undemocratic.
And who gets to decide who is psychologically stable and sufficiently educated?
Objective reality decides. If you are unable to tell fact from fiction despite having the tools needed to determine the difference then you have failed.
You can train your NN with as much data as you want and you will never achieve autonomous driving.
That's not true at all. It's likely to reach a point where it's better than a human driver and yet there will still be collisions. What you are expecting is perfection which is far beyond human capability.
That is what Tesla-nuts don't understand: NN work NOTHING like the human brain does.
You seem to have made the false assumption that the human brain is the most optimal mechanism for driving. In case you hadn't noticed, neural networks have greatly exceeded human capability at performing some tasks already.
It's important that distinctions be made when referring to self-driving cars. There are five levels of autonomy and I can only say that this claim that it's "years away" only applies to level five because Waymo has already demonstrated a level four autonomous vehicle.
While it may or may not be true that level five autonomy is still be years off, that doesn't negate the fact that we have level three already deployed and level four in development.
free and anonymous connectivity is not the problem
When it comes to psychologically stable and educated individuals, this is correct. However, this is a significant contingent of humanity that is unstable and/or impressionable. With this segment of the population, free and anonymous connectivity can be weaponized to amplify their misinformation/disinformation. It can be used to rally people to focus their feelings of living an unfulfilling life on to a scapegoat.
Scapegoating has in fact been a highly successful engagement strategy for media outlets and politicians, which have in turn convinced many that education is elitist and to distrust experts thus further exacerbating the issue.
The question is really, how do we protect our society from those who would take advantage of these people?
I actually took a look at what they've did and it's a significant development. I think the best way to explain it is that they developed a set of basic building blocks that can be slapped together. It's basically the difference between building logic circuits using standard set of analog components and using various refined metals: either way it's possible but one is far easier than the other.
In this case they have developed DNA "tiles" which are an arrangement of 42 biological nucleobases (G, A, T and C). They made a set of 355 tiles which can be orchestrated to build what you want.
It's an indirect effect. NDAs ensure that hobbyist communities (which are basically free advertisement, support and software development) are DOA. Being well supported is what really matters, so the onus falls entirely on the chip maker. Generally chip makers have really shitty support compared to communities and Intel is no exception.