No, it is not possible to inspect hardware at that level sufficiently thoroughly and it is certain that the entities will be coerced into doing exactly what you wrote.
This threat is not theoretical. The details are classified but what's been leaked is pretty indicative, if you know government bureaucracy, that things have happened for real. Actual chip-gate-level "flaws" and backdoors of very high sophistication have been inserted into the physical manufacturing chain.
---When "scientists" start playing politically-minded games with data, engage in semantic and legalistic games to prevent its dissemination, and then complain that they are being treated unfairly or for political reasons -- well, they only have themselves to blame.
This is a great example of non-factual conservative *sneering*.
In climate: an enormous amount of data was and continues to be publicly available, thanks to efforts from mainstream climate scientists. (it takes money & time to curate huge complex data sets too). None was prevented from being disseminated. (and in fact another re-analysis of data from a skeptical UC Berkeley statistician revealed that the original climatologists got the right answer and weren't faking or hiding anything).
What was attempted to be prevented was crackpots getting scientifically wrong papers published, this is what scientists do all the time in journal reviews.
They are being treated unfairly for political reasons and do not have only themselves to blame, but a large and well-funded lobby full of wealthy, shameless and ruthless political Iagos.
Between 1974 and 2010 the demand for immediate practicality in order to obtain funds for scientific research has dramatically increased in all government and private sector funding agencies.
I pay nearly $1500 A WEEK in income tax and I'd like to know what the hell our Government thinks it's doing by sitting idly by and saying "Geez, the Chinese Government is attacking our Corporate Citizens and by proxy, our Economic Security and the future Security of our entire Nation -- that's too bad"
The people who run the government think "those guys are really making lots of money, maybe I can make a little bit by going along with them".
The people who run the government then say "protectionism is bad for Job Creators and we don't ever want to be mean to Job Creators".
"Now whether you believe in all the spiritual and supernatural part of the story is up to you, but Jesus' statements at the time eventually being translated into the Catholic Church's view of the eating of the literal body and blood of the Christ is just disturbing."
It's clear that whoever started the early Christian church practices actually made one giant screwup: why is it that the 'wafer' aka the matzoh (dry flat dreary cracker) is associated with the Flesh Of Jesus, when it's obvious from common sense and the historical relation to Passover, that Jesus himself was talking about the ritual lamb?
Instead of lining up for a dreadful wheat thin, all those Christians should have been getting tasty BBQ every weekend from their priest. That would sure pack the pews. All along through the service everybody would be smelling it being prepared in back. Licking their lips and waiting for Eatin' Jesus Time.
Maybe they wouldn't even have needed the Protestant Reformation and two hundred years of vicious warfare.
"Too bad climate 'science" cannot say the same about their so-called "evidence" that man-made CO2 is the cause of global warming, as opposed to other possible causes, both man-made and natural."
Of course it can. You can measure the CO2 and change thereof, confirm that it is from human activity (fossil fuels) with isotopic ratios, measure the change in infrared emissivity, find it is exactly as predicted by theory and lab experiments, confirm other physical predictions such as lowering and cooling of the stratosphere and followup with global temperature measurements which show patterns consistent with greenhouse increase (and inconsistent with others such as increased solar output) such as more warming at night than at day, more warming at poles, and more warming in winter than summer.
More generally, you can see that your predictions from the laws of physics (which are damn good for anything not producing exotic quarks or understanding the first microseconds of the big bang) plus observed physical facts play out as you think they should which means that more CO2 == warming due to well-understood processes of radiative transfer.
By the way, human emissions of other gases and land use changes are responsible for nearly half of the anthropogenic effect (CO2 is the other half plus a little bit), and these are probably more easily controllable in the short run.
That's true. HOwever, an appreciable amount of carbon which was out of the climate system for a hundred million years (and made things damn hot when it was in the atmosphere), was never suddenly inserted in the environment in a tiny time scale geologically and substantial magnitude.
In the professional atmospheric physics community (say people who are members of the American Geophysical Union, attend the conferences and regularly publish papers), it was sometime in the early 90's that nearly everybody was convinced.
A Friend Of A Friend said that they have donation boxes and huge pictures of sad, big-eyed puppy-faced programmers outside the iTunes for Windows development offices. "In some places, even in California, not everybody is a hipster. You can sponsor a suffering developer for only 3 espressos a day!"
Virtually everything about the NIF design has been optimized for the production of calibration information for the nuclear weapons program. Nearly all the experimental runs are designed for weapons, as are nearly all the scientists working with it.
It is run, and funded by the NNSA, the part of the DoE that makes weapons, not the Office of Science.
The little patina of 'energy programs' is a cover for its actual purpose. But if in fact, it had really been about alternative energy, it would have been canceled ages ago. (Not because of scientists' desires but because of Congress' desires).
"Felony is an american term about crimes bad enough that they are charged at the federal level instead of the state level."
This is not true. Crimes specified in federal statutes are charged at the federal level and crimes in state statues are charged at the state level. Both states and federal government have felonies.
And all the other circumstances, such as who the people were, and some sense about how the world and how people's minds work.
For instance, a jury could reason that if somebody had the intent of depriving the other person of the phone *permanently*, they would likely have used more certain means of disposing of such phone. In this case, it looks like the perp certainly had the intent of depriving the other person of the phone temporarily, and possibly the intent of damaging such phone.
the problem isn't that they are doing a $2000 CAT scan, the problem is that a bog-standard scan and three minute examination of the results costs $2000.
I had a very simple chest X-ray. This technology and much of the medical training for common conditions is unchanged for at least 50, and probably 80 years. I was charged $600 which my insurance's awesome discount helpfully lowered to $450. This was an as an outpatient.
"Hence what Guido is saying. You can do that "most stuff" part in python, and then write that "some stuff" part as a C module. You can then use that module from python. Thus you get the benefit of both languages."
No you don't. If you had written it in C++ you could natively use C++ objects and libraries fluently.
It takes more skill and system-programming knowledge to deal with the tricky interfaces between the internals of a Python interpreter and an external C++ program. The object structure in Python is obviously alien to the C++ object system. Of course there is always workarounds, but they are inconvenient and require arcane knowledge. Somebody who is an expert at Python internals doesn't think this is hard. Somebody who is an expert at computational algorithms but not compilers does think this is hard, and especially thinks this is something that they really do not have a desire to learn. Me, I have far more interest in spending my time reading a machine learning research paper rather than learning about some crufty programming interface.
The article is a naive cop-out for not specifying a sufficiently good language in combination with implementation techniques (they go together). Guido could try to implement a whole bunch of new libraries in some external Lisp and see how much he likes it versus writing native Python code. It sucks.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Ahhh. This was from version 1.0 and no longer applies.
No persons, houses, papers or effects were harmed in the acquisition of certain electron charge distributions. Why worry, be happy!
Slashdot Mirror
No, it is not possible to inspect hardware at that level sufficiently thoroughly and it is certain that the entities will be coerced into doing exactly what you wrote.
This threat is not theoretical. The details are classified but what's been leaked is pretty indicative, if you know government bureaucracy, that things have happened for real. Actual chip-gate-level "flaws" and backdoors of very high sophistication have been inserted into the physical manufacturing chain.
there's this obsolete technology known as telephone
I would argue that median income of working age people (including unemployed) is an important measure.
---When "scientists" start playing politically-minded games with data, engage in semantic and legalistic games to prevent its dissemination, and then complain that they are being treated unfairly or for political reasons -- well, they only have themselves to blame.
This is a great example of non-factual conservative *sneering*.
In climate: an enormous amount of data was and continues to be publicly available, thanks to efforts from mainstream climate scientists. (it takes money & time to curate huge complex data sets too). None was prevented from being disseminated. (and in fact another re-analysis of data from a skeptical UC Berkeley statistician revealed that the original climatologists got the right answer and weren't faking or hiding anything).
What was attempted to be prevented was crackpots getting scientifically wrong papers published, this is what scientists do all the time in journal reviews.
They are being treated unfairly for political reasons and do not have only themselves to blame, but a large and well-funded lobby full of wealthy, shameless and ruthless political Iagos.
That isn't the biggest liberal idea.
Prohibition of slavery is.
Between 1974 and 2010 the demand for immediate practicality in order to obtain funds for scientific research has dramatically increased in all government and private sector funding agencies.
Even US firms who take active measures to avoid handing over the family jewels find those same jewels absconded-with.
Look up AMSC.
I pay nearly $1500 A WEEK in income tax and I'd like to know what the hell our Government thinks it's doing by sitting idly by and saying "Geez, the Chinese Government is attacking our Corporate Citizens and by proxy, our Economic Security and the future Security of our entire Nation -- that's too bad"
The people who run the government think "those guys are really making lots of money, maybe I can make a little bit by going along with them".
The people who run the government then say "protectionism is bad for Job Creators and we don't ever want to be mean to Job Creators".
following people home from the synagogue just isn't Kewl enough for millenial haters I guess.
why are average guys also not perceived---entirely correctly---as having the same trend-setting appeal?
Mark Zuckerberg: all your data belong to *us*, not them.
I don't seem to remember preventing truancy as a sinister issue to Orwell.
"Now whether you believe in all the spiritual and supernatural part of the story is up to you, but Jesus' statements at the time eventually being translated into the Catholic Church's view of the eating of the literal body and blood of the Christ is just disturbing."
It's clear that whoever started the early Christian church practices actually made one giant screwup: why is it that the 'wafer' aka the matzoh (dry flat dreary cracker) is associated with the Flesh Of Jesus, when it's obvious from common sense and the historical relation to Passover, that Jesus himself was talking about the ritual lamb?
Instead of lining up for a dreadful wheat thin, all those Christians should have been getting tasty BBQ every weekend from their priest. That would sure pack the pews. All along through the service everybody would be smelling it being prepared in back. Licking their lips and waiting for Eatin' Jesus Time.
Maybe they wouldn't even have needed the Protestant Reformation and two hundred years of vicious warfare.
"Too bad climate 'science" cannot say the same about their so-called "evidence" that man-made CO2 is the cause of global warming, as opposed to other possible causes, both man-made and natural."
Of course it can. You can measure the CO2 and change thereof, confirm that it is from human activity (fossil fuels) with isotopic ratios, measure the change in infrared emissivity, find it is exactly as predicted by theory and lab experiments, confirm other physical predictions such as lowering and cooling of the stratosphere and followup with global temperature measurements which show patterns consistent with greenhouse increase (and inconsistent with others such as increased solar output) such as more warming at night than at day, more warming at poles, and more warming in winter than summer.
More generally, you can see that your predictions from the laws of physics (which are damn good for anything not producing exotic quarks or understanding the first microseconds of the big bang) plus observed physical facts play out as you think they should which means that more CO2 == warming due to well-understood processes of radiative transfer.
By the way, human emissions of other gases and land use changes are responsible for nearly half of the anthropogenic effect (CO2 is the other half plus a little bit), and these are probably more easily controllable in the short run.
That's true. HOwever, an appreciable amount of carbon which was out of the climate system for a hundred million years (and made things damn hot when it was in the atmosphere), was never suddenly inserted in the environment in a tiny time scale geologically and substantial magnitude.
In the professional atmospheric physics community (say people who are members of the American Geophysical Union, attend the conferences and regularly publish papers), it was sometime in the early 90's that nearly everybody was convinced.
A Friend Of A Friend said that they have donation boxes and huge pictures of sad, big-eyed puppy-faced programmers outside the iTunes for Windows development offices. "In some places, even in California, not everybody is a hipster. You can sponsor a suffering developer for only 3 espressos a day!"
that's what elections are for.
Virtually everything about the NIF design has been optimized for the production of calibration information for the nuclear weapons program. Nearly all the experimental runs are designed for weapons, as are nearly all the scientists working with it.
It is run, and funded by the NNSA, the part of the DoE that makes weapons, not the Office of Science.
The little patina of 'energy programs' is a cover for its actual purpose. But if in fact, it had really been about alternative energy, it would have been canceled ages ago. (Not because of scientists' desires but because of Congress' desires).
"Felony is an american term about crimes bad enough that they are charged at the federal level instead of the state level."
This is not true. Crimes specified in federal statutes are charged at the federal level and crimes in state statues are charged at the state level. Both states and federal government have felonies.
"How do you know what the intent was?"
The jury makes an evaluation based on evidence.
"All you know is the action."
And all the other circumstances, such as who the people were, and some sense about how the world and how people's minds work.
For instance, a jury could reason that if somebody had the intent of depriving the other person of the phone *permanently*, they would likely have used more certain means of disposing of such phone. In this case, it looks like the perp certainly had the intent of depriving the other person of the phone temporarily, and possibly the intent of damaging such phone.
the problem isn't that they are doing a $2000 CAT scan, the problem is that a bog-standard scan and three minute examination of the results costs $2000.
I had a very simple chest X-ray. This technology and much of the medical training for common conditions is unchanged for at least 50, and probably 80 years. I was charged $600 which my insurance's awesome discount helpfully lowered to $450. This was an as an outpatient.
It's a PITA for machine-generated source code, and given that Python is an interpreter, this seems like an important use case.
"Hence what Guido is saying. You can do that "most stuff" part in python, and then write that "some stuff" part as a C module. You can then use that module from python. Thus you get the benefit of both languages."
No you don't. If you had written it in C++ you could natively use C++ objects and libraries fluently.
It takes more skill and system-programming knowledge to deal with the tricky interfaces between the internals of a Python interpreter and an external C++ program. The object structure in Python is obviously alien to the C++ object system. Of course there is always workarounds, but they are inconvenient and require arcane knowledge. Somebody who is an expert at Python internals doesn't think this is hard. Somebody who is an expert at computational algorithms but not compilers does think this is hard, and especially thinks this is something that they really do not have a desire to learn. Me, I have far more interest in spending my time reading a machine learning research paper rather than learning about some crufty programming interface.
The article is a naive cop-out for not specifying a sufficiently good language in combination with implementation techniques (they go together). Guido could try to implement a whole bunch of new libraries in some external Lisp and see how much he likes it versus writing native Python code. It sucks.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Ahhh. This was from version 1.0 and no longer applies.
No persons, houses, papers or effects were harmed in the acquisition of certain electron charge distributions. Why worry, be happy!