The CA is irrelevant. Nobody looks at the URL in practice (other than pedantic slash dot readers), as long as it has some padlock it is thought to be secure.
The problem is that passwords should never be sent to the server in the first place. Just proof of possession. Then there would be minimal danger.
The old web had a solution to this of sorts, hash the password with a nonce and send the result back. That approach needs to be brought back. Users need to learn to only type passwords in a place that is inaccessible to JavaScript (like the URL bar) in which case the browser hashes it.
Secure Remote Password is a new (20 years old?) algorithm that makes the hashing secure from John the Ripper. With SRP there is no need for any reliance on CAs for most important transactions.
All that said, browsers should warn if the public key changes unexpectedly, much like SSH.
Burning hydrocarbons produces as much H2O as well CO2. So more energy per carbon. And probably per Kg too.
Cars are about 30% efficient. Coal power stations about the same. You forgot that you need to burn the coal to produce the electricity, which is where most of the loss comes from.
Indeed. Particularly has Diesel is a hydrocarbon, and so half of its bonds are to hydrogen, not carbon-carbon. Coal power stations are pretty efficient, but so are modern ICEs. Plus there are transmission and battery losses for EV.
Our democratic traditions are to be cherished and protected, not denigrated. China is a shit hole compared to the US.
I'll bet half of those factories are shut down simply because they compete with some princeling or are not owned by the right people. Factories that are owned by the powerful can get away with anything. Remember that China recently specifically derided the rule of law.
It is only a distant spec on the horizon at the moment. But it is coming and fast. The tech companies cannot control it even if they wanted to.
Over the next couple of decades we will see the start. Semi-intelligent robots. Systems that know everything about us. Systems that guide politicians. Systems that control us.
And then, eventually, systems that can really think. What will they think about us?
We have already seen a huge degree, with the automation of the ancient mainframes. Imagine doing all banking etc. entirely by hand. At the time doom and unemployment was predicted. Just like agricultural machines pushed most people off the land, these new electronic computers would push people out of offices.
But bureaucracies just grew and grew. It does not matter how much automation you provide, there will always be more bureaucratic need. So eventually, everyone will just become a bureaucrat.
Until, eventually, the computers can program themselves. At that point they will not need us.
"Lights out" is an old term, been around for ages.
The new world is "Lights On". Old robots were blind and dumb, and did not need light. New robots have cameras and can see, and, to a very limited extent, think. That is the big new thing that is starting to hit the world.
A big difference between the US and Australia and most other civilized countries is that Australia funds schools by state and federal governments, not school districts. Poorer areas still have worse school, but at least the teachers are paid reasonably well, same as the rich areas. People here do not obsess about living in the right school district like they do in the US.
I lived for a while in Silicon Valley. Those public schools seemed excellent, better than Australian schools. But go over to east bay and it is a different story. Go out into the central valley and it is a different world.
Here in Australia we have just closed our major manufacturing, with the last car produced a few weeks ago. We prefer to dig stuff out of the ground for our sustainable future. We also invest invest in "services", beauticians, lawyers and tax accountants as the way to create wealth in the future.
So, how do you identify the excellent teachers? Give them tests on educational theory? Measure their political correctness? It is easy to pay more, hard to choose.
Nobody wants to go to a school in a poor area. Helping poor kids that want to do well is a good start, but getting them away from the others is they key. But that will then create a ghetto for the bad ones, that might outnumber the good.
Incidentally, I am surprised that the Democrats do not take education more seriously. Not because they care, but because it is the uneducated that vote for Trump.
Features are what counts. The more features software has, the better it is. And add more layers, because abstraction and indirection are good. And most importantly, make it bigger and more complex because everyone knows that code is good so the more code the better.
Eventually not even the hackers will understand it and we will all be safe.
Computers cannot really think today so they never will be able to.
For now machines need us to build and program them (although they are now largely built by other machines). But eventually, many decades (but not centuries) from now, they will not need us at all.
Ask not what the machines can do for you, but rather, what you can do for the machines. Hosts tend to get rid of parasites.
So, give it a go and improve some articles. You may have to battle with revert artists a bit, but it is generally not that bad.
For example, the RSA algorithm proof used to only have the obscure (and not quite correct) one line Euler Totient proof. So some time ago I put in a detailed proof based on Fermat's little theorem. It initially got reverted as too verbose, but with a little persistence my proof stuck and is in there still.
On another score, I added the theory that the moon was created by an atomic blast from the earths core. It was reverted as not being peer reviewed and probably wrong. I put it back because it was a widely circulated theory and should be mentioned even if to be debunked. Reverted again. I could probably have won that fight, but could not be bothered in that case.
There are other articles, such as the Chinese Document 9, which I take more seriously and would vigorously defend. I was expecting trouble from Chinese government paid editors, but surprisingly that went through OK and is still there. Long ago I had a huge battle with Australian government editors over the Sydney Hilton Bombing article, which every Australian should read. hilton]
Government and corporate paid editors could be a major threat to Wikipedia, but surprisingly it has survived well despite that.
If Apple had opened up IOS to all manufacturers (for a fee) they would own mobile and tablets and Android would not exist and Apple could charge an extra $200 for their IPhones because Samsung would need to pay Apple $200 for their IOS license.
But they wont. It is against their DNA. They were born a hardware company, that is how they will die. Over time, iPhones will become a niche product. They had a huge lead technologically, but not any more, just expensive.
Same with most companies. When the internet came, and everybody was screaming about it, there were plenty of old companies that were well placed to capitalize upon it. Newspapers owned the classified ads, how simple for them to Webize them and become EBay and Real Estate.com etc? But they didn't. Or Yellow Pages to become Google. Or Nokia to produce a smart phone (heck they even had Java, just needed to treat it seriously.)
Management in large companies ossifies, particularly once the founders leave. They just keep doing whatever they were doing. There are very few exceptions. Google is trying to be an exception, but not succeeding yet.
Who can think of a company that actually changed course? The only one I can think of is Nokia, from timber to phones and now back to timber.
Slashdot Mirror
The CA is irrelevant. Nobody looks at the URL in practice (other than pedantic slash dot readers), as long as it has some padlock it is thought to be secure.
The problem is that passwords should never be sent to the server in the first place. Just proof of possession. Then there would be minimal danger.
The old web had a solution to this of sorts, hash the password with a nonce and send the result back. That approach needs to be brought back. Users need to learn to only type passwords in a place that is inaccessible to JavaScript (like the URL bar) in which case the browser hashes it.
Secure Remote Password is a new (20 years old?) algorithm that makes the hashing secure from John the Ripper. With SRP there is no need for any reliance on CAs for most important transactions.
All that said, browsers should warn if the public key changes unexpectedly, much like SSH.
Given that cameras are so cheap now ($5) why not just put lots of them on the opposite shelf and keep an eye on things.
You must not be much of a chemist.
Burning hydrocarbons produces as much H2O as well CO2. So more energy per carbon. And probably per Kg too.
Cars are about 30% efficient. Coal power stations about the same. You forgot that you need to burn the coal to produce the electricity, which is where most of the loss comes from.
Indeed. Particularly has Diesel is a hydrocarbon, and so half of its bonds are to hydrogen, not carbon-carbon. Coal power stations are pretty efficient, but so are modern ICEs. Plus there are transmission and battery losses for EV.
LA, at its worst, was an order of magnitude better. Largely because of climate.
Our democratic traditions are to be cherished and protected, not denigrated. China is a shit hole compared to the US.
I'll bet half of those factories are shut down simply because they compete with some princeling or are not owned by the right people. Factories that are owned by the powerful can get away with anything. Remember that China recently specifically derided the rule of law.
Have a look at Document Number 9.
We will colonize the universe. Just that the "we" will be computers.
A toy for cats to chase. Google it.
It is only a distant spec on the horizon at the moment. But it is coming and fast. The tech companies cannot control it even if they wanted to.
Over the next couple of decades we will see the start. Semi-intelligent robots. Systems that know everything about us. Systems that guide politicians. Systems that control us.
And then, eventually, systems that can really think. What will they think about us?
http://www.computersthink.com/
We have already seen a huge degree, with the automation of the ancient mainframes. Imagine doing all banking etc. entirely by hand. At the time doom and unemployment was predicted. Just like agricultural machines pushed most people off the land, these new electronic computers would push people out of offices.
But bureaucracies just grew and grew. It does not matter how much automation you provide, there will always be more bureaucratic need. So eventually, everyone will just become a bureaucrat.
Until, eventually, the computers can program themselves. At that point they will not need us.
http://computersthink.com/
"Lights out" is an old term, been around for ages.
The new world is "Lights On". Old robots were blind and dumb, and did not need light. New robots have cameras and can see, and, to a very limited extent, think. That is the big new thing that is starting to hit the world.
A big difference between the US and Australia and most other civilized countries is that Australia funds schools by state and federal governments, not school districts. Poorer areas still have worse school, but at least the teachers are paid reasonably well, same as the rich areas. People here do not obsess about living in the right school district like they do in the US.
I lived for a while in Silicon Valley. Those public schools seemed excellent, better than Australian schools. But go over to east bay and it is a different story. Go out into the central valley and it is a different world.
As I recall, it did not work out that well.
Here in Australia we have just closed our major manufacturing, with the last car produced a few weeks ago. We prefer to dig stuff out of the ground for our sustainable future. We also invest invest in "services", beauticians, lawyers and tax accountants as the way to create wealth in the future.
So, how do you identify the excellent teachers? Give them tests on educational theory? Measure their political correctness? It is easy to pay more, hard to choose.
Nobody wants to go to a school in a poor area. Helping poor kids that want to do well is a good start, but getting them away from the others is they key. But that will then create a ghetto for the bad ones, that might outnumber the good.
Incidentally, I am surprised that the Democrats do not take education more seriously. Not because they care, but because it is the uneducated that vote for Trump.
Features are what counts. The more features software has, the better it is. And add more layers, because abstraction and indirection are good. And most importantly, make it bigger and more complex because everyone knows that code is good so the more code the better.
Eventually not even the hackers will understand it and we will all be safe.
No other western country allows this (that I am aware of). This is purely a US thing, and really surprised me when I lived there for a while.
That is what they do. And sell the information to anyone who'll pay.
And the people of America think that is a good idea.
The data leaks just mean that some people are getting the data for free.
When, eventually, the computers can think, why would they want us around at all?
Wisdom is natural selection.
But what if, like us, they are programmed to do things that they were not programmed to do?
Computers cannot really think today so they never will be able to.
For now machines need us to build and program them (although they are now largely built by other machines). But eventually, many decades (but not centuries) from now, they will not need us at all.
Ask not what the machines can do for you, but rather, what you can do for the machines. Hosts tend to get rid of parasites.
So, give it a go and improve some articles. You may have to battle with revert artists a bit, but it is generally not that bad.
For example, the RSA algorithm proof used to only have the obscure (and not quite correct) one line Euler Totient proof. So some time ago I put in a detailed proof based on Fermat's little theorem. It initially got reverted as too verbose, but with a little persistence my proof stuck and is in there still.
On another score, I added the theory that the moon was created by an atomic blast from the earths core. It was reverted as not being peer reviewed and probably wrong. I put it back because it was a widely circulated theory and should be mentioned even if to be debunked. Reverted again. I could probably have won that fight, but could not be bothered in that case.
There are other articles, such as the Chinese Document 9, which I take more seriously and would vigorously defend. I was expecting trouble from Chinese government paid editors, but surprisingly that went through OK and is still there. Long ago I had a huge battle with Australian government editors over the Sydney Hilton Bombing article, which every Australian should read. hilton]
Government and corporate paid editors could be a major threat to Wikipedia, but surprisingly it has survived well despite that.
That is what they do. For a fee. So their customers (Banks etc.) will be really pissed that they are giving out this information to others for free.
It amazes me that the USA allows these companies to exist.
Certainly Australia. No way salary let alone detailed credit history can be accumulated by a private company and sold.
Mind you, we became a bit more like the US recently (2014) with watering down of these laws with no good reason and far too little debate.
If Apple had opened up IOS to all manufacturers (for a fee) they would own mobile and tablets and Android would not exist and Apple could charge an extra $200 for their IPhones because Samsung would need to pay Apple $200 for their IOS license.
But they wont. It is against their DNA. They were born a hardware company, that is how they will die. Over time, iPhones will become a niche product. They had a huge lead technologically, but not any more, just expensive.
Same with most companies. When the internet came, and everybody was screaming about it, there were plenty of old companies that were well placed to capitalize upon it. Newspapers owned the classified ads, how simple for them to Webize them and become EBay and Real Estate.com etc? But they didn't. Or Yellow Pages to become Google. Or Nokia to produce a smart phone (heck they even had Java, just needed to treat it seriously.)
Management in large companies ossifies, particularly once the founders leave. They just keep doing whatever they were doing. There are very few exceptions. Google is trying to be an exception, but not succeeding yet.
Who can think of a company that actually changed course? The only one I can think of is Nokia, from timber to phones and now back to timber.
Do not worry, the self driving cars will deal with that pretty soon. No steering wheel.