...corruption universally. If you work for the government or one of its contractors, you should be filmed at all times, and have all your texts and emails monitored. A parallel law for the private sector should kick in for executives.
Is that intrusive? Yes, that's the point. Would it work? Not perfectly, but it would knock out a lot of casual corruption and catch quite a few of the more egregious abusers, particularly in the defense industry and the three letter agencies.
But we are rarely moved to conquer the entire globe spanning goldfish empire. We might, if they got in our way, but we wouldn't go out of our way to do so.
If they can, and they're interested, they are probably already learning about us without our consent. I'm sure we'll make a tidy little entry in a very large database and be used for comparison purposes in some starving PHD candidate alien's thesis. We may even appear near the top of the bibliography.
I'm making what seem like reasonable guesses based on the assumption that we're completely ordinary as tool using, sentient species go and while individual differences exist, physics and the nature of the problems to be solved will impose very similar restrictions on any sentient species seeking to engage in space travel.
There's no possibility that aliens capable of FTL would find us remotely interesting. Once you get to that technology, energy and resource problems either have been solved, or become very easily solvable. In addition, given that FTL is far more likely to be developed using AI rather than human intelligence, space faring races (if they bother to be space faring) are more likely to be 2nd order intelligences (i.e. artificial intelligences),rather than 1st order, genetically based naturally developing intelligences).
Bottom line? To space faring AIs, we're squirrels. Our nuts are safe. Really.
...to suppress the use of TOR and it's ever growing list of alternatives. I'm surprised they didn't break heads and steal their equipment while they were at it.
Anyone who's not a moron or a well bribed congresscritter or defense contractor has figured out that getting people in foreign countries involved in American technology with military operations is a huge vulnerability.
Think China or Russia buy mass quantities of military hardware and software from the USA? Surprise answer. Almost none.
And even more money to be made by selling Iran's oil and stopping all those silly profit-eating conservation and energy independence programs. Better to sell our national security for a few bucks. The oilies figured that if things got bad in the states, they'd just move elsewhere.
Both things have happened to me in my lifetime. I had an employer who just stopped paying for health insurance, telling no employees. We found out when someone made a claim. The owner, unsurprisingly, was infuriated at the employee who outed him. FYI, I found out later that my tax withholding somehow never happened and eventually they just stopped paying us, allowing us to work a few extra weeks, unpaid.
Good times. Owner was never charged with anything and never went to jail. Welcome to American capitalism.
All software development must be seen in a greater context of economics and human neurophysiology.
Writing code is a business, not an artistic pursuit.
Efficiency in coding means taking into account the average, affordable programmer. If C++ had to go through a human factors analysis before adoption, it would fail miserably.
As C++ becomes "richer." it also becomes more error prone, and less economically viable from an economic standpoint.
If someone asked you today, to make a business case for any of these new features, could you do it? With real data?
As a practical matter, I just assume that any encryption, cloaking, etc. has already been broken and that you can be seen if certain people at the NSA, CIA. etc. can read your communication if they're interested enough.
It's not a big deal to me personally. I'm not political, which is the real criteria for whether you're monitored or not (not the drugs or kiddy porn smokescreen reason). Political folks know better. They use old fashioned ciphers, red herrings, paper and face-to-face.
I don't think it's bad, exactly. I've worked in a shop that has been using agile for about 5 years now. Before agile, we had good releases and bad releases. After agile, we have had good releases and bad releases. I certainly *like* aspects of it, like daily meetings, limited goals, being two weeks from something shippable, etc. But my *liking* it is different from being able to prove, quantitatively, that it's much better or worse than any other software development method.
"Fuck you, developers" has been the M$ mantra for the last couple of decades. Now we have "universal apps" based on the giant clusterfuck that is WPF. That'll last until upper management once again changes direction, focus, or their socks.
As in, "shove in enough engineering and AI specific domain knowledge into it, and have it help us design the next generation of AI." After that, all subsequent AIs will design themselves.
Slashdot Mirror
...corruption universally. If you work for the government or one of its contractors, you should be filmed at all times, and have all your texts and emails monitored. A parallel law for the private sector should kick in for executives.
Is that intrusive? Yes, that's the point. Would it work? Not perfectly, but it would knock out a lot of casual corruption and catch quite a few of the more egregious abusers, particularly in the defense industry and the three letter agencies.
But we are rarely moved to conquer the entire globe spanning goldfish empire. We might, if they got in our way, but we wouldn't go out of our way to do so.
If they can, and they're interested, they are probably already learning about us without our consent. I'm sure we'll make a tidy little entry in a very large database and be used for comparison purposes in some starving PHD candidate alien's thesis. We may even appear near the top of the bibliography.
I'm making what seem like reasonable guesses based on the assumption that we're completely ordinary as tool using, sentient species go and while individual differences exist, physics and the nature of the problems to be solved will impose very similar restrictions on any sentient species seeking to engage in space travel.
I'm hoping for cats, actually. Better lifestyle and all that.
Uh, yes, well I always suspected that the scientists doing those quantum entanglement experiments were just messing with us for fun.
There's no possibility that aliens capable of FTL would find us remotely interesting. Once you get to that technology, energy and resource problems either have been solved, or become very easily solvable. In addition, given that FTL is far more likely to be developed using AI rather than human intelligence, space faring races (if they bother to be space faring) are more likely to be 2nd order intelligences (i.e. artificial intelligences),rather than 1st order, genetically based naturally developing intelligences).
Bottom line? To space faring AIs, we're squirrels. Our nuts are safe. Really.
...to suppress the use of TOR and it's ever growing list of alternatives. I'm surprised they didn't break heads and steal their equipment while they were at it.
Essentially, this is still evolution. The queasy, moral folks will breed themselves out in the long run.
NOT!
Anyone who's not a moron or a well bribed congresscritter or defense contractor has figured out that getting people in foreign countries involved in American technology with military operations is a huge vulnerability.
Think China or Russia buy mass quantities of military hardware and software from the USA? Surprise answer. Almost none.
Guess why?
Shrug. Protein is protein.
I'm sure he'd be in favor of breeding donor babies in feedlots if he could just get away with it.
Certainly couldn't be a diversion from a DNC "leadership" to which rules mean nothing.
designed to placate technopeasants and convince them that government actually has control of this.
If someone wants to encrypt a message, they will, and there's nothing, really, that anyone can do about it.
And even more money to be made by selling Iran's oil and stopping all those silly profit-eating conservation and energy independence programs. Better to sell our national security for a few bucks. The oilies figured that if things got bad in the states, they'd just move elsewhere.
Just like now.
without notice. Then, yeah.
Both things have happened to me in my lifetime. I had an employer who just stopped paying for health insurance, telling no employees. We found out when someone made a claim. The owner, unsurprisingly, was infuriated at the employee who outed him. FYI, I found out later that my tax withholding somehow never happened and eventually they just stopped paying us, allowing us to work a few extra weeks, unpaid.
Good times. Owner was never charged with anything and never went to jail. Welcome to American capitalism.
'Cause that would be weird. Cool, but weird.
All software development must be seen in a greater context of economics and human neurophysiology.
Writing code is a business, not an artistic pursuit.
Efficiency in coding means taking into account the average, affordable programmer. If C++ had to go through a human factors analysis before adoption, it would fail miserably.
As C++ becomes "richer." it also becomes more error prone, and less economically viable from an economic standpoint.
If someone asked you today, to make a business case for any of these new features, could you do it? With real data?
As a practical matter, I just assume that any encryption, cloaking, etc. has already been broken and that you can be seen if certain people at the NSA, CIA. etc. can read your communication if they're interested enough.
It's not a big deal to me personally. I'm not political, which is the real criteria for whether you're monitored or not (not the drugs or kiddy porn smokescreen reason). Political folks know better. They use old fashioned ciphers, red herrings, paper and face-to-face.
Funded originally be DARPA, as I recall. Because how could you not trust DARPA?
Preferably immediately after detection and verification.
This opinion is unpopular, until you've been scammed.
I don't think it's bad, exactly. I've worked in a shop that has been using agile for about 5 years now. Before agile, we had good releases and bad releases. After agile, we have had good releases and bad releases. I certainly *like* aspects of it, like daily meetings, limited goals, being two weeks from something shippable, etc. But my *liking* it is different from being able to prove, quantitatively, that it's much better or worse than any other software development method.
"Fuck you, developers" has been the M$ mantra for the last couple of decades. Now we have "universal apps" based on the giant clusterfuck that is WPF. That'll last until upper management once again changes direction, focus, or their socks.
As in, "shove in enough engineering and AI specific domain knowledge into it, and have it help us design the next generation of AI." After that, all subsequent AIs will design themselves.
are the witches brew that has made this happen, along with the opiate epidemic. If people suddenly realize they have nothing to live for, they won't.
Not that anybody in *real* power (i.e. the world's unelected wealthy) gives a damn. As far as they're concerned, it's just fewer cattle to feed.