I may buy one -- while it wasn't a Sinclair, my first serious computing was done on a Z80-based machine; oh, the endless fun POKEing assembly! It sometimes even worked!! -- but I will wait until there's actual HW out there being poked (see what I did, there?) by actual users, if it's all the same to you.
308 posts • joined 15 Nov 2009
"starting with an untried-at-scale e-mail system".
Should be fun to watch, that. If one doesn't have to support it. Where's the popcorn...?
But seriously, why weren't they using their own variant of Linux already? I guess no one would grease the proper palms to get that happening, so who cares if it makes sense!
So... surely they'll have need of a versatile sysadmin with a physics degree who's fluent in several languages, no?
Re: What size?
While I do not think this particular incident depends on it, keep BadUSB in mind.
Linux, I believe, is vulnerable. Indeed, a Windows machine with an AV package that's aware of this is probably in a better position than the typical Linux installation with no AV at all.
No, it's best to only use UFDs you personally depackaged after getting them through a reliable chain of supply from a reputable manufacturer. $deity-knows they're chap enough!
>> So perhaps it's more quality than quantity to begin with?
>> Or maybe it's being open and welcoming to foreign talent.
My main argument in a nutshell is that it's mostly the latter -- being open and welcoming -- that's the more significant factor in the long run as other countries put in enough resources in fixing their education and so on, as time goes by.
Obviously the quality of the infrastructure available is a factor. As is the momentum of where on the planet the best people in a given field reside at any given moment in time. That's why a lot of early modern physics is written in German. That's why many of the heavier synthetic elements in the periodic table have US-centric names, while most of the named celestial objects have Arabic names. Etc.
More pertinently, that's why talented individuals will willingly jump through some hoops to go to a place that gives them the best chance to pursue their particular thing most effectively. But the number of hoops they're willing to jump through will go down as their native countries make available to them more and more resources. And many major economies are increasingly doing just this -- look at what the UAE and KSA are doing, for example, to name a couple of non-usual suspects.
Ultimately, in the specific case of BrExit, if the UK makes it harder for EU nationals to work in a stable environment in the UK, then many of them will ask themselves why they should bother and decide to go elsewhere. Coupled with loss of EU funding for research in the UK -- or more accurately redirection of said funding to other places in the EU -- this could be disastrous, from a UK PoV.
While every country on the planet should invest in better education, more STEM and so on, it's not strictly a money problem.
The fundamental problem is the scarcity of the required calibre of brains -- the basic fool-to-genius ratio of the human race, if you will.
You see (or I hope you do; or would, if it's pointed out), it stands to reason that the distribution of such raw talent is random and uniform over the entire human population on the planet. And the percentage that would be born in any given country is more-or-less the same as said country's population of the human race.
The UK's is not a particularly-large population, obviously.
You can of course do your best to enhance the likelihood that any such talent in your country has a better chance to be discovered, nurtured and developed to its full potential -- that's what all the investment in education and so on is about, essentially. But in an increasingly competitive "market" where other countries are also pouring resources into similar efforts of their own, this does not alleviate the need to try and... attract such people from other countries -- the exact opposite of making them jump through hoops for the privilege of working for you.
"There's not much more than fine print between stress testing and DDoS-as-a-service".
The main difference, I believe, is who is ordering the service for whom.
Re: Always carry a fire extinguisher under the passenger seat
Excellent idea. Indeed, having an extinguisher in the car at all times is a legal requirement, around these parts.
But would not have helped in this specific case, as it sounds like the car was unattended at the time. Of course, it could be argued that leaving your expensive and combustible S7 to charge in an attended car is courting disaster in and of itself.
Exactly my thoughts, indeed.
I wonder what the legal situation is, in this case. Are Samsung liable, even after a well-publicized recall?
Re: @RIBrsiq : VISA doesn't mean credit card details
>> Call me when the US has caught up with current technology.
You realize that the world is a bit larger than just the US and wherever you live, right?
Re: Why Bitcoin ?
You may not see the benefit in being anonymous, as a paying customer. But I hope you will see the benefit of less people having access to your credit card details...
>> are we sure this guy was a leet developer back in the 80's
It was a different time...
See icon. For both the original and this post, in fact.
“Our storage algorithm allows us to regenerate any corrupted or lost data.”
Yes, but what if the entire site is lost...?
Re: Trade deficits also need to be taken into account
What's a "losse"? How do you "loose" one? And is such action likely to negatively impact any parties it's done at...?
>> "Wait, what, the FTSE100's up?", etc.
Now, I'm not a financial expert -- though maybe that gives my opinion, such as it is, more weight in your eyes, come to think of it -- but it seems to me that if GBP goes down against the rest of the world's major currencies then the total valuation of UK stock as measured in GBP will go up even if their absolute value as measured in "real money" goes down, assuming the drop in stock value is not as steep as the drop in currency value; which it stands to reason would be the case. At least in the short term.
But I like your attitude! I mean, what do experts know about their field of expertise anyway? Amirite...?
>> [Deniability] for what?
Suppose someone the NSA are not supposed to mess with was messed with using one of these tools/vulnerabilities during the period this compromise of their systems is supposed to have taken place. Further, suppose that this messing is about to be exposed -- or even has already been exposed, in less public circles. Do you still not see the deniability this #Shadowbrokers business creates?
So... we're sure that it's not the NSA deliberately leaking a subset of obsolete tools to create deniability?
Assuming we're sure it has anything to do with the NSA in the first place, that is!!
Anyone want to bet that by the time they're done migrating, the OS they'd have migrated to will be out of support...?
Where's a hamster wheel icon when you need one?
Re: Single point of failure
There should never be an unforeseen catastrophe. There should only ever be foreseen catastrophes that you decided not to protect against after crunching the numbers and judging the investment didn't make sense.
Ah, the righteousness of youth! How I miss those heady days!!
But here's the thing: one *can* raise security concerns with a site's admins, if one finds serious vulnerabilities. No real need to hose anyone's system; and nothing gained from that, apart from those death threats mentioned. Even if the damage is minor and would take someone who knows what they're doing only minutes to fix: the vast majority of users will not be able to handle anything close to fixing an MBR, for example.
What if the admins will not take a friendly warning seriously, you ask? Well, then it's probably a hopeless situation and nothing will prevent a catastrophic breach of the site concerned, sooner or later. After all, raising awareness of a specific issue or three, no matter how dramatically done, is unlikely to change the underlying culture.
I think you need a new acronym because right now, this is starting to look pretty usual, to me.
>> Easy to tell who has never used a database in their life in this thread.
It is, isn't it?
Or at least who finds DBs an apparently unfathomable and insurmountable challenge, if one takes into account that you seem to be equating locating files locally stored in a presumably well structured and indexed archive to clandestinely retrieving files that were stored by a non-cooperative remote entity, that have supposedly long since been deleted and, further, that the bleeding FBI already tried to recover -- with presumably much more cooperation than the Russians are likely to get, one might add -- and reportedly couldn't!
>> If they do have them, they don't need to go hacking.
More importantly, if they already have them, they don't have to find them.
Read into that what you will.
Personally, I read the comment regarding the Mansfield bars more as referring to their high visibility than their ability to stop a car going at that speed. I mean, I'm sure they would have helped cut down the distance the car travelled, but I suspect it would still have passed under the semi had it been travelling at the same speed on impact, at which point it would unfortunately have been too late for the passenger. But a combination of the Tesla spotting the bars in time to start rapid deceleration and the bars' stopping power itself could certainly have avoided total disaster.
"no single point of failure"
You keep using that term, and I don't think it means what you think it means!
Re: Why not
>> It's never a good idea to let alpha emitters inside.
True. But then again, it's never a good idea to eat top-soil in general in the first place!
Re: Why not
People in general, I find, just don't understand radiation and how the regulations surrounding it work.
Which's extremely unfortunate and may eventually end up being a species-wide "[D]arwinian population control" mechanism.
>> Where would we go beyond that limit?
If I knew that, dear old chap, I wouldn't be wasting my time writing comments on an Internet forum!!
Point is, there's usually new tech sooner or later. Even without that, I've been reading about the eminent demise of the so-called Moore's Law since the early '90s.
Demonstrably, matter can support higher computation densities than we've so far achieved. Much higher densities, in fact. To stick with a cliché, take the human brain. And for a bit of a more abstract example, take any lump of matter doing whatever it is it is doing: to accurately simulate all intermolecular interactions and so on, you would need a computer much more massive than the original lump of matter. Now, I'm not saying we'll ever approach such a density, but when we needs to count the orders of magnitude separating us from it in orders of magnitude, there's clearly still a long way to go!
Here's what I read:
"If the future were like the past, it couldn't possibly contain any advancement!"
As an exercise, I would like to see the authors make predictions based on the data available a) before semiconductors were developed b) before vacuum tubes were developed. Etc.
Backups are important. I would be at the head of the queue to tell you this. In fact, I'd probably have come in half an hour before, said my piece and long gone by the time the queue formed.
But not this important! I mean, they're backups, for Bob's sake! Of your actual data you actually need to run. Only to be needed -- and usually found not up-to-date/functional -- when the live copy fails.
Re: "every provider must log all Russian internet traffic for up to a year".
>> maybe then the big ISPs would have to make a noise.
Oh, they'll be making quite a lot of noise anyway: all those disks and the HVAC required to keep them operational!
More seriously, while your point regarding the actual behaviour of lawmakers seemingly everywhere is well-made and unfortunately apparently very accurate, in theory they should very well care about not wasting the public's money. It's, in fact, quite high on their job description, I think!
"every provider must log all Russian internet traffic for up to a year".
My first guess is that Putin, or a close friend of his, has recently bought a boatload of Seagate and/or WD stock...
That, or someone who has absolutely no idea what they're talking about is writing laws again.
I know which explanation is more likely, but I also know which one I prefer.
Here's to it soon changing to "driving with no hands on the wheel, please! In fact, let's take that wheel away before it confuses the poor, squishy meatbag..."
Re: "his own interests of greed"
>> "Smacks of unbelievable stupidity to me".
Also considering that he was apparently selling trade secrets for amounts on the order of magnitude of what he was paying for readily-available soft-porn, it does not seem to me that this guy was very smart.
And he "worked as a security tester on military satellites"...!?
>> "many people lost their only copies".
Repeat after me: two is one, and one is none.
First, why would you trust anyone else to encrypt your off-site backups for you? And if you don't, why would you care if they did?
Second, I believe it should be "which stuff belongs to whom"...
You do realise that this is not, by and large, about your -- or anyone else's -- next laptop, yes?
I mean, sure, that's also impacted. But it's not what the discussion is about.
Re: Extensive delay in return of computers is SOP by PC Plod. Usually the items are also broken...
I would hope everyone keeps multiple properly encrypted backups of all their important files regardless of absolutely anything else.
Embedded security is critical, IMO. I would very much like to see all data outside processors fully and securely encrypted before I allow chips to be implanted into my body, for example. And we're certainly headed there, even if it's probably optimistic on my part to think that I would ever have to make that particular call, given the percentage of my hair that's white.
But trying to get there by buying McAfee? What on Earth were Intel thinking...?
Ah! The hidden costs and impacts start to show up!!
And it's not like the visible ones were great to begin with...
And I am sure I read quite a few narratives of the Chinese invading through the ground!
>> "half the country has a below-average IQ"
And it's not just IQ, either! It's everything!!
It's extremely frustrating, this. No matter what one does to better things -- education, welfare, etc. No matter what efforts are taken, it still always seems that half the population remains below average.
I'm telling you: the system is rigged...
Not as exciting, I know, but I'm thinking this is more "breakdown of cellular control mechanisms" and less "fear the living dead".
But certainly some more fiddling to find out what's going on is needed.
Former Miss Bikini World contestant Renee Eaves
It would be, you must admit, the perfect cover for an international criminal master mind!
Maybe we should review the file one more time, just to make sure nothing was missed...?
'Nobody cares about your heart-rate'
Until they do, that is. By which time it's usually too late to secure the data.
Re: What's all this then?
A person I rather respect once said that if you ever find yourself considering what politicians are doing and thinking "now, that's stupid!", then know that you do not know all that is going on.
Of course, it's not exclusively correct, obviously: sometimes it's the politicians who are lacking critical information and/or understanding, and sometimes they are indeed just being plain stupid. But it's a world-view that's useful to keep in mind, I find.
"US companies dominate the international market".
The question, kind sir, is "would you like that state of affairs to continue?"
Because I personally doubt that it would for long. Even without artificial incentives for people to jump ship.
"The second most popular password was '18atcskd2w' used by 91,103 accounts, with '3rjs1la7qe' coming in fourth spot used by 74,806 accounts".
Eh...? How did that happen, then? I know that the answer to this question is what I personally am most interested in.
Edit: Interesting theories in the video linked.