Hack it!
Some hacker has to post the software mod to make the iron play online radio, to remote control the kettle to prepare a cuppa from my desk, ...
Great stuff waiting to happen!
1771 publicly visible posts • joined 22 Oct 2007
The Bundesnachrichtendienst does what its name describes: Collecting news. The service was actually described as "newspaper clipping service" in the not-so-distant past. I am sure that they did expand their act a bit since then, nobody is immune against mission-creep. But the combination of German morals (nobody loves this undemocratic institution, it just has too many historic connotations) with the general boringness of German administration work (rules, rules, rules -- don't touch that pen unless you read the 20 page regulation on legitimate use), it makes me hopeful that the Bundesnachrichtendienst is still quite tame.
They seem to have outsourced the more demanding jobs anyways: recent exposures of German spying software showed that they rely on commercial software of questionable quality.
It's actually easier to understand why the NSA would want to spy on the head of a state as opposed to spying on the whole populace. But they managed to be indiscreet about it -- if Snowden had documents about it, then the better part of the US security services and administration might have access. Nobody wants their dirty laundry thus widely disseminated.
Even 'if it can be expected' that the US spies on the rest of the world, they managed to really mess it up by creating such a large and all-encompassing system, that all kinds of sensitive information seem to be floating around. (If Snowden had access to presentation slides advertising those great information gathering tools, then there must be a lot of people for whom the data was advertised.)
The NSA clearly overstepped the boundaries of reasonable actions and they might loose a lot of access due to it in the near future.
"[...] revenue increase [...] attributed to Surface, and particularly to the 32GB model of the ARM-powered Surface RT [...]"
No shit Sherlock. They just wrote off USD 1 billion on their surface inventory. If they can't create at least a superficial appearance of success after this write-off, then Ballmer should be fired again!
It was a definite eye-opener for me, when my grandma told me about 'how it really was' back in the times; your grandparents were no chaste angels 80 years ago, neither were your parents (exceptions do exist). Gives a somewhat relaxed point of view that cannot be obtained by any quantity of sex-education.
Not that this can - in any way - excuse the horribly actions of the boy.
W3C should stay out of the DRM business and instead focus on maintaining open internet standards. If companies insist on DRM, then they should carry the burden to convince their customers that DRM is in their best interest and they should carry the burden of developing a convincing solution.
Companies want to wall off their portions of the internet? No need to offer standardized fences.
"Paid subscribers are offered a one-year subscription to a non-US VPN service"
So now we'll see security-conscious internet companies building infrastructure across the Canadian and Mexican border, administered by non-US nationals? The NSA will surely build next door to make sure no bytes are being lost, but with the correct ownership-structure such companies might be safe from secret court-orders.
This should be easier than shuffling data across continents to access European or other services.
Some background information can be massively helpful to ensure cooperative behavior and is therefore a guarantor of peace and harmony (just ask Al Capone and his friends).
Based on the documentation series "24", a significant number of government officials everywhere are collaborating with nefarious terrorists. Hence I'd say that some surveillance is perfectly adequate.
What do you say, '24' is fiction? Well, now the terrorists had access to the series and know how to do those things ... and the Agency for Secret Surveillance of the USA (Ass of the USA) and it's partner ASS of the World will have to make sure it remains fiction.
''If a device does everything described in each independent claims, then the patent applies.''
You surely are mistaken, each claim in a Patent can be enforced separately. The patent lawyers spend their whole careers to inflate the number of claims for exactly that reason: one single claim can lead to courtroom victory even if all others are not breached or are invalidated.
New patent war imminent, please don't feed the lawyers.
The Chinese are surely aware that the US heavily spy on them. The NSA budget does give a little hint.
They would surely love to get Snowden, but they would just as much love to have any other educated NSA employee. Working with somebody else at Booz Allen would be much more discrete and there are surely some greedy bastards that are less principled (easier to buy) than Mr. Snowden.
Snowden also no longer has any documents. To get those the Chinese and Russians might try to go after the newspapers that have the documents. Or considering the excellent security of the NSA system, maybe they should just dig up a cable in Hawaii.
The US authorities try to smear Mr. Snowden and they try to build a case against him with hearsay and allegations. After all that Snowden did, I gotta say that I trust him to tell the truth (take that, Jake). Contrast that with the repeated lying of Mr Clapper and Mr. Alexander. Whom would you want as role model for your kids?
Indeed, The Washington Times gives some nice little details:
"In response to a follow-up question, Gen. Alexander also acknowledged that only one or perhaps two of even those 13 cases [out of 54 foiled terrorist plots he had claimed before] had been foiled with help from the NSA’s vast phone records database."
"Director of National IntelligenceJames R. Clapper denied that the number of plots foiled should be the sole metric by which the success of the program is measured. “I think there’s another metric here that’s very important. … I would call it the ‘peace of mind’ metric.”"
The new line of defense for the NSA: Give us your taxes. You'll feel better afterwards.
Sounds like someone should finance some fundamental research to figure out how to finance fundamental research. It'll be a recursive project and if you do it right it can eat all the available resources.
Seriously, they should experiment with decentralized financing of research / development. They could offer prices for independent researchers (kind of like buying-out only the ideas you like), they could offer grants for people coming forward with good ideas, or they could follow the classic approach and just buy out anybody who develops a successful little company.
In the end, successful research is all about giving people the freedom to try out their crazy ideas and then to identify the gems among them. Picking winners is difficult, hence the top-down approach will only work for incremental (obvious) research. The big question should be: how can Google lower the barrier for people to try out their ideas -- and how can Google profit if someone succeeds with the Next Big Thing.
The US attracted scientists for two reasons: (1) They have the biggest number of top scientists and scientific institutions, and (2) they were perceived as very welcoming to scientists and immigrants in general. Now they killed off number (2), the example here is just one in a long list of similar incidents. In the longer term, this will also affect point number (1) -- just look at how many of the top scientists originally came from abroad.
With their rising xenophobia, the US may well kill off its greatest source of scientific and economic success.
Building big stuff sounds like a reasonable thing to do before you organization perishes. Think about the pyramids, Acropolis, Circus Maximus, Lichtenstein castle, ... we remember the builders even though their organization perished long ago. Economic success is temporary, but a good building will last for a while. Using a lot of glass in the spaceship may undercut the argument a bit though.
They have to spend oodles of money every year and they have to show some results for it. They did the 'snooping on terrorists' thing last decade, so the 'snooping on everybody and their grandma' thing was the only realistic (and obvious) target left.
What else should they do, ask for a budget-cut?
I don't think the message arrived yet. It does not look like the responsible bureaucrats and politicians took notice. Probably it will take a good number of scandals and elections to get the message through: Most people don't like the nanny state or the all-knowing secret police.
The People are supposed to make the important decisions on how to run the country, it's called a democracy after all. But this seems a difficult message to get across, so keep on revealing, Mr. Snowden. As his information grows older, he should be able to publish more and more without endangering anybody. I hope he created a nice archive to publish it all for posteriority in some 30 years. To learn from history, we need a true account of history and the secret bureaucracy will probably not give it to us.
When I grew up in the Free West (good old western Germany), I never would have believed that the roles might ever be thus reversed. There was an evil empire right next door and we all believed in the great and good US to protect freedom and liberty forever. And now the wistleblower has to run from the US to Russia to reveal the all-encompassing secret spying of the US.
Aaw, it sucks to grow old and cynical. Is it just me growing old, or has the world changed beyond recognition?
I'd say that the storage location is much more important that the storage material.
Tungsten is well beloved for its high melting point and that seems to be the relevant property the boffins rave about when they propose etching of information onto tungsten. But if you want to keep stuff for elongated amounts of time, you have to worry about where to store the stuff.
St. Catherine's in the Sinai desert apparently has a good record on the order of millenia, mostly because it was far enough from the rest of civilization and those occasional wars didn't interfere with the storage location. For millions of years you should probably encase the thing in ice and send it on a loong-loong trajectory far away from our sun.
Who knows what kind of data they destroyed when shot that message capsule Tempel 1 .
Extrapolate the development of DRM into the future and we might well end up with a compartmentalized system managed via routine ('standard') DRM. There are obvious interest groups that would love this development: big publishers, control-freak security agencies, anybody that hopes to control and monetize your data consumption. It's a slippery slope.
The great success of the world wide web lies in its openness. Every move to restrict the WWW will limit what can be done with the web in the future. Leave it to the companies to compete on DRM, so at least we, the consumers, have a choice and a randomly chosen bad option will not be perpetuated forever.
Everybody involved should chill out a bit. So the police busted a major drug peddler and destroyed a drug market. But, as long as there is business, there are surely lots of others waiting to fill his shoes.
As long as people crave drugs (forever?), there will be drugs.
This is a war that could only be won in a totalitarian police state (although the example of North Korean indicates that a totalitarian police state may not be sufficient).
Beer: currently legal!
The article contains a not-so-smart quote from Kersti Hermansson "When you solve equations on the computer, you obtain information that is at such detail it is almost impossible to get it from any other method."
D'oh, when you solve equation on the computer you get numbers of arbitrary precision (it's a digital device, after all and it doesn't specify error bounds). Whether those numbers have any resemblance to some property of a chemical system is a completely independent question that is much harder to address. Once you properly consider the approximations going into most molecular calculations, you'll realize that the details are quite unreliable. The art is to ask the right question, a question that can be answered by a calculation despite the lousy approximations and despite all the wrong details.
I like the statement of Phil Bucksbaum: "Most theoreticians perform small-brain, big-computer calculations." The problems of this approach should be readily apparent.
This price honors the tools of the trade. Now smart people have to use those tools.
As opposed to the implications in the subtitle, the price actually honors the classical balls and sticks approach: it was the virtual balls and stick model -- with a little quantum physics injected where required -- that won this years Nobel price. The combination adds value, because the proper quantum description (very time consuming) can be combined with proper systems (beyond a few atoms).
The art is in finding the right balance between the wrong (classical calculations just won't do for molecules) and the infeasible (quantum calculations just take to much time). Most attempts get it wrong, but the field is still young.
of distributing tablets? Their design confines the users to a consumer role. This can be useful, for sure (access to a world of literature and information). But the little extra cost to add a useful input interface (aka keyboard) might offer the 1% of creative minds the option to do something beyond consuming. Wouldn't that be the whole point of the exercise?
This alone is quite a good reason to disinvest. A company that follows a master plan will not make it all too long (at least if it competes in an innovative industry).
It does take a dedicated jerk to push through new innovative ideas against the gooey resistance of an establishment. Everybody in the company knows how it succeeded in the past, few will enthusiastically throw the successful ingredients overboard to make room for a new thing. And even if some are, they won't agree on the next idea.
Society without government has been extensively discussed (and tried), but came out of fashion quite a while ago. Google for anarchy if you want more.
Government and related bureaucracies like to grow. Arguably this has led to the downfalls of societies (see, e.g.: "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire"). How to scale back without reaching anarchy, say via a revolution, remains a mystery. In Europe, people believed for centuries that every generation requires a war to reset the priorities. We fortunately went beyond that phase and, luckily, our rich societies can afford a lot of waste and inefficiencies without going bankrupt so it went OK for now.
I guess the tea party offers one possible path towards smaller government. So go ahead and call them anarchists, I am sure they'll like it!
"There's no agents looking through the 400,000 other bits of information"
Surely not, they just want all the keys to avoid future inconvenience in the case that they might need another key. Wouldn't want to bug busy Mr. Levinson every time that happens, right? After all he's busy looking after the privacy of his customers.
Of course there might be a computer program continuously scanning all communications, adding the relevant statistical output and social maps to the relevant servers. Nothing to worry about ... except if you promise your customers a secure and private communications tool (your bad, Mr. Levinson).
Privacy in the US -- apparently nonexistent.
There seems to be a constant struggle, at least in Germany, about how much data the law enforcement agencies are allowed to access. At least the fight is in the open and the result seems to offer a decent compromise between the proponents of total surveillance and those of total liberty.
Doing everything in secrecy, the apparent modus operandi in the US, is surely much easier for the agencies. Until the secrets are revealed. So much for shortcuts in a democratic society.
The great thing with Arduino is that you can completely control (and understand) the software running on it. There is no operating system or any hidden processes interfering with your programming. As a result, things like communication protocols or real-time data acquisition become trivial. If the Galileo works in a similar fashion and doesn't just emulate the Arduino in software, then it would be a great addition. The description on the Arduino website doesn't really specify much.
"Aaaaand...what makes you think that it is only the Americans expending this level of effort?"
Follow the money: no other western democracy spends anywhere as much money on homeland security (what a nice term).
Look at the system: A significant fraction of the working population in the US has a security clearance. Looks like you need to become part of the secret society if you want a government job (and if they want you) -- and once you have it you are bound to secrecy.
It's the scale of the American efforts that is so scary. We may expect to be spied upon by the secret service of multiple countries, but the US does it with a huge amount of resources and personnel -- so by the laws of mission creep, they are bound to develop ever more intrusive schemes to spy on everybody and their mom.
And they will find ever increasing missions to justify the collection of all that data. (Just imagine the alternative -- the responsible person explaining how he spent all that money just to find that there actually was no threat or benefit from it.) They must catch (real or imagined) terrorists, find plots and criminals, ... to deliver value for their money and their salary. If they destroy a few lives or some minor country, well, what's that as compared to a few billion $ and thousands of livelihoods within the organization.
Using secret information for secret purposes is fundamentally incompatible with democracy. Democracy requires that everybody has the same information and can participate in government. If you compartmentalize information, then there is a strong motivation for those inside -- those that know more -- to take over (for the good of everyone, of course). Let's hope that the scale of secret activities in the US will be scaled down soon, so it may never stop but may remain a small fringe activity at the edge of democratic society.
MS was not interested in buying a phone OS, they were interested in buying a competent phone manufacturer to complement their phone OS and to buy a strong brand name without any strings attached.
Why should MS spend money reviving an independent phone system that might or might not succeed? The managers at MS, just like everywhere else, want their own strategy/products to succeed, not to finance somebody else's. A financier might do the latter, hence the buyout of BB.
And for MS, the death of an independent BB is just as attractive as the success of BB under their tutelage might have been. Option 1 (let them sink) carries much less risk.
Corporate marriages are not made in heaven, quite the opposite. So stop dreaming and learn to live on the ground.
According to some FISA court opinion, the NSA has to expect a > 50% probabililty that the snooping subject is a foreigner to hoover data. By indisciminately snooping on the whole world population, the probability to snoop on a US citizen is only about 300 M / 7 G, i.e. some 4 %. All legal then.
“If leap seconds are eliminated from UTC, there will be no perceptible impact on social activities and conventions,”
Just as the Julian Calendar was just fine ... until it wasn't. I personally would favor omitting the switch to summer time ... to get one hour of extra sleep every year.
Sounds quite sane when compared today's policy of random criminalization, or to last century's prohibition of alcoholic beverages in some countries.
Some wars will never be won. And the war on narcotics -- fought against well-organized freedom fighters also known as ordinary citizens -- seems to be one of them. Not even the illegal activities of the NSA seem to have made any difference in that respect.
That the millions (actually, make that billions) spent on ultrafast trading do not contribute a bit to the fundamental function of the markets, i.e. the robust and reliable determination of market prices. It is gambling in the purest sense, except that the cards can be bought by well-connected banks and trading firms with deep pockets.
The price is payed by all participants in the market -- you have to pay that little extra because an ultrafast trader got his fingers in your wallet as you tried to trade. And if you think this doesn't really concern you, think again, because it surely does concern your retirement funds. The earnings of the ultrafast traders are, ultimately, payed out of your pocket.
Have you been playing the markets today?
The fact that the NSA has active plans to subvert NIST standards is quite a strong hint, isn't it? I'd say take the hint and start looking for other partners.
Maybe the Chinese will be happy to offer alternative 'strong' random number generators to add to the Linux XOR slugfest
This statement is fundamentally false. Even if we would happen to live in a completely deterministic universe, the laws of quantum physics would only allow us probabilistic statements about the presence and the future. In other words, it is impossible to tell from within the universe if the universe is deterministic and it is therefore impossible to predict the future.
As we cannot predict the future, any measurement is probabilistic and contains true randomness in the sense of unpredictable outcomes or fluctuations. This randomness can be very small if we move towards the realm of classical physics, but the uncertainty is still there, it's just very small.
So if you want true randomness, use a quantum-mechanical measurement, such as described here or here. I'd have to look into it, but I would guess that a random number generator based on a UV LED, a beamsplitter, and two avalanche photodiodes should be quite simple and cheap.
""I can tell you that in the next several generations you're not going to see a lot of graphene parts" ... and when it arrives, what will it do? I wonder if anybody will talk about graphene 10 years from now or whether it'll go the way of its predecessors, the fullerenes (90s) and the nanotubes (2000s).