570 karma · joined April 8, 2007
jack@realmode.com
Most police reports say the victim is attacking, but they've been caught lying time after time (usually with no repercussions). Talking about all these statistics to even one significant digit seems suspect.
"The heart is more expressive, enabling you to convey a range of emotions and easily connect with people."
It's still just one bit, right? How does it enable conveying a range of emotions?
git undo
git reset HEAD hard -f --now origin/master --no-rebase %${%&`+'${`%&NO CARRIER")
U.S. Worries NSA Leaker's Files Could Be Hacked (Tom Gjelten)
This story came out when Snowden was still at the Moscow airport. At issue is whether Snowden's files can fall into the hands of the Russians or Chinese. This is a fair question. But the piece focuses on physical access to the files on Snowden's laptops, which is simply comical. Of course they can take his files. A listener would get the impression that Snowden's protection of the data consists of holding tight to his computers while the Russians attempt to wrest them from his arms, or his ability to sleep with one eye open and his laptops at his bedside. My favorite gem was when security expert Lee explained that you can get at a laptop's hard drive using nothing more than an ordinary screwdriver. Will the Russians be able to locate a screwdriver? Only time will tell.
Gjelten tells us: "For Snowden to have kept his files secure, he would have had to keep his laptops powered off and disconnected from the Internet. Plus, he'd need physical control of the machines at all times." This statement is irresponsibly misleading. A trusting listener would have no choice but to conclude that Snowden's secrets are unprotectable after hearing this. But the truth, access to the files themselves are unimportant, because they are surely encrypted.
Eventually they did get around to talking about encryption. Their experts on the matter were the likes of Mark Weatherford, ex-DHS undersecretary who now works at the Chertoff Group (as in Michael Chertoff), who told us that "Encryption really only buys you time. You can eventually decrypt it. It just takes time to do that, and it's really dependent on the algorithm and the keys." Again, it's being emphasized that it's only a matter of time before the Russians have the goods. What is not mentioned is that a modest-sized encryption key buys billions of billions of billions of years [1]. It would be an earth-shattering breakthrough if the Russians or the Chinese or the Americans had an algorithm that could beat this.
At one point, Michael Sutton of Zscaler admits: "If Snowden were using the best possible encryption and he was using a strong key, it would be virtually impossible for NSA, China, Russia - anyone - to access that data." But Gjelten immediately smothers this thought: "At least in the short run. There are ways to break a code, if only by what cyber technologists call brute force - essentially having a computer try every possible key combination until the correct one is found. Mark Weatherford, now at the Chertoff Group, points out that no encryption lasts forever." Not forever, but much longer than the age of the universe. At no time in this story is it revealed the kinds of time frames we are talking about. By the way, "the best possible encryption" is available for free and runs on any computer, and a strong key takes an insignificant amount of effort to generate.
Finally, the piece ends with "In all, cyber security experts agree, the likelihood is good that the Chinese or the Russians or both, will sooner or later have whatever documents Snowden has taken with him, whether he intended to share them, or not." This is false. Not only is it untrue that the Russians are likely to get the data, it is also untrue that cyber experts agree that they will, which Tom Gjelten would have known had he asked any non-government-affiliated encryption expert.
In short, Gjelten spent the first half of the piece addressing physical access to the files, which is ludicrous, and the second half convincing us that encryption is futile, which is the opposite of the truth.
[0] http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=2035315... [1] http://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1279619
I hear people claim that once everything's set up, it's easy. That's not my experience. Every time I go home I've got to deal with issues with my mom's computer and internet. They're never her fault, and sometimes they're difficult to solve, even for a tech person.
Watching video online is great when everything goes right. But it seems like a good portion of the country has fairly lousy internet, which makes videos sputter or stop. People who grew up with the ease and reliability of tv have a hard time stomaching these kinds of problems.
Also, when you get older, you don't necessarily want more choices. Your mind is tired and cluttered, you just want to relax in front of the tv and not have to sort through an infinite array of choices or deal with technical issues.
Imagine if you had secret and unfettered access to your friends' email, texts, and phone calls. Further imagine that you can spoof sending emails and texts. You see that Alice is interested in Joe and you don't want them to get together. Don't you think you could sabotage this from ever happening without either of them knowing? I do.
The government (or corporation) could effectively hellban you. They could drive you around by remote control and you wouldn't even know it. Surveillance is Orwellian. Secret surveillance is 10x Orwellian. Stealth surveillance plus subtle control is game over.
AppScale relieves me of the fear that Google drops GAE or raises their prices too much, and having observed Google over the last 5 years, this is a real fear. I'm not sure how I feel about the fact that AppScale and Google are in cahoots on this.
There are other Google headaches as well. Support is very hard to come by, even with credit card in hand. Compared to Microsoft support it might as well be called nonexistent. And the Google account "system" is completely perplexing to me. My sites just use the old-fashioned username/password scheme, and I try to just ignore Google's because I don't understand it and neither do my customers.
The ease of administration trumps all of that for me though.
The 10^100 deal seemed to just quietly fizzle. I never heard back anything, and I'm not sure they ever picked any projects to run with. FWIW, here's the submission.
10. What one sentence best describes your idea? (maximum 150 characters)
Bring the bus system into the new millennium.
11. Describe your idea in more depth. (maximum 300 words)
The goal is to revamp the municipal bus system by using a little technology. The key ideas are:
a. Riders use their cell phones as a kind of "elevator call button." Using an Android app, they tell a central computer where they are (possibly automatic with GPS) and where they want to go. b. There are no fixed routes. A central computer is continuously processing requests and sending routing information to the bus fleet in real time. c. Riders are given instructions, via their phone, as to where to go to catch which bus, and where to get off. d. Integration with Google Maps is an obvious win!
12. What problem or issue does your idea address? (maximum 150 words)
Current bus systems are underutilized because of long wait times and because most riders don't know the routes well enough to feel comfortable.
13. If your idea were to become a reality, who would benefit the most and how? (maximum 150 words)
The biggest beneficiary would be those who want to ride the but but don't now because of route unfamiliarity and long wait times. All commuters would benefit from the decrease in traffic and pollution.
14. What are the initial steps required to get this idea off the ground? (maximum 150 words)
At first, a simulation to demonstrate the effectiveness of the new model. Then, a pilot city to give it a real spin.
15. Describe the optimal outcome should your idea be selected and successfully implemented. How would you measure it? (maximum 150 words)
The desired outcome is an increase in ridership and fewer cars on the road. A straightforward metric is a simple rider count.
18. If you'd like to recommend a specific organization, or the ideal type of organization, to execute your plan, please do so here. (maximum 50 words)
I think Google would be an ideal implementer.