oracuk

I'd love to be able to buy MP3s of his lectures for download. I have been unable to find them online, does anyone here have any pointers?

Dan is always worth reading. It seems to take me 6 months an average to process what he's saying and see it in the real world but he consistently adds to my knowledge.

Some of the commentators on the original article also pointed this out.

We've been facing domestic and foreign terrorism for a very long time. We found our societal balance for freedom and security some time ago.

If anything the Internet and commercial surveillance for marketing purposes are the things that have disturbed the balance rather than the previously accepted concept that we are surveilled by the state in every public and private forum.

Written down it sounds terrible but it works in practice.

In hindsight I wish I had done more than just read this article before I submitted it.

A lesson learnt.

Agriculture.

An aging industry, small margins for the older economic structure of small/medium holdings, little existing use of new technologies at scale.

As the industry demographic shifts and as 'new' technologies such as drones, robotics, remote sensing, pervasive wireless data, vat-grown meat and mixed land/marine farming are adopted there will be a lot of money to be made feeding the world.

This talk completely described why I stopped attending security conferences.

As a practitioner trying to build well defended pragmatic systems and organisations they provided nothing for me but entertainment. I got that in the bar much more than listening to the talks.

A kindle version is a good idea. The PDF is difficult to read on the kindle in its current layout and an auto-conversion by Calibre makes it worse.

I'm limited to reading this on my laptop and my phone now. It looks like good content. shame about the format.

Not those sort of games:

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/skin_in_the_game

:)

I hope this isn't unfair but..

Does this mean that Canonical either don't believe enough in Ubuntu Edge to raise the $20m difference themselves or that Canonical do believe in it but are not able to raise $20m?

I have to admit I am skeptical about the commitment of a large, established, company to a product that they are not willing to put their own skin in the game to develop.

However, I can understand and have participated in crowd-funding for smaller companies who are trying to play a bigger game.

I just wonder which one Canonical is.

When I started my career I was in the UK civil service. One of the best things I took from that experience was the formal training they gave me in interviewing.

The UK civil service used interview boards consisting of a manager of the role, a subject matter expert and an independent person from outside the organisation. It is an inherently high-stress situation for the candidate due to the numbers involved and and usually due to the room layout.

I was trained to account for the stress reactions and see past a freeze due to the situation and focus on clear demonstrations of skill and experience. If anything we were trained to try to make the candidates perform at their best in the board rather than probe to see their worst sides.

It was complicated by the fact I was employed in a highly technical specialist team (It was a military research agency) and few people we interviewed had any experience of what we were planning to employ them for.

We also consciously went beyond a general knowledge test and focused on how the candidate thought about answering questions rather than if they knew every technical detail. In that role technical detail was only a man page or a conversation with a colleague away if you know what you didn't know and were prepared to ask for help.

Any interview that stresses the candidate, quizzes the candidates memory of detailed technical facts and doesn't work from the premise that it is a high stress artificial situation is not going to provide a valuable outcome for anyone involved.

Edit: My best question to identify general technical competence starts with "Can you describe the TCP handshake?" and if they know is quickly followed up with "Why is it like that?". Unless there is role specific reasons to know TCP then it doesn't really matter if they don't know, if they do know I am really interested in their answer to why it is the way it is. Many even quite senior candidates have never considered it before and watching their process of thinking about it is very instructive about their ability to think about technical details in the abstract.

BBC.com is ironically unavailable to Brits due to the fact we fund the BBC but not BBC Worldwide.

So whereas the rest of the word can access BBC Worldwide content Brits are not allowed to.

Shame, sounds like a moderately interesting article. I'll never know without tunneling to a different location to access the content.

If you are an organisation with deep pockets (nation state) and are willing to send trusted (armed, diplomatic) couriers to every end point you want to talk securely with (embassies) every month then it can be secure but it will definitely be expensive.

I thought this was an excellent and thoughtful piece on the new? ethical and moral dimensions of security. I've had to ask myself some of these questions during my career and it was good to see them spelled out and placed into context.

Coupland absolutely nailed it.

I used to get sudden moments of fear that the 'flash' could happen at that particular moment when it struck. I can vividly remember these happening when I was a teenager.

Looking back it was a terrible thing to grow up with, a constant fear of immediate death without warning.

Somehow while the danger is still present the immediacy of the fear has waned as I have gotten older. Although now I worry about my children it's more of a vague worry about their future than a immediate pressing fear of a the 'flash'.

He is (apparently) considering sueing her: http://order-order.com/2013/07/24/should-guido-sue-claire-pe...

I am conflicted. I never really liked Paul Staines' style but I am somewhat afraid of the impact of Claire Perry on the UK Internet regulations. I have to admit I would love to see him publicise the lack of understanding she has in the Internet that she is working so hard to regulate..

Whenever someone suggests an Internet filter to protect the children as David Cameron is right now I am reminded of this short and very powerful piece of writing by Vint Cerf.

They are doing it now with legal standing. (Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000)

Specifically chapter 2: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/23/part/I/chapter/I...

The new legislation is updating the definition of Communications Data for the age of application specific messaging.

Could you publish a citation referencing these problems?

Is anyone building a solution to this? Why should you be trusted?

My opinion is that the USA tends more towards individualism and Europe more towards collectivism which would explain the authors approach to handling issues at the European level (Combined with the fact she is an MEP so is heavily invested in the European system) and probably also underlies your sensitivity to 'doublespeaky' statist approaches. I made an assumption about you there that may well be unfair.

However, It would appear there is a wide spread of individualism vs collectivism across Europe http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/26956-Map-of-Individual... and when you dig into the comparisons the USA isn't that far from the UK or similar EU nations like the Netherlands where the author hails from http://geert-hofstede.com/united-states.html.

I have to admit the scale of the issue makes me think of collectivist approaches similarly to the author but I'd be interested to hear of individualistic approaches.

Possibly because someone wanted a market demand to drive down the cost of ASICs for cracking AES256?

We have had a similar case publicly exposed here in the UK a little while ago with Phorm and British Telecom:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-13015194

There is a good chance that such practices may be found to be illegal in a UK court (Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act primarily with some discussion about applying the Data Protection Act or Computer Misuse Act) but they haven't been tested yet. Both companies very quickly stepped back from the 'trial' they were conducting when it became clear there might be public support for a test case.

There's been a real change, even from 6 months ago when I last considered Python 3.0.

Apart from NLTK (A port is underway) everything I use currently has been ported which was a surprise. Time to start thinking about making the move I think.

Is there a clear list anywhere of which major packages have and haven't moved over to Python 3 yet?

Edit: I found one here https://python3wos.appspot.com/ and another one here http://py3ksupport.appspot.com/

Looking forward to NLTK 3.0.

I have read the first edition, not the second yet.

There is very little good material written publicly about building secure systems rather than breaking them or fixing components. This book describes a series of systems (not just stand alone IT systems) and describes their security in their social / cultural / physical context.

It's not a patch and firewall compliance guide, it uses the systems word appropriately. There are no big methodologies or techniques, which is appropriate as these just don't exist at the scale this book discusses.

For technical 'breakers' moving into the world of building it's a useful book.

I am about half way through 'Dreaming in Code', Scott Rosenberg's story of the early days of Chandler. I thoroughly recommend the book so far.

As soon as I saw this it felt like how OSAF might have started Chandler if they were starting out today, it has a similar clumsy feel to the goals and rewards.

I am constantly surprised at the bipolar nature of HN. It ranges from intelligent and considered posts about technology to unpleasant playground posts relating to politics and especially to sexual politics.

I am usually able to sigh, roll my eye and close the browser tab but your comment 'deserved to be forked' demanded a response.

Your post wasn't intelligent, wasn't constructive and offended me.

I too would bankrupt myself over a firefly kickstarter.

This is affecting me similarly to the announcement of Yahoo killing Delicious. Both Delicious and Google reader became for me definitions of their services. As a result of this all alternatives do not feel right (Even if they're technically more full featured).

I have swapped Delicious with Diigo (After shopping around many alternatives). I really hope the process of replacing Google reader isn't as long or as painful as that was.

The ending of Delicious and Google Reader is the end of an era of my use of the Internet. I wonder if it's a function of my age that I now see that as a sad and worrying development rather than an opportunity to be grasped.

I will miss Sir Patrick Moore, he represented a side of British life that is rarely as celebrated as it should be.

Was he a flawed man? I suspect he was.

Were his politics reprehensible? I think so.

But was he a media icon of his time who contributed to the advancement of science and education? Absolutely.

None of the people I admire have ever been perfect, I'm okay with that.