Thanks for the recommendation!
Here's a PDF version of it: https://mises.org/library/driver
63 karma · joined July 7, 2015
Here's a PDF version of it: https://mises.org/library/driver
Back in the late 90s, Ron Rivest proposed Chaffing and Winnowing [0]. In that scheme, no ciphertext is transmitted and therefore no encryption is involved; only plausible plaintext is transmitted. The receiver filters out the chaff, leaving only the intended message. Perhaps one could construct an end-to-end winnow-chaff scheme (E2EWC) to replace existing E2EE schemes.
I think it plays into the propaganda of the oppressive regime by not asserting individuality. "See, they identify as the group we claimed they were the whole time," the regime would say.
That being said, there is acting as a member of a group and identifying as a member of that group. The former need not entail the latter. For instance, donating money to the ACLU doesn't change your identity to ACLU-er (et simis). No, you are just helping that cause.
The trouble is that a lot of good and bad JS/CSS/content is gotten from third-party sites. Some websites are simply useless unless your browser loads third-party JS (e.g. Bootstrap). The ability to load third-party code/content is built into HTML and web developers naturally take advantage of that capability.
(1) Whether LE agencies are actually finding it more-and-more difficult to access devices that employ encryption. I think this is plausibly true, simply because there are more such devices being sold than ever before (from the perspective of senior LEOs).
(2) Which LE agencies is he talking about? If he is refering to all agencies, then he might be right. Many LE agencies have very limited budgets. However, if he is talking about the more well-funded and competent agencies, then he is probably wrong
>I wish there was some punishment for Government officials for lying to the public. You can be prosecuted for lying to the FBI, so why shouldn't they be prosecuted for lying to you
Get rid of the punishment for lying to LEOs and it is all fair and equal. They lie to us and we lie to them, both without punishment. It would still be illegal to lie to judges.
>(the voter, who is supposed to have the power in a democracy)
The purpose of democracy is to use elections to legitimize a limited group of persons to use the power of the State. The power of voters is limited to selecting who will be in that group. The rest of the power of the State is in the power of the hands of those who were selected.
Facebook mainly solves one problem: How do I keep in communication with the many people I know IRL? This is a real problem for many people, especialy when you have friends/family all over the country/world.
Any would-be strict competitor with Facebook will have to deal with a bootstrapping problem: How do you get enough people who know each other IRL to sign up and use the website?
Relaxing any one aspect of that, I think, will make success much easier:
* Enough people: You could have a niche focus (car forum) or a niche community (forum for one Eve Corp).
* Know eath other IRL: You could have an anonymous forum (4chan) or a pseudonymous forum (Reddit).
* Sign-up: Twitter, YouTube, and most forums don't require signups to view user-provided content. 4chan doesn't even require login to post.
If the target is in your custody and you coerce him to give training data, then he could just give garbage data. You tell him to think "fish barrel neuton whale", but he really thinks "somebody once told me".
Do sub-vocalizations only occur for certain categories of thoughts? I suspect that facial memories do not induce sub-vocalizations.
"I was a racist prior to the 70s. Here's some articles where I show clear racism from that time. In the 70s I had a change of heart. Here's some articles from the 2000s where I clearly show that I am no longer a racist, but in fact the opposite of a racist."
This would not be an apology, because it doesn't stop at showing one's previous racism. It continues on to try to give evidence of current virtue as if that were a remedy for past racism. However, the real problems generated by racism are not cured by changing your position on race.
The NG article puts this in the proper context of intention:
>But when we decided to devote our April magazine to the topic of race, we thought we should examine our own history before turning our reportorial gaze to others.
Do they mean they are going to expose other magazines as being racist? While that might be historically interesting, it doesn't seem remotely professional. If they are planning to publish such exposes, then the current article is clearly an attempt to preempt the natural claims that NG was racist too.
>Since the time of the fifth Dalai Lama, his personage has always been a symbol of unification of the state of Tibet, where he has represented Buddhist values and traditions.
This explains the interest by the Chinese Communist Party in wanting the Dalai Lama spirit to stick around. If he goes away, then political turmoil is sure to follow.
Also, this bit reminded me of an episode of Mike Judge's King of the Hill:
>They present a number of artifacts, only some of which belonged to the previous Dalai Lama, and if the boy chooses the items which belonged to the previous Dalai Lama, this is seen as a sign, in conjunction with all of the other claimed indications, that the boy is the reincarnation.
This seems rather easy to defeat; it is analogous to security by obscurity. You only need to learn (1) what files and registry entries that specific malware generates and (2) what subset of those are harmless. If Territorial Dispute only looks at file names, then that makes things even easier.
This also shows that Google is a power-deficient gate-keeper, because they are buckling under pressure over search results.
Somewhat OT: Wikipedia has a list of Swedish Jews[0], but Helle Klein, for instance, is not on that list. She does have a Wikipedia article and it clearly has her on a different list of Jews.[2] In fact, Wikipedia has a list of lists of lists of Jews.[3] Wikipedia probably gets zero flak over this fact, because there is zero neo-nazi rhetoric surrounding the lists.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Swedish_Jews
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_in_Sweden
We replace computers two to three times per year; I get to pick from generally four-year old computers. I assume that a second computer is not an option for most at work.
Most of the times that I bring up the concept of virtue to my peers in age they seem either confused with the concept or contemptuous of it. They behave like virtue is a purely religious thing, yet caution in the face of possible danger is a very basic survival skill.
FWIW, this is probably both an historical attitude and a population difference. If you and a colleague at a university just made csh to get your jobs done, then you will help each other out by doing the development. Because ya'll are also the entire userbase, then you are also the beta-testers. Back then, if you used a computer, it was because you were either developing software or entering data for a developer. Not very many non-developer users touched computers until the 80s; most people developed some kind of software, even if it was trivial BASIC programs on a Commodore.
In the OSS world, you have always been expected to contribute fixes to bugs that affected you, because the tools and source code were in your hands. For most non-developers, there exists only a lack of skill to stop them from fixing bugs or at least filing usable bug reports.
Nowadays, there are much more users who cannot or do not submit bug reports, let alone develop software. Nevertheless, the attitude since the days of csh has not changed much, because not a generation has passed since OSS went somewhat mainstream (e.g. in the data center).
Whether OSS will leave behind the historical attitude that users should be able to understand the software they use (this seems a responsible attitude to me) remains to be seen. Regardless, the developer-base will likely continue to proportionally shrink and users will proportionally become less able to understand their computers.
Recent is overflowingly unhelpful, considering AMT (a part of IME) popped up in ICH7 back in mid-2005 [0]. It is unfortunate that Doctorow is associated with this rubbish journalism.
For what its worth, anything that has DMA can takeover a CPU that is reading instructions from RAM. AMT/IME are just explicitly intended to do that.
For those concerned, and probably rightly so, about AMT/IME, the simplest solution is to use a non-Intel NIC [1]
[0] = https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I/O_Controller_Hub#ICH7
[1] = https://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-vpro-technol... ["Intel Active Management Technology communicates only through the onboard network interface of Intel vPro technology. Additional wired network interface cards are not supported and are ignored by Intel AMT."]
Things like Bitcoin and Bittorrent would better fit the word serverless. However, you need servers of a sort for Bitcoin to work (e.g. you need nodes and miners) and you need an initial seeder for each torrent to get going.
Since serverless seems to be mostly about a class of applications, I think only those that function either without network access or without contacting any specific organizations computers (i.e. servers) would qualify. This would make my browser fundamentally serverless, since I can browse files locally. Suddenly my browser seems like a glorified file viewer and One Note is rsync with an editor attached.
Bottled water is often just tap water.
Flint Michigan has undrinkable water as a result of decades of mismanagement from the entrenched local politicians.
The water in my city makes me nauseous to drink, so I have to buy distilled in gallon or larger containers. It is fortunate that most of my water usage is showering.
Ah, but these are anecdotes.
> Americans have been working together to foster functioning and great societies through government for ages now. It's you that wants to test this brave new world.
The victims of the Drug War (primarily poor and minorities) must live ruined lives from this "functioning and great [society] through government for ages now."
They are just anecdotes.
World-class government sucks.
> I think it leads to a 'shotgun approach' where if enough people "try try try" then yes some do succeed spectacularly while everyone else around them crashes and burns.
This reminds me of the Orks in Warhammer 40k, wherein the sheer psychic power of an Ork can make a war machine function; the machine would collapse if a non-Ork attempted to operate it.
I think the negativity about / criticism of oneself and one's identity (e.g. the self-effacing comic) is unique to Western civilization. Do people outside the West (e.g. Africa, Middle East, Asia, and perhaps South America) view themselves as backwards for how their lives work? Plenty of people, whether on the right or left, are critical of Western policies, especially regarding military and economic campaign in non-Western countries.
I am genuinely curious if people in non-Western countries see themselves as Westerners do (e.g. more bad than good).
The usual recommendation is to either get a pre-2009 AMD machine (which is what my present desktop is) or get a Sparc machine. My boss won't buy me a desktop with an UltraSparc CPU, so I won't bother with that. AMD has substantially less documentation than Intel, AFAICT, so Intel products deserve investigation for their relative starkness.
An albeit outdate list of systems to avoid, see [1].
I will assume that you are trying to build a desktop from off-the-shelf parts.
For sure, get a CPU without vPro, since that downgrades the type of AMT/IME feature set to Standard Manageability:
"Please note that NON -vPro™ Intel® desktop procesors will make Intel® ME FW to switch its features set from full Intel® Active Management Technology to Intel® Standard Manageability that do not suport Intel® AMT KVM Redirection feature (it is disabled internally in the Intel® ME FW)." [2] When the CPU doesn't support AMT, then Standard Manageability is what is running in the background.
This says 2 things: (1) non-vPro desktop CPUs downgrade AMT to Standard Manageability and (2) IME is active regardless of the CPU's feature set.
What is Intel Standard Manageability? "Q8: What is Intel® Standard Manageability and can it run on a non-Intel® vPro™ technology-based CPU? A8: Some basic management capabilities are available on non-Intel® vPro™ technology-eligible Intel® Core™2 processors as well as Intel® Pentium® dual-core and Intel® Celeron® processor-based CPUs. Intel® Standard Manageability is available only on desktop systems right now (not notebook), and only includes basic capabilities such as hardware and software inventory and remote diagnostics." [3]
I can't tell if Standard Manageability is a lite version of AMT. Intel's documentation on it [4] isn't a whole lot of help.
Intel mentions that Atom and i3 platforms generally do not support AMT. [5]
At the bottom of this [6] page lists those Intel chipsets with IME. I'd consider that to be a list of chipsets to avoid, but those cover almost all modern chipsets, AFAIK.
For sure, don't use any Intel NICs: "Adding another NIC will not nullify Intel® vPro™ technology verification, but Intel® Active Management Technology communicates only through the onboard network interface of Intel vPro technology, and it is strongly recommended that an additional wired NIC is not added to the platform as this might cause some of the features of Intel AMT to not operate as expected." [7]
[0] = http://ark.intel.com/search/advanced?s=t&VProTechnology=fals...
[1] = https://communities.intel.com/docs/DOC-2033
[2] = https://communities.intel.com/thread/65350
[3] = https://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-vpro-technol...
[4] = https://software.intel.com/en-us/blogs/2009/03/27/what-is-st...
[5] = http://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/include/re...
[6] = https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/misc-devices/mei/me...
[7] = https://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-vpro-technol...
[0] = http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v520/n7549/abs/nature14...
>Lack of confiurability. It was impossible to change the behaviour of initscripts in a way that would survive system updates.
I wonder how often updates (dist-upgrades or package updates?) actually break initscripts. Further, would it make a system no longer boot fully (e.g. to the GUI login prompt)?
If you don't mind me asking, from where did you get this spreadsheet?
All in all, this is a lesson that some high-profile person/group eventually had to learn on our behalf. Now, when an unknowing manager asks why your chat bot needs to avoid certain offensive phrases because, "our clientele aren't a bunch of racists", you can just point him to this story. The actual racists are tame by comparison to what trolls will do to your software.
[0] = https://github.com/shutterstock/List-of-Dirty-Naughty-Obscen...
It seems that the unix principle is most relevant when compiling a C program takes too long and no interpreters exist that are fast enough. So, you figure out all the higher level functionality that you will need for system administration and compile that long before needing to do any sysadmin work. When a problem arises on a system, you can write a shell script that uses those already compiled commands, instead of writing a C program and waiting for it to compile. If your initial code sucks, you don't have to debug and recompile; you just debug and re-run the script.
Compiling C programs is now substantially less time consuming, so you could use C for sysadmin work (shudder). C shell was perhaps a similar attempt to get the benefits of C, but without the downside of compilation times. I seem to recall some essay on the harmfulness of using csh, so C will continue to keep its place.
Are there any languages or language families that you find easier to use? (inb4 COBOL is the easiest)
So long as the company does not go rogue and purposefully brick the devices, then the company could shutdown and the devices could still be usable. Further, other companies could provide remote management services for these devices. Being IoT devices, though, would make them still susceptible to security issues, but at least being able to use them on a segregated network could limit that from happening.
As long as the stupid thing still flushes without internet access; I have never been more concerned about an IoT version of an existing appliance not doing its job. That is, I could stand an oven or blender not functioning; a toilet simply must work or the bathroom itself becomes nigh useless. "Honey, our toilet won't flush; are we still being DDoSed?"