Yeah, sadly there is also the whole ego thing. I would love to see us move away from all this stupid fighting and direct that energy elsewhere, but idiots will be idiots.
I mean come on, what are these wars even over these days? Lot of times it seems to be stupid religious fighting. You don't follow same god as me so I must kill you junk. How about we all just drop the stupid fighting and instead focus on more fun things like going into space.
Imagine the things we could do if all the military budgets world wide were taken away and directed at space programs. I bet we would have already colonized a few planets by now.
You really think they aren't hacking the "war machine"? It is one thing to hack an email server and then brag/showoff. It is quite different when you hack into a system to steal plans for weapons.
You don't want anyone to know their classified weapons system is leaking valuable data, they might plug the leak. Their email though? That is rather useless and boring and not such a big deal if you loose access for a bit.
Real irony though is strength doesn't necessarily win wars. A small poorly armed group could take on the largest of armies and still win. Strategy plays a huge part in a war, as does moral of your troops.
Really just look around the world today. I don't think anyone would call the US military weak, yet they are sure having a lot of trouble with these little terror groups.
Yeah, I can't think of any way that kind of system would make sense though. I guess you could argue that it cuts down on damage to infrastructure, but if I am going to die from a war I would prefer to actually fight in it.
Now having a virtual reality war, that I can see making sense considering if we get the technology good enough we could fight an entirely virtual war and prevent any real death or damage.
Sadly though I think we are more likely to just keep going with the "lets build robots that can kill" idea. So in the end we can all die a horrible death at the hands of our own robots.
I don't really think it is fare to try and throw Tesla under the bus like that. For one thing, Tesla is open about autopilot being just what you said "beta". It also is clear that autopilot is not fully "automated driving".
Blaming autopilot for crashes is a lot like blaming your cruse control for speeding. They are both there to make things easier for you, but if you set your cruse control for 55 on the highway and don't adjust when you reach a town, that is on you.
When a car is built that you don't control and instead a computer fully drives it for you. That is when you can then point fingers at the computer. If your told before hand that your beta testing a driving system and you die, that is on you.
You know, I think we are actually getting very close to the perfect kind of war. We just need the countries to come together and agree to a neutral third party to regulate things
Then both countries will send in their best solders who will fight it out in the ultimate game of team fortress. Whatever side wins has won the war. Suddenly "Cyberwar" becomes a lot less deadly and much more fun way to handle wars.
Of course depending on the conflict the countries could choose different games, but same idea still would apply.
Really sad part is you can actually show proof from the last time we had this debate. I can't remember all the details but there was a vulnerability in browsers that was found recently but was a holdover from last time we had this debate.
The issue is that you can show these guys actual hard proof of the damage they are trying to cause and they will just wave it off. They are messing with systems they don't understand and they choose intentionally to not understand.
Is it just me that really questions the idea of pimping your car out to random people?
Sure you car can go drive people around while your at work and then come to pick you up at the end of the day. So long as you don't mind the lovely mix of vomit and other bodily fluids all over your car. That is if your car even makes it back.
That would sure make things easier for the chop shops wouldn't it. Just hail a car, disable it, load it up and go. Really cuts down on the risk when someones car will come to you in a nice empty parking lot for you to steal it.
Well, from what I understand, anything you share with Microsoft you give up privacy rights to. So anything your computer sends to them the Government can ask for without needing a warrant.
So.... When you use their full disk encryption and Microsoft "backs up" your key on their servers..... Yeah, after all that has come out about the NSA just try and argue that they aren't making copies of all those keys. If you can do that with a straight face then you have a bright future in politics.
Also lets not forget that the FBI can "neither confirm nor deny" listening in on amazon echos. So yeah, sure they are not listening in on Cortana.
This comment really makes me hope that someday soon people will get together for one of the most epic protests ever. I can just imagine a huge protest with few thousand people marching out in front of some government buildings before all bending over and mooning them.
I love how these people also so quickly overlook history. The way I look at it, the second amendment is there for pretty much one reason, to keep the government fearful of the population. The founding fathers had just fought a war against the most powerful nation in the world after all. Pretty sure the abuses of governments were at the front of their minds when writing these things.
Now you give the government the power to take weapons from anyone they want just because they feel like it... no due process or trial... well you just destroyed the point of the second amendment. Anyone who shows any resistance to those in power will end up on the list and guns taken. Then later maybe they will just use the list to round up these "terrorists".
That email certainly does make these guys look amazingly stupid. I can understand that if I had a system with highly confidential information on it, and it was under attack, first response might be to shutdown, but as soon as that shutdown command was sent I would be working on ways to block future attacks and not turn the server back on until my systems were secured better.
It is amazing anyone in an IT position would be stupid enough to go for the "We will just shut down and hope they go away" method.
As someone who has been excited about this tech for years before Rift even started on, I find this kind of thing so extremely frustrating. I have a head mounted display from the 90s. Used to play the original Unreal Tournament with it. I LOVED it back then but the draw back was horribly low resolution due to the LCD technology of the day. They couldn't make a high resolution screen that small.
Now take a moment and think about that. I had something like the Rift 20 years ago. This stuff is not at all "new" it is just that finally some companies are starting to build it for the mainstream.
What really makes me furious is that I have been waiting for these devices for around 20 years, and now these morons are trying to fuck it all up? Finally we are going to have somewhat affordable VR gear with actual VR software instead of poorly hacked games, and these morons are trying to kill the adoption of it with stupid DRM bickering and mistreating their most loyal fans?
I would first like to point out a few things stated by Yubico's engineer.
"We have both internal and external review of our code to ensure that it is secure." ....... "The bug was inherited from the upstream project which ykneo-openpgp is based on, and was NOT detected by any audit of the source code."
Ok... So they did audits on the code and DID NOT FIND THE BUG, but hold on, they are talking about the bug right? So where did they find out about it?
"It's important to remember that open source code is no guarantee that bugs/vulnerabilities will be detected as the bug you've linked to demonstrates quite well."
To me it sure sounds like having some open source helped, or maybe I am reading into this a bit too much?
Either way, The point of open source is not necessarily that everyone has to audit the code themselves. The point is that anyone CAN audit the code. This means you have a lot more than two small audit groups looking at it. It also makes it MUCH harder to hide a backdoor or anything of that nature. If you add bad code then your auditors that you are paying will ignore it, an independent security researcher auditing the code will not be so kind.