I'm running Linux Mint Olivia -- the next to current version -- an no openssl patch is yet available as of this afternoon. I image there are quite a few similar distros. Since I have actual work to do, and can't risk wasting two hours on a potentially borked upgrade, I'm stuck to trying not to use programs affected by the exploit for the duration.

While something tells me this exploit is somewhat overblown, what really ticks me off is that this is all the result of delegating memory management to C pointers and basically mmap. As far as I'm concerned, in this day and age, that amounts to spaghetti code and I can't say it endears me to the reliability of openssl.

Please, we need SSL to be secure, not fast. Just use a less efficient method to make things more secure.

Ok, let me shut this shitshow of a discussion down:

It's now officially cool to endorse Hitler because you agree with his views on vegetarianism.

In the Scrabble universe?
http://www.howstuffworks.com/l...
http://www.scrabblefinder.com/...

p.s. pay more attention to the spelling, the Z is important in scrabble.

Yes. However if Microsoft kept doing that Windows would end up being a "BIOS". And someone would do to them what Phoenix etc did to IBM and IBM PC BIOS. I suspect all the BIOS vendors combined don't make as much money as Windows does for Microsoft.

That's why Microsoft has to keep moving the goal posts every now and then. Even like now when they have run out of good ideas on where to put the goal posts.

If they stopped moving and didn't come out with stuff like Vista someone might eventually succeed in turning ReactOS or similar into a practical working Windows XP compatible OS. Then a lot of large companies might switch to it.

How many really care about what BIOS their PC used? As long as it keeps working fine nobody gives a damn, they just want to use the OTHER stuff.

Similarly most people don't actually want to care about the OS. They care about what they want to get done. At most they care about the apps they use to get things done. And crap like Windows 8 just gets more obviously in the way.

All they have to do is sell the data to private companies then buy it back later, or buy an option to have permanent access to it. ...The merger of state and corporate power.

The one Apple stole from real life? People have been using slide-to-unlock on doors for centuries. Sometimes people experiment to see if there is a better way, but often they end up going with convention if that is what people are used to. This is why nobody but Apple are allowed patents on blatently obvious things that have been done before, otherwise we would have to use every phone in a completely different way and the damn things would become unusable. Slide-to-unlock is not innovating, it's trying to set a standard on something obvious and then claiming a monopoly on that standard.

Phillip.

Meh I can come up with silly theories too.

a) neurons while not necessarily geniuses are actually not that stupid, and that the real problem a brain solved was not "thinking" but that a single thinking neuron can't be used to control a multicellular body because of connectivity and redundancy reasons (can't have a whole body wasted just because one neuron died).

b) The brain is like a bunch of Bingo halls each filled with neurons that yell Bingo when something they recognize is "read out". The fancy trick is some of them are supposed to recognize and announce the future before it happens... ;)

Now move along and figure out how a neuron or single celled creature actually thinks.

Wouldn't Occam's razor exclude the subjective _experience_ (not behavior) of consciousness? There's no apparent "need" for it is there? Couldn't all of us walk, talk, etc without experiencing it? Except for the fact that I know I personally experience it AND I don't think I'm that special to be the only one. There's no proof you can provide to me that you experience consciousness right? Couldn't an AI make the same claims you do and not be conscious?

Or does the simplest explanation in this Universe require that experiential consciousness must exist alongside behavioral consciousness? Both the true or false cases would be interesting ;).

Maybe you're one of those who doesn't experience the same consciousness phenomenon that I do?

Hmm. Are you an AI posting on Slashdot?

But why do you say so? I'm talking about the consciousness _experience_ not the behaviour.

I have no evidence that you experience consciousness anymore than I have evidence that a dog does too. How can you or a dog prove to me that you experience consciousness?

All I know is that I am conscious and I doubt I'm that special, and that's why I have faith that others are conscious too. I don't see such a big difference between humans and many other animals.

From what I gather we don't even know in detail how single celled creatures make decisions! Testate amoebas build distinctive shells for themselves, putting particles in the right places. Some can even decide to not reproduce if there's not enough material for daughter cells to have their own shells. Maybe they experience consciousness too, just limited in their capabilities and senses?

But couldn't a machine do the same things without generating/causing/experiencing the same consciousness effect I experience? Couldn't something behave as if it was conscious without that consciousness effect emerging? Why not?

Are you claiming that a conventional computer would actually experience "consciousness" and not just behave as if it was conscious when it runs a self-predicting program that's "complex enough"? It'll be interesting if someone can describe the laws of physics/this universe that would cause some NOR gates to generate consciousness... Or would all physical operations generate it?

Or would it only happen to a quantum computer (e.g. the sort of that does quantum superpositions) simulator that also recursively simulates itself?

Morpheus: The Link-bait is everywhere. It is all around us. Even now, in this very article summary. You can see it when you load up your RSS feed, or when you log into Slashdot. You can feel it when you're skiving off at work... when you're tweeting during church... when you're moaning online about politics and taxes. It is the distraction that has been pushed into your eyes blind you from the truth.

Neo: What truth?

Morpheus: That You are the Product, Neo. Like everyone else you have logged into a panopticon. Into a marketing scam that you cannot taste or see or touch. A prison for your attention-span.

Yeah we might be in a simulation (that's in another simulation and so on) but why do we experience this consciousness thing? Not talking about free will, but the experience of awareness itself.

Are the rules of this universe such that no matter what as long as you have certain processes, consciousness will arise as an emergent phenomenon? And what would those certain processes be?

Could it be extinguished and yet the person still continues on "living" and moving as before? For example say a person went to sleep, and woke up the next day but never had the consciousness thing anymore - but just walked and talked etc like before as if he/she still had it.

Here's another thing for you to work out while you're at it:

Why are you even conscious? Couldn't a machine exist like you that did the exact same things you'd do but wasn't conscious at all?

Note: I'm not talking about "free will". I'm talking about the subjective experience that I have (and I believe you have) of being aware. I don't think I'm the only conscious being in this universe.

To me the two amazing things are:
0) That there is anything at all in the first place.
1) That there is this consciousness phenomenon that I'm experiencing.

Some time later...

"My name is Maximus Decimus Meridius, commander of the Armies of the North, General of the Felix Legions, loyal servant to the true Admin, Jon Postel. And I will advertise Cheap Affordable Cialis and Nigerian investment opportunities, in this life or the next."