Just for giggles I did test auto complete on that and it gave:
1. steve gibson is a fake
2. steve gibson is a moron
3. steve gibson is a idiot
Could that be considered the -opinion- of the Google algorithm?
My opinion about TFS involves squirrels too. But mainly their primary food source ( pronounced 'nuts').

You are absolutely right. I was shocked at how quickly the knocking began. Within a day of registering a new address it already had obvious attempts to find a hole. The logs also show many other things that would worry people IF they knew it was happening. Very few people have the experience and skills to deal with it. It seems obvious that the intruder has the advantage. In a system with more than 2 to the 64th directions to guard against, the attacker has the advantage of surprise.
Analogy: Open field, everybody has a gun, some have food, others want it.
It could be that the only way to win is not to play at all. The problem is that the game has already started and this is no longer a choice. There is a dominant strategy. It is a conflict of interests. It is thus "Bellum Omnium contra omnes". No way to tell how it will end, but everybod has a "shot". ;)

Proof pudding

I never minded having company meetings that included everybody. The internet is like a company meeting where people off the street are allowed to attend wearing a stocking on their head and screaming obscenities and nonsense and grabbing papers from the table, while everybody else is trying to accomplish something. Anything other than limited complexity is just toothpaste in a hole. Ten to the ninth factorial is a REALLY big number. It can never be operated by a competitive population. Maybe human V6 will all be able to be in the same room.
There was talk about getting the worst type of literature off the ebook sites, but in reality the internet is a toliet and they just have a problem with solid waste as it clogs the tubes.

The question may be whether the internet should die and be replaced by something better. The cost of doing business through the internet may be too high compared to some other alternative. It has failed to exhibit a plan for -sustainable- profitability and it is too connected. It is like a brain tumor. It has no core structure that could serve to regulate growth or partition against assault. Designing security or subjective isolation after the fact is becoming an ever increasing burden that will only get worse. It might be a good network for a nuclear war, but it has served as an example of what not to do and now a new system needs to be designed that has no middle man to pay. ( In ad clicks, private information, overages, outages, loss of security, escalating prices, ...)
The signal to noise ratio is rising and will drown any utility eventually. CARRIER LOST

Or espionage. I am thinking nerd Mata Hari would clean up. All you bases and acids are belong to us!

The problem that I have observed is that there is no effective oversight to complex systems. The people who can deal with the complexity and create things like this work in a sort of isolation. Sometimes this happens when contractors are asked to create a system and then get paid. If they don't get paid, they leave the back door. I can guarantee that this is not the last one that is found and some are much worse than this. I was looking at the javascript linked in an earlier article and it reminded me of the "never attribute to malice ...." . When you add the possibility that espionage or criminality could be involved it gets even more complicated. I help relatives with computer problems on a daily basis and most people have trouble just figuring out how to use the damn things. They are completely vulnerable to even the simplest tech attack or SE.
I also have my own site and I see many things. I know that every day there are people knocking on doors or ports. It is another world that most people only understand as some kind of stuff done by technically afflicted people.

It was an interesting article. I was hoping for something more detailed and technical as well as new. Printed guns got a lot of coverage and I thought that was just a way to get attention through controversy. A rocket that could be -completely- printed would be a far more effective weapon. What I did not appreciate was a gizmag popup that asked for my email to subscribe. I am capable of discovering what I want to read and when.

The problem with your argument is that you assume that I am doing it for you. "Wow really" is certainly a compelling argument but I have advanced technology that absolutely proves "Oh, yeah?". Complicated and impossible is nonsense. if [ N && !N ]. I hope you don't write shell scripts for somebody.

Vast amounts of personal information are already available on the internet. The focus is to monetize what is publicly available. The issue seems to be -who- gains from what is laying around in the open or what can be inferred. The present model seems to revolve about connecting products to sales and taking a cut. That does not seem to be a sustainable gain. It requires that the consumer be actively involved in the process and people can simply stop using the internet without dying. The internet has exposed almost every person to scrutiny. Information does not act by itself. It is the motives and real world actions of those who observe that information that matter.
I'm going to hang up this phone, and then I'm going to show these people what you don't want them to see.

The biggest advantage that could be achieved in 3D printing is the self replicating printer. That would seem to be the best focus for a first design.
There are many ways to achieve that goal and I have tested several methods that can be integrated in a single device. The challenges include working directly to metals, printed electronics, precision and speed. These are all attainable goals and it seems that the hype goes more to what can be done to monetize and control the industry of 3D printers.
There is no doubt that other things can be done when the proper framework is created. It seems that the technology is at that threshold similar to the first integrated circuits on a chip and a complete microprocessor. The real progress comes when the device can successfully duplicate itself. It would be the Cambrian explosion of the personal industrial revolution.
It presents many new problems for society as a whole because it short circuits the consumer pathway from manufacturing to sale. The actual cost of products drops radically when you cut out several layers of middle men. There is no doubt that it will eventually happen. There is also no doubt that the existing economic and political structure will vehemently oppose such a process.

Suppose a person taped that missing episode at that time for themselves. Would they get a share of the profit they make for archiving their stuff for 50 years or would they be prosecuted for theft if they came forward? Copyright is very strange. I suppose it depends on the local laws. It seems there is a statute I recall from grade school called "Finders keepers, losers weepers".

What you said is exactly what I thought. As somebody who has done several high end graphics cards and even worked on the first "Paradise" VGA compatible, drivers, VESA, stuffing, ASIC, fabless, FPGA, and CAD for a board are all commodities ( and 200k isn't a big sticker price for that). I like the idea, but doing this is like asking to be sued. It is something that should be done and perhaps a better way would be to create a multi-core RISC that was so flexible that it could run from an installed microcode.
But then if you make money you will get sued anyway by some patent troll. I wish there was more information than just a page of description as it would be nice to know how they would answer the patent question.

I paid for abuse, this is merely contradiction, I want my money back.

Worm brains were used some time back. Given some of the recent research in the genetic area it would seem that some sort of hybrid would be the best approach and a bit more cost effective. There are ethical issues but that doesn't seem to be a concern for anyone. A combination of technologies using 3D printing, integrated circuits, and techniques developed by studying the homeobox genes (HOX) has a more realistic chance of producing results. A biological system has the advantage of being self replicating as well as extensible. A static fabricated silicon solution would likely branch to chaos as easily as come to a solution.
Neurochip
I wonder what the goal is here. If it is the continuance of being it becomes a philosophical issue. It is a "Ship of Theseus" issue and somebody has not thought this all the way through. Nature has designed a composite structure and parts can't be added or subtracted to enhance memory or IO without changing its balance. It functions as a whole like the universe that it models. The universe functions on factorial infinities and even the best brain will only cut a small slice of those infinities.
There are Hidden Markov Models there and my little noodle triggers alarm bells, but the advance of technology does that to me quite regularly and now it has just become a cacophony of sirens and so I ignore it. All of these advances can be positive and what worries me is the fact that the original motives define the direction of application. What seems to be the motive is to extend a dominant biological position into a dominant mechanical position. In other words they want to create a mechanical system that rules the biological as an extension of their own biology. They are confused and they wish to extend that confusion to gigantic proportion.
--John Connor