Forgot your password?

Comment: Nope (Score 0) 46

by ColdWetDog (#47952221) Attached to: Data Archiving Standards Need To Be Future-Proofed

While there certainly is an issue with data integrity and retention, it is unlikely that anyone will need their entire DNA sequence "stored" for future use. It's becoming clear that the DNA you're born with isn't the same as the DNA you have when they recycle you. Further, medicine doesn't need your entire genome. Just the part that the doctor (or whatever they're called at that point in time) is interested in.

It is far more likely that you will be resequenced as needed.

Besides, you won't be able to afford it anyway.

Comment: Re:Uses? (Score 1) 59

If you can't figure out a use for this technology, go sit in the corner and let the rest of us talk. Depending on the resolution, this could be used for object identification, for artists and engineers to quickly set up projects, for real estate agents to create quick walk throughs or better descriptions of property. That's just off the top of my pointed little head.

And of course, for the myriad Rule 34 topics that have already been discussed.

Comment: Re:Still not easy (Score 1) 35

by ColdWetDog (#47946297) Attached to: The Myths and Realities of Synthetic Bioweapons

Not really. What the Fine Article was saying, basically, is that even with planet leading expertise and equipment, making anything other than the biological equivalent of a dirty bomb is very, very hard. The US and USSR could barely do it in the 1990s. Even though the tech has improved by leaps and bounds, actually using that tech has also become much harder.

It's not all that easy to splice DNA together to get something functional. You can get a Nobel Prize for that sort of thing these days. Maybe in another couple of decades, but not tomorrow.

TFA did point out that terror weapons - scary things that don't really kill very many people - are another issue entirely. It doesn't take much to get a populace wound up - all you have to do is chop somebody's head off and put it on YouTube.

Comment: Re:fortress on foundations of sand. (Score 2) 227

by ColdWetDog (#47941467) Attached to: Apple's "Warrant Canary" Has Died

Nope. Not for everything. Perhaps every phone conversation, but I don't necessary use my smart phone for talking. If I, for example, work in 1Password which encrypts the data while synching, the NSA can listen in on that conversation and presuming they haven't broken my password or the companies algorithms, that conversation is not understandable.

If it goes into the modem encrypted, having the keys to the modem isn't going to help all that much.

And you're an idiot if you're doing anything remotely illegal on a cell phone system anyway.

Comment: Re:Not a problem... (Score 2) 310

by ColdWetDog (#47939905) Attached to: New Study Projects World Population of 11B by 2100

Why would you even want to do that?

I can tell you why you don't want to - 'Most of Canada', 'Australia's Outback', Siberia, the Amazon (which you didn't mention) and the Tibetan Plateau (among other regions) serve as enormous ecological buffers. What do you think filters out all of the crap we're putting into it?

We've done oh so well on the parts of the planet that do have significant human population densities. How do you think spreading this out over the rest of the world is going to work?

And you're utopian statement of 'by 2100 even and individual could convert surroundings to their own tastes' is decidedly Star-Trekian. This individual and a Mr. Fusion, perhaps. This individual and a bunch of solar panels, not so much. Not such a bright idea to plan on rearranging the world using technologies that haven't been invented yet. Reality sucks sometimes, but it's reality.

And you forgot all about 'ol Murphy.

Comment: Re:Is this real? (Score 1) 494

by ColdWetDog (#47937919) Attached to: Apple Will No Longer Unlock Most iPhones, iPads For Police

There already is a master key, or, more specifically, a master wrench. Preferably a 1 inch or larger spanner wrench.

Applied to various parts of the body it will do a wonderful job of improving certain specific memories. This isn't designed to prevent the NSA from going after you should they find that desirable (don't kid yourself, twinky). This is designed to protect yourself against two bit private investigators, your local sheriff, the creep down the block and your mother. No security is perfect, but this is lots better default security than most people ever get. Yes, Ms. Random Luser can defeat it by posting their passkey on Facebook or telling their soon to be ex boyfriend, but since security is a process, not a thing, nothing is always completely secure. And especially nothing that is designed to connect to the Internet.

Comment: Re:So everything is protected by a 4 digit passcod (Score 4, Funny) 494

by ColdWetDog (#47937839) Attached to: Apple Will No Longer Unlock Most iPhones, iPads For Police

Can't wait to see how people spin this as anything but good news.

-- Complex passcodes take more computational power to crack.
-- More computational power takes more electricity.
-- More electrical use leads to burning more coal and oil which leads to global warming.
-- Global warming is bad.

Q.E.D - complex passcodes are bad.

One good reason why computers can do more work than people is that they never have to stop and answer the phone.