I wonder how this could ever be implemented in FOSS.

The same way anything is implemented in FOSS. It'll be written into the source. Lots of people will modify the code to disable the backdoors. People will post versions of the software with the backdoors missing, many of which actually still have them or have different backdoors installed. Governments may lead an automated search for software without the backdoors, or may simply ignore it uniless they have a reason to target the individual using it.

In other words, what a fucking mess.

Charles Stross also wrote of a similar future in his Accelerando; and of corruptions of such in other novels, like Singularity Sky. His works are perhaps a bit more skeptical of such an outcome; disasters and initiation of force still happen. But it also happens in Banks' Culture.

I know N. Korea has been in contact with Iran; is it possible Iran is paying N. Korea to act as a distraction, and help prevent the US from moving more assets into the Middle East?

Typically nations are expected to attack the other nation's strategic resources, and any people who get in the way are going to get creamed. Nations may also target persons who are providing an effective defense or offense against themselves. There's nothing new here.

However, as mentioned above, it may be very difficult to accurately target the hacker. IMO in most cases it will prove more efficient to target the other nation's infrastructure. Breaking fiber optic links, locking attackers out of satellites you control and jamming or destroying satellites you do not, would likely prove more effective in blocking further cyber-attacks than trying to locate and kill individuals.

Yeah, I'm expecting a machine to be grabbed, then hacked, and all the coins in its account moved out.

If they're smart, they'll have a separate account for each machine to limit the potential damage, although this may make scaling and inventory difficult.

Yup. The one thing I'd like to see at CES is... CES. Unfortunately, I'm not in the consumer electronics industry, nor do I have enough desire to fake it. So, not going.

If you think the point of the metric system is to have everything in some integer measurement, then you're converting for the wrong reason.

No, but that is the goal of metrification .

Interesting.

Part of this is, I'm sure, that the drive measurement is a meta-level away from the socket dimension, and has simply become so universal that no one questioned it. (Sort of like SAE measurements, before metrification became trendy, talking about meta-levels.) Another part of it is that, being square drive, there's a bit more room for play in the connection than in a hexagonal drive, and if it doesn't fit right you can usually take a grinder to it to make it work.

I just found it interesting.

Y'know, I was being slightly trollish when I started this, but holy crap, people just don't READ.

We're talking about the socket DRIVE measurement, people! Not the sockets, but the square-drive connection to the WRENCH.

Uh, no?

Britain also seems to use English measurement drive sockets...

Same in France...

I had to equip my shop, and among other things picked up a set of socket wrenches, in both SAE and metric sizes. One thing I noticed, though, was that the socket drives were all in English measurements (1/4", 3/8", 1/2", 3/4") and that there were no metric-drive sets around anywhere. Just curious, are there any metric drive standards in Europe, and why haven't they found their way to the US? I'd expect at least some metric size sets from China to sneak in...

higher res version.

Definitely the best art.

And 64KB on the motherboard. I know, I had one.