The AI we have today is not capable of the kind of malice that people seem to be afraid of with all of these FUD stories, and will not be any time soon if ever. Even if we add some AI to things like drones which can kill people it is only the malice/incompetence of the developer that causes the destruction that results. If an engineer built a bridge woefully inadequately, either on purpose or because he is incompetent, and it falls down and kills a bunch of people would you blame the bridge or the engineer? We are not even remotely close to the Terminator level strong AI, and it's still a big open question whether such a thing is even possible at all.
Formal logic: Yes Troubleshooting: Yes Basic computer skills: Yes The fewer people who think computers are magical devil machines and can figure out how to solve technical problems on their own the better, but the vast majority of people will not write programs.
When more of them can be used offline (when it's easier to make them work offline), then they will be more prominent.
Half the web developers out there can't even prevent simple cross site scripting let alone the dozens of other common threats that exist in web development. As with adding any other new development feature, it's just giving people who don't know any better more ammunition to shoot themselves in the foot with. There needs to be more focus on educating developers on security instead of trying to cram every new buzzword tech they can into their application.
There was a company that already tried to do this with games, they got some VC money and then ran into the dirt. At this point the vast majority of user hardware is all but useless for mining. This would have worked a couple of years ago, but not now.
That would seem to be a matter of what the default configuration is. Do these DNS servers have these protections enabled by default, and are then disabled? Is it that they left it off by default on older versions? Do they still leave it off by default?
This article makes very little sense to me. They don't mention what the crypto algorithm was or who was pushing it as the "next gen standard". I don't know of any proposed cryptographic standard with 923 bit anything.
Microsoft Malicious Software Removal Tool? Microsoft Security Essentials?
Does the "liveness" test work as well as those for fingerprint scanners?
I just took a look at their site, which I thought must be amazing for that kind of money, and I found this: <meta name="ICBM" content="52.48002, -1.902805"> What exactly Birmingham City Council up to!? Perhaps the money is going someplace a bit more nefarious.
I have the same name as a Canadian hockey player, though unintentionally, and virtually every result for my name on Google is for him. If your name is common enough and you practice information control over yourself you can almost completely avoid being in Google's system. The real problem is that youths are willing to give out vast amounts of personal information, partially because they don't realize the value of such information and partially because they are stupid kids.
Are you sure you aren't confusing symmetric and asymmetric crypto keys? I don't think 128 bit has ever been considered unbreakable for asymmetric keys, 1024-2048 has been the standard for asymmetric since I have known about it. For symmetric, 128 bit is still considered secure and is still the standard for AES, although many applications are moving to 256 bit.