Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Seriously, an iphone? (Score 5, Insightful) 143

IDK, a smartphone is the perfect spying machine.

Not only do people keep their whole lives on their phone, email, pictures, documents, passwords, social media accounts, but the same device is fully portable, has a GPS receiver, picks up and connects to open wifi APs, has a microphone, and accelerometer.

So you can find out what your target is up to, what he's planning, who he's talking to, where he is, and how fast he's moving, and by extension you get acces to his digital life.

Comment: Does your CPU spy one you? (Score 1) 143

Let's say a hypothetical security service, such as the Norway Safety Alliance (NoSaal), wanted to collect intelligence by putting in a backdoor, secret registers, or something in a CPU manufactured by another hypothetical entity called Ingal, how would they do it?

What intelligence gathering capability could you include in a CPU that would 1) not interfere in the normal functionality of the PC, or otherwise be detectable by the end-user?

I've read that an entity like nosaal could read the electrical hum of the CPU from a distance to determine what it's doing, or maybe grab crypto keys that way.

But could Ingal actually put code or some other way dope their CPUs without anyone knowing?

And more importantly if that's the case, what could we do about?

Comment: Re:Yay big government! (Score 3, Insightful) 310

No, I think you're logic is fallacious. You're not looking at the functional power wielded by either party. Since the US is a democracy which holds private property, including the assets of a corporation, as the highest form of freedom, the government can't take that property without due process.

This process is handled through the court systems, which works with lawyers and Judges, and juries. The only lawyers that work for the government are criminal prosecutors, and they make less than corporate lawyers. So government lawyers would only be involved in a criminal case against a private corporation.

Therefore, in civil suites, corporations get get the best private attorneys money can buy. This includes lobbying the government to pass certain laws in their favor. And the corporations that pay for the right lawyers, can get away with anything they want and $$$.

So, in reality, in the American capitalist system of government, it's the government that's beholden to private interests, since they make more money.

If you can't see this, you've been watching too much Fox News.

Comment: Re:240,000 jobs for robots? (Score 1) 171

This doesn't make sense to me. On the one hand, a big reason for automation is that you can easily replace a broken component with another one. If an army of technicians were required to fix a robot, who would buy it? On the other, a large part of creative destruction in the modern era is that 1 new job replaces many old ones, unlike the example of the car replacing the horse an buggy. Innovation no longer replaces specialized craft-labor (required for building a buggy) with huge factories full of workers (required to assemble a car), it replaces that factory with very few specialized knowledge workers an loads of automation.

"With the current state of robots, you're talking about taking away the most dull, dangerous, and dirty jobs out there"

But we're not talking about the current state of robots, like robotic arms painting a car, with a highly specific set of pre-programmed instructions
The future of robotics alluded to here ranges from automated package delivery, robotic supermarket clerks and checkout counters, to automated fast food service.
There's no technical reason at the moment why something like an automated drive-through burger place couldn't exist

But really though, future advances in AI could even put most lawyers out of work, what with autonomous systems which fill out contracts, deeds, divorce papers, etc, jobs that are already being outsourced.

So it's pretty naive to think that only dangerous blue-collar work would be subject to robotics and automation. And it's not unreasonable to surmise that unemployment in 50 years might be 20%, a society where the wealthy build and own robots and their labor, while everyone else picks-up the scraps.

Comment: Re:Wait... (Score 2) 255

by gizmo2199 (#47101559) Attached to: Chelsea Clinton At NCWIT: More PE, Less Zuckerberg
"McCain picked Palin who is probably smarter than Biden"

What evidence are basing this on? It took Palin 5 years and 3 different colleges to earn a BA (in communications). The totality of Palin's government experience before she became governor was 10 years as city councilor and mayor of a town of 5,000 in Alaska. Biden, in addition to a law degree, was a well-respected U.S. Senator for 40 years. He served on the Judiciary and Foreign Relations committees.
Moreover, since losing, Palin has made some pretty questionable decisions regarding her public persona. Nobody takes her seriously as a political contender any more.

Comment: Undeniably not (Score 1) 255

by gizmo2199 (#47101163) Attached to: Chelsea Clinton At NCWIT: More PE, Less Zuckerberg
"the right policies that could help put Computer Science — which is undeniably the most important 21st Century skill..."

Isn't this a bit like saying: in the 1950's undeniably the most important skill was operating and repairing TVs and video transmission equipment.

Just because a technology's new, doesn't make it the most important. If anything skills making pharmaceuticals and treatments for human diseases is a much more important skill, let alone robotics and engineering.

There's only so much you can do with a compiler, OS, or a database after all.

Comment: Re:The Canadian Exodus.... (Score 1) 1633

by gizmo2199 (#46770723) Attached to: Retired SCOTUS Justice Wants To 'Fix' the Second Amendment
"I mean machine guns should be fine"

You do know that machine guns are mainly used to fire at advancing infantry, and kill dozens of people at the same time. In other words, they're truly weapons of war, not for hunting or self-defense. Why would the average person need one again?

"Well hello there Charlie Brown, you blockhead." -- Lucy Van Pelt

Working...