Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
For the out-of-band Slashdot experience (mostly headlines), follow us on Twitter, or Facebook. ×

Comment: Re:Pre-installed Malware on Chinese phones & t (Score 1) 74 74

And oddly, I somehow feel safer with the preinstalled Chinese malware vs. the preinstalled NSA malware. Really, it isn't the Chinese that are going to come knocking on my door. But alas, they probably share their data anyway, with some free-trade like spy agreement.

+ - XKEYSCORE: NSA'S Google for the World's Private Communications->

Advocatus Diaboli writes: "The NSA’s ability to piggyback off of private companies’ tracking of their own users is a vital instrument that allows the agency to trace the data it collects to individual users. It makes no difference if visitors switch to public Wi-Fi networks or connect to VPNs to change their IP addresses: the tracking cookie will follow them around as long as they are using the same web browser and fail to clear their cookies. Apps that run on tablets and smartphones also use analytics services that uniquely track users. Almost every time a user sees an advertisement (in an app or in a web browser), the ad network is tracking users in the same way. A secret GCHQ and CSE program called BADASS, which is similar to XKEYSCORE but with a much narrower scope, mines as much valuable information from leaky smartphone apps as possible, including unique tracking identifiers that app developers use to track their own users."


"Other information gained via XKEYSCORE facilitates the remote exploitation of target computers. By extracting browser fingerprint and operating system versions from Internet traffic, the system allows analysts to quickly assess the exploitability of a target. Brossard, the security researcher, said that “NSA has built an impressively complete set of automated hacking tools for their analysts to use.” Given the breadth of information collected by XKEYSCORE, accessing and exploiting a target’s online activity is a matter of a few mouse clicks. Brossard explains: “The amount of work an analyst has to perform to actually break into remote computers over the Internet seems ridiculously reduced — we are talking minutes, if not seconds. Simple. As easy as typing a few words in Google.”

Link to Original Source

Comment: Re:More AI BS (Score 1) 220 220

Who cares what's in the black box if you can perfectly replicate its outputs? That's like saying we didn't actually crack the Enigma code, when we actually knew everything the Nazis were saying to each other.

We don't know how a steel rod works either. You seem to want us to map out every atom of the thing over time to make sure that we know what is going on when we can bypass all the busywork with a little observation.

Stop being so stupid.

Comment: Re:Fails to grasp the core concept (Score 1) 220 220

"That is pure hope as well as circular."

No, it isn't. Humans learn how to learn as babies.

And failing to differentiate between programming and machine learning automatically makes your opinion on AI completely invalid. That's like having someone who doesn't know the difference between a standard and an automatic giving you car advice. Extremely basic stuff that even normies should know.

Comment: Same old silly press (Score 2) 220 220

The same articles show up over and over. The first states that computers are about to do consciousness. The second states that consciousness is a mere illusion for humans, whose actions are truly run from deterministic unconscious processes. In both articles, there is some hero scientist, with the article most often based on that scientist's press release.

There is never a popular press article about how computers may never do consciousness, at least by any current definition of "computer," nor an article about how there are things human consciousness can do which no deterministic process can more than imperfectly mimic. Both of these positions are viable, and embraced by experts in various fields. By all current evidence, they may prove right. But it doesn't make for a hero story to write about someone who argues for these positions. "Discovering" that consciousness either essentially does nothing or that some computer advance is just about to do consciousness (or both!) is a "great" story. Editors like it. The public is impressed by the "brilliant" "counter-intuitive" revelation.

Comment: Fails to grasp the core concept (Score 1) 220 220

mbeckman fails to grasp the core concept behind machine learning and AI. They aren't programming a computer to do things, they are programming a computer to learn things (or at a more advanced level, are programming a computer to learn how to learn things).

He dismisses the whole concept like it is some kind of mechanical turk, but it is real, and it is getting better every day.

Comment: Re:I'm spending 60% of my monthly income on rent (Score 1) 939 939

Jesus, read a fucking book. Short of that, read a fucking wiki page.

And I NEVER said the US had anyone's best interest's at heart other than their own, but that is beside the point. They moved away from government control, and the direct result was that people stopped starving. This is very, very fucking simple. The more state control their is, the more impoverished the people, PERIOD. If state intervention "worked" as you claimed, then there would have been no need for reforms, because Spain would have been a magical paradise where the dictator commanded the tides and economic growth was shat out by flying unicorns on command. But that wasn't the case, and never has been, there, or anywhere else with a massive state control apparatus.

You dumbassed statists are simply too stupid to understand the concept of a spectrum, so you can't make any kind of reasonable assessment of any situation, which is why every time you are put in charge, you destroy everything, leaving nothing but crumbling monuments to your own ineptitude.

Adapt. Enjoy. Survive.