If you try to find the flaws as a defender, you have already lost.
Non-sense! There are plenty of very well designed software packages built using defensive programming practices that still have security flaws. To claim you have already lost when using those measures is to claim that only code with years of tireless review like NASA's near flawless software is good enough.
Just because we lacked the resources to find software flaws didn't mean that there were never massive vulnerabilities just waiting to be discovered, it just means it required dedication to find them. The lack of investment in security is about to be laid bare for all to see. Those that are actually interested in making secure software now have the opportunity to get even closer to that goal. Everyone that has been doing (and continues to do) the bare minimum is about to get a lesson in the importance of investing in real security.
Good security is expensive but having bad security is about to cost a whole lot more.
The issue of daylight savings has largely been solved by shifting clocks a minute every day for sixty days. The obvious problem is that we didn't build our electronics based on the concept of variable lengths in the days. However, we could mandate that all new electronics either have a built-in calendar, have NTP capability, use celluar towers for synchronization, or not have a clock at all and at the end of a decade or two we could switch to a much healthier approach. However, it will never happen because of businesses like trains, airlines, financial markets, and international logistics rely on a synchronized timeline which means it would need to more than just a single nation that uses this scheme but the whole world.
TL;DR: it's just not lethal enough of a problem to get solved, especially when the money changers get involved.
The estimate is about $1.8B per day. Which has cost consumers (not businesses) ~$100B thus far.
Rule 99: "Trust is the biggest liability of all."
what did you trade for reliable access to electricity?
The ability to stargaze and an increased probability of burning down my house. How dare they take house burning away from me! It makes me so bad it makes me want to set something one fire... like a house! Wait... OK, so just stargazing.
Consoles are usually using out of date hardware by the time of their release.
"usually"? I think you mean post PS3 when they started making x86 based systems. Anyway, designing, testing, and coordinating the construction of millions of these takes time. So sure, "out of date" for children with no grasp of what goes into building hardware, but when the systems are designed, they are cutting edge.
it's too expensive to do it fully custom.
Well that sure is funny because everything used to be fully custom.
If you're not Nintendo then people expect to be impressed by your graphics - the last Nintendo which fit the bill was the N64
they got burned on N64 because the carts caused the price to be high. However, the lesson they learned was that high-end graphics weren't worth the cost. Literally all of their systems use dated technology. However, they are brilliant when it comes to marketing. Also, they will sue the shit out of you for anything.
This is just one of the problems with using cutting-edge hardware: component prices are not always consistent. In extreme cases like this, Microsoft now finds itself with it's back against the wall. They want to rake in the cash with console churn (buy all your old games again) but they are now finding out that making cutting edge hardware is quite expensive. MS and Sony are both left with poor options while Nintendo has consistently used under-powered hardware and focused on marketing to boost their profits.
I expect there to be some "creative" mistakes made in the next gen consoles, except Nintendo, they will keep milking the Mario brand/franchise and suing people until there is no more Nintendo.
I've already discussed that possibility here: https://slashdot.org/comments....
If the government asked a corrupt voting machine company for one of their boxes through legal means, they would be sure to lock it down.
If they had any evidence (even circumstantial evidence) of corruption in a voting machine company then the government could have used the FBI to raid the office/warehouse/wherever to obtain what they needed or used an third-party intermediary. When it comes to real matters of national security, judges will sign off on just about anything.
Your mental gymnastics do not pass the smell test.
Where do you get the "stealing" part from?
Acquiring possessions without the knowledge or consent of the owner is called theft. How can you be so obtuse?
We don't really understand it, so we'll give it to the programmers.
