Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:Old Man Yells At Cloud (Score 1) 139

Neither Einstein nor Hitler were orders of magnitudes greater intelligence than the average human- Albert was smart, but nowhere near the potential of AI.
Neither Einstein nor Hitler could process data from all around the world from millions of inputs at the same time.

Einstein and Hitler were both mortal and had a finite life span.

However, even though both Einstein and Hitler were singular humans with limited capabilities and lifespans that could not begin to have the potential impact of something like AI, there is a "meta" version of both personas that was somewhat inspired mythically by the actual humans, that continues to live and influence people today. This meta-Einstein and meta-Hitler are un-embodied ideas which are no longer constrained by mortal limits and you might argue are actually more powerful today than they were in when their namesakes were alive because there are millions more people supporting the mystique behind them and often even operating on behalf of these meta-beings (aka, the idea of the person not to be confused with that person's actual ideas).

These meta-beings (anthropormophizing a set of ideas to be represented by a popular figure) can even be extrapolated from an entity who may or may not of even actually existed in real life (e.g., meta-Jesus or perhaps AI).

To borrow some contemporary lingo, once created, key to the power of this meta-being (which is really an un-embodied idea even though it might be "named" after someone that inspired it) is dependent on if it "goes viral" or not. Unfortunately, "going-viral" is almost an autonomic reflex of our societal-organism over which we have little conscious control. The analogy of a "virus" is pretty good since the idea is not a real organism (or person), it depends on the societal-organism's infrastructure for reproduction and propagation. Once the "virus" takes over part of the infrastructure, the influence if as large (or even larger due to multiplicative effects) as the infrastructure it overruns.

The immunity response to "bad-viruses" of our societal-organism, is not unlike a real-organism's immunity response. If it can remember an idea is bad, the societal-organism is better at containing it before it gets out of hand. If the idea has mutated a bit, or the response would create some complicated inconsistencies (e.g, good for some parts of the organism, bad for some parts), the immunity has a hard time mounting any defense and the virus is more likely to get a permanent foothold or even take over.

Nobody knows if AI is a "good-virus" or a "bad-virus" with respect to our societal-organism, but I'll go out on a limb and say it's probably good for some, bad for others which mean the if it ever goes viral, it will be very hard for our society "immunity" to stop it. Let's hope it's a good idea... Our society's immune system has yet to kill meta-Hitler probably because some of the ideas represented by meta-Hitler are potentially good for more than a small part of the societal organism.

Comment Re:Snake oil salesman (Score 1) 47

Ha ha. That's a common joke about the security industry. There is some truth to it.

What's great with bug bounty programs is that customers pay for results. You pay for valid and useful vulnerability reports. You don't pay for reports that are not useful. For hackers to make money (and the best ones make a lot of money), they must produce useful and relevant vulnerability reports.

That's a HUGE difference compared to traditional security products and services and it explains why bug bounty programs are becoming so popular. They are much more effective than any other method of finding vulns in live software.

Comment Re:70,000 white hat hackers? (Score 1) 47

Yep, 70,000 is a lot! The number keeps growing, and we hope to get to a million. To serve all companies and government organizations worldwide who will be needing bug bounty programs, we need a lot of excellent hackers.

It should also be noted that it takes a lot of hacking to find even a simple vulnerability. Of the 70,000 hacker accounts we have, about 1 in 6 have filed an actual vulnerability report. To help them get going, we have an ebook on hacking that we give to new hackers. Once new hackers get the hang of bug hunting they can advance fast, earning more and more reputation points. When you sign up at HackerOne, you start at 100 points. Our most prolific hackers have reached 10,000 points. You can do it, too!

Comment Re:Second coming of teams of ethical hackers (Score 1) 47

Yep this is true. It is also a common situation that humanity has dealt with successfully many times. To keep a ship afloat, you must find and fix every hole. Even one hole might sink it. To keep an aircraft safely flying, similarly every safety aspect must be in shape. Shipping and airlines have great safety track record these days.

To keep software secure, you must attempt to fix all serious vulnerabilities. You may never get to 100% vuln-free software, but the closer you get and the faster you can asymptotically move towards that goal, the more you reduce your cybersecurity risk.

Comment Re:They both look the same from here (Score 1) 10

Wow, where to start with this one.

The claim that monarchies are legitimate so that makes them non-fascist is total bullshit - those monarchies didn't just naturally evolve - there was a lot of blood spilled in the process.

Oh shut up. Now you're picking random potentially totalitarian things out of the air as if Fascism is a generic term of really bad totalitarian governments.

Monarchies are a completely ridiculous diversion and no, they're not the same. They're not even the same type of thing. Fascism is an ideology, not a constitutional system of government. And nobody would argue that monarchies are "legitimate" so that makes them "non-fascist", because the term has no meaning here. Are fascist governments not "legitimate"? I'm pretty sure Mussolini was the legitimate leader of Italy until the Italians found a new use for meathooks.

Nor is this a discussion of totalitarianism, and we're not trying to define totalitarianism. We're discussing Fascism, a specific ideology, created by Benito Mussolini in the 1920s, and expanded upon by Adolf Hitler and others after that.

Europe in the 1920s and 1930s is precisely relevant to defining Fascism. That's when the first Fascists appeared. And almost from the beginning, Mussolini was adamant about "protecting" the "Aryan race". Between his own rhetoric, and Hitler's influence, this culminated in the Manifesto of Race on the Italian side. I don't need to tell you what it culminated in on the German side.

If you reject the inventor of the term "fascism" as being somehow unconnected to his own ideology, and decide to ascribe completely unrelated movements and constitutional systems (!!!) to Fascism purely because they're totalitarian, then again you're just plain not addressing the term.

And to circle back to the topic, I called Trump a fascist. Not a communist. Not a king. Not a totalitarian. Not a dictator. A fascist.

He's a racist who demonizes and dehumanizes non-whites, and scapegoats them for America's "problems". He has contempt for democracy. He directly and actively promotes violence against his political rivals. He wants to use the law to punish those who oppose him, from politicians to the free media.

I don't like Clinton, but she's none of those things. And you have to be those things to be a fascist.

Comment Re:Second coming of teams of ethical hackers (Score 2) 47

It has taken decades for the industry to get used to bug bounties. The first one was in 1981. Now it is starting to be very real. HackerOne has already paid out over $10,000 to hackers and researchers around the world. One hacker has made over half a million dollars. Another recently bought an apartment for his mother with the bounty money he had made. Still lots of work and education to do, but it is very much moving in the right direction. An example: the US DoD now committing $7m to vulnerability disclosure programs.

- Marten (HackerOne CEO)

Comment Re:Not a copyright violation, a Trademark violatio (Score 1) 214

No it's not legitimate if he merely mentioned either. Merely mentioning a trademark doesn't mean you're in violation of trademark law, otherwise you wouldn't be able to talk about most commercial products. The precise restrictions on trademarked word use are best described by a lawyer, but remember the intent of trademark law is to prevent people from passing an item off as something associated with the trademark owner, not to restrict people's ability to talk about products they've seen or owned.

For more information, visit Bing and google "trademarks".

Comment Re:About time. (Score 4, Interesting) 493

Medical professionals have a professional duty to state medical facts. If they refuse, they can and should be placed in a different career path.

An accountant or lawyer promoting a Sovereign Citizen view of the relationship between client and state would be struck off. A Bridge Engineer who rejects Newtonian (or better) mechanics would be struck off.

This isn't like banning a doctor from discussing gun safety because you lobbyists are worried it might lead to a decrease in household gun ownership. This is about nurses being required not to mislead people about medicine, abusing their positions as respected medical professionals to sow misinformation. It's not a freedom of speech issue, it's a professionalism issue, and critically it's a life and death issue.

Slashdot Top Deals

I've looked at the listing, and it's right! -- Joel Halpern