Re: Human-fired power station
Yes, well with types like Zuckerberg, it's pretty obvious.
18221 publicly visible posts • joined 10 Apr 2007
Oh, right, I've heard of it in the £2B ballsup at the perennially failing Europe's biggest council.
And yet they get another £700 million (which, as we all know, will balloon to over a billion) to play with.
If I screw up at a customer site, they'll never invite me over again, let alone sign over a paltry €70K.
Too big to fail, hmm ?
If I'm not mistaken, that's over a petabyte of storage needed par month. The biggest HDDs you can get is apparently 16TB, so that's 3 disks a day, 21 per week. I hope they get a good price, because otherwise it's a budget that can reach over €5000 per week.
I checked SSD prices and capacity, but that would be insanely expensive at such a volume.
I'd like to see that storage room.
No, no. You don't get it. Apple is committed to human rights as long as it doesn't harm its bottom line.
There is no company that will actively go against a dictatorship. Apple is in China, right ? What more proof do you need ?
Money is everything to The Board. If slavery was still acceptable, you can be sure that Apple would have slave drivers.
And they wouldn't be alone.
Of course. Since OpenAI is a company, it obviously will define its actions on the best legal basis possible. No company actually does things it thinks are illegal. They all take the shady to the limit.
The tribunal is there to find out if OpenAI is right.
"large tech companies 'enjoy a remarkable degree of freedom from regulation and accountability for their activities and the content they carry' "
Yup. And, in my opinion, it's because the Internet has never been considered as something important by governments across the world.
But that is changing. All you need to do is look at how many governments have officials with their personal social media page when they should be talking through official government channels. Or look at how many governments actively control, at sometimes forbid, Internet activity. Oh sure, the ones that do that now cannot be counted as democracies, but the day is coming when Internet regulations will be decided upon and enforced.
Acts count.
And $600 million is obviously not something a company is going to ignore.
So good on Fujitsu for having once again put its snout into the trough. Bad on UK government officials for allowing that.
Oh well, it's just pissing another $600 million into the wind. It's not like that has any consequence, right ?
Borkzilla is heading for a wall of its own making.
It promised that Windows 1 0 would be the last ever version, and now it has proven that you can't trust its words.
Nobody cares about upgrading a PC that is still working satisfactorily. 5 year old equipment is good for the trash ? I don't think so. Come back in six years and we'll talk about that again.
Face it : the least capable, lowest-cost laptop is fine for surfing the Web and doing mail. Companies have equipment that is much more powerful and will last a decade or more.
The renewal treadmill is over, Borkzilla. Deal with it.
Yes, building a foundry is costly. Yes, it will take years, maybe a decade before said foundry actually makes a return on investment.
Guess what ?
Some things take time to be realized and, if you can't wait, you won't reap the benefits.
Too bad for you.
The discussion is still open on that point. Maybe when the Sun goes into its red giant phase it will indeed swallow our planet, or maybe the Earth's orbit will have changed because the Sun's gravitational pull will have weakened.
Either way, Humanity will have to have evacuated long before, or it will already be extinct and the fate of Planet Earth will no longer be a problem.
The enemy hardly needs biological weapons. A space-faring civilization capable of spanning the mind-boggling distances between stars will just chuck a 20km-wide asteroid at our planet and wait two (twenty ?) years for the fallout to wipe eveything out.
Then they can colonize and mine our planet for whatever it is they think they're looking for, or just use the planet as another host for their ever-growing population.
I must agree with you. The answer to the question "Why does software require so many urgent patches?" is that the security landscape is continually changing.
Okay, that does not give a free pass to not sanitizing inputs - that should be punishable by a dozen lashings - but you can build a product with care and attention, making sure to protect against all known vulnerabilities, and then bam! A month later, a new type of vulnerability appears and you have to correct for it by patching.
That is the truth, but it should not hide the lazy programming many products are guilty of.
After reading this article, I have the feeling that there are several issues that are at the root of this problem.
First, there's the fact that ServiceNow has had to amend its platform to bolster security. That tells me that their handling of security wasn't properly thought through in the first place.
Then there's the fact that, despite having amended the platform, customers are still getting it wrong, which points to a possible lack of clarification in the documentation. It's difficul to write good security documentation when you're tacking on a new process that changes everything.
Finally, there's the fact that customers don't have time for security, they just want things to work. Maybe some customers gave it a try and found that their new configuration broke their processes and, instead of correcting the processes, they reverted to the old, insecure configuration. Maybe some customers just didn't understand the problem and left everything as is because they had enough trouble getting it working in the first place.
In any case, this whole affair demonstrates just how important it is to establish proper security from the start. Making such corrections after the fact is always a problem in itself.
I wish as well, but enough billions have spent for no result that I seriously doubt that this sudden uprising of virtuous indignation amounts to any meaningful difference with the past.
You'd have to eliminate all current pigs-in-the-trough for this to have any meaning. That means getting rid of Fujitsu, Capita and any other "consulting" firm that has given les than mediocre results.
But of course, that would mean needing to find new companies to arrange brown envelopes and endless budget overruns and delays.
One day, one fine day, you might finally ask yourselves where the real issue lies. Maybe it's not the consulting firms ?
Maybe you need to get rid of the useless cruft that thinks it can make decisions. You can't do that ? Fine, here's another solution : name a responsible for every new government project. If it does not succeed, he is retired and stripped of all his medals and UK whatnot.
Sometimes, the knout is the only answer.
I would hope that is true, but given that the entire project is based on the work of a US Government agency and that there is no reason to not believe that the CIA (or other agencies) is actively involved in it, I somehow doubt that that is entirely true.
I'm sorry, doesn't that mean that AI companies are defending their ability to lie ?
And that has been accepted in a country that continues to endlessly chant God Bless America ?
You guys do know that the Ten Commandments include "Thou Shalt Not Lie" ?
Hypocrites.
You missed this part of the article :
"Binary Defense is due to publish a report on Thursday about the cyber-break-in and lessons learned. "
If they're already writing up a report about lessons learned, it seems to me that the details are known.
Maybe not by you, but they are known.
Just like kidnapping.
It was made a crime to pay a kidnappers ransom, result : no more kidnappings for ransom in the US.
Do the same with ransomware. When there is no more money to be made, the only attacks left will be those of state actors who have other interests in mind (my how that sounds better <shudder>).
Excuse me ? If you're laying me off I will not sign that and I will talk about it. Now what are you going to do ?
How is it that this kind of thing is legal ? At the very least, I would have thought that someone being "forced" to sign that NDA would go directly to court over the matter.
Look, I'm very glad that you dismantled a violent criminal network, don't get me wrong, but I can put 200kg of anything in the back of my Skoda Fabia.
That is not an impressive amount to me. Can't you find anything better ? In the boatload range, for example ? I don't know, a ton or more ?
200kg sounds like a Saturday at Cosco. If these guys were such criminal masterminds, you should be able to find that under the sofa.
Just one question, Nadella : have you planned on shutting down Borkzilla in five years ? No ? Then why is your Long Term limited to five years ? Are you planning on leaving before that and you won't care any more ?
Your customers, the ones who pay for your product, definitely plan to be there in five years and long after. It is exhausting to continually read that software companies are the ones who decide how long their software is supposed to be used. It's not like that. You're a multi-billion dollar company. You put out a critical piece of business software, and YOU FUCKING SUPPORT IT UNTIL BUSINESS DOESN'T NEED IT ANYMORE.
That should be enshrined in law.