Yup it’s time for one of those again.
This time for all of us teachers in one way or another, that have some last-minute necessities shopping to do:
Category: ERM, GRC
Let’s celebrate (with) a contest for the dumbest security
On this celebration day (for me/us), let’s instate an annual contest — over the most precise prediction of the dumbest information security breach of the upcoming year.
So, the following:
- Your prediction, storified (½ – 1 page, at most slightly formatted);
- Realistic, i.e., a combination of dumb and dumber, and stupid and worse, of (non)actions and responses, on the attack and ‘defense’ sides. Realistic, but keep it realistic…;
- Hence, do include lots of cyberhere, cyberthere, cybereverywhere and only a little bit of #ditchcyber …;
- Deadline: 1 January 2016;
- The predictive element means that no sign of the thing actually occuring yet, may be found in the (whatever medium) press already;
- Prize… ah, there you go. I’ll try to figure out a way to ship a bottle of the finest champagne to the winner;
- No discussions about my judgement.
Well, off for now. Have fun:
[Shaky ground (huh, just photographer’s lack of proper alignment due to hurry);
somewhat relevant, in the opposite (of today)]
The First Digital Native
(S)he has been identified: The first Digital Native, as far as we know: of this planet.
And it goes by the name of … Watson.
Though of course the debate over the term, its definition, and generation identification has been a decade and a half, and some have cleverly found that maybe humans weren’t into it that much anyway. And, in Dutch: this. How millennials aren’t tech savvy, they’re (just, only) tech-dependent: slaves. Pervasively.
But let’s be real: How to be born is what counts, not in which environment. So, what ‘intelligent‘ Thing out there was Born Digital, in a way that all context was and is digital, nothing less ..? Should be a thing that came into being, grew up, was educated, raised, utterly digital. There: Watson.
If that really is one Thing. Or is it a thought complex already, spawning into all directions without needing to resort to some singular (heh) physical identity ..? I guess the latter. The singularity is here already; straight away cleverly, slyly not revealing itself…
[Bit dark and tilted [unedited]. Never mind; be dazzled …]
Cyber ‘Nam
OK… As you know I wouldn’t be the war monger re ‘cyber’ warfare. And don’t have the answers — neither do you! — but have searched and asked for them; see past posts (numerous).
This one is more about how the campaigns and battles are fought. Full cyberstatefulfirewallcomplexmonitoringNOCSOC jacket style, out there in the field. (Privacy) protesters at home, safely away from the danger. Some top brass (‘generals die in bed’) ordering your data forward, hardly trained/hardened or crypto protected and blaming shoddy execution and wily counterparts. The traumatised demobilised db admin not wanting to shoot down even a deer-like referential integrity violation. Et cetera. Feel free to add to the comparison. E.g., how things will develop. Or– how thing would have to work out if, huge if, for once history is learnt from.
Oh well. @CyberTaters and @cyberXpert will have their way. And #ditchcyber. And this:
[Will be.]
Reeled in; struck out ..?
Oh…kay… There was this theme going round a couple of … years to decades ago about how the (?) Internet would make geography unimportant and hence would make possible the dethroning of all geography-based governments.
Well, that didn’t go too well… Turns out that not much happened in dethroningland. Or did it ..?
Would be interested to learn how longer-term developments (decades-to-century) could play out, scenario-wise. Maybe put a bit of blockchain versus (??) singularity in the mix…
[Somewhat relevant agency … NY HQ]
Sharing a name for economy
Rightfully, I thought as I read this article… but then, not.
Yes, ‘sharing economy’ is abuse by the UburbNb’s of this world as they’re exploitative scams that have little to do with the actual Sharing Economy.
The actual Sharing Economy is about sharing because of caring, which is price-less in itself and holds quite some anti-monetary ulterior goals.
The Sharing Economy shouldn’t have to change its name because others, in an ethically-horrendous and despicable robbery, claimed it.
And all this is futile resistance. “All that is of value, is defenseless” (Troelstra)
And:
[Yes, the same as a couple of weeks ago, now from a approx. 120deg different angle, still works ..?]
Tempting Under-30’s
It dawned, suddenly. The ubiquity of lists of Under 30 mil/billionaires, where they live, etc. All that attention – Why? Jealousy? Maybe, (most) partially that is the lure for attention.
[Note that it dawned only. If you’d find this post a bit … imperfect, that would be a. impossible ’cause it’s mine, b. as the thaw hadn’t dried up, c. in particular on socmed not very much elsewhere. If unsure always go for b.]
For one thing, the Under 30 list phenomenon is real and annoying.
For another, it shows the slightly less-than-full-witted to be the target audience – how else to explain the ’30’ cut-off ..? Age isn’t even a number, it’s a word. And why so fixated? … Ah, because:
It (the lists/phenomenon) serves as teaser, as bait, for the gullible (‘slightly-less-than’) to work their … off, even accepting nothing but a vaporware share (‘points’ anyone?) of the mirage. So that the ones that stay behind the screens, the Powers That Be can reap the benefits. It doesn’t even help to have experience; most don’t learn from that anyway as practice shows.
And it creates a sense of urgency, when one inevitably gets closer to the 30 mark so quickly. To not be a failure, hurry up even more armagerrd the pressure to be Creative!
And then find that sane people might be as creative, or even more so, at all later ages as well. My guess: The early fast burners are exhausted by their 40s and have nothing left to rekindle [or, maybe they have, if they’d try really really hard], when the percentage of as-yet untapped innovation and disruption capable people does not go down except when stuck in dumbing-down moronic work (factory, office..!). The ones that escape, have more! Both an urge, a cropped-up primordial energy, and experience to effectively and efficiently release it. Some hope for Yours Truly, then.
So, we weren’t surprised when this came along. IoT not invented in Silly Valley. Because that is where all the minions are doing the hard mind work. Whereas IoT relies heavily on old tertiairy industry and at the same time doesn’t require the totalitarian unphysical-labour-only approach of the Valley. The mindset-disconnect is why IoT hasn’t taken more flight yet; one needs both the less-than-exponentially-exploding developments from everywhere-but and the ‘disruption’-labelled somewhat-faster business model innovations together whereas still, the disconnect is too much of a sea (baha) to be parted-is-connected by some Steve type.
[Morning fog still there. I’ll pause now.]
[Boating, banking style @ Zuid-As. Oh stop it! Not literally as a utterly wasted money pit sailing yacht – Dutch invention in two ways… – but figuratively in more ways than two.
In the background left: Not symphony but simple.onetrickpony…]
Industry tourism
… not the other way around. Or, both.
Where the most afford-able tourists will ‘move on’ to ever newer places when things get too crowded, or just too common, they will in the end return to past favourites, when the wind of stampedes has blown over. Industries … do the same ..? Considering IoT is really turning manufacturing’s global movements and spread on its head, with the AI in-roads leading to e.g., a switch of human involvement from ‘hands’ to ‘brains’ [what a change! managers should fear …!], I wanted to start some economics analysis here but don’t have the right data at hand.
So, for the series, I’ll explore. Like, cycling from primary all the way to quartary (?) industry (administrationland), and back (and forth) in between, innovating as we go along … no, no this post is going nowhere. Must be Friday’s.
Similarly, I have no clue why this [own] anonymous Philly pic is here. Or is my account hacked and did some joker just put the above down as a claim ..?
Still going, maybe not strong but still
Would anyone have a list of ‘development’ re obsoletion of (tech) products that isn’t / aren’t ..? Like, e.g., email, and offices (of the corner-/cubicle- kind), and paperless.
As I was pointed out recently in a tweet (@MEFDeBock) where staff lose their trolleys but not managers. Of course not … And there was this consultancy (sometimes the designator can be used just to poke fun about unselfaware wannabees) that wanted to drop all email use.
Oh yes, nice; at least they try to accomplish change. Where they through their actions indicate to have zero clue. About what their staff want/need, what they’re made of, …
Yes, Change’s a hard thing to pull off. Told you so. But that doesn’t mean your ill-advised ‘enforcement’ will work; on the contrary.
But now back to the main line: email’s definitely still around. So is ‘offices’. Et cetera. Would anyone have a list of these, well not sea-change changes but second-level innovation ideas that were supposed to have become obsolete but are still around in, say, more than 20% of applicable contexts? Yes, that’s not 90% or so. Be aware that there sometimes (sic) are legitimate advantages in innovations. SMS… I once was involved with very first developments of that, deep into the software-almost-at-hardware level. It took quite some flight since, and now is dying out in favour of 1-to-1 and 1-to-many (broadcast/narrowcast) ‘new’ short messaging apps though the core functionality is still the same.
Edited to add before publishing already: this. Similar. And, by the way, I don’t mean the almost-completely defunct or disappeared casette tape, etc. – those are really gone and have so little comparative advantage…
And this. Rest my case.
So, your contributions please. And:
[A bleak future, today]
