singularity – Page 9 – Maverisk / Étoiles du Nord

Classic plusquote: Progress

You can watch it, but you can’t stop it. As you’re only a looker-on, unable to halt progress.
Like, this here classic from 1987 already.
[Explains the less than stellar graphics quality but hey, from analog to digital vid…]

And:

[In the church of inevitable Dutch waterworks; Lijnden]

New Normal Hacking

Errm, anyone still surprised about (not) new news on data being stolen, ransomware striking, or democracy perverted, anywhere, all the time ..?

Got a bit worried, and wondered whether there would be others the same, about the current Mehh impression of everyone in the loop, about even political parties [now openly], voting machines, etc., getting cracked and data stolen which combined with at last, at very last finally, the hackability of voting machines not, against all sane arguments, being tamper-resistant — which leads to the vulnerability and class broken-ness of fundamental human values.

And still, there’s hardly more than Mehhh.

Would anyone have a reason not to worry …?

Ah:

How you know that you are old in infosec: you remember when you were trying to get the world to care about improving security.

— Dino A. Dai Zovi (@dinodaizovi) October 6, 2016

Oh well, blue pills everywhere …? Plus:

[Sorry to say lads and lassies of the Royal Academy of Arts, but the Gemeentemuseum did beat you, on this one]
[Edited to add: No, this post was written before the NIST October 7 ‘news’ came out that (‘end’?) users are tired of hack-warnings (security fatigue), if that were a thing. Which is also not quite what I meant above, which is worse…]

Contra Bruce, for once

For once, Bruce is not at the right end. Maybe not opposite of it, but.
As per this here blog post of his — a repeat of one of his, and others’, thread.

The argument: We make things, like, security, too difficult for users and hence (?) we shouldn’t try to change them into secure behaviour.
The contra: ‘Guns kill people’, or was it that the men (mostly) firing guns, kill people? And the many toddlers shooting their next of kin since, being at the approximate maturity of the Original gun pwner, they have no clue.

The Contra, too, and much more to the point when it comes to ‘information’ ‘security’: We should make cars run at maximum 5Mph … Since ‘users’ are waaaay too stupid to drive carefully.
Just don’t mention that ‘security’ is a quality not an absolute pass-or-fail thing, and that ‘information’ could not be more vague. [Except ‘cyber’, that’s so vacated of any meaning that it’s a black hole.] And don’t mentoin we still seem to let cars be used by any other moron that once, possibly literally decades ago before ‘chips’ were invented, passed some formal test — the American idea of the test coming very, dangerously, close to … was (sic) it the Belgian? system where one could pick up one’s driver’s license at the post office. Able, allowed, to buy cars that drive not just 5 but 250Mph, on busy roads, without protection against using socmed mid-traffic… One thing could be to introduce Finnish-style booking for unsafe behaviour (if caught, not when as per next paragraph [think that through…]), and/or huge fines for the producers of bad equipment (hw/sw) comparable to fines on car makers, or outright laws to build airbags in, etc.

And then, if we’d design ‘secure’ systems, e.g., the Apple way, we’d end up with even worse Shallows sheeple that have so much less clue than before… And all in the hands of … even in ultra-liberal countries one would suggest either Big Corp, or Big Gov’t, both options being Big Brother literally in such an atrocious Dystopia of humanity.

So, you want safe systems? You get the loss of humanity before actual safety.

[Yes I get the Humans Are The Cause Of Much Infosec Failure thing (including Human Flexibility Can (still!) Solve More Than Machines Can, Against System (!) Malfunction), but also I am completely in favour of both the Humans Must Through Tech Be Completely Shielded From Being Able To Do Anything Wrong and Humans Should Retain All Freedom To Act Responsibly solutions.]

Pick your stand. And:

[Use G Translate if you have to, from Dutch. Typifying the driver, probably, if only for picking the brand/car…; London]

World Animal Day: a disruptive Whale

Because today is World Animal Day, let’s think of the Whale.

Because this is the kind of disruption your brain needs. Today, and any day.
Yes the clip is ‘Old’ — but still fresh; how’s that you Under-30-or-younger hunting faux headhunters that still, en masse (over 99,5% at least) hunt for dummies (car crashing kind) to fill dummy slots in Bureaucratia.

That’s all. And do check the vid at least until 2:42 Because Reasons.

Weird infosec science

Who would have thought — that total surveillance would reach into the house, no / hardly any backdoors need to be built in even.
As explained here, and here in closer-to-humanly-readable form.

If such are the Tempest inroads, who needs the newest-of-highest-tech solutions as they all will all succumb to either trivial complexity-induced-unavoidable sloppiness of implementation, or to circumvention in the above way…?

Of course all of it is an atrocity in ethics but … I won’t be utterly negative about humanity’s future so I’ll stop now. With:

[Art imitating life; Stedelijk Amsterdam]

Plusquote: You ..?

Short of just copying the site of all sites when it comes to motivation, this time we have something truly positive ..:

Men have become the tools of their tools.

H.D. Thoreau was right. Already in his day. Didn’t witness the atrocities of … about every decade somewhere (yes, 00, 10s, 20s and 30s, too, around the world, and 50s, 60s/70s, and, on an economic scale, 80s/90s included) of the last century though a millennium ago [is that the right expression? Not like the length ago but the timeframe that has passed…] but still already he was right.

And, since ARPAnet was invented, we’re on a same track for this century, be it still, again, as Always, again, under the flag of utopian optimism about what newest developments in AI bring. But hey, Skynet’s a beautiful thing, right ..? Right ..!?

Since this is a Plusquote post, I’ll still leave you with something positive:

[Keeps on slipping, slipping, slipping, into the future]

Area man will reluctantly vote for Hillary

“I’ve had enough of hanging around at that White House.”

27 july 2016 by Jack Dornbusch

After the nomination of Donald Trump, many Americans have indicated their intention to vote for Hillary Clinton this November, while they actually do not particularly want her for president. The same for the 69 year old Bill, just the average next door American for whom the Democrats rooted the past 23 years. “I would rather enjoy my pension in quiet.”

It is that strange feeling of responsibility that moves Bill to vote for Hillary anyway, but it will not be full-heartedly: “I’ve had enough of hanging around the White House and at my age, I’m not particularly fond of all that travel abroad. But then, I owe her one.”

Eight years ago, Bill voted for Obama, when he contested the nomination against Clinton. “ I thought then that her political career would be over, but she’s unstoppable. Oh well, here we go again.”

Flickr-Steve-Jurvetson-670x375

[Original, in Dutch, on the Speld; translated with permission]

Fintech: Babble-fork

Coining (pun not even intended as I wrote this — lame non-landing anyway) a new phrase: Babble-fork.
Which is what happens now in the financial industry with fintech:

Banks et al. think they have a role to play in the applications of blockchain technology in the financial industry of the future.
As bc is just a distributed ledger technology [ref. Tapscott the Elder & the Younger], right?
Obviously, dead wrong. Or, ‘the Internet’ is just phone lines between mainframes.

Otherhandly, the start-ups that have no role or place for the incumbents. The start-ups that expect the old ones to die [1:03 of the linked]… and then, it is already a mockery of a flattery to relate the financial industry-that-was with that commander that never made it to captain (Navy); an outright self-delusion of the grandest scale when such industrialists think they’ll still be able to catch up with the innovation tidal waves already rushing to their shores (unseen, over still deep seas until reaching their shallow tropical beach sides ..!).
Since bc is the very counterpoint of centralized (‘trusted third party’-, quod non par excellence!) trust, being the utter distribution of it hence contra anything however remotely approaching the delusion of importance that may still be with the traditionalists.

So, fintech forks ferociously for the financial future as a tenable alliteration runs only so long. But you get it. Time again to ask for the entry password — with the wrong answer leading to …?

Well then, I also have for you:

[Dear Lord. In the Attick; Ams]

Golden Oldie Pic of the Day

Once again, there you are. Because Monday:
autocars

Silent majority presents new spokesman

David Walker will ‘smash the oppositions with considerate nuance’

By John Neighdor and Harry Lydell

The silent majority wants its voice back. Today, it presented a new spokesperson: David Walker.
It will be Walker’s mission to give the silent majority a new identity, a new voice once again. “We have been silent for way too long, and it is time we start to communicate to The Others what really goes on inside our heads. We might continue to whisper to each other that we actually are a majority, but we’ll not convince The Rest with that.”

The silent majority will stay in character by remaining nuanced, moderate, and politically correct and decent, but its voice will from now on be heard. Walker: “The essence of the silent majority is that we do not tend to raise our voice. We often think before we say anything but therefore we often don’t say too much. Where in the past, the focus was on the thinking part, I would consider laying more stress on the other part, possibly and where appropriate. It’s not just about how one would say something, but also about saying anything in the first place.”

David Walker even hints at ‘smashing the oppositions with considerate nuance’ when a debate might polarize: ‘When both extreme sides are just yelling at each other, I could for example outdo them both: “You both have some arguments worth considering so why don’t you try for once to see the other’s valid points! Maybe we could even reach a compromise! We can only be successful if we arrive at a bipartisan solution! If you keep yelling at each other, you’ll not achieve much!” or something like that.’

The appointment of David Walker was a surprise. Gallup polls had shown a clear victory for D. Trump as new spokesperson.

[Original, in Dutch, on the Speld; translated with permission]