80 karma · joined December 9, 2016
(from the transcript [0])
05:30 There's one guy moving down there but he's uh, he's wounded. ... 06:01 He's getting up. 06:02 Maybe he has a weapon down in his hand? 06:04 No, I haven't seen one yet. ... 06:33 Come on, buddy. 06:38 All you gotta do is pick up a weapon. ... 06:54 This is Two-Six roger. I'll pop flares [drop flares]. We also have one individual moving. We're looking for weapons. If we see a weapon, we're gonna engage. ... 07:18 Bushmaster; Crazyhorse. We have individuals going to the scene, looks like possibly uh picking up bodies and weapons. .... 07:36 Picking up the wounded? 07:38 Yeah, we're trying to get permission to engage. ... 07:59 Roger. We have a black SUV-uh Bongo truck [van] picking up the bodies. Request permission to engage.
There's nothing unclear here or anything to be misunderstood. If they had seen weapons they would have engaged already instead of asking for permission. It's just that the crew of the helicopter really wants to shoot them and that they, the US military nor the US public don't really give a shit if they are civilian as long as they can get away with it, which they can.
[0] https://collateralmurder.wikileaks.org/en/transcript.html
So to paraphrase "they did nothing wrong and even if they did it would have been okay".
First, they clearly shot civilians trying to take other civilians to the hospital by essentially inventing weapons they didn't and couldn't have seen. Secondly, in most countries when you get the responsibility to fly something like an attack helicopter, which takes a fairly long time to learn, you tend to have to be better than some random soldier. The "war is hell" excuse isn't really viable with the attitudes displayed in the video. But if you're trying to say that these are the kind of actions we should expect when the US invades a country then I guess we are in agreement.
Your education prospects now depend on which school you go to, especially with blatant grade inflation. My friends are putting their kids in queue for elite elementary school the day after they are born. Even if you can make it to college the traditional route you'll have trouble finding an apartment and keeping your student benefits.
Healthcare is a complicated system of public funded private institutions that regularly and willingly violate the law on things like time before you get to see a specialist. I always used to like the Swedish healthcare system until I realized I've always visited the same doctors that I knew.
Unemployment benefits doesn't apply (or atleast appeal) to former students or short contract workers these days. You have to go the welfare office and even they have no problem denying you means. You'll probably won't have much job security anyways since you'll be hired as a contractor.
Housing, especially in Stockholm, is a mess that won't be solved anytime soon. It makes the effects of everything worse. Commute time, work-life balance, even the weather.
I honestly think Sweden is one of the best countries in the world, but it's not a good deal anymore. If you got established ten years ago and could go to school before rampant youth unemployment, got an apartment before housing prices skyrocketed, know which doctors to go to, get a stable job where it makes sense to join the union etc. then it's great. You can study at university for seven years, some of them abroad, work for a few years, go on paternity leave for the better part of a year, move abroad for some time, then come back to your stable job again, leave your employer and get hired back as a consultant and if you don't find work go on unemployment. All this while you make a workers salary in housing appreciation, take vacations three times a year and get to use your parent country house in the summers.
Bottom line is that increasingly only the rich can afford to take advantage of the social safety net these days and I think it's starting to show even with things like startups. It was apparent very early that companies like Spotify, Klarna, Mojang etc. would be successful. I don't see many of these types of early successes anymore (but that might be my own ignorance of course).
There's increasingly nothing special about Sweden.
1. Distinguish clearly between authenticating to the correct server and entering form data.
2. Not send the actual password to the server but instead use some form of challenge-response.
3. Store the authentication token securely i.e. not as a cookie.
4. Enable other forms of authentication e.g. with keys.
5. Decrease the use of passwords overall (though better password authentication would still be a win).
This would make it much harder to perform a range of attacks from phishing to session hijacking. It would also potentially increase privacy, since you could more easily disable things like tracking. The reason you don't see the improvements you mention is to some extent because the engineers in question would have to reconciliation with the idea that they are the ones responsible. It's much easier to hold the position that its other entities, or users, that don't understand how things work.
While they have been producing endless press releases about "makers" and "IoT" in the last couple of years, they still charge $4k+ for a usb vid (and prohibit sharing) as part of the usb if [0]. So yes, I wouldn't expect much change.
Considerable effort has already gone into making food service efficient. One of the few reason I can imagine to unbundle food is to have fewer flight attendants. But now you're suggesting they should service the passengers in a random rather than sequential order, as not everyone would want to eat at the same time. A tray doesn't really solve the problem of the person shaking their protein drink (which hopefully stays in it's container), the person having to grab the third thing from the over head storage nor someone spilling their to go coffee over you. Food service is efficient. It comes in bulk, everyone gets served, everyone eats, everyone throws things away, done.
> Yes. It is called a "post-security food court".
"Amenities" like food courts and shops is a big reason why airports are annoying. If it wasn't for trying to get you to buy overpriced things airport entry would be as efficient as airport exit and not some IKEA style maze.
What I want is an airline that doesn't undermine their own business by making things better for their passengers, but instead have incentive both to make things better and more efficient. If there's no upsell the airline have to make sure things are efficient and there's less reason to hold back on "goodies".
I know there have been attempts to make such airlines in the past, but maybe with the new smaller long range aircraft, that can go from smaller airports, and more competitive taxi market, for transfer, it could work.
A password isn't information, especially in this context, it's data. How the login or encryption system works is information. Of all the misconceptions about hackers this is one of the weirdest to criticize. From the introduction of computers until the mass adaptation of the Internet, access to information was the largest issue in hacker culture. From BBSes to hacking groups and computer clubs, it was all about access.
> Basically a hacker is someone who enjoys hacking for its own sake
Not only isn't that what your quote says, it's essentially just the definition of an enthusiast. Hackers are, even in the most watered down definitions, something different. Doing something for fun is part of hacker culture, but it's not the purpose of it. It's things like curiosity, exploration, exchange of ideas etc.
> Whether you like it or not, most discoveries will be made by those who enjoy discovery, not as part of some moral crusade.
Rarely. Discoveries (at least "common" ones) tend to be made by people who see a future other people don't. One could argue that people like Elon Musk is very much on a moral crusade and that his motivations are utopic.
I don't really care who calls themselves or things "hacker" these days. But if you don't recognize that hacker culture, or the future of technology in general, is something more you're missing out.
People say that China is 10 years in the future and 10 years in the past, but in many ways it's 50 years both ways.
The "R" is presumably because these sound also tend to have a rolling sound to them (reverb?). Think brrr or purr.
You could probably say something like PREEEB with similar effect though.
[1] http://www.macworld.co.uk/feature/mac-software/best-mac-maki...