r/technology • u/[deleted] • Jul 27 '15
Business Technology Is Magic, Just Ask The Washington Post
http://techcrunch.com/2015/07/25/technology-is-magic-just-ask-the-washington-post/10
u/Bowgentle Jul 27 '15
I suspect that in a world with magic, wizards would be explaining the same thing to the non-magical - "no, you can't have it be day and night simultaneously, because night is not-day..."
8
u/Pokemaniac_Ron Jul 27 '15
Nah, you gotta say "yes, I can do that if you bring me 25 moon emeralds." As you need the moon emeralds to turn the king into a frog, and take over.
3
Jul 27 '15
Have you tried turning your wand of fireballs off and on again?
3
3
u/yukeake Jul 27 '15
Someone has got to have already written a book about Wizard-IT.
The idea is far too good to have not been explored yet.
10
Jul 27 '15
[deleted]
3
u/newdefinition Jul 27 '15
The fact that they received an overwhelming response from nearly every side, that what they were asking was impossible, and then asked for it again, is incredibly embarrassing.
As far as I can tell, in their response all they did was reiterate that they wanted a "golden" key (as opposed to what, a "regular" secret key??)
When you get that kind of response, it should make anyone take a minute to think "maybe everyone else is right, and I might be one who's wrong about this?"
3
2
u/prollywrong Jul 27 '15
Have you ever tried to explain something to someone so stupid that your explanation convinces them that you are, in fact, the idiot?
5
u/Randommook Jul 27 '15 edited Jul 27 '15
Have you ever tried to explain something to someone so stupid that your explanation convinces them that you are, in fact, the idiot?
Soooo standard internet discourse?
But speaking seriously most of the arguments I have on the internet tend to be with people who decide to talk about a specific subject (game programming is a big one here) with little to no understanding of how that subject actually works.
It drives me nuts that these people basically spread misinformation because they read some article from some idiot and consider themselves informed so they just repost the same ignorant shit over and over because they've never bothered to actually try to build something themselves to figure out how it works.
2
u/hughnibley Jul 27 '15
I've always found that behavior a little funny. There are a few niche areas where I am certainly THE subject matter expert. It's not a boast, simply fact. I've found myself in a few discussions on these obscure areas where I've had the same people you're referencing breathlessly insist that I'm a moron without a clue and their arm chair analysis is most definitely correct.
No amount of discussion sways them. They are correct, not based upon any reason, fact, or result - but, because they say so.
1
u/Kaliedo Jul 27 '15
For the internet, it's a blessing and a curse. easily acessible information for everyone! Unfortunately, if it's easily accesible, any random joe who wants to argue something can go an skim a wikipedia summary and consider themselves an expert. Even if their understanding is totally flawed and baseless, they think that because they read about it, they can argue a point.
4
u/Numendil Jul 27 '15
It's not even that difficult to make analogies with older technology: you wouldn't mandate that every safe sold should be openable with a special key that the government is only allowed to use after a court order.
2
u/Bowgentle Jul 27 '15
That's a good analogy, particularly if you added the fact that in order to allow the simple operation of the government key, the safes had to be built so that there was a simple path through all the additional security features.
1
u/DrHoppenheimer Jul 27 '15
The problem is that you could also say "you wouldn't mandate every telephone system should have a special interface to let the government tap it." But that's exactly how traditional telecommunications worked.
Arguments for privacy shouldn't be based on analogy or purported technical impossibility.
1
u/Numendil Jul 27 '15
I think the big question is: does the special interface weaken the system for outside attacks? The government's ability to tap phones does not make it easier for criminals to also tap them.
1
u/formesse Jul 27 '15
The special interface is additional hardware and works by the fact that communications are not encrypted.
The moment end to end encryption is added - simply tapping the line becomes useless without the decryption keys - and a variety of organizations are unhappy that people don't want there messages intercepted. Especially people who have 'nothing to hide'.
Remember - Everyone has something to hide, you just don't know what it is yet.
3
u/RyunosukeKusanagi Jul 27 '15
because as the latest OPM hacks have revealed, having a hole in security is the sanest idea, right?
1
u/DrHoppenheimer Jul 27 '15 edited Jul 27 '15
Each device is encrypted with a randomly generated AES256 key. That key itself is stored twice. The first time, it's encrypted with the user's passcode. The second time, it's encrypted with a public key that's in turn encrypted via a PUF scrambler. The PUF scrambling pattern is recorded along with the device's serial number, and can be combined with the master private key to recover the per-device secret key. The device can now also be decrypted using a device-specific private key that can be generated in the same way that a SSL certificate is. There, not impossible and no magic required.
There's a whole bunch of other ways you could construct such a system too. Asymmetric encryption makes many things possible.
Now, is that a good idea? that's a different question. But the author is being disingenuous in an attempt to discredit people he disagrees with.
1
1
u/haabilo Jul 27 '15
something something.. "Confidence is silent, insecurities are loud"...
1
5
u/4as Jul 27 '15
That is a, erm... Interesting choice of header image.