@mxxcon is right in that there's no absolute reason this isn't possible. There's lots of exploits that start with malicious data, and exploit overflows or error conditions to trick the computer into executing data. This is obviously easier if you start with a digital file, but it wouldn't be impossible to create an analog object that when measured would create that equivalent file.

I mean obviously it would take a chain of crazy that's very, very long (and has nothing to do with fractals), but it's not absolutely impossible.

The target could perhaps be a set of values that are automatically calculated and that wouldn't be affected by things outside of the bad guy's control (random things like the orientation of bones for scanning). Perhaps (and bear with me on the crazy) there would be a set of measurements that are stored as a string, and the artifact could be crafted to have much larger values for those measurements (or more of that feature) than the buffer was prepared to receive. That's a very normal start for an exploit.

Having the surrounding data correspond to a valid popped address, and in turn having that point to runnable code would require either a lot of data, with very predictable quantization, stored consistently and together, or (more simply) omniscience.

Theoretical discussion aside, it was a vaguely clever idea very poorly executed. This is really, really bad for a police procedural. Honestly, though, it's still much better than what you get in sci-fi (eg. Warp 10 made us slugs, transporter fixed it, we're fine now so let's forget about Warp 10).

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

I don't watch much TV but I'd be pissed if the ABC was cut - mostly because commercial TV in Australia is really, really bad.

That could've gone really, really badly.

>> ^ChaosEngine:

>> ^marbles:
Is this what passes for financial experts nowadays? Outside of Rickards, the rest are fucking dis-info tools.
The Ben Bernanke said gold isn't money. He also said in response to Why do people buy gold?: "As protection against of what we call tail risks: really, really bad outcomes". Bad outcomes like... destroying an economy by design?
Meanwhile, If Central Banks Believe in Paper Money Why Are They Loading Up On Gold?
Also former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan disagrees with Bernanke. 2 years ago: "What is fascinating is the extent to which gold still holds reign over the financial system as the ultimate source of payment". (This is when gold was around $1,000/ounce)
In 1971, gold was $35/ounce. Now it's $1700/ounce. So it only took 40 years for the dollar to lose 97% 98% (edit) of it's value against gold.
It doesn't take an idiot to understand that if you save a $100 bill and forty years later it only has the purchasing power of $3 $2--that something is seriously fucked up with our monetary system.
You don't like gold? No problem. Just get rid of the economic central planning and let there be competing currencies. Gold will ALWAYS win in a a free market.

Rubbish. Gold has nothing but perceived value. In real terms, it is useless. If the world economy completely destabilised tomorrow, gold would be worthless. It's time we started basing our economy on the the real cost of things, energy. Ultimately, everything has an energy cost. Today energy is cheap, mostly because of fossil fuels. When energy starts becoming much more expensive, that will be the single greatest economic change in history.


The US dollar has nothing but perceived value. In real terms, it is useless. If the world economy completely destabilized tomorrow, the US dollar would be worthless.

Gold has nothing but perceived value. In real terms, it is useless. If the world economy completely destabilized tomorrow, gold would be worthless.

According to history, one of these statements is true, the other is laughably false.

So what do you measure you energy cost in?

>> ^marbles:

Is this what passes for financial experts nowadays? Outside of Rickards, the rest are fucking dis-info tools.
The Ben Bernanke said gold isn't money. He also said in response to Why do people buy gold?: "As protection against of what we call tail risks: really, really bad outcomes". Bad outcomes like... destroying an economy by design?
Meanwhile, If Central Banks Believe in Paper Money Why Are They Loading Up On Gold?
Also former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan disagrees with Bernanke. 2 years ago: "What is fascinating is the extent to which gold still holds reign over the financial system as the ultimate source of payment". (This is when gold was around $1,000/ounce)
In 1971, gold was $35/ounce. Now it's $1700/ounce. So it only took 40 years for the dollar to lose 97% 98% (edit) of it's value against gold.
It doesn't take an idiot to understand that if you save a $100 bill and forty years later it only has the purchasing power of $3 $2--that something is seriously fucked up with our monetary system.
You don't like gold? No problem. Just get rid of the economic central planning and let there be competing currencies. Gold will ALWAYS win in a a free market.


Rubbish. Gold has nothing but perceived value. In real terms, it is useless. If the world economy completely destabilised tomorrow, gold would be worthless. It's time we started basing our economy on the the real cost of things, energy. Ultimately, everything has an energy cost. Today energy is cheap, mostly because of fossil fuels. When energy starts becoming much more expensive, that will be the single greatest economic change in history.

Is this what passes for financial experts nowadays? Outside of Rickards, the rest are fucking dis-info tools.

The Ben Bernanke said gold isn't money. He also said in response to Why do people buy gold?: "As protection against of what we call tail risks: really, really bad outcomes". Bad outcomes like... destroying an economy by design?

Meanwhile, If Central Banks Believe in Paper Money Why Are They Loading Up On Gold?

Also former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan disagrees with Bernanke. 2 years ago: "What is fascinating is the extent to which gold still holds reign over the financial system as the ultimate source of payment". (This is when gold was around $1,000/ounce)

In 1971, gold was $35/ounce. Now it's $1700/ounce. So it only took 40 years for the dollar to lose 97% 98% (edit) of it's value against gold.

It doesn't take an idiot to understand that if you save a $100 bill and forty years later it only has the purchasing power of $3 $2--that something is seriously fucked up with our monetary system.

You don't like gold? No problem. Just get rid of the economic central planning and let there be competing currencies. Gold will ALWAYS win in a a free market.

>> ^bobknight33:

Are you suggesting that the debt ceiling is more if a political ceiling for the parties to use for convenience, as in this case to beat up democrats in this coming election cycle?

Yes and no. Yes, it's being used as a political weapon right now, and I think that's bad for everyone. But also no, I'm not saying the debt ceiling is some toothless measure that doesn't matter beyond politics. If this ends up with the country defaulting, it's going to be really really bad for everyone.

>> ^bobknight33:
Should there be a limit? Do you see a limit to the amount of debt that the USA can take on and still be fiscally responsible nation?

A hard legal limit in dollars that Congress needs to explicitly vote to change? No.

As a more general question, sure, there absolutely is such a thing as too much debt. But I tend to think of it as being a dynamic sort of thing. I think of total debt in terms of debt/GDP ratios -- we're at something like 40% right now. In situations where countries are at war and have an economic depression, a ratio of just over 100% isn't all that uncommon. We'll want to keep our deficits under control so that hopefully we peak under 80%, but the long and short of it is that right now I see zero need to worry about the deficit at all.
>> ^bobknight33:

Are you implying that there is no accountability for the debt that is created by government?

I think the real problem is that Republicans want deficits and debt to always be high. Essentially all of our debt comes from tax cuts, starting with Reagan. Before Reagan, we'd been paying down our debt for decades. Clinton balanced the budget and got us running surpluses again, and Bush slashed taxes to get and keep us in deficit.

At the end of a 30-year plan to borrow money, and give it to the rich in tax cuts, we now have the people who got us in this mess screaming "it's out of control spending!" They then demand cuts in "spending," which means reneging on the benefits owed to people who've paid into Social Security and Medicare all their lives, but won't get because all the money in the trust fund (and then some!) got shipped off to the top 1% of income earners in tax breaks.

So no, there's no accountability on debt, because people believe the lies they're told about how we got where we're at.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

That's on my list - I've got to see that one.>> ^enoch:

i love movies too much to ever walk out..even the crappy ones.
gives me an excuse to bitch and eviscerate the director.
didnt proyas also direct "the crow"?
that boy has chops.
the only movie this year that really grabbed me was "let the right one in".
http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?
AID=/20081111/REVIEWS/811129995/1023
seen it three times so far and every time something new pops out at me.
i even liked the americanized version with chloe moretz.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

You'll probably like Source Code. It's a tight SF thriller- a bit on the short side - and a little more mainstreamy than Moon - but still good and validates Duncan as someone who can direct a fairly complicated movie and have it make sense to to a general audience without dumbing it down.

I wish someone good would do a reboot of Bladerunner making a version more true to the original book Do Andriods Dream of Electric Sheep which had so much more in it:

>> ^dag:

I have high hopes for Proyas as well. I think our best bet though, for smart speculative fiction on the screen is Duncan Jones. Director of both Moon and the recent Source Code - his next film is supposedly a homage to Blade Runner set in Berlin - which sounds just awesome.
>> ^spoco2:
>> ^dag:
Nobody ever wants to watch Logan's Run with me - but I love that movie so much.

Oh! Great movie, I downloaded it recently to watch again, but it has to be one of those I watch alone as my wife has only so much ability to watch dated Sci Fi (current sci fi no probs).
Knowing had good bits, but I disliked the resolve. Also had high hopes because it was Alex, and, well, shot in Melbourne Yeay for the museum that me and the kids go to regularly.
Alex has done some stunning work, Dark City and the Crow, some ok work, iRobot was pretty good as long as you didn't actually expect it to be anything to do with Asimov, and some dribble... Garage Days was pretty crap.
I'd love to see him get back on top with an awesome, high concept, visually thrilling film again. Dark City is just so damn awesome.
Oh, but yeah, the plane crash scene in Knowing was awesome, very awesome.




Moon was pretty darn awesome, proper sci fi, dealing with 'concepts' rather than just flying cars and lasers. Source code looks cool, haven't seen it yet. But a 'love letter' to Blade Runner sounds ok by me

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

I have high hopes for Proyas as well. I think our best bet though, for smart speculative fiction on the screen is Duncan Jones. Director of both Moon and the recent Source Code - his next film is supposedly a homage to Blade Runner set in Berlin - which sounds just awesome.

>> ^spoco2:

>> ^dag:
Nobody ever wants to watch Logan's Run with me - but I love that movie so much.

Oh! Great movie, I downloaded it recently to watch again, but it has to be one of those I watch alone as my wife has only so much ability to watch dated Sci Fi (current sci fi no probs).
Knowing had good bits, but I disliked the resolve. Also had high hopes because it was Alex, and, well, shot in Melbourne Yeay for the museum that me and the kids go to regularly.
Alex has done some stunning work, Dark City and the Crow, some ok work, iRobot was pretty good as long as you didn't actually expect it to be anything to do with Asimov, and some dribble... Garage Days was pretty crap.
I'd love to see him get back on top with an awesome, high concept, visually thrilling film again. Dark City is just so damn awesome.
Oh, but yeah, the plane crash scene in Knowing was awesome, very awesome.

>> ^dag:

Nobody ever wants to watch Logan's Run with me - but I love that movie so much.


Oh! Great movie, I downloaded it recently to watch again, but it has to be one of those I watch alone as my wife has only so much ability to watch dated Sci Fi (current sci fi no probs).

Knowing had good bits, but I disliked the resolve. Also had high hopes because it was Alex, and, well, shot in Melbourne Yeay for the museum that me and the kids go to regularly.

Alex has done some stunning work, Dark City and the Crow, some ok work, iRobot was pretty good as long as you didn't actually expect it to be anything to do with Asimov, and some dribble... Garage Days was pretty crap.

I'd love to see him get back on top with an awesome, high concept, visually thrilling film again. Dark City is just so damn awesome.

Oh, but yeah, the plane crash scene in Knowing was awesome, very awesome.

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

There is another good blog topic: Movies you liked that everyone else hated.


OK, I'll go 1st, I liked Who's That Girl? with Madonna.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

What can I say - I enjoyed it. Maybe because I had really low expectations - for the first half, I thought I was watching a crappy supernatural thriller. The plane crash was a scene right out of one of my nightmares. Alex Proyas, the Director (Dark City) shot it beautifully - in a dreamlike way. It really was like watching a dream - the plane crash and flaming moose being just a couple of examples of that. >> ^dystopianfuturetoday:
Also, I've got a bone to pick with dag. Although you generally have great taste in movies, Knowing was fucking horrible. Fuh. King. Whore. Ih. Ball.
Issy and I had some friends over, and I said "Hey, I've got Knowing on DVD from Netflix."
"It got bad reviews"
"A friend with good taste recommended it"
Then we started it up and, like.... WOW. The plot, the twists. Yikes. The best part was the flaming moose...<

I was a kid at the time. It was my very first walk out - very empowering. >> ^kymbos:

Drop Dead Fred? Why, was it too immature for you? It's children's film.