I don't want to be very mean but I don't understand why I used to think this guy was so awesome. Maybe he is, I don't know...but I started to like him before twitter was big and peoples personality really shown through. After that I guess I forgot about him and then he exploded later on with the advent of massive amounts of social media and pop-science stuff.
At this point I can't help but imagine him as part of the 'Smug' South Park episode smelling his own farts and such.
I don't know him personally so I don't want to make a personal attack or anything but am I the only one that feels this way after liking him at one point?
Hah, this makes it even better. Deepak Chopra's equally ridiculous response (though he is right he is missing the mark completely while trying to also be smug about it).
Can't even watch that.
Picture related is the KING WITHOUT A CROWN of 'Pop-Science' in my opinion.
If you read his other tweets it seems fairly likely that he was being very, very serious with this one.
He loves making the sort of comments that you can imagine him smuggly smirking about 'they are giogn to love this one, it is so clever/innovative/mind-blowing/SCIENCE RULES-y' while he types.
Nah hes pretty stupid in my opinion. Kind of in the same boat with Bill Nye. Just memes of atheism (they don't question anything). For example, whether you believe evolution is true or not, you should be skeptical about everything. They say that too, but then arent.
And he warps history in Cosmos. No thanks
I'll give him credit for this one being pretty good, haha.
>Neil "global warming is real" SmokeDeGrasse Tyson
Are you sure this wasn't some sort of sarcasm? It sounds pretty sarcastic to me. Especially considering this tweet >>52420126
Seems to be in the same vein of sarcasm/humor to me.
If not then, while a retarded tweet, I don't hold it against him. He's an astrophysicist, not a computer scientist
Because you were a Redditor probably. Intelligent people always thought he was a dumbass. In some video about atheism he compared it to fucking tennis players, What a retard. All he does is spout science opinions and the sheeple eat it up.
...no kidding, I wasn't talking about the obvious joke tweet. I meant that the 'unhackble' tweet lines up just as well with his 99% 'serious' tweets not just this one humurous tweet.
You mean systems that arent connected to the internet, right?
America wont get hacked for shit if we'd just take these critical systems offline.
>but then I have to drive places for data
Suck it the fuck up. This is national security.
>Just taking a system offline doesn't mean you're safer from attacks.
I have to disagree with that. If a system is offline, the only attack that can occur is a physical one.
I'd like to think that America can still defend against those.
Espionage would be a hell of a lot harder if the spy had to actually go to the place he wanted to infiltrate.
When you have the proper password/passwords for a system because you're supposed to have them to begin with you're not "hacking" it per say. Instead you're just sabotaging or vandalizing it. Hacking implies that you breach something you're not supposed to have access to and when you access a system you're actually supposed to have access to, it's not hacking.
Simply put: "Hacking" a system is getting access into it when you're not supposed to have access to it. When you're supposed to have access to it, it's not hacking anymore. The same way getting into your own car and driving it into the ditch is not "stealing" it or "joyriding" in it.
i have never seen the video you are talking about or even watched/read/heard anything to do with neil degrasse tyson, but what i can say is that
a) nothing precludes tennis from being a valid analogy except the validity of the analogy itself
b) you're a fucking edgy gen-x'er loser calling people "sheeple" unironically
c) you're not as smart as you think you are
>I have to disagree with that. If a system is offline, the only attack that can occur is a physical one.
You're ignoring the opportunity cost of taking a system offline. Information is then transferred much slower due to systems being offline, which could have an impact on safety.
I'm not sure where you are getting your definition of hacking from man.
Almost all hacking is done by people on stuff they have complete access too, from their own computers, to their cars, phones, locks, instruments, etc.
It's not about 'breaching something you’re not supposed to have access to', it's about doing things that aren't immediately apparent/making things do what you want them to do/using things in ways they weren't originally meant for/etc. and yes breaking into systems is one facet of this.
When you have the actual passwords in front of you and don't need the effort of getting that password trough random underhanded measures or getting into the system without the password, it's hardly hacking. What I mean by having access to something I do mean having the passwords necessary to get in and mess around with it at hand rather than having to put in effort to get the passwords or bypassing them.
Of course what I'm referring to is actually called "cracking", but the mainstream instead choses to mislabel it as "hacking". The original term did use to mean just making a piece of electronics do something it's not supposed to do or was never designed to do it.
So I suppose you're talking about the original definition of the word and I'm talking about the re-definition done by the media since the 1980's.
Solution there, it seems to me, is to kill the system's creators.
The basic idea is somewhat similar to something called the "uncertainty principle" found in physics.
At it's core the idea is that there really isn't a way to conclusively prove that there is absolutely no way for a system to be hacked. There are only ways to prove that a system is safe from specific types of hacks, not that there doesn't exist a type of hack, currently known or not, that can be used to hack a system.
The dismissal of the idea of an un-hackable system is based on a lack of proof that there is such a thing as an un-hackable system, rather than actual proof that every system is hackable.
a + b * c = x
if x is greater than the number of shitposts in this thread, then we don't do one.
I'm not sure if it's him who shits me, but the super science friend squad on friendbuck who love this guy sure as hell rustle my cosmic jimmies.
Also hate how for the last ten years it's been the norm for pseudo academics to refer to blackholes as anything more than theory.
Of course they're real, but every fact we have about them is still wholly theoretical. Fucking keep being the magical fact wizards you fucks. People love to follow, you will always have someone to pretend you are superior to.
Kids today eat this shit up.
I laughed too hard at this. Thanks m8