A lot of mixed up arguments
Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs (which was good, is still lovely but has a
lot of holes poked in it and alternative theories proposed since Abraham
Maslow proposed it)
The good old slippery slope logical fallacy between security and privacy
Out and out science fiction of the minority report type
All extremely entertaining but way too facile, even naive.
Yes security and threat management is essential for privacy. And vice
versa too. And yes both will scale up and evolve so that the balance
will continue to remain essential.
Beyond that, I just don't see his point as clearly as he wants me to see
it. Maybe its all the coffee I haven't drunk since I'm trying to cut
down on it, but .. that's a lot, and I mean a lot of talking to make
those points.
At least I don't think this verbosity crosses (maybe by >< that much)
the line into pure bullshit like that Neal Stephenson piece about geeky
gold assay clerks from the California Gold Rush.
srs
On 8/19/2011 6:04 AM, Udhay Shankar N wrote:
I'm a sucker for well-argued predictions. Whether they come true or not
is secondary to the "well-argued" part, as their primary function, for
me, is to provoke thought.
Udhay
http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2011/08/usenix-2011-keynote-network-se.html
USENIX 2011 Keynote: Network Security in the Medium Term, 2061-2561 AD
By Charlie Stross
Good afternoon, and thank you for inviting me to speak at USENIX Security.
Unlike you, I am not a security professional. However, we probably share
a common human trait, namely that none of us enjoy looking like a fool
in front of a large audience. I therefore chose the title of my talk to
minimize the risk of ridicule: if we should meet up in 2061, much less
in the 26th century, you’re welcome to rib me about this talk. Because
I’ll be happy to still be alive to rib.
