Day Zero

http://money.cnn.com/2014/09/24/technology/security/bash-bug/index.html. An exploit found in the bash shell of Unix-like systems. The linked Red Hat site listed this bash bug as urgent, claiming that unauthorized users can use this exploit to inject bash commands. This leads to a conversation on security. There will always be security issues in devices, and as more appliances are controlled through the internet, there will be more opportunities to attack. How do we keep everything secure? Is it enough to just set everything to automatically update whenever patches are available? Do these appliances need a system complicated enough to run bash shells? (more complicated means more possible exploits.)

Bitcoins

http://www.eweek.com/security/bitcoin-poses-danger-to-british-economy-warns-bank-of-england.html. Naturally, the article's contents say the opposite of what the title says. That's a different topic. The evolution of digital currency is intriguing. Virtual economies in online communities are fun to watch, but a real economy based on digital currency interacting with the standard currencies is more interesting. Of course, according to the article, there is no worry about Bitcoin harming any economies at its current scale. You can't claim that it will never harm a standard economy though. Bitcoins aren't really any different from standard currencies: Physical money has no real value (it's just a store of value); Purchasing power of standard currencies is also completely dependent on people's confidence; The vast majority of money in this world is stored electronically with no representative physical object. My first reaction to the idea of Bitcoin was incredulity that anyone would trust a currency based purely in digital form. But it's not really much different from our dollar.

"Make Definite Assertions"

A quote from William Strunk, Jr. Often accompanied by the quote "It is worse to be irresolute than to be wrong." It's a fantastic thought. Don't be afraid to be wrong; you can learn so much more. In the classroom, the teacher can infer the root of misunderstandings and clarify. In brainstorming, the most elegant solution can evolve from the strangest suggestion. But it's overstated. The wording is too strong. Assertions boldly stated can alienate. They do not invite inquisition or discussion. This is not a problem in a setting where the presenter and the audience have agreed that assertive speech is not meant to alienate, but this agreement is difficult to remember after some time and has not been agreed to in a general sense. This is why my Ethics in Technology professor has to continually present disclaimers. We read articles or watch videos with opposing views in order to stimulate personal thought about the topic. Most of these articles are worded strongly. My professor has to remind us that these opinions are not presented as truth, but as starting points for our development of opinion on these topics. Otherwise, there's a strong chance that a student with a differing opinion will feel alienated and unable to present an opposing viewpoint to the discussion. Being wrong is not something to be scared of. Much can be gained from expressing ideas. But a less assertive presentation of ideas will encourage those without that understanding to contribute to the discussion, and more contributions is a shortcut to advancement.