Skip to main content

Blackhat (2015)



Blackhat, the Michael Mann movie about hackers and international intrigue, was close to unwatchable. The plot was just an all-over-the-place mess.

In the action sequences, people were shooting at each other. I got who the good guys were and who the bad guys were (more or less) but I seldom really understood why they were where they were and how the showdown there had come about. I've had time to reflect on it since and "kinda" understand the plot but ...

don't see it if you don't like to work that hard.

But I'm not part of the hacker subculture, so maybe I just don't get the appeal ... right?

Maybe. Except that the movie makes some stupid technical mistakes of the sort that have apparently turned off those who are very much of that subculture. At one point, the protagonists asks to borrow another character's phone, asking, "is it an android" and proceeding to make valuable use of it after getting an affirmative answer. Apparently, though, the app he then proceeded to use doesn't actually come with the android system.

Similarly, the characters in the movie refer to a small doohickey that plays a role in the plot as a "thumb drive." Even I could see that it didn't look like a thumb drive. According to a "trivia" observation at imdb, it is a yubikey verification thingy. No, that means nothing to me either, but presumably the intended audience knows as well as I did that it isn't a thumb drive.

The above photo is of a thumb drive. A yubikey thing, on the other hand, is smaller and thinner (because it isn't really used to store anything) and can be recognized by the four 'fingers' at the business end --the outer fingers longer than the inner ones. As below....

And yes, I know that this is my fourth successive post with a headline that begins with the letter "B." Not a pattern, just a fluke. As it happens, I've got another B-post planned for tomorrow, though we'll be moving on to the rest of the alphabet after that.
Image result for yubikey verification

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge.



We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a majestic wate…

Hume's Cutlery

David Hume is renowned for two pieces of cutlery, the guillotine and the fork.

Hume's guillotine is the sharp cut he makes between "is" statements and "ought" statements, to make the point that the former never ground the latter.

His "fork" is the division between what later came to be called "analytic" and "synthetic" statements, with the ominous observation that any books containing statements that cannot be assigned to one or the other prong should be burnt.

Actually, I should acknowledge that there is some dispute as to how well or poorly the dichotomy Hume outlines really maps onto the analytic/synthetic dichotomy. Some writers maintain that Hume meant something quite different and has been hijacked. Personally, I've never seen the alleged difference however hard they've worked to point it out to me.

The guillotine makes for a more dramatic graphic than a mere fork, hence the bit of clip art above.

I'm curious whe…

Cancer Breakthrough

Hopeful news in recent days about an old and dear desideratum: a cure for cancer. Or at least for a cancer, and a nasty one at that.

The news comes about because investors in GlaxoSmithKline are greedy for profits, and has already inspired a bit of deregulation to boot. 

The FDA has paved the road for a speedy review of a new BCMA drug for multiple myeloma, essentially cancer of the bone marrow. This means that the US govt has removed some of the hurdles that would otherwise (by decision of the same govt) face a company trying to proceed with these trials expeditiously. 

This has been done because the Phase I clinical trial results have been very promising. The report I've seen indicates that details of these results will be shared with the world on Dec. 11 at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology. 

The European Medicines Agency has also given priority treatment to the drug in question. 

GSK's website identifies the drug at issue as "GSK2857916," althou…