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

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Searle: The Chinese Room

John Searle has become the object of accusations of improper conduct. These accusations even have some people in the world of academic philosophy saying that instructors in that world should try to avoid teaching Searle's views. That is an odd contention, and has given rise to heated exchanges in certain corners of the blogosphere.  At Leiter Reports, I encountered a comment from someone describing himself as "grad student drop out." GSDO said: " This is a side question (and not at all an attempt to answer the question BL posed): How important is John Searle's work? Are people still working on speech act theory or is that just another dead end in the history of 20th century philosophy? My impression is that his reputation is somewhat inflated from all of his speaking engagements and NYRoB reviews. The Chinese room argument is a classic, but is there much more to his work than that?" I took it upon myself to answer that on LR. But here I'll tak...
24 comments
Read more

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 maj...
10 comments
Read more

The Growing Block Theory of Time

My own disposition, in regard to the philosophy of time, is toward the "growing block" theory. This is the view that past events remain realities, that present-moment events are also realities, but that future events are not yet real. The image is of the universe as a block with an edge on (say) the right-hand side. The block is expanding because that edge is moving ever further right, and that edge is what we call the present, or, simply, "now." Everything to the left of that edge is both static (the past is complete) and, still and forever, real. Think of the phrase "the moving finger writes." The chief alternatives to the growing-block theory are "presentism" (only the now-edge itself is real) and "eternalism" (past, present, and future are all real." I believe that time is a growing block because (1) that's what it feels like, (2) we should stick with the introspective phenomenon unless we have good reason to abandon ...
8 comments
Read more