first human "infected with computer virus"

think that guy makes electronic music?

  On 5/26/2010 at 8:20 PM, theSun said:

i wouldn't say he is infected with the virus, moreso that he is infecting other synthetic computers with his implanted chip.

 

just a little semantics. the chip isn't interfacing at all with this guys body.

Yeah I was disappointed too. I thought it would be a manifestation of a computer virus in a human.

Who would give network access to a pacemaker? Thats really retarded. The fact that its under his skin doesn't really make this more than a glorified passcard. Its just a piece of electronic equipment thats east to carry around.

Still interesting, and good to know they're looking out for this shit. But still SCARE MONGERERS.

  On 5/27/2010 at 1:52 AM, Scrambled Ears said:

think that guy makes electronic music?

idm fer sure

interesting

lol one of the headlines in this morning's Metro (a London paper) was "SCIENTIST RIDICULED FOR COMPUTER VIRUS INFECTION CLAIM" (or something very similar anyway). loads of other scientists taking the piss out of him saying his claim is the same as loading a virus onto a USB stick, then putting it in your mouth and claiming you're infected with a computer virus. I guess the guy has pretty much ruined his career lol. what a twat.

man i wish anonyfourum was there to tell them how they've "missed the point"

  On 5/27/2010 at 11:38 AM, BCM said:

lol one of the headlines in this morning's Metro (a London paper) was "SCIENTIST RIDICULED FOR COMPUTER VIRUS INFECTION CLAIM" (or something very similar anyway). loads of other scientists taking the piss out of him saying his claim is the same as loading a virus onto a USB stick, then putting it in your mouth and claiming you're infected with a computer virus. I guess the guy has pretty much ruined his career lol. what a twat.

lol

wicked. I want to turn someone's computer into a bomb!

it's really easy all you need is omginstabomb.exe developed by brilliant but unscrupulous hackors

  On 5/26/2010 at 8:24 PM, TwiddleBot said:

that's how i read it too, I totally had this ghost in the shell imagery of having your brain hacked.

from the computer being turned into a bomb article:

  Quote

it is already possible for an assassin to send someone an innocent looking email with an innocent-looking attachment connected to it. when the receiver downloads the attachment the electrical current and molecular structure of the central processing unit is altered, causing it to blast apart like a large hand grenade.

i bet fred's got some ideas about this and how to prevent it. possibly to do with re-routing your ethernet stream back into your main .ini configuration file buffer to prevent rogue data packets from leaking into the RAM channel (which would obviously cause an explosion).

  Quote

it is already possible for an assassin to send someone an innocent looking email with an innocent-looking attachment connected to it. when the receiver downloads the attachment the electrical current and molecular structure of the central processing unit is altered, causing it to blast apart like a large hand grenade.

Wuuuuuuuuuuht?

as i said, rogue data packets leak into your RAM stream, which obviously causes a lorentzian feedback current inside the central processor and causes the explosion. i'd be interested to hear fred or alzado's ideas about how to prevent this.

  On 5/27/2010 at 3:14 PM, theSun said:

man i wish anonyfourum was there to tell them how they've "missed the point"

I can't be there but I'm still here. I'm interested in what the article BCM mentionned said because the only one I could find is this one, where the guy ridiculing our poor scientist actually says that the flaw is not about your brilliant semantic distinction (which he probably also realized wasn't the point) but about implant vulnerability to viruses.

  Quote

The problem is that what Gasson has demonstrated is an obvious one that probably requires no proof-of-concept. Technology implanted in humans is no less vulnerable than the same technology not implanted in humans. What matters is showing vulnerabilities in technology that is actually being used.

 

"The main progress that appears to have been made from such research is not a contribution to computer security, but a full-proof method of ensuring that university staff don't forget their office door pass in the morning," shoots back Cluley. "Predictions of pacemakers and cochlear implants being hit by virus infections is the very worst kind of scaremongering."

So yeah, if you or anyone else think that the point is about considering whether or not an infected usb stick in your mouth is part of your body is completely off the point.

i've got an infected USB stick up my arse - does that count?

edit: here is an article - not the one i read this morning, but essentially the same

  On 5/27/2010 at 11:20 PM, BCM said:

i've got an infected USB stick up my arse - does that count?

Yes but only if you haven't missed the point.

Cool article, but it was nothing like I thought it would be.

I thought it was actually going to be a person who got sick from a computer virus,

I was just thinking "no-way"

  On 5/27/2010 at 11:38 AM, BCM said:

lol one of the headlines in this morning's Metro (a London paper) was "SCIENTIST RIDICULED FOR COMPUTER VIRUS INFECTION CLAIM" (or something very similar anyway). loads of other scientists taking the piss out of him saying his claim is the same as loading a virus onto a USB stick, then putting it in your mouth and claiming you're infected with a computer virus. I guess the guy has pretty much ruined his career lol. what a twat.

so what you're saying in this quote is that you didn't understand well the article you read ? Or you blatantly lied to us watmmers ?Because, as I was saying, the semantic distinction Mr Sun was mentionning is not even alluded to in the article, because guess what, it's not the point.

are you the scientist in question? you are aren't you?

lol, nice.

Seriously though, can you come up with an explanation (or an apology ) ?

no

  On 5/27/2010 at 11:28 PM, the anonymous forumite said:

  On 5/27/2010 at 11:38 AM, BCM said:

lol one of the headlines in this morning's Metro (a London paper) was "SCIENTIST RIDICULED FOR COMPUTER VIRUS INFECTION CLAIM" (or something very similar anyway). loads of other scientists taking the piss out of him saying his claim is the same as loading a virus onto a USB stick, then putting it in your mouth and claiming you're infected with a computer virus. I guess the guy has pretty much ruined his career lol. what a twat.

 

so what you're saying in this quote is that you didn't understand well the article you read ? Or you blatantly lied to us watmmers ?Because, as I was saying, the semantic distinction Mr Sun was mentionning is not even alluded to in the article, because guess what, it's not the point.

Imma let you finish, but The Sun had one of the great missed points of all time.

lol

But can I interface with Taylor Swift's body?