I was working at a medium sized accounting software firm over a decade ago when I was called into the CEOs office and sat down for an interrogation.
Apparently they had setup their Exchange server poorly and I'd had access to any number of mailboxes (including the CEOs) and other folders that I wasn't supposed to have access to. I was completely unaware of this access, but was being directly accused of having access confidential information.
I insisted, truly, that I wasn't aware of the access and hadn't looked at anything confidential, but they tried to tell me they had proof that I had accessed email I shouldn't have. At this I got upset and demanded they show me this proof, which they couldn't do because they didn't have any, but I'm guessing they thought I had seen some stuff and they could get me to cave it if they pretended they had proof.
Anyways, I didn't get in any real trouble because I wasn't intimidated, but it damaged the relationship and I ended up quitting a few months later. Now I feel the same way as OP, I don't want to be in a position where someone can make a plausible accusation of misconduct, you could be totally honest and still end up railroaded just for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. CYA.
Was reading Stranger in a Strange Land recently and Heinlein describes a similar system developed for handling the volume of mail addressed to the Man from Mars.
> Tong quickly admits that his claim to refute the simulation hypothesis is just “clickbait”—i.e., an excuse to talk about the fermion doubling problem—and that his “true” argument against the simulation hypothesis is simply that Elon Musk takes the hypothesis seriously (!).
Yeah. PhD have to eat too.
We disdain academics when they are too hype, then turn around when good information doesn't get wide spread, we blame them for being to 'dry'.
Do we allow marketing or not. We dislike when media over-hypes, we dislike media when it doesn't get the word out.
You can build a better mouse-trap, doesn't mean anything if nobody knows about it.
If only Elon was actually advancing actual humanity, and not just his own narrow idea of what humanity should be.
Also, trying to establish a self-sustaining base on Mars right now is short-sighted and a tremendous waste of energy and material.
Also also, how you do a thing is (often) as important as doing the thing itself, we're still suffering the consequences of last centuries megalomaniacal claims to be advancing humanity at the expense of a few people.
And just in case someone mentions something like D-Day, I doubt any of Elon's workers signed on to sacrifice their bodies to "save humanity" in the same way the Allies signed up (or consented to be drafted) to save Europe.
Also, if a manned mission to mars goes awry with a catastrophic failure due to cutting corners and carelessness Oceangate-style, we will probably see a massive slowdown and cut funding in space exploration in the future due to the bad publicity.
Nice, great presentation! Curious what he has in mind for the "dynamic pipelines" and "scripting (Lua?)" he mentions in the "Future directions" section. I'm imagining something more powerful for animating properties?
Sounds like a total crank, from the abstract of the paper making the claim[1]:
> ... We show that the equivalence of QC techniques (with IBM, Google and others compared with our version of QC) has been hidden for about 2,500 years – since Pythagoras. All our computations were done in a commercial cellphone, or a commercial Linux desktop, as our QC devices -- opening the user market to many industries. No cryogenics or special materials were used...
According to his profile[2] he also:
> Developed and widely published blockchain in 2001, thus protected and prohibited any patent. Protected by trade-secrets. End-to-end encryption and authentication that is secure and easy to use, and works in any platform without change.
"We broke the RSA-2048 key" is the equivalent of "I have no idea what I'm talking about, so I'll just say something slightly less dumb than what you'd see on NCIS".
Apparently they had setup their Exchange server poorly and I'd had access to any number of mailboxes (including the CEOs) and other folders that I wasn't supposed to have access to. I was completely unaware of this access, but was being directly accused of having access confidential information.
I insisted, truly, that I wasn't aware of the access and hadn't looked at anything confidential, but they tried to tell me they had proof that I had accessed email I shouldn't have. At this I got upset and demanded they show me this proof, which they couldn't do because they didn't have any, but I'm guessing they thought I had seen some stuff and they could get me to cave it if they pretended they had proof.
Anyways, I didn't get in any real trouble because I wasn't intimidated, but it damaged the relationship and I ended up quitting a few months later. Now I feel the same way as OP, I don't want to be in a position where someone can make a plausible accusation of misconduct, you could be totally honest and still end up railroaded just for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. CYA.