Right Light Center Game Of Science
Many Americans were outraged over Russia’s e-mail hacking during the 2016 presidential election and expected a vigorous response from the U.S. But new research that views cyberattacks from a game theory perspective suggests that the delayed response was a sound one. While instinct suggests that such attacks deserve swift retaliation, viewing cyberwarfare through a mathematical lens can reveal situations where that knee-jerk response is useless. The new study, published online February 27 in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, explores various where rational choices are made by the attacker and the victim.
In this series of games, your students will learn how light behaves like a wave. The Wave Model of Light learning objective — based on NGSS and state standards — delivers improved student engagement and academic performance in your classroom, as demonstrated by research. Science Social Studies Brainteasers Teacher Tools Music Art Typing Holidays Spanish Presentation Files Flash Files Not Opening Correctly Light: Powered. Light: Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.
This game theory analysis finds that how or even whether to respond to an attack depends on how much and what the players know about each other. The take-home message of the study is sobering, says Jon Lindsay, a cybersecurity expert at the University of Toronto. “It’s not just about whodunit,” he says. “They’ve shown that you can invest a lot in identifying who carried out an attack but that’s not necessarily going to stop the attackers.” The analysis makes explicit what many victims know, whether attacked by a schoolyard bully or foreign government: Vulnerability matters.
Consider an attacker A, who strikes out at victim B. After the attack, the response depends largely on the vulnerability of the players. The victim can hurt a vulnerable attacker and gain from that strategy.
Or, if the attacker is invulnerable, the victim can pay a cost for trying to fight back. In the schoolyard, for instance, telling a teacher about a bully might mean future torment with no relief, making it safest to do nothing. In the realm of cyberattacks, vulnerability can be interpreted in several ways. The United States, for example, could have industrial secrets that make it vulnerable to an attack from China. But if the reverse isn’t true, then China might not be afraid of the United States countering a hack with an industrial espionage attack. When hackers from North Korea compromised and leaked Sony Picture’s e-mails, the U.S.
Government didn’t have a similar target in North Korea. So the United States was left in the awkward position of either ignoring the attacks, retaliating disproportionately (which could escalate things) or retaliating in a different domain (which it did, imposing economic sanctions that were largely symbolic). The game theory approach also incorporates knowledge: To make decisions about vulnerability, you have to know who your attacker is. Here, the cyber world is often different from the physical one, says computer scientist Benjamin Edwards, of IBM’s Thomas J. Watson Research Center in Yorktown Heights, N.Y. “Attribution can be harder with terrorist organizations or lone actors,” says Edwards, who led the new study.
Even when an attack might be traced to a physical location, it doesn’t necessarily mean that there’s an obvious target for retaliation, like a state government. The players’ types (vulnerable attacker, knowledgeable victim, for example), payoffs (such as the cost of public anger over a victim’s inaction if the attacker’s identity is known) and beliefs (about the other’s nature and knowledge) create a calculus that reveals various strategies, like when it is rational to tolerate an attack.
Given the various types of players and moves, the game yields three stable outcomes where neither player has an incentive to change strategy: no attack, attack and no blame, or attack and blame. While the questions that players ask, both of and about each other, appear straightforward, the answers aren’t, the researchers note. Such was the case with the presidential election hacks, says Edwards. There was growing public outcry following Russia’s leaking of Democratic National Committee e-mails, an attack that seemed aimed at influencing the outcome of the U.S. Presidential election.
This outcry was a cost for the U.S. Government, the victim. Government didn’t take public action against Russia until December 29, when it announced that 35 Russians living in the United States under diplomatic protection would be expelled. It seems President Barack Obama knew his game theory. In a news conference on December 16, he discussed the hacks, stating that “the idea that somehow public shaming is going to be effective, I think doesn’t read the thought process in Russia very well.” (At the time, the researchers had finished their analysis, says Edwards.
Right Light Center Game Of Science Fair
Obama’s remarks were “very validating.”) The research is timely because cyberattacks are increasingly a tactic of choice, says Lindsay, who served as an intelligence officer in the U.S. The good news, he says, is that adversaries are opting for cyberwar because they don’t want to challenge nations with military might. “There’s less war, but there’s now more diversity in things that are not quite war.”.
Regina Lynn poses in front of the main plaza in Red Light Center. Females aren't as scantily clad as they used to be, but males still get the better t-shirts. Editor's note: Some links and the accompanying gallery in this story lead to adult material and are not suitable for viewing at work. All links of this nature will be noted with 'NSFW' after them. — One thing you notice in my line of work is that everyone likes to talk about future enhancements rather than current functionality, even if it took years to get a product to its current state. I suspect this is a universal enthusiasm among creative people, but it seems particularly strong among sex-tech pioneers.
So when I talked with Ray Schwartz, co-founder of, NSFW I did my best to keep us focused on what is rather than what will be. Red Light Center is an adults-only virtual world that boasts 40,000 members, 10 percent of which are VIPs who pay $20/month for their privileges – even though Red Light doesn't officially enter beta until September. In May, I invited a dozen Sex Drive forum members to explore the new platform for me, as I wasn't going to have time to devote to it until late July. Initial reviews were mixed, with the men more patient with the product's flaws than the women were. Both men and women decried the generic avatars, the inability to customize anything and the clunky user interface.
Reading the women's comments, I could see each one pushing back from her computer and flinging her hands up with disgust. 'My biggest gripe is that the guys have actual clothes and women have to walk around in itty bitty slutty underwear and teeny tiny strappy high heels,' wrote one. 'Do they seriously think this is women-friendly?' 'It struck me as a very guy ideal,' said another, who admits that she found the virtual environment difficult and distracting in general.
'As for the porn available, there are easier ways to surf for naughty bits.' I finally entered Red Light Center last week, wondering how much had changed since my helpers first saw it. I managed to clothe my avatar somewhat modestly – she has pants – and yet the available bodies, skin colors and facial shapes are still woefully limited. All around me, female avatars minced by in stilettos, breasts bobbing gently in bras and corsets. Men's chests swelled against painted-on T-shirts; the occasional nudist sprinted past, penis conspicuously dangling halfway down his thighs. I wandered through an erotic art gallery, watched a porn video and ran through the public sex hall before I realized where I was. Along the way I passed a gentleman's club, a bordello and several storefronts that launch websites where you can buy real-world lingerie, porn and toys.
I felt like I was walking through a frat boy's spring break fantasy. And yet, Red Light Center markets itself as an erotic adventure for women. I asked Ray what made him think that this environment had any particularly feminine appeal. 'The lagoon is opening, and you'll be able to swim in it,' he says. Until now, the lagoon has been purely for decoration. 'We have caves to explore, and one of the caves has a clamshell bed where people can have sex if they want.
Right Light Center Game Of Science 2017
And there's a pirate ship.' Also, female VIPs will be able to slip into mermaid avatars here. Next up, also by female request, is a spa where you can get massages, pedicures and mud baths. 'It's in a very serene, comfortable, outdoorsy setting,' says Ray. 'With trees and little rabbits running around.' It's not that the world is unwelcoming or that women wouldn't enjoy it as it is – but after all the build-up, I was expecting something more balanced.
Certainly it needs male pole dancers, and more 'working boys' to balance the working girls. Once I started talking with other people and finding out where they like to go, I began to relax and get into the scene. Like most newbies, I found my way to the clubs and started clicking the dance animations, developing my own signature fusion of ballet, hip-hop and the funky chicken. Soul Train, eat your heart out. In the past, I've slipped into virtual environments incognito.
But this time I let the community know who I was and that I was researching for a column. As I write this, I'm dancing on a bar in Blu's and asking my neighbors if they come here often. ThickoneMike tells me he joined in April looking for cybersex, but he stays because he enjoys the people he chats with.
'I can't remember the last time I had sex in here!' He asks me if I've had time to try the VOIP; I didn't even know the world had voice chat. I follow him to the hotel and we discover that the VOIP activates automatically when you enter a private room. I like his voice, and I right-click his avatar to view his social networking profile. He's cute offline, too! I realize that we might be heading for something I hadn't planned on, and I check the time, assess the current level of pain in my wrists and decide that my editor will understand if the column is late.
And then suddenly I'm back in my office and Red Light Center has shut down. I don't know if I lost connection or if I accidentally clicked Quit as I switched between the 3-D client and Notepad. Unfortunately, you don't return to the world in the location where you last left it. This doesn't seem like a big deal until you get knocked offline at an inopportune moment. By the time I logged back in, ran through the revolving entry door, down the street, through the hotel lobby and to the elevator, ThickoneMike was already on his way out and the moment was lost.
Red Light provides sex bots to help you practice your cybersex positions. Like dancing, once you get into a sex hotspot, you get a list of moves and sub-moves to click. Select Flirting and you can add a smile; select Doggy and you can add a smack or a push back. Orgasms are anti-climactic, but followed by cuddling; a nice touch. The list offers a nice variety of vanilla positions and the animation is lovely. Straight and lesbian pairings are supported, with male homosexual options – including a bath house – coming soon.
Having now spent several evenings turning the place inside out, my biggest complaint about Red Light Center is that it provides almost no documentation. There's no online help where you can look up how to find partner sex, how to locate the hot tub, how to travel between dimensions to find your friends. Launching one of the internet's first adult 3-D environments without extensive online help is appallingly shortsighted. People will come to Red Light Center with and without experience in other games or online worlds; many will enter through the social networking portal. Leaving them to fumble around on their own even when they look for help is a major flaw. See you next Friday.