I had a green tea and lime lolly the other week, it was quite nice actually.
What's that? "Bimodal IT"? Sounds like a load of DevOps to me mate.
6734 publicly visible posts • joined 23 Feb 2010
We don't need guns to stop terrorists, we have Glaswegians for that.
If you hear about some case where someone is in court for doing something weird, odds on it's being heard in Exeter Crown Court.
I have no idea why that is, but there used to be an endless parade of 'interesting' cases when I lived down that way.
Getting into orbit isn't just about getting high, erm, I mean reaching a high altitude. You also need to be travelling sideways fast enough that you fall towards the Earth at the same speed it's falling away underneath you.
Orbital speed at about 200km (below about 150km there's too much atmosphere) is about 7000m/s, so to get into orbit from Perlan 2 you'd have to raise your altitude from ~30km up to ~170km and your speed from ~180m/s to ~6500m/s.
For a 1kg satellite you're going to need something like an extra 20 mega joules of energy to get into a very low orbit. Looking at some energy densities, you might be able to get that out of a rocket weighing 5-10kg, which I guess isn't out of the realm of possibility (but I'd check with an actual rocket scientist rather than going with my back-of-the-envelope guesses).
A virus scanner is unlikely to pick up a brand new threat (although I assume this one is in the databases of most virus scanners by now), so that probably wouldn't have helped you.
Also, a change to the MBR is 'before' any OS is loaded, or startup programs, so monitoring here wouldn't have helped either (assuming this malware just altered the MBR and didn't install it's own startup program).
What would keep you safe from this is enabling (the much reviled in anti-Microsoft circles) SecureBoot, which checks that the bootcode is cryptographically signed. Or simply just using a GPT boot block, rather than MBR.
tl/dr: no, your current defences would probably not have helped defend against this specific malware.
"Explain how my cash purchases put me at the same risk as credit card use."
I'm not sure that it's the same risk, but if you use a currency that is widely counterfeited, you might buy something from a shop, and be given fake money in your change which you would not be able to spend elsewhere, thus losing money.
Of course, what's more likely to happen is the shop doesn't notice the fake pound coin when they give it to you, nor do you notice that it's fake, and neither does the shop where you spend it. Your only loss would be a tiny amount of inflation, but not one you'd notice.
It's not unusual in the UK for a law to be widely ignored, and almost never upheld.
For example, in Bristol the police don't care about recreational weed smoking. As long as you're not dealing, or trying to blow the smoke in someone's face they'll pretty much ignore you.
See also: motorway speed limits, bikes on pavements, street drinking and lying to the electorate through the medium of slogans on buses.
It does seem to be a US idea that laws are fixed and immutable and that there should never be any leeway in interpretation.
I have a Yahoo account because my first webmail was a rocketmail.com address. Rocket Mail then got bought by yahoo and converted into Yahoo mail (just after Hotmail was bought by Microsoft for the same reason).
I just checked, it's still there, getting about one spam email per month. I could delete it, but at the rate Yahoo are going they'll be deleting every thing in a few years anyway.
What bothers me is that after watching (for example) a video about a SpaceX launch, YouTube then suggests some of these "UFO sHown In nasa FOOTAGE!!!11one!" videos.
No Youtube! You should be able to tell from the amount of NASA etc videos I watch that I like science, not woo! Stop bloody suggesting these credulous idiots to me.
I like Mint, I use it a lot at work, but I can't claim with a straight face that the GUI makes any more sense than Win10.
Both OSs have a generally well thought out main interface, but both have odd inconsistencies where older UI systems are still used for some backwards compatibility related reason. With Windows you've got the registry instead of config files which may or may not be better depending on what you prefer, but with either Mint or Win10, you're still going to have to resort to fiddling with things by hand in a registry/text editor.
There's Group Policies you can set to prevent any user from enabling macros.
First you ban them everywhere, then you find the five people in your entire company that actually use them and work with those people to either remove macros completely or at least make sure only the approved ones get run.
There's the Defcon documentary, which is available for free.
So you didn't bat an eyelid at the idea that all US citizens are constitutionally bound to shoot each other, but you do take umbrage at the idea of every street corner having a camera?
Perhaps you should avoid any media where they might use exaggeration for comic affect, it clearly doesn't agree with you.
King Cnut's grandfather was one King Harald Bluetooth, after whom the short range wireless protocol is named. The Bluetooth logo is made up of the runes of his initials.
There's your IT angle right there.
The C-47/DC-3/Dakota would be a better example than the B52, because they're mainly (only?) used in civilian service these days. The last ones were produced in the 40's but there's still hundreds still in regular use.
The tenth DC3 ever made is still in regular commercial use!
Have you read all of these yet?
Or to look at it another way, if there was some big secret that they could learn from the air, we probably wouldn't let them fly over the UK.
Open Skies doesn't really give anyone any more information than they could have got via satellite, but as an exercise in international cooperation and trust I think it's a good thing.
Also, imagine the drinking contests that will be going on at Brize this week as the RAF attempt to uphold their country's honour against the vodka swigging Russians!
What if one, or both, of the combatants were on fire? Would that change the results?
"testing phase", is that the bit where you ask the customer if they've bothered testing the new system you've developed and they say "yeah, looks fine", so you go ahead and deploy it to production, only to get a phone call five minutes later saying "it's all broken". You ask why they didn't bother testing that bit and they say "I thought it would be ok".
Because I find that pretty testing...
That's actually a good question, you'd normally expect rats or mice to be the first cloned animals.
I assume there's an agriculture angle to why a sheep was picked (some funding came from the Min. of Ag.), but I suspect it just happened that the researchers who got there first happened to be using sheep.
By the sounds of it, Ford assumed that the door wasn't operational yet. The operator assumed that when Ford hit the button, he wanted the door to close.
What should have happened was when people came on set, someone should have pointed out "hey, these doors are hydraulic and fully operational, so you really don't want to be under them when they close, so be careful".
The idea is that you can't be responsible for your own safety until you've been informed of the risks to your safety.
"secure in the knowledge that _they_ won't be around when it all blows up"
As senior members of the Iraqi government, presumably they should have been worried about things literally blowing up around them, especially if they knew that the security forces didn't have working bomb detectors.
Making money off of bribes isn't much use if you get blown up.
You jest, but the UK has had a large role in the development of modern computers, from Turing, through LEO and Ferranti, all the way to ARM.
Er, which has just been bought, never mind!
Mine's the one with a RPi in the pocket, that can replace our DB servers right? >>>>>
Making a physically small nuclear weapon is more difficult than a large one. There is a lower limit to the smallest amount of fissile material that can create a nuclear explosion, and that would have to be 100% pure, and the rest of the bomb would have to perform close to the theoretical limits in order to detonate.
For a country building it's first nuke, they'll be working to loser tolerances, which will result in a physically larger bomb.
This doesn't mean a bigger boom though. A less sophisticated weapon will probably have a larger yield than a smaller, more advanced one.
The smallest (publicly known) nuke is the SADM, which was the size of a large backpack, weighed about 25kg and had an explosive power equivalent to six thousand tons of TNT. In contrast, Little Boy, which was the second nuclear device ever detonated, weighed four tons, and only had twice the yield.
When they build these new launchpads, they should build some specially hardened camera silos round the edges, and one right in the middle pointing straight up.
Imagine the footage as each booster comes in to land!
Of course, it won't matter in a few years because Elon will have his volcano lair with a hidden landing pad ala Thunderbirds.
It turns out the standard has it's own website, http://www.internationaldockingstandard.com/, with a pdf to download. Handy for those of you building spaceships in your shed.
Although it might have been agreed in 2010, it's clearly based on the Apollo/Soyuz docking adaptor, as developed by NASA and the USSR in partnership back in 1975. That's right kids, even in the middle of a Cold War, and a space race, engineers don't care about your petty politics, they just wanna SPACE.