Re: Air safety is an International issue
I think that the RADLT interference is much more worrisome than GPS, because it's a much more critical component. But either way I agree that interfering with civilian commercial flights is a VERY bad idea.
55 publicly visible posts • joined 7 May 2010
> It's not only Covid that's done damage to the Chinese economy but also Xi Jinping himself with his none too subtle attacks and restrictions against China's tech sector so he has been effectively strangling the goose that lays the golden eggs for China.
Oh yeah. Just when the whole West was holding their breath and worrying that China might actually surpass them in terms of technology development the Chinese have successfully shot themselves in the foot so the West can now breathe a sigh of relief. It was a close call but with their insane measures against their own tech sector they might be done for for a while. We all have the Dear Leader Xi to thank for that!
> You only have to look at the European gas debacle to see how things have changed.
Actually those pipelines were (mostly) laid down during socialist times, so that's not a brand new problem at all. And the power of "Star Wars" wasn't only in the COCOM (although that was admittedly a big part of it as well), but also the act of tricking the USSR into using all of its resources to finance something (i.e. a space race) which they just simply couldn't finance. And this approach might actually work right now just as well as it did ~40-50 years ago.
.> It is a huge landmass and the elite are very rich.
The same could be said about Russia too and look what happened...
Even if we assume that China has become more confrontational lately thanks to the policies of Trump (which were long overdue and had bipartisan support anyway) China did act like a bully even to countries like Australia thinking that they can force the OZs into obedience, so they've more than earned what's coming to them. OTOH threatening civilian airplanes is not only not gonna earn them ANY sympathy anywhere in the world (I think that we still remember what happened to the KLM flight that flew over Donetsk), it'll also attract even more attention from US warships and submarines.
Because those suppliers are probably con organizations who are exclusively in the business of selling fakes. The overwhelming majority of such fakes is literally purpose-made stuff (probably mostly stuff that didn't pass QC at the semiconductor fab) and not just something that "slipped through" due to issues with QC. 40% is WAY too high of a number for that.
"It's obviously the only way to be sure." - No. The only way to fix this mess would be to fix 'murica's utterly broken DMCA that's full of loopholes and which almost openly encourages legal extortion, racketeering and corporate bullying. And fixing that would have the pleasant side effect of discouraging bogus copyright claims as well.
"Also, the "no tailgating" rule is impossible to enforce pretty much anywhere outside of a secure mental health unit or a prison." - Some managers seem to think otherwise and enforce rigid (and rather idiotic) door entry policies for that (the card only lets someone out if he/she used it to get in and vice versa). Manglement's creativity (and sadism) is limitless.
I swear that articles such as these are NOT written (nor recommended) by IT guys, but by those CSO types instead which I had the "fortune" to meet in my life. They seem to want to run everything like the Soviets ran Eastern Europe before 1989: monitoring everyone (including their private communication on social networks of course), giving the least amount of access (he can't do his work properly? Who cares?), encouraging EVERYONE to be suspicious of their colleagues (I've seen such idiotic campaigns alleging that the evil wrongdoer is among the corporate monkeys) and of course to report everyone for anything that seems even remotely suspicious. And then they don't understand why does IT crowd leave that company in flocks like rats abandoning a sinking ship. No sane person would want to (voluntarily) work in such a hostile environment (although mortgage does wonders).
Then there's this statement that has REALLY cracked me up: "Give them a way to do so identifiably but with guaranteed confidentiality (never anonymously – you can't follow up)." ROFLCOPTER Does any sane person actually believe that any information they report would be confidential (even with the false promise of anonymity, let alone without)? Especially when it involves one's own supervisors? Or to turn it around: could anyone believe that if being accused of something they could defend themselves in any reasonable manner? In corporations with cutthroat attitude and morals (or lack thereof)? This is REALLY something that only someone working as a CSO (or for one) can actually believe in. Everybody else is sane enough not to believe any of this BS.
"Their software, their license, so they can do what they want" - Not quite. If any company would take them to court and prove that Oracle's doing this (mislabeling its own virtualization solution) only to keep the competition out (i.e. as an anti-competitive measure), they could sue Oracle for quite a lot of money (and other lawsuits would follow too).
"Had they used a physical server or a one/two node VMware solution they wouldn't be facing this huge bill." - Except that companies that pretty much need to have Oracle databases usually aren't running their VMs on only 1-2 nodes of course....
So the notices they put up and published is just lip service?
Oh and don't worry, a burglar will never bother with picking your lock. Too much of a hassle and too noticeable. They'll just go for your open window or unlocked basement door. The only kind who'd bother with lockpicks are private investigators and the NSA (and probably the CIA and MAYBE the FBI, but definitely not the local police, they're a bunch of brutes that are too stupid for such things anyway).
Yeah, the thing about the guy being tipped off at an IRC channel (and the CSO's subsequent idiotic reaction) is what really got me thinking: this wasn't even a 0-day vulnerability. And that idiot of a CSO thought that he could wrap things up by trying to get the researcher fired? Can he be really THAT incompetent?
Actually the situation is more akin to someone seeing an open window, climbing in, retrieving my ring of keys that open the lock to my server room in the basement (and all the racks in it) that was in the other room and then handing those keys to me. Sure, I wouldn't be happy, but I'd at least thank him for being honest with me (and report him to the police if I'd notice that something valuable has gone missing) and keep those keys on me all the time. Hypothetically speaking of course.
And besides, FB was actually inviting security experts to "poke around their house".
I think that there's a quite clear line on how far researchers can go: they shouldn't cause any problems (i.e. outages) nor changes in the systems with their actions and shouldn't publish any of their findings (and especially not the data they managed to retrieve) at all, only send them as evidence to the company itself. Such actions would not cause any damage to the company in question (neither in money nor reputation) and allow it to resolve the problem in a quiet way too. Sure, that's lax enough to give ANY CSO (and the brown-noses immediately below him) a heart attack (and possibly a termination letter too), but my experience tells me that they almost always deserve it anyway.
FB CSO Alex Stamos is obviously an idiot and should be fired from FB on a short notice. Does FB's policy require security experts to submit "evidence of flaws that allow deep penetration of the firm's servers"? Obviously it does. Did the guy do it? Of course, because he was promised by corporate marketing BS to be paid for it. Did he cause ANY problems with it (meaning downtime, data leak or ANYTHING that would've compromised FB in any way)? NO. Did some data stolen from FB start appearing on pastebin or whatnot? Obviously not (otherwise FB would be in deep sheet by now).
Really, Stamos, you're an idiot. Why don't you just go ahead and work as a garbage collector instead? Hopefully that's a position where you won't mess anything up and don't get an opportunity to threaten anyone either. Oh and while I'm at it: you're a sneaky, sleazy bastard too. Didn't threaten with legal action or ask Wineberg to be sacked? Of course you did, only between the lines, not directly.
It's quite interesting to see a company like FB turn from a startup full of hopes into a corporation full of bastards and empty slogans/meaningless guarantees/promises in real time. History's repeating itself over and over again (yes, Micro$oft, Apple et al. I'm looking at you!).....
Oh and threatening security researchers with lawsuits to shut them up about your pathetic security holes just creates ticking time bombs: you'll just never know when will it go off and will your confidential corporate data suddenly start appearing out in the open. Just ask the scumbags at Sony about it. I'm sure they'll confirm how "wise" did they act about security (I bet their shareholders were REALLY happy about the turn of events too). Sigh, when will the corporate dumba$$es sitting in top positions learn (most probably never, because that's what landed them in those positions in the first place)......
Actually you can. You can open the PDF linked in the article and at the end you can see the names and signatures of the GOP 4ssholes who penned the letter. Expecting any more than that would amount to expecting them to stop using prehistoric equipment (e.g. faxes), which isn't happening......
Nah, you can't auction off the 2.4 GHz frequency band, because microwave ovens run at those frequencies too. And not even the cynical bastards at AT&T, Comcast, Tim Warner etc. would be able to lobby for scrapping microwaves in the whole US, even if they'd utilize the lunatics who argue that microwaving food turns it into a carcinogenic blob of organic material with no caloric value whatsoever.
There's just one slight caveat to your line of thinking: those corrupt bast...er individuals use the HUGE leverage they have by being board members/top managers of a big, powerful corporation to bully other people into making decisions which are VERY disadvantageous to themselves.
"Err no, that's one of the lies the anti-GPL brigade trot out.
You only need to provide the code to the part of your system that uses the GPL code."
Riiiight, the anti-GPL brigade trot out. Are they the same folks that assert that the whole source code has to be published if you statically link your code with some library released under GPL terms? You're aware of the fact that in this case the GPL expects you to release your own source code under GPL terms too, right?
Well guess what - in the corporate environment I work at the damned AV monstrosity is set to full paranoia mode - it filters out even Unix shell scripts. And no attachment releasing option either. If I want a file delivered by a HW vendor (it happens fairly often in fact), I'm out of luck. And chaotic as it is, I'm not even sure which team do I have to talk to to ask for some tweaking (well, theoretically I could try the helldesk, but no, thanks, I'd rather shoot myself in the foot). And don't even get me started on the enterprise AV policy they pushed out regarding "unwanted programs" (e.g. those idiots have included even stuff like bash.exe, which renders Cygwin unusable on the machines running the AV i.e. every corporate machine)......
All those bells and whistles are fine, but I just simply can't bring myself to like this whole business model of theirs. It isn't much about the money part either. It's the whole principle that's scaring me.
I mean do they seriously expect people to process raw picture and video data in this? I have 16-bit (per color channel) scans of color film negatives stored in raw format which are like 200 megs each. Well I surely won't wait an hour for each such file to upload to their servers before I can process them (sure, I happen to have a crappy Internet connection, but even with higher speeds and waiting times as low as 1 minute I'd hate it). And I seriously doubt that anyone with its right mind would upload even compressed 4K or 6K (let alone uncompressed!) video data to their service. I mean even with compressed video it's at least tens of gigabytes to upload, which is/would be slow even with South Korea-grade Internet connectivity (which most of the people don't have, especially in Adobe's main target market i.e. 'murica).
The thing is, I found this whole cloud concept even in itself to be unsympathetic (since it's far too reminiscent of my annoying experience with a similar solution in the form of some AutoCAD "online trial" about 6-7 years ago, which was like living hell for me), but that major outage of theirs (that rendered pretty much every single service they have unusable for quite a long time) makes the whole Adobe CC project sound even worse than that AutoCAD nightmare. I like most of Adobe's products, but this time I really hope that this cloudizing step of theirs (i.e. forcing everyone to use their products off of the cloud) will cost them dearly (simply because I think that this was a very, VERY ridiculously retarded idea).
What evidence? Your own innate pessimism? Or your irrational belief that if reovlutions don't result in paradise after the first [short timeframe] they're a failure?
Iran? Or the permanent civil war between factions in various African states, all of which are commanded by various cannibalistic chieftains (some of those are also Muslim, and just as radical as their ME counterparts)? Oh and in some of these areas the status quo has been lasting for the last couple decades (Somalia anyone?) too, which isn't quite a short time frame either....
I don't see the difference between a Muslim theocracy and a Christian one...and, quite frankly, I see a few of the western nations sliding way too close towards "theocracy". Australia, for example. Or the
Batshit Bananas Party Republicans in the states.
Me neither. But if you compare the western countries that slid "way too close towards theocracy" to the ones from the ME (Egypt and Turkey being especially notorious examples), there's a striking difference in the mechanism that stopped theocracy from happening: in the West it were the elections (or the Supreme Court at some of the more extreme lunacies), while in the Middle East it was the army. In this latter case I have this feeling that they didn't have any other options left (with a cleric/pack of clerics seizing the opportunity and trying to create a dictatorship much in the way Hitler did after being legitimately elected as Germany's chancellor).
Things aren't so simple as you pain them. Brown people aren't "primitives" that need our "guidance". They're human beings, not all that different from you or I, with hopes and dreams, desires and beliefs. Some are similar, many are different.
I think that this doesn't have anything to do with race at all (in fact I'm more inclined towards religion as the main reason, but that's a different story). Your comment is even beyond the point which I tried to make i.e. the western democracies pretty much have only two options to choose from: either they support a local strongman (who isn't a complete nutjob and can be reasoned with, even if he's a tad bit bloodthirsty at times) who'll turn the country in question into a dictatorship OR they support the local cleric (imam, ayatollah, whatever you name it) who'll turn the country in question into a theocracy or more likely a theocratic dictatorship (and in addition is completely nuts, paranoid, spreads hate propaganda against the West, and cannot be reasoned with at all). Deep inside I really hope that history will prove me wrong, but at the moment no third option seems to be viable.
I hope that Egypt is a tad bit different in this story (since the army turned out to be the smartest part of the government), but it's different in more ways than one: first of all it's the most populous Arabic country, and second (mostly thanks to tourism) it has a very broad SME sector (which is almost unheard of in other Arabic countries). Since these SMEs live pretty much only off of foreign tourists, they surely won't take a cut in their business lightly (which'd happen if theocracy would win over in Egypt and the number of tourists visiting the country would sharply drop). This lessens the likelihood of wannabe despots doing anything stupid. However these same conditions don't apply to the rest of the Arabic world, so I really can't keep my fingers crossed in their case.
By what right do you call yours better, and where is your evidence? Has your society solved all problems? Is it without corruption, without oppression, "-ism"s, dramatic wealth disparity, rampant unemployment and so forth?
The country I come from is a post-Communist Eastern European country full of people who are feeling nostalgic about Communism and are cynical pessimists too who are just unable to think in terms of the free market at all. Thus yes, my country has all the problems common to EE including corruption, cases of oppression here and there, cronyism, unemployment, lack of education etc. However at least I'm confident that nobody would sincerely wish for a theocracy (like many Muslims do) nor any form of dictatorship here. Like I said, in the Muslim world, clerical and worldly leaders are one and the same thing ("western inventions" such as separation of church and state just don't exist there and the general populace seems to reject the notion as well), regardless of the "hopes and dreams, desires and beliefs" they have. And this just isn't gonna change no matter how much "humanitarian bombarding" or "fights for freedom/democracy" (all done by one of the factions against the other ones with the help of the West, especially US) will try to advance the cause (and naturally make things even worse). Intelligence services probably know this already (or at least should) so now they're probably trying to side with the least despicable (and ideally also most powerful) faction (after they gather enough intelligence in such mess of course).
it's their nation, and they're going to run it how they like. And that's the whole goddamned point.
Yeah, but with nowadays the world being as small as it is, they're pretty much "close neighbors" (at least to me). And IDK about you, but I just won't be too happy if whatever
monsterregime they create will spend all its spare time (and maybe even resources) to spread anti-western hate propaganda day and night (and possibly also think up ingenious ways of wreaking havoc in Europe too). The precedent is there already: Gaddafi, but also Iran (even though if the latter was only involved in hate propaganda/political trolling so far, since they still need someone to buy their oil).
Oh, you mean the "revolution" among people, according to whom clerics===government, was a good thing? You think that in such countries a "new culture" or especially "self-determination" will win and people will live happily ever after? Ever heard of Iran (which prior to their "self-determined" theocracy was called Persia) BTW?
On one thing I agree with you though. Yes, they probably WILL make new culture and those WILL surely be different from "my own". However such "new cultures" are mostly called "dictatorships", "autocracies", "despotism" etc. (or "theocracies" at best) where I come from.
Well guess what, it wasn't only in ME where "all these countries boundaries were created in 1918 in a stitch-up between France and the UK", but also all throughout Eastern (and Central) Europe too. And the only reason those "lines on the map" in EE aren't as straight as their ME counterparts is because most of the times they were pegged to various landmarks (mostly rivers or some cases creeks). But the main philosophy was the same: they did cause the same kind of "tribal cracks" as in ME or Africa (divide et impera). Taking this into consideration it might not be too far-fetched that the EE maps would be redrawn in the same fashion as in the ME (provided it does happen in the ME, for which there's no proof as of this day), especially if the traditional Western European superpowers' power weakens (especially if it'd be coupled with Russia's demise), is it?