Re: MSC Zoe was a proof of concept hack?
Most likely not.
1400 containers fall off ships PER YEAR, on average.
The damn things can take years to sink. They are so massive that in collision tests, 9.99 times out of 10 , a yacht comes off worst.
238 posts • joined 14 Apr 2011
So, the US threatens the EU to stop using Huawei - a company which has offered to show its source code to govt infosecs....
Meanwhile, US routers have more NSA approved holes in them than a colander. - https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2018/08/backdoors_in_ci.html
Perhaps 5 eyes are pissed because they cant hack Huawei routers, "methinks the ladies doth protest too much!"
and El Reg calls Huawei 'controversial' - :sadface: expected more from you
They are ignoring their DPO as well.....
While its legal to do so, it requires an organisation to fully justify why.
Surprised that this hasn't been bought up yet.
the DPO is involved, closely and in a timely manner, in all data protection matters;
the DPO reports to the highest management level of your organization, i.e. the board;
We know that rockets can become an unplanned firework. It has always been so. The Soyutz has been so reliable for so long, that it became boring. Time to get real though. They have been stupidly reliable for years.
Find the fault and the steed rides again. Don't change it if it works.
I love my work surface, to be honest. Its a 3, I7 8GB 256 model. Best laptop I have owned, bar none.
I had to evaluate dell, HP and some other tablets for work - and none - none at all 'got' how windows 10 is meant to work on a tablet/laptop
I do use a mac for my personal computer - its grand, but, ya,know.....
My wife just gave up her winfone. as discussed above. I could not see why she would keep it almost 2 years past her contract 'upgrade' - but it takes all sorts. She is changing for an Iphone 8 plus.
It would be crazy to drop parts of colregs-such as lookout because it would also be dropped for crewed. Crewed ships have radar too.... but still need to have a lookout. If we dropped it for uncrewed ships, haulage companies would use the same argu ment for reducing bridge crew for regular ships.
Nah - having AIM missiles is what won it for the harriers.....
The argintinian missiles (AIM 9B) had to lock from behind, and less than 3KM range..... designed in the late 50s....
The AIM J the aim could acquire lock at 5KM, all aspect locking. designed late 1970's
Regan gave the RN those -on the way to the falklands - they were not even issue to us front line squadrons at the time.
21 of 75 argintinian aircraft destroyed (inc helicopters, ground attack, anti ship fighter-bombers and unarmed) were destroyed by harriers....
[quote] 3. I can always find a sucker who values mine for more then I do, I should sell mine to him/her.
4. That sucker can almost certainly find another sucker to sell them to for a higher price.[quote]
Problem being 1:that eventually the suckers run out -
and 2: with the design of BC, the cost you have in making the coins are such that no further suckers can afford them.
There is a cost to producing a BTC, but you have no real asset delivered... There is no lump of coal to warm someone, there is no service given to a customer. Noone is actually buying stuff with BTC now. They are trading BTC (and it seems many are now really struggling to do so)- and that is a real problem. PPL claim banks having no intrinsic value - but that is not correct. Banks provide a service (overcharged, I believe but hey!). The banks needed to be bailed out by central governments to keep the rest of the economy working - they really were 'too big to fail'. Governments will not to do this for BTC.
yes, it does. - funnily enough, management of properties is one area you must register...Maintaintainance not so much.
Yes, it does in some cases - for example, if you are an accountant with a list of clients, but not if you are managing a list for say a hobby or club... Marketing lists may not require registration with the ICO - it depends.....
The ICO (busy boys and girls!), if you are deemed a controller or processor. (IE, you are providing services to someone in euroland.
Useful worksheet here:
It would seem to me the following....
the data subject is the tracked person.
The data is being collected by a third party, without the consent of the data subject. This is a case for the stalked to take against the stalkee.
I think you are the data processor
When you know that data is being gathered without consent, you likely need to stop processing it. You may need to inform the ICO. If the owner of the device is registered with the ICO/using the data for corporate mischief (spying on staff/customers etc, without consent) then it is the ICO who will be dealing with them. If it is a stalker, then advice from the ICO needs saught.
you likely should give the tracking information to the subject - though not who comissioned your gathering work - that would be given up upon request by the court, and you should advise the stalkee of this.
Alternatively, you could make it clear in your privacy statement that surrendering any physical device is considered proof of ownership of the data, and in that case, the whole file would be shared (including original purchaser, account details (for your cloud service, etc). That may bypass the concerns - it will certainly discourage the stalkers (and you may loose sales) - though who reads the privacy statement!. It certainly lessens the creepiness factor a bit.
In any event, if you know the work is potentially creepy, then stop doing it.
IE There neither a russian or Israeli hack. there has been no real information - yet.
Good old Symantic et al can stand as proud US services, with the NSA giving a straight extranational competitor a good kick in the nut-sack. After the Boeing/Bombardier spat, and the general anti-russian sentiment, I would not be surprised.
It makes one forget about stuff that matters, like gunrunners money laundering in Las Vegas
The US navy do not publish their position on AIS, and (obviously) dont post an adequate lookout.
The large commercial carriers often dont post an adequate lookout either, as just about everything in those waters has AIS, which gives them time to make adjustments. Radar is OK, as far as it goes, but can be problematic on so many fronts. NO technical means negates the requirement for Mk 1 Eyeball - from either side.
COLREGS defines the international rules for the avoidance of collisions at sea.
Part A - General (Rules 1-3)
Rule 1 states that the rules apply to all vessels upon the high seas and all waters connected to the high seas and navigable by seagoing vessels.
Rule 2 covers the responsibility of the master, owner and crew to comply with the rules.
Rule 3 includes definitions.
Part B- Steering and Sailing (Rules 4-19)
Section 1 - Conduct of vessels in any condition of visibility (Rules 4-10)
Rule 4 says the section applies in any condition of visibility.
Rule 5 requires that "every vessel shall at all times maintain a proper look-out by sight and hearing as well as by all available means appropriate in the prevailing circumstances and conditions so as to make a full appraisal of the situation and of the risk of collision.
Rule 6 deals with safe speed. It requires that: "Every vessel shall at all times proceed at a safe speed...". The Rule describes the factors which should be taken into account in determining safe speed. Several of these refer specifically to vessels equipped with radar.The importance of using "all available means" is further stressed in Rule 7 covering risk of collision, which warns that "assumptions shall not be made on the basis of scanty information, especially scanty radar information"
I believe that the carriers will be either in mothballs or be full time drone & Possibly heli carriers by 2030 anyway.
The fact was that the timing of the opportunity for the navy to procure didn't align with the technology for drones is the only reason we built what we did.
We bought around 50 of the first surface pros - we have almost 700 in all now.
With batch 1, to date, I have had 2 returns to Microsoft - TOTAL. I have also had 3 broken screens in traunche 1. (though I think 1 of those might ave been an effort to get a surface pro 4!). They were i3/64/4 datapads and not worth sending to the screen-menders.
I have had 1 PSU failure also in that batch.
No keyboard issues.
Many of the pens didnt last - this was almost always lost.
Surface pro 4 here (i7/8GB) = couldnt be happier, tbh. I did find (I had to 'test' one for our SMT) that the i5 was almost always adequate.
Most of SMT (and myself) ditched desktops for the older 'slide in' docks, with a beefy PSU for charging phones etc off the USB.
We found that our return rate was actually significantly lower thus the cost was less (not ideal) of a factor - staff take more care of them. Most common return is still dropping them ! To date my organisation has about 700 surfaces 3's & 4's of about 5000 portables in the field .
Chromebooks/pixels didnt cut it with our users. Ipads/Ipad pros were popular, but were not taken up when the choice was either/or (IE staff wanted to keep their desktops for real work)...
The Dell talets were complete fail, with their craptastic keyboard connections (several field test ones broke within 2 months)
HP ones we not bad, but very much second.
The art of management of staff is knowing you have internal bias, and making personal adjustment to ensure that these bias do not negatively impact your staff.
I have managed large teams in the past - had to hire, and unfortunately fire. I have always tried to understand my biases and not based my decisions on these - rather corporate needs.
EVERYONE has some forms of bias - its management 101 to underdstand this, and develop tools to work with your own. Be it gender/belben person types/colour/religion - whatever.
Reading the article, it appears that Kieren has developed (and revels in) bias of his own.
Arline, before being leader, when she was head of Finance for the NI assembly and she signed off the RHI system - basically green/woodchip heating.
Unfortunately, (for N Irish tax payers) she dropped off the caps on the claims, and forced the grants to remain available for months AFTER the issue was reported - twice - to her office.
There are EMPTY barns here which are heated to tropical temps, so the grants can be earned. 70% + of the claimants are also 'connected' with the DUP.
Liability for this is in excess of .9 DUPs, over 20 years.
The UK govt refused to pay for the DUP blunder.... I guess they are now
I was a student nurse in the 1980s - before I went into tech.
I was reciently in hospital with an elderly parent, and again with a sick daughter. The process /paperwork AND the staff really suck. No energy any more on the wards. No nurses, really- just auxillaries (agency/uncertified carers -perhaps 2 qualified nurses on at a given time).
Sad really. THe qualidied staff fill in forms, (either on their pcs or paper - doesnt matter which) the rest dont give a shit.
The staff are protecting their arses against claims.
My brother in law is a consultant - now a days at 45, he does 16 hours per week, for around 100K pa.
Everyone who can is gouging the NHS - drug companies, consultants, 'health professionals' politicians.
I believe that HMS Caroline cost something like 45K per year, back in the day, to keep mothballed in Belfast. She was a WW1 light criuser, converted to RNR and Sea Cadet offices until 2009. She is about to become a tourist attraction in belfast - her initial unveil had attracted some 40K tourists right away, and should be net income generating.
Keeping a ship like this is nothing like keeping a small craft maintained. you take out most breakable bits (engine, tanks of hazardous materials, fuel, asbestos, etc), and effectively manage a big metal box.
In 2008, (when I joined her for a while), the biggest repair was from some burst pipes during a cold snap.
A refit is different altogether - new stuff for the tourists. that cost millions....
Active IR/Radar chaff/flares. It woul dbe essential for next gen tanks and support veichles. Enter a hot area, deploy a continuous swarm of drones to act as chaff/decoys, recharge and redeploy.
Ships could use them too for point defence - possibly helicopters.
Even further - use drones as micro, disposable weapons platfrorms to deploy, and return if not used. Indeed - why bother with batteries - you could host more weight efficient powerplants, if you could automatically redock to refuel...
Knife missile, anyone?
only needed 140M for takeoff as well.... 4 canons on the front - more firepower than those figates. and did over 2 miles per gallon, with 900 miles range!
Almost seriously though, the swordfish would make an excellent replacement - its unlikely almost any modern frigate could lock them, and with a few mods, it could be IR invisible, practically (just wet the canvas, and fit a better exhaust :) ) Modern british torps have a range of about 30nautical miles - so well out of range of small arms fire. Trouble would be that most military helicopters are faster - so you might need that rear gunner afterall.....
This ship was due to carry a railgun. It didn't work to schedule, so it carries 2 155mm canon. (as well as missiles etc)
The tumblehome is little to do with radar. The point was to create a wavepeircing hull, to provide stability for the railgun/guided shell launcher. This boat sinks (it has ballast tanks fitted to flood before firing). The problem with that is that it will basically unstable in this configuration, and liable to capsize in anything greater than a force 4/5 (as waved are likely to crash the deck)
So imagine the hull 6 feet lower in the water, moving at 10 knts (to fire). Generally low radar profile doesnt matter when 10 24LB shells per minute are detected!
It might be a submarine after all!
There are very few legitimate reasons for an individual to create offshore shell companies. They are often there for tax evasion or money laundering or reverse mergers.
The few legitimate reasons for a company to set up one are fairly sketchy, - hiding deals with dodgy companies.
The panama papers are there not for the deed of setting up the company which is not illegal - rather it is a pointer to individuals who should be considered for investigation.
Its like finding a gun that's been traced to a murder in someone's home. It doesn't prove the owner was the shooter - but you would look into them.
More interesting will be the individuals that a state doesn't investigate - that suggests that they have power to deflect.
It would be a better idea to have a phone case, with an NFC or something to triangulate the phone (a transmitter in 2 corners, with 2 recievers would triangulate the position in 3 axis, and orientation (face up/down/a potential target for the charger presented). Then use a freaken laser to beam onto the case- if its an appropriate target (hit it at low power for a few milliseconds, to sense if you have a direct line of sight, then ramp up ) Bluetooth reports back if the case has charged the phone.
Relatively efficient transmission, no diffusion
Less collaboration with external suppliers
I mean - LASERS.
It not just the FBI that has to cover its arse..... the accusations were made, and further sanctions were imposed (mostly low end arms sales, one of NKs major exports). Ob cant back down because he was wr... wro...wr... wr... (dammit)... not correct...
If the FBI was to turn around and say "gee it was X, Y or Z", then the state dept would also look (more) stupid.
When you think about it, its almost the perfect crime, if it were carried out by someone else - because the FBI (NSA or whoever) CANT finger anyone else now.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020