Complication...
"...sub-one-metre dish needed to pick up the Cascade (Ka band) signal..."
That'll need aiming. At a fast moving (LEO) target. Annoying.
4286 publicly visible posts • joined 28 Jun 2013
How about we put all the boring/tedious security wheeze into a wee feisty little box, with two Ethernet sockets: one dirty one for the Interweb and one sanitized one for your PC? Pay some boring/tedious security-wheeze drones to keep that wee feisty little box up-to-date. Obviously the https client and the like would have to be moved to the wee feisty little box (*our* man in the middle).
You'd probably want to glue-shut the USB ports and do something about the optical drives.
"...IT'S no fun when a plane is falling through the sky, YOU'RE running through your emergency procedure..."
Electronic version can be better faster and cheaper. They can tick-off things as they go. They can defer items for later, and be reminded. A vast improvement.
Just not sure about MS Windows. Their management, designers and coders are the sharpest knives in the drawer lately.
M_P666: "I think you will find windows in a LOT of critical environments - Warships, ..."
You mean Windows-for-Warships? Hardly a good counter-example to prove how reliable Windows can be in a critical environment. It actually proves the opposite point. The first UK-built Windows boat experienced a complete PC shut-down within minutes upon entering its very first sea trial exercise. It took them 20 minutes to turn it back on again. Sitting duck. FAIL.
Future Apple Manual: Under the removable cover (17) is a hidden micro-USB socket that can used for charging, thus meeting EU regulations. However the charging current into this socket is limited by design to 500mA and it would require 11 hours to fully recharge. We therefore recommend leaving this little, easy-to-misplace, intentionally-awkwardly-placed cover in place and just using the goldarn Lightning connector. Nah nah nah.
@ Pete 2
You Climate Skeptic. SKEPTIC! SKEPTIC! SKEPTIC! Burn him! Burn Him! BURN HIM!
;-)
Yes, I've noticed that the Concerned Climate Scientists and their followers have adopted the vocabulary and techniques of religious persuasion.
Do ye have faith? Or are ye a skeptic?
Their religious approach to a scientific debate is dripping with so much religion/science irony that the irony itself may raise sea level by another eight feet.
"...they plan on having large families because lots of their children will die before they reach 5 years old and they need some surviving children..."
Wow. I'm impressed. Well done. That counter-intuitive relation - where high infant mortality CAUSES over-compensation and therefore results in very high population growth - is essentially unknown. Even though it's been staring us in the face for centuries.
Healthy and wealthy: you want two kids, you have two babies, you end up with two kids.
High Infant Mortality: you want two kids, you have eight babies* but half +/- die, you end up with four +/- kids.
* The uncertainty means they need to aim high to reduce risk of no kids.
With certainty of survival, parents can play it closer to the bare minimum of replacement.
Obviously this relationship falls apart if the infant mortality rate goes extremely high.
Latest predictions put the peak of human population at about 11 billion, or perhaps just 8.7 billion with what is probably a better model. Hardly frightening.
Like the problem of traditional air pollution (CO, HC, NOx) from modern cars in the Western world, the human population explosion is pretty much sorted.
Relax. Have some cake.
"...the radioactive release from Fukushima is, per hour, half that from the hourly consumption of bananas around the world. ..."
I take issue with the wording of the banana-half of this comparison. Properly parsed, it implies a 'release' of radioactivity from the 'consumption' of bananas.
If I recall correctly, it was K-Mart where the stock price tanked towards zero. Somebody clever started buying like crazy because K-Mart's real estate holdings and other assets were worth several times the Market Cap, even accounting for taste... ...I mean liabilities. Blackberry should be worth something, even as a lifeless carcass.
Of course, I wonder how come there are hundreds of little companies making hundreds of models of mobile phones? It shouldn't be lethal to be in 5th (?) place, amongst dozens of players.
More details on this incident are still coming in...
The unwanted 'Ask Toolbar' was attached to the Oracle boat with a long thin rope. The rope was long enough that the impact of the Ask Toolbar was delayed for ten minutes. This unethical trick made detection of the giant 'Ask Toolbar' by the Oracle boat crew much more difficult. They were well into the race before they noticed something wrong.
The Oracle boat was dragged off course by the hidden underwater giant 'Ask Toolbar' attached to the underside of the boat. The boat crashed off course and got tangled up in some advertising banners lining the course.
It's mayhem.
It's amazing that, with all the Apple executives flying back and forth to Asia, they would have noticed this upmarket-reaching characteristic of the admittedly-stereotypical (but ~75% true) consumer in Asia.
If Apollo 13 was a "successful failure" then this marketing boondoggle is a "failed success".
The original GSM TDMA signal was very easy to detect. Just place any cheap clock-radio near the mobile device in question and you'd hear the transmitted signals via the clock-radio speaker: "Dah-da, dah-da, dah-da, dah-da...." and then your mobile would start to ring. It was easy to answer on the first ring, since you had about two seconds advanced notice via the clock-radio.
The same GSM "dah-da..." noise is a regular feature of BBC WS news interviews from Africa; when the signal from the old GSM mobile in someone's pocket starts to get into the reporter's, sorry - correspondent's, audio recorder.
The 3G signal is much stealthier. I've never actually heard it. Too broadband I suspect.
Re: iPhones assumed to be more expensive
Here in the cold colonies, I hadn't really noticed that the Apple iPhones were significantly more expensive than the compatible top-end competitors. They're all about $250 when bought under a two-year contract. You choose whatever ecosystem you want, the phones are all about the same price.
Since its a bit utterly pointless to have a smartphone without a generous (e.g. 6GB/month) data plan, and the monthly fee doesn't change much with or without a brand new subsidized phone every two years, your point about how "expensive" iPhones are is not really supported by the facts (although YMMV).
Granted: the guys at work with Android phones generally take the tight Scottish approach. They typically have a 100MB (0.1GB LOL!!) per month data plan. So they have a nice Android phone (e.g. a Nexus 4 for - again - $250, Contract Free), but then they can't really use it due to their tight fisted approach. They're so hardware centric and tight, they forgot that there's a larger purpose (actually using it in locations other than wifi hotspots).
In summary: The total cost for a smartphone (one that is useful and actually connected to the 'net via a generous and honestly useful data plan) is dominated by the monthly fee (~$50). The hardware is effectively about $10 per month (pay $250 every two years) for your choice of phone. Within this environment, the cost of the various desirable phones are all about the same, and relatively negligible.
Hmmm... Does this explain why so many of the unwashed masses cluster around wifi hotspots like bugs around a light? Perhaps if they didn't spend $8 a day on mocha-latte, then they could afford an actual mobile data plan.
Sorry if this is a bit complicated.
PS: Not a fanboi. We have many Apple, Android, and Blackberry gadgets.
The 5C goes against all that is Asian.
Marketing FAILS:
1) "C" as in 'CHEAP' - a branding that might work in Scotland
2) Everyone knows it's cheaper than the 5S (S = 'SOCIAL')
3) They're brightly coloured to highlight your life's failures
4) All iPhones are too small
The general aspiration is a huge gaudy smartphone that is obviously expensive. Not one that is small, and obviously branded as the "I'm a failure" cheaper version.
On my last visit to Hong Kong, I saw hundreds of expensive supercars, including Porsche 911 models. But I don't recall seeing any Porsche ("I can't afford a 911") Boxsters. This verified Clarkson's theory.
Running original software on (carefully-proven) emulators is the best initial step for major hardware upgrade cycles. Your example London bank has very clever IT managers.
On the other (tree stump) end of the intellectual spectrum is found the naïve approach of switching over to SAP.
"...based upon geographical location..."
My iPhone 4S spent a month in Asia. When I landed back in North America, it steadfastly refused to find the Rogers network. I hard reset it, and it still couldn't find the network. It was however looking for location using (probably) GPS.
It wasn't having much luck with the GPS for the simple reason that I WAS DEEP INSIDE THE MADE-OF-METAL TERMINAL BUILDING.
Point being, geographical location is often unknown (by the phone) in the precise location where you'd need it most (having just changed continents, thus 99.99% odds of being inside an airport terminal building).
Duh, it's Apple. It'll be accomplished in the most technically-complicated possible way, that excludes the aftermarket.
Something like Bluetooth 5.0+ from the phone to two tiny hidden micro speakers in the dock.
Instead of having 'ugly' holes to let the sound through.
"...Relying solely on the hardware random number generator which is using an implementation sealed inside a chip which is impossible to audit is a BAD idea."
MS Windows-based software would have suggested "...Relying solely on the hardware random number generator THAT is using an implementation sealed inside a chip THAT is impossible to audit is a BAD idea."
Back-feeding 5 volts into the Raspberry Pi via its USB port is not a feature, it's a bug.
It means that the subject USB hub has left off the special, low voltage drop, Schottky diode that should be used to allow the host to power the hub while preventing the hub from powering the host. That spot on the PCB has been jumpered.
The problem to be prevented with the diode is the situation where the host (perhaps not a Raspberry Pi, or perhaps a combination of gadgets) requires some arbitrary amount of current that's just enough to cause intermittent problems (low voltage at the host) but not enought to be the obvious cause. Recipe for frustration.
The only reason to leave off this "expensive" Schottky diode is to save a couple cents on the BOM.
I bought a USB Hub from a famous online vendor based in Hong Kong with the name starting with DX and ending with .com. It was about $8 (shipped!) and has ten (!) ports. It had the same missing diode cheapskate short-cut. I cut an internal trace in the cheap hub to isolate the power supplies. It now *requires* the included AC adapter, but at least I don't have to worry about sharing power in a manner that will not help with reliability of the Rasoberry Pi in outlying cases where the current is creeping up to the ill-defined trouble point.
Nice Raspberry Pi logo on the reviewed USB Hub though. Full credit for style.