Re: Not so certain- Detection?
How would you plan to tell the difference between a drone and a mobile phone carried by a passenger?
192 publicly visible posts • joined 23 Jul 2007
Cos if you look closely at the technical details they don't have the platform to guarantee reliability, nor the physical security to be trustworthy, and the unnecessarily short expiry that enforces automation means that any interruption to that will render you without a working site. There's no pragmatic fallback to make it robust, they've chosen to design it in a fragile manner because their ideals are more important than your uptime.
It's a bunch of idealist amateurs. If you are playing around, learning that is fine but for any real production site it just isn't credible.
Ok so lets ban cats too. We can't wait until a cat damages a plane!
These drones are too light to physically do any damage and most of the supposed sightings are at physically impossible altitudes and speeds. They pose no threat to air traffic. People are even legally allowed to fly them in most of the places you are griping about.
This is a case of any flash of a bird or carrier bag becomes a drone instead of a ufo. And a sensationalist media whipping a paranoid public into a frenzy to sell advertising.
"Intel's cunning revenue generation plan of changing the socket with each new CPU release"
To call it revenue generation really demonstrates your ignorance. Chipset features are being updated at least as quickly as cpu features these days and more needs to match in order to work at all. New chipsets with new cpu families are a necessity for innovation because CPUs are not the independant black box that they have been in the past.
Also hypervisors already have hardware support. Depending on what exactly your idea of not running in software is, it is either not physically possible or has been available in CPUs since 2005!
"I don't think that they are [contradictory]. I would have no issue with lawful, warranted access."
How do you provide warranted access to truely secure encryption if the parties involved don't want to give up the key? Your opinion on whether it is reasonable is irrelevant, without a backdoor, it is impossible. That is the contradiction. Either it is secure from everybody including gov or its not. Backdoors are there for everyone, if gov insists on some type of masterkey hackers and foreign powers will have that in no time because how will it be possible for gov bureaucracy to use that key(s) without passing them around (and losing them)?
That is actually just what Cameron has brainwashed you to think. Labour had a far better record on the economy and spent LESS than this Conservative government. Leading upto the banking crisis the Conservatives were fighting regulation while Labour were trying to increase it, so repeatedly blaming Labour for lack of regulation really only fools the naive voters. The tories say they want to make work pay, meanwhile opposing minimum wage rises, tax credits, etc. Overall they have made a right cock up of the economy, the only thing they have succeeded at is lining fatcats pockets at the expense of the rest of us.
The point is there are no actual costs for Sony, they can remove the item from the account and playstation as easily as they added it. Not refunding any clown making unsubstantiated claims is one thing, not refunding where they have evidence and acknowledge fraud was committed is bad faith.
No refunds under any circumstances is their standard policy. They charged me £39.99 just before christmas for a renewal that I had cancelled. Despite proof that they had accepted the cancellation they still refuse to refund the charge and gave the same ultimatum to block my account if I use the bank or small claims court to reverse the charge.
They think they can completely ignore the law and take money as they please. I won't ever purchase anything from them again.
to be fair to GDS there is not much they can do if antiquated Gov processes only allow them to be a frontend handing off registrations to manual paperwork departments.
The real problem is that Gov isn't embracing digital processes, but trying to slap on the veneer of GDS, etc. to give the appearance they are moving forward. However it is failing because they haven't updated how they fundamentally work.
The rules only need changing if people flying WITHIN the rules cause (potential) accidents. If they are ignoring the rules anyway, then the rules wern't relevant to that incident. In fact looser rules would mean more people following the parts that ARE important.
I'm not suggesting that anyone should fly a drone drunk. However I'm also not suggesting that we should ban all cars from the road because very occasionally the steering breaks and one veers off the road.
Science tells us what is safe and what isn't. The rules should be based on sense, not a bunch of troglodyte mumbo jumbo.
How does a bunch of people flying outside the existing rules make a case for tighter ones when there were no accidents involved in any of them? Surely this makes a case for looser controls?
People are perfectly happy for a lorry to come within 1m of them as it drives by at 60mph yet are terrified of a 1kg drone pootling around at walking pace?
Why are we not seeing thousands maimed already, when there are endless clips on youtube of amateurs flying within inches of their faces? Because the dangers are being wildly overstated.
As AC put it so well, the reason for lack of women in IT is NOT because it is misogynistic or unwelcoming but because they opt out of learning the skills.
Worst still the SJWs repeatedly telling everyone the myth that it is a toxic, sexist environment are only making the situation worse by putting off more girls from choosing it as a career path!
@Jagged well then you are a fool because currently IT has a shortage of skilled workers and demand is very high. It is one of the few professions that completely bucked the recession. Since ICT was introduced and killed the previous bubble of interest there are far fewer people coming into the industry and chasing jobs. Demand to automate and increase productivity is higher than ever, that requires IT people to implement.
Well for a start a £300 SSD does not have a super capacitor so would likely corrupt your RAID at the first power outage. Then there is all the supporting hardware, you can't just buy a petabyte of disks and bung them in willy nilly and expect any kind of performance or reliability. And how are you planning to back all this up?
As they say, the devil is in the detail.
When Amazon took over the service from Lovefilm it went rapidly downhill. They have filled it with TV boxset, mostly old and their homemade very US centric series trying to stumble on another game of thrones.
They clearly don't love film anymore because very few new films are added on a regular basis and all the brand new stuff requires payment above the subscription.
It is not surprising that people don't want a service that they have ruined.
4) where people find it difficult to get out of their home to a voting office (or postbox) through disability?
Trying to pretend that online voting wouldn't be far easier and subsequently encourage more people to do it is just moronic. There is no doubt that it would be beneficial, doing it in a secure way is the only part that is quite tricky.
So you are basically saying you have insufficient visibility and poor control of your paraglider so as not to be able to see or avoid obstacles in the sky. Why is it that you are allowed to fly them again? Lets regulate the unsafe vehicle in this scenario of yours, not the highly accurately positioned and stable one!