Re: I'll See Your 33xx and Lower You
dropped into toilets (three times), into a pot of boiling soup
Please tell me it was cleaned at some point between loo and lunch?
757 posts • joined 29 Aug 2017
searches just returned a list of URLs and, later, page titles
In the current climate just clicking on some links can put you in prison. Without page snippets how exactly do people avoid prison short of sticking with Facebook, Twitter, etc.?
Or was that the intent?
Similarly, shielding for EMC works both ways -- reduces noise getting out, by reducing radiators and general coupling to the outside environment. Those same changes reduce external noise getting in and causing havoc, so even with more sensitive circuitry the overall lower coupling wins out.
There's also the fact that high speed signals nowadays are run on impedance controlled striplines with low impedance values, versus the old point to point relatively high impedance type wiring. It's much harder to induce a signal level transient in a properly terminated differential pair at 70 ohms than a single TTL trace that might as well be a aerial for anything above a few MHz.
I'd say not just a goal -- they reached it a long time ago. Everything is up on GitHub, I've recompiled my own Talos II firmware a few times, mainly tweaks and simply making sure I can build and load my own version. Quite a nice desktop if you can afford one, and where I'm sitting now typing this.
Rudder stops preventing enough authority to get out of a fully developed spin, as I understand it. The 172 doesn't have that problem but also likes to get out of a spin on its own in something like 1/4 to 1/2 turn.
I was up (with instructor) doing all kinds of stalls and spin induction / recovery in a 172 recently, it's definitely allowed with proper weight and balance, but with two people and full fuel you're probably outside the utility category so have to take less fuel. The 152 (with rudder stop fix) is more suitable for this in general.
And yes, power on stalls with full power and a really high nose up attitude are all kinds of fun. I learned in a matter of only a couple exactly how to use the rudders, then proceeded to do falling leaf etc. Loads of fun overall and a great experience.
No standard 172 is aerobatic so you should never be going there
Look in the POH -- for many of the older ones, spins are explicitly approved assuming utility loading (forward CG). In Canada you have to demonstrate spins and spin recoveries to get a license at all.
Spins are probably one of the only "aerobatic" maneuvers a pilot is likely to inadvertently find themselves in, due to stall recovery practice. Stuff up the stall entry badly enough and nearly anything is going to want to spin.
Yes, the 152 Aerobat is the version that apparently likes to enter and lock in a spin*. And, strangely, in the article he specifically mentions the Aerobat as not wanting to stay in a spin in the simulator.
Icon 'cause spinning fixed wing is sorta rotary wing?
The Cessna 172 is notoriously stable to the point of auto-recovering from a spin just by taking one's hands off the controls, but from what I've heard the 152 should have been able to lock in a spin after forcing it for a few turns. What you describe sounds a lot more like the 172, so I'm not confident they got the modelling correct on the 152
Review idea: give XPlane or FlightGear a try (if you haven't already) to see if they behave differently -- XPlane is consistently sold on the basis of the accurate modelling, but I'll admit I've never tried it.
I really wish this were true, however I am getting the impression that most people in fact don't seem to care.
I wouldn't be above reporting the individual that failed to disclose and receive consent for the online listening / recording device they installed in their house / office / whatever to the ICO. That should cause them to care right quick.
As an added bonus, it might just cure them of the "I don't ever do anything wrong, so I like 24/7 surveillance" fallacy!
1. CLOUD act overrides public marketing and contractual statements
2. Assume the CLOUD act is invoked for some bit of user data. Yes, Microsoft is in breach of contract but they likely argue some variant of force majure. The EU still fines the organization under the GDPR, which is quite fair since that organization chose Microsoft knowing these issues could arise. Microsoft walks away with a slight bit of reputational damage they can patch over with marketing, and the organization is out the entire cost of the fine and either any required migration away from Microsoft or repeating, increasing fines as the GDPR continues to be violated in the future.
And putting all the protected data in the hands of a US company, bound by the CLOUD act, helps with this exactly how?
Remember, what people have thought were clever GDPR workarounds like this one have been shot down by the EU courts in the past. And when (not if) that happens here, Cambridge will have a very large fine to pay. Responsibility stays with the data processor (Cambridge) under the GDPR, not the external service provider (Microsoft)!
As it is, there is talk of making my office into what the MoD call an "Amber Zone" - meaning I'd need to leave the office and get my phone from a locker any time I wanted to see if anyone had tried to contact me.
Even corporations are starting to wake up to the fact that this is a good idea*, especially when said company is handling PII, or developing a new technology they don't want stolen, or dealing with security sensitive things, etc **. You got used to a level of convenience and communication that is at odds with your job -- deal with it or change to a line of work that lets you communicate more often while being around less sensitive material, even if it means less pay. The last customer's burger order probably doesn't qualify as sensitive and you can text all you want!
* I'm not allowed to carry a phone in many areas of the building I work at, due to security risk, and that's just for routine tech operations. Cameras and microphones are verboten in those spaces as well. Somehow, my desk phone, Email, Slack, IRC, etc. seem to suffice for communication needs during the work day, and that's a major step up from the 1980s when all you had, best case, was that single desk phone!
** Not me, sadly, but the rules still apply.
The MCAS could be overridden but the pilots weren't familiar enough with it to know how.
Erm, pulling a specific (tiny) circuit breaker out of dozens and also disabling the electric trim system in the process? Yeah, that's exactly what I want to be doing while hauling back on the yoke trying to keep the suicidal aircraft from killing me.
McInerney suggested that manufacturers should look at signing their firmware.
Did he also suggest that the manufacturer support the device for the lifetime of it's (quite possibly corporate) owner? With a hard, financially backed guarantee of design file security and privacy? This is just recommending a 3DPaaS scheme with you providing the electricity, space, replacement parts, and maintenance labor for free, with a nice big helping of post-sale monetization and forced obsolescence on the side. Sweet deal for the vendor, not so much for you.
I specifically avoid anything with signed firmware because I'm far more likely to be screwed over by the vendor than some random hacker (see Netgear, though I've always avoided their tat like the plague). Besides, Marlin does everything I could ever want for 3D printing and then some -- and without an Ethernet connection, you'd have to hack the host it's connected to before anything bad could even possibly happen.
Even with the potential for a firmware hack, how is that significantly different than a thermistor failing or a heater drive FET shorting out? Why not add a 1p thermal fuse on the printhead for protection against all of these failure modes?
Or, try not storing your 3D printer plugged in next to petrol containers if you're worried about this kind of thing.
Um, no? The concern is warrantless data collection for any perceived violation of law. If the only way to avoid warrantless collection of my location and who knows what else data is to switch the phone off or leave it behind, then so be it.
Regardless of that pesky issue, in this particular case the armed robber got exactly what he deserved.
This is just one more reason not to carry a phone, let alone one that's turned on all the time. As public opinion blows with the wind and associated laws, with ever increasing punishments, change to meet it, it's simply not safe to have such warrant free records strewn about for easy pickings. Want to be sent to prison or blacklisted from professional work based on where you were 20 years ago, even if you were doing nothing wrong by the laws and policies of the time the record was created? By all means, keep that phone glued to your face or stuck in your pocket.
Perhaps Orwell was simply 30 years too early in his famous work?
What would happen if, for every paywalled news article found, a quick Wikipedia stub with the bare essence of the restricted article was added?
Should do a lot more damage to the bottom line than just letting people read it who aren't going to pay in the first place, no matter the strong arm tactics tried. Whenever I see that pop up, reflex action ^W kicks in and goodbye tab (and a little memory is created of "don't bother with greedy site [X]", which gets reinforced every time this happens).
Threaten me with the DMCA for viewing something on my computer that you published online, however, and I hope your works die, still encrypted, in obscurity, and that your name (along with the decryption keys) is absolutely and utterly forgotten.
Strangely, if a site is greedy enough, I also remember not to sign up for their dead tree subscription version, where I might have otherwise. Odd that!
Apparently (at higher power points) the POWER CPUs are coming back into their own.
And they're just as free as RISC-V now that the ISA was made open some time back. I have a Power desktop and it's nice to be using an open ISA without sacrificing (too much) speed / usability over Intel/AMD. Of course I have been using Linux since the stone age, so probably was an easier transition than some others.
The PSP is AMD-controlled (signed), closed source, and has access to everything on the system. Even the owner of the machine cannot alter it or replace it because of the AMD signing key.
Why exactly should I trust this not so little bit of proprietary software, especially in changing legal frameworks mandating backdoors? Remember, AMD doesn't even have enough confidence in their own code to make it a burned-in, non-updateable ROM!
I'm happy to report that for whatever reason, dd hadn't actually started writing before I was able to stop it
Very likely because it was busy filling its buffers before starting the write process, and if your tapes are as slow to respond to the initial position request as some of ours, that could be several minutes before dd would even have enough of a buffer to start writing anything.
Am I the only person who doesn't use a mouse mat any more?
I use one, but not because the mouse needs it, more like the desk needs protecting from the mouse. Had to replace a fairly nice desk once before when I wore through the veneer where the mouse was, and didn't feel like scraping the mouse or my hand across the sandpaper-like glue board underneath!
A nice sheet of blank A4 does the job nicely, and it's rather cheap to replace when it wears out.
If someone was able to unlock my phone with their face, I don't get arrested and potentially imprisoned for a crime I didn't commit.
Careful now...that's a naive statement in an otherwise spot on post. If someone truly malicious manages to unlock your phone (which is registered nearly everywhere as yours) all they need to do is a few carefully crafted searches / posts to put you in prison. Good luck claiming you weren't the one doing that at trial when the judge / jury* is presented with that 50000:1 chance that the phone unlocked for anyone else.
This is just a long way of saying it's a bad idea for governments to assume a digital device is, for all intents and purposes, the same thing as the individual. Of course they do it anyway, and what the digital device does is permanently added to the individual's (mostly hidden) lifelong record. Very bad spot to be and one reason I detest mobile phones.
* If present. They may not be depending on what was actually posted!
The reason your accuracy is so high is because: a.) the human brain is hardwired to do this and b.) your training sample set (people you know) is orders of magnitudes smaller than a useful police database. Also you tend to constantly refresh your internal training data when you interact with the people you know!
And if you misidentify me, I'm probably not going to automatically go to prison. Application matters just as much as technology and capabilities.
I may be wrong, but I think adding extra sensors etc. would have required re-certification of the whole 737 Max or at least its flight control system
No, especially if those sensors just fed the MCAS system. What likely happened in reality is that a triple voting system is expensive -- by specifying one, you've highlighted to the regulatory bodies "this item is safety critical" (MCAS was not specified as safety critical during design), and the extra weight for wiring and extra sensors goes into someone's budget somewhere. Knowing a thing or two about corporate culture, could have been as simple as no one wanted to trim something else out or be responsible for the increased weight of the overall aircraft.
5000-mile video conferences on triple HD screens with HD audio, and it was like having the other people in the room
And all the TLAs listening in really appreciated both the fidelity of your cameras and knowing exactly what your business plans were.
Until you fix the snooping problem, this simply won't be an option. One could argue that for every "terrerst" caught several hundred / thousand people die from climate change just because face to face meetings are required to have any privacy at all in this age of lunacy!
I think the general idea then is:
1.) They're now formally un-electable
2.) They can now be charged with various crimes as the (disgusted) populous sees fit (unfortunately mob "justice" is a thing in the United States)
So out of power and probably locked up (hoisted on one's own petard). Sounds good to me.
2. If telegram is truly a secure E2E platform, how can they possibly determine the content of a message in order to cooperate with authorities?
Because it isn't -- it's a proprietary, effectively closed source* app on a phone. That's about as far from secure as you can get. I am assuming that the open source desktop variants are not relevant here, for the sake of argument, since the vast majority of users are on some kind of cell phone and the open source version should be verifiable to actually do what it says on the tin regarding encryption.
If they're not bothering to MITM the traffic directly, it's probably some proprietary local filter in the app detecting keywords. Where it gets interesting is what happens when that filter detects unsanctioned content -- does it send out a trace to the authorities and pretend to send encrypted? What exactly happens in that case?
Other possibilities could be metadata checks -- better hope you're not within some degrees of a known bad apple, or you'll be tasting Putin's special polonium dessert...
* If you can't compile the app yourself, it could have any special modifications required for the app store / local authorities, and you can't check it or fix it.
that was completely accurate, if understated.
Having worked with some of the underlying commercial cell and WiFi /BT technology in $DAYJOB that the NSA etc. then hook into, the simple fact is if a device has has a radio it's a bloody position-transmitting beacon, and algorithms to correlate activity of location beacons to find unwanted patterns (mass gatherings etc.) are so trivial they could be run en masse with 1990s era technology.
The simple fact is, in today's surveillance world, you just don't go up against the state, the state will always win, as a lot of people in China have learned the hard way (if you count understanding a problem right before you cease to be able to change behavior due to a sudden, permanent lack of brain activity "learning"). You have to change things via more legal means no matter how distasteful or seemingly impossible it is, and if your country is as fucked as China is at the moment you basically have to be willing to pick up and leave via whatever means are necessary.
All of that is a long way of saying if you don't want your country to go a certain way, you make absolutely bloody certain that you have done and continue to do everything within your power to stop it going full on surveillance authoritarian. Even if it takes every bit of resources you have, you make sure everyone knows what that means, make sure everyone you know is deeply uncomfortable carrying a phone without strict changes to law to stop the surveillance, etc. Once a country goes surveillance authoritarian it cannot be recovered by any means short of external takeover in a war (which could happen after internal economic collapse, or just over the natural course of time) -- this isn't something you fight from a couch, this is something that takes real, continued effort to drive the vote etc. as needed without putting yourself out of action with illegal activities.
What I wonder is if a human sized heat signature without a digital beacon (i.e. person with no cell phone) is now automatically flagged as a potential threat? Given how pervasive phones are and how few people understand they're carrying around a spy in their pocket, it would seem to be a potentially high quality signal.
Sooo.. Assuming you're not on a metered Internet connection. Stick a mic in a sound damped box, add speaker, add loop saying 'OK Google, FOAD'. Close box.
I'd bet bottom dollar after some amount of resources are used that way Google would detect "suspicious traffic" from your IP and force you to
engage in a lot of unpaid Mechanical Turk AI training validate that you are human across all of its services, for some indefinite time, when trying to use them. No validation, no more load on Google's servers.
For this to work it's a lot more complicated, you have to feed it something its AI doesn't think is garbage (this rules out even playing movies on loop in front of the mic). Some kind of random speech generator on a PC could do the trick, but then you're wasting a lot of your own resources (power, the PC itself) just to create a very slight additional load on one server of Google's millions.
Nice try though.
microphones recording anything you say
I know several countries and states where this would put you in prison for a very, very long time unless you had written consent from everyone being recorded.
So, if Google is doing the listening via "your" phone, for instance, who goes to prison in case someone does not give consent for that recording? Why is Google above the law? Or, scarily, is it actually your responsibility because you purchased an always-on listening device and failed to follow the law regarding such things?
That's against the Windows 10 desktop EULA (no CALs, you see, it's user locked -- RDP only legal if you are the primary user of the machine) and almost certainly against the Adobe TOS too.
Note Microsoft has (cunningly) chosen not to enforce this little limitation in software. Remember Windows NT and similar lax enforcement for market share gains? It won't last, but for now, there are probably millions of users and / or thousands of lucrative companies just waiting to be
extorted gently pushed into a brand new paid subscription Azure/Windows-based infrastructure under threat of criminal prosecution for past misdeeds.
Because if they can remotely access your boot sector and change boot device
Perhaps via the Intel ME or AMD PSP that Microsoft also effectively* requires?
Food for thought: most of the time, the TPM 2.0 on those platforms is implemented by the Intel ME or AMD PSP.
* Windows might still run on some old pre-ME/pre-PSP hardware, but for how long is anyone's guess given the age of that hardware.
I suspect the OP knew a little, but not much, about flying.
Guilty as charged. I'm still learning and as you can tell I have a ways to go.
That said, I have noticed the absolute noisiest takeoffs in prop-driven aircraft being at the steepest climb angles for a while now (I live near a GA airport). Those doesn't really sound like classic engine exhaust noise either, more of a sharp noise I'd associate with the propeller, and as the aircraft passes that noise diminishes sharply and you hear the engine itself more clearly (and a lot quieter).
In VP aircraft attempting to take-off in full coarse pitch would be a huge mistake and probably culminate in a failed take off or accident. So is a very, very rare occurance.
Interesting. From a physics perspective why is this the case? Not doubting what you are saying in any way, but it seems counter-intuitive from the standpoint of taking off at maximum possible power output.
This. IIRC BMW have already tried it for their infotainment systems, and Tesla seem to be doing something sinister when cars are sold on.
Which is why I will never even consider a Tesla, and if BMW really does that they'll be on my shit list too.
So far VW seems to be somewhat reasonable, but I wonder how long that will hold out.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020