6.3 58km W of Illapel, Chile 2015-09-17 04:10:31 UTC 40.1 km
5.3 89km WNW of Illapel, Chile 2015-09-17 04:02:10 UTC 19.5 km
6.2 44km SSW of Ovalle, Chile 2015-09-17 03:55:07 UTC 35.0 km
4.9 47km SSW of Ovalle, Chile 2015-09-17 02:59:29 UTC 35.0 km
6.4 64km NW of Illapel, Chile 2015-09-17 01:41:09 UTC 35.0 km
5.6 86km W of Illapel, Chile 2015-09-17 01:33:03 UTC 15.2 km
5.2 76km W of Illapel, Chile 2015-09-17 01:21:50 UTC 24.2 km
4.9 90km W of Illapel, Chile 2015-09-17 01:09:49 UTC 35.0 km
4.9 118km W of Illapel, Chile 2015-09-17 00:50:08 UTC 10.0 km
5.0 54km SW of Ovalle, Chile 2015-09-17 00:42:56 UTC 32.9 km
5.2 81km WSW of Illapel, Chile 2015-09-17 00:22:20 UTC 10.0 km
5.3 57km SW of Ovalle, Chile 2015-09-17 00:06:16 UTC 10.0 km
5.7 76km WSW of Illapel, Chile 2015-09-16 23:38:05 UTC 35.0 km
7.0 25km W of Illapel, Chile 2015-09-16 23:18:42 UTC 30.9 km
6.2 70km W of Illapel, Chile 2015-09-16 23:16:05 UTC 10.0 km
6.1 44km WSW of Illapel, Chile 2015-09-16 23:03:56 UTC 10.0 km
6.4 58km W of Illapel, Chile 2015-09-16 22:59:13 UTC 22.0 km
Overall though, Hitler became grossly overconfident as a result of the 'easy' victory in France.
Thank you, I've never heard a good strategic reason for Operation Barbarossa, only ever idealistic excuses that didn't sound really plausible. This makes sense.
We understand where you stand on surveillance. Where do you stand on these issues?
Add to that:
Stance on Israel
Nuclear power
Renewable power
Carbon-based power
Fusion research
Edward Snowden
Manned space exploration
Robotic space exploration
Recent Russian expansionism
Syrian and African refugees
Would you support the re-opening of research into liquid fluoride thorium reactors.
As much as this question is flamebait, the truth is that many people smarter than me see these types of reactors as the only really feasible way out of the environmental mess that we're in. They reduce the need to release carbon, and at the same time clean up the mess that light water reactors leave behind.
I would support a presidential candidate on this basis alone.
Will you let those of us who live and breath security 24/7 lend a hand before you release it next time?
Sure, I'd love for you to lend a hand. Really.
I recently finished a two-year project for a client creating an API for aggregating and analyzing social media data in near-real-time. We could tell where an earthquake happened, minutes after it happens and before it hits the news, by the tweets, to within a few hundred KM of the actual epicenter. It was developed and implemented by myself, who studied mechanical engineering, not CS, and a small team that I led. Why me? Because I am a skilled applications developer, programming professionally for a decade and as a hobby for three. But I've no CS degree and no system that I've written has ever suffered a serious security breach. Id est, I'm probably naive about security even though I perform best practices such as using bcrypt today, and individually salting passwords before that, and prepared database queries, and XSS escaping, and CSRF token, etc.
And yet, the API is running on AWS and is probably vulnerable to attacks specific to that platform. It is also vulnerable to zero-day exploits in Linux, Apache, and PHP itself. _I_ can't make it any more secure, without going down a very long tail of unlikely attack vectors, only one of which needs to be exploited.
So will you come in and lend a hand? Lets assume that you are willing to do that for free. Am I to just give you SSH access to all our systems, and trust you? Let's assume that we were to pay you as a consultant. How much would it cost this company to secure the systems, and keep them secure as a maintenance plan? And even as a consultant, how can I know to trust you? How about if I were to hire you as an employee, how much would that cost? And even so, how could I know that I trust you?
In the real world, IT systems are not 100% secure. As a user, never assume that they will be, and don't be surprised when they are cracked.
A big difference from regular light would be blurriness. WiFi, at 2.5 GHz, has a wavelength of about 5 inches. This would lead to an extremely foggy, blurry image of everything around you.
This is actually terribly insightful. I just googled "c / 2.4 Ghz" and Google came back with "12.4913524 centimeters".
Make your choice, but you should not expect to have it both ways.
Notice that your argument works for many other fields as well. Many in both the pro-Israel and anti-Israel camps conveniently pick a date that suits their bias, be it 1000 BC, 70 AD, 1886, 1947, 1967, or 2015 to choose a cut-off line of everything up to here is forgiven, everything since needs to be justified and compensated and revenged.
More importantly is how does Siri answer your questions whether the phone is on or off?!?
There is no more "off" as you and I remember it. There is now "responsive" (on) and "not responsive" (what they call off) but the machine is still monitoring you, even when it is "not responsive". Now we know why the batteries are not removable.
GIMP is indeed overkill for many tasks or users. A light-duty image editor would be nice.
However, please add local and general blurring, brightness/contrast/alpha tuning, and basic color adjusting with red/green/blue channel shifting (alpha curve). Don't need layers.
For LIDAR it's actually not that hard to counter, instead of emitting a continuous series of pulses you emit a pseudrandom sequence. Anything that comes back that's out-of-sequence gets rejected. Since the attacker can't predict the sequence, they can't send back fake signals in the same order (assuming you're not using a crappy random number generator).
I'm pretty sure that's how the Enterprise D was destroyed. Just make sure that the LIDAR frequency isn't displayed prominently on the dashboard.
That why Western Europe is dying. It will be gone in a couple hundred years.
You haven't been reading the news this month? Tens of thousands of African and Syrian refugees are pouring into Europe, there are standoffs and concentration camps, wall and fences are being built to contain them. The Hungarian state primere has already stated that Hungary does not want any more Muslims in their country, they're loosing their Christian and Hungarian identities.
Aliases are not realy a fix you can not reliably write shell script with them and stay portable.
In scripts long names are fine, I would even say preferable.
However when I'm SSHing into a foreign box (that I what I do most of the time) then I like to have my rm, ls, cd, mv, vim, and other short commands _already configured_. I cannot imagine if I had to configure my aliases each time I SSHed into another machine. Also, if the aliases are up to the user to configure, that means that every user will have different aliases and we'll be back to the Tower of Babel when trying to communicate with other sysadmins.
Since Ubuntu was/is a very easy to use desktop environment, it has become familiar to a lot of people. Those people ended up developing cloud services and stuck to what they are familiar with, Ubuntu. It's that simple.
I moved from Fedora to Kubuntu on the desktop circa 2008 or so. Not long after my servers went from CentOS to Debian, then to Ubuntu. The real kicker for me was the seamless integration of sudo, which allows for per-user accountability even when performing commands with elevated privileges. Sure, I could have hacked sudo onto CentOS 5 or 6, but Ubuntu already had that and other niceties set up.
A poster above mentions that Ubuntu does not separate out feature updates from security updates. However, on any LTS distro (these come out one every two years), after the first six months all updates are only security updates. In fact, other than the abomination that is Firefox, even in the regular updates (non-LTS) I think that there are no feature updates, only security. To get featuers one must update the release, which happens once every six months.
There are tens of similar projects the mortar experiment was just one of them
That makes a lot of sense. The four basic components (threat identification systems, targeting systems, laser and related gimballing robots, and field power systems) all have many applications in other fields as well.
The optics, software and servos that make up this kind of system are evolving rapidly- I doubt it is really an adaptation of anything
Sure it is, nobody starts a project like this from scratch. I even recognize the body of the device from infrared cameras from over a decade ago, not identical but very similar.
Which has me wondering just how much unpredictable manoeuvring a small autonomous aircraft would have to do to defeat it.
The fine article states that the laser must stay on target for 2 seconds. I don't know if this is to target the plastic (melt, warp, or burn) or the metal (penetrate) components. When targeting mortars the system would heat them until the explosive ignited, when targeting rockets they would be heated until the vehicle failed structurally. I find it hard to believe that these differing applications would all need the same 2 second time period, though.
Notice that the targeted devices in the video seem to have a dangling antenna, it really seems as though that is helping with targeting. Maybe they can't target drones without the antenna!
it can be transported in a few medium-sized boxes"
How big is a medium-sized box?
Rosanna Arquette or John Edwards
This device seems to be an adaptation of the mostly-failed experiments to knock down mortars and grad-style rockets with lasers. Those systems only worked if the projectile was following a previously-known flight path and the laser was set up to protect that specific path, because they couldn't target fast enough. Real-world mortars are less predicable, but drones are slow enough that the targeting seems to work on them.
It is rather convenient for the researchers that a slower, more media-visible target for their mortar-laser was developed!
I'm not morally offended at his approach, but as a crowd-funding campaign, it does present a risk/reward ratio that I'm not willing to accept.
What would be more acceptable is if he firs developed the software and shows its worth, and then offered to open-source it for some specified amount of money. That eliminates almost all risk related the fact or quality of the delivery.
In open source, the delivery is not the binary but the code itself.
I've seen (and written) quite a few applications that run great, don't crash, wow the user, and have horrible code that I was _not_ proud of. I think that Open Office under Sun was a prime example of this. I understand that Photoshop code is a horror, a mess, and that nobody understands the full code base anymore.
In my opinion, fullscreen application launchers on a multitasking OS are not the ideal solution to presenting the user with a list of applications to run because the idea of fullscreen implies that it is itself another application. Id est, it blocks the currently running application. The 'start menu' type launchers that we are familiar with do not _apparently_ block the running application (even though they often block keyboard input). Thus, the user feels that the menu is part of the environment and not anoth application that has replaced the application that he is running.
I accept the premise on my Android phone because on that device I expect to only run a single application at a time. No matter what memory-management does behind the scenes (and I am familiar with onPause() onStart() onRestart() and onResume()) it appears to the user that he is running a single app at a time. Empirically, pick up the average user's phone and look at the running applications. On Android (and iOs, and Windows Phone) people typically return to the Home screen and start another application without ever closing the original applications: that is indicative of the mindset that only one application is ever "in use" at a time.
I'm sure that I could continue just using the Lancelot menu, but the point is that the fullscreen application launcher has already been tried and proven wrong.
Slashdot Mirror
Are you the Ray Morris associated with Better CGI? Is there a better way to contact you if I ever do need your services?
Thanks.
Here is the OP's table formatted:
6.3 58km W of Illapel, Chile 2015-09-17 04:10:31 UTC 40.1 km
5.3 89km WNW of Illapel, Chile 2015-09-17 04:02:10 UTC 19.5 km
6.2 44km SSW of Ovalle, Chile 2015-09-17 03:55:07 UTC 35.0 km
4.9 47km SSW of Ovalle, Chile 2015-09-17 02:59:29 UTC 35.0 km
6.4 64km NW of Illapel, Chile 2015-09-17 01:41:09 UTC 35.0 km
5.6 86km W of Illapel, Chile 2015-09-17 01:33:03 UTC 15.2 km
5.2 76km W of Illapel, Chile 2015-09-17 01:21:50 UTC 24.2 km
4.9 90km W of Illapel, Chile 2015-09-17 01:09:49 UTC 35.0 km
4.9 118km W of Illapel, Chile 2015-09-17 00:50:08 UTC 10.0 km
5.0 54km SW of Ovalle, Chile 2015-09-17 00:42:56 UTC 32.9 km
5.2 81km WSW of Illapel, Chile 2015-09-17 00:22:20 UTC 10.0 km
5.3 57km SW of Ovalle, Chile 2015-09-17 00:06:16 UTC 10.0 km
5.7 76km WSW of Illapel, Chile 2015-09-16 23:38:05 UTC 35.0 km
7.0 25km W of Illapel, Chile 2015-09-16 23:18:42 UTC 30.9 km
6.2 70km W of Illapel, Chile 2015-09-16 23:16:05 UTC 10.0 km
6.1 44km WSW of Illapel, Chile 2015-09-16 23:03:56 UTC 10.0 km
6.4 58km W of Illapel, Chile 2015-09-16 22:59:13 UTC 22.0 km
Overall though, Hitler became grossly overconfident as a result of the 'easy' victory in France.
Thank you, I've never heard a good strategic reason for Operation Barbarossa, only ever idealistic excuses that didn't sound really plausible. This makes sense.
We understand where you stand on surveillance. Where do you stand on these issues?
Add to that:
Stance on Israel
Nuclear power
Renewable power
Carbon-based power
Fusion research
Edward Snowden
Manned space exploration
Robotic space exploration
Recent Russian expansionism
Syrian and African refugees
Would you pardon Edward Snowden?
I came to ask this. Alas, no mod points.
Would you support the re-opening of research into liquid fluoride thorium reactors.
As much as this question is flamebait, the truth is that many people smarter than me see these types of reactors as the only really feasible way out of the environmental mess that we're in. They reduce the need to release carbon, and at the same time clean up the mess that light water reactors leave behind.
I would support a presidential candidate on this basis alone.
Will you let those of us who live and breath security 24/7 lend a hand before you release it next time?
Sure, I'd love for you to lend a hand. Really.
I recently finished a two-year project for a client creating an API for aggregating and analyzing social media data in near-real-time. We could tell where an earthquake happened, minutes after it happens and before it hits the news, by the tweets, to within a few hundred KM of the actual epicenter. It was developed and implemented by myself, who studied mechanical engineering, not CS, and a small team that I led. Why me? Because I am a skilled applications developer, programming professionally for a decade and as a hobby for three. But I've no CS degree and no system that I've written has ever suffered a serious security breach. Id est, I'm probably naive about security even though I perform best practices such as using bcrypt today, and individually salting passwords before that, and prepared database queries, and XSS escaping, and CSRF token, etc.
And yet, the API is running on AWS and is probably vulnerable to attacks specific to that platform. It is also vulnerable to zero-day exploits in Linux, Apache, and PHP itself. _I_ can't make it any more secure, without going down a very long tail of unlikely attack vectors, only one of which needs to be exploited.
So will you come in and lend a hand? Lets assume that you are willing to do that for free. Am I to just give you SSH access to all our systems, and trust you? Let's assume that we were to pay you as a consultant. How much would it cost this company to secure the systems, and keep them secure as a maintenance plan? And even as a consultant, how can I know to trust you? How about if I were to hire you as an employee, how much would that cost? And even so, how could I know that I trust you?
In the real world, IT systems are not 100% secure. As a user, never assume that they will be, and don't be surprised when they are cracked.
A big difference from regular light would be blurriness. WiFi, at 2.5 GHz, has a wavelength of about 5 inches. This would lead to an extremely foggy, blurry image of everything around you.
This is actually terribly insightful. I just googled "c / 2.4 Ghz" and Google came back with "12.4913524 centimeters".
Make your choice, but you should not expect to have it both ways.
Notice that your argument works for many other fields as well. Many in both the pro-Israel and anti-Israel camps conveniently pick a date that suits their bias, be it 1000 BC, 70 AD, 1886, 1947, 1967, or 2015 to choose a cut-off line of everything up to here is forgiven, everything since needs to be justified and compensated and revenged.
Nice catch!
More importantly is how does Siri answer your questions whether the phone is on or off?!?
There is no more "off" as you and I remember it. There is now "responsive" (on) and "not responsive" (what they call off) but the machine is still monitoring you, even when it is "not responsive". Now we know why the batteries are not removable.
GIMP is indeed overkill for many tasks or users. A light-duty image editor would be nice.
However, please add local and general blurring, brightness/contrast/alpha tuning, and basic color adjusting with red/green/blue channel shifting (alpha curve). Don't need layers.
You want KolourPaint:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
It is part of KDE. Install it on *buntus with:
$ sudo apt-get install kolourpaint4
For LIDAR it's actually not that hard to counter, instead of emitting a continuous series of pulses you emit a pseudrandom sequence. Anything that comes back that's out-of-sequence gets rejected. Since the attacker can't predict the sequence, they can't send back fake signals in the same order (assuming you're not using a crappy random number generator).
I'm pretty sure that's how the Enterprise D was destroyed. Just make sure that the LIDAR frequency isn't displayed prominently on the dashboard.
That why Western Europe is dying. It will be gone in a couple hundred years.
You haven't been reading the news this month? Tens of thousands of African and Syrian refugees are pouring into Europe, there are standoffs and concentration camps, wall and fences are being built to contain them. The Hungarian state primere has already stated that Hungary does not want any more Muslims in their country, they're loosing their Christian and Hungarian identities.
Europe is already gone.
So what you're saying is you like powershell?
Aliases are not realy a fix you can not reliably write shell script with them and stay portable.
In scripts long names are fine, I would even say preferable.
However when I'm SSHing into a foreign box (that I what I do most of the time) then I like to have my rm, ls, cd, mv, vim, and other short commands _already configured_. I cannot imagine if I had to configure my aliases each time I SSHed into another machine. Also, if the aliases are up to the user to configure, that means that every user will have different aliases and we'll be back to the Tower of Babel when trying to communicate with other sysadmins.
You apparently didn't read the complete article. They are now busy building components for the Space Launch System. They are still very much alive.
They might have food on the engineers' families tables, but I don't see anything coming out of there flying anytime soon.
Since Ubuntu was/is a very easy to use desktop environment, it has become familiar to a lot of people. Those people ended up developing cloud services and stuck to what they are familiar with, Ubuntu. It's that simple.
I moved from Fedora to Kubuntu on the desktop circa 2008 or so. Not long after my servers went from CentOS to Debian, then to Ubuntu. The real kicker for me was the seamless integration of sudo, which allows for per-user accountability even when performing commands with elevated privileges. Sure, I could have hacked sudo onto CentOS 5 or 6, but Ubuntu already had that and other niceties set up.
A poster above mentions that Ubuntu does not separate out feature updates from security updates. However, on any LTS distro (these come out one every two years), after the first six months all updates are only security updates. In fact, other than the abomination that is Firefox, even in the regular updates (non-LTS) I think that there are no feature updates, only security. To get featuers one must update the release, which happens once every six months.
There are tens of similar projects the mortar experiment was just one of them
That makes a lot of sense. The four basic components (threat identification systems, targeting systems, laser and related gimballing robots, and field power systems) all have many applications in other fields as well.
The optics, software and servos that make up this kind of system are evolving rapidly- I doubt it is really an adaptation of anything
Sure it is, nobody starts a project like this from scratch. I even recognize the body of the device from infrared cameras from over a decade ago, not identical but very similar.
Which has me wondering just how much unpredictable manoeuvring a small autonomous aircraft would have to do to defeat it.
The fine article states that the laser must stay on target for 2 seconds. I don't know if this is to target the plastic (melt, warp, or burn) or the metal (penetrate) components. When targeting mortars the system would heat them until the explosive ignited, when targeting rockets they would be heated until the vehicle failed structurally. I find it hard to believe that these differing applications would all need the same 2 second time period, though.
Notice that the targeted devices in the video seem to have a dangling antenna, it really seems as though that is helping with targeting. Maybe they can't target drones without the antenna!
it can be transported in a few medium-sized boxes"
How big is a medium-sized box?
Rosanna Arquette or John Edwards
This device seems to be an adaptation of the mostly-failed experiments to knock down mortars and grad-style rockets with lasers. Those systems only worked if the projectile was following a previously-known flight path and the laser was set up to protect that specific path, because they couldn't target fast enough. Real-world mortars are less predicable, but drones are slow enough that the targeting seems to work on them.
It is rather convenient for the researchers that a slower, more media-visible target for their mortar-laser was developed!
I'm not morally offended at his approach, but as a crowd-funding campaign, it does present a risk/reward ratio that I'm not willing to accept.
What would be more acceptable is if he firs developed the software and shows its worth, and then offered to open-source it for some specified amount of money. That eliminates almost all risk related the fact or quality of the delivery.
In open source, the delivery is not the binary but the code itself. I've seen (and written) quite a few applications that run great, don't crash, wow the user, and have horrible code that I was _not_ proud of. I think that Open Office under Sun was a prime example of this. I understand that Photoshop code is a horror, a mess, and that nobody understands the full code base anymore.
In my opinion, fullscreen application launchers on a multitasking OS are not the ideal solution to presenting the user with a list of applications to run because the idea of fullscreen implies that it is itself another application. Id est, it blocks the currently running application. The 'start menu' type launchers that we are familiar with do not _apparently_ block the running application (even though they often block keyboard input). Thus, the user feels that the menu is part of the environment and not anoth application that has replaced the application that he is running. I accept the premise on my Android phone because on that device I expect to only run a single application at a time. No matter what memory-management does behind the scenes (and I am familiar with onPause() onStart() onRestart() and onResume()) it appears to the user that he is running a single app at a time. Empirically, pick up the average user's phone and look at the running applications. On Android (and iOs, and Windows Phone) people typically return to the Home screen and start another application without ever closing the original applications: that is indicative of the mindset that only one application is ever "in use" at a time.
I'm sure that I could continue just using the Lancelot menu, but the point is that the fullscreen application launcher has already been tried and proven wrong.
Just the Windows feature that everybody has been lauding! Can we get forced data siphoning next, pretty please?