In most states, including NY, the check is simply an ODBII test. This test simply asks the car for a list of components that need to work to meet emissions and a yes/no/maybe answer for if it's working. If all things work then the car must pass emissions. This is known to be true because the EPA requires that the manufacturer write up a report that proves they tested the emissions and it meets the standards when the emissions components are working and that the computer detects and reports when the emissions components don't work.
VW's problem is they lied on the report which and actual emissions are not tested for each car.
Yea, it's a weird situation, but we have already make people pay for things they don't want. A real big one is war, you are required to pay taxes to support a war. It's irrelevant that you may or may not approve of it, or that you might be against killing people, even if that's your religious belief. You are required to pay for the food for the soldiers, which may involve killing sacred animals. You are also required to pay for courts, that may preside over divorce cases.
That's the real issue, the government can and does make you pay for things you disagree with, and you don't have a say in it (other than your vote). So why can't the government make you pay for health care that you don't agree with? If the receiver disagrees with it, that's usually when your choice comes into play. But we found that doesn't really matter either, for example in a draft. Being against the war doesn't exempt you from being required to kill someone.
Yes, it's very worth it, it lets you move the cockpit so it doesn't interfere with aerodynamics. It will most likely result in an improved view (they can put cameras on the bottom so they can actually see crew on the tarmac when taxing). And removing the windows will help aerodynamics and save fuel. Considering the plane is already fly by wire, it's not a significant complexity addition.
In addition I wonder how this patent is even valid, the Virginia class submarine already does this, they have a photonics mast which means cameras are the only way to look outside. The benefits for them is that the periscope no longer enters the hull (safety), the control room no longer needs to be directly under the conning tower which means a bigger control room, and other items on the ship don't have a periscope they have to design around. Also the photonics mast is more capable as it's not limited by optical tech, they can put better cameras on it (IR) that you couldn't really do in a purely optical system.
I don't think it's much of an issue, you can put cameras on board that are much better than what you can normally see (like a couple IR cameras), and identify actual objects (like other planes) in the monitor. It results in a much more interesting display. Not to mention at cruising altitude there isn't all that much to look at anyways.
Airbus want this probably because they can move the cockpit, it no longer needs to protrude out the nose (and impact aerodynamics), it can save lots of fuel that way.
In a highly redundant system it should be enough to have multiple monitors inside, with multiple cameras outside whose field of view significantly overlaps. Camera fails? Well the other camera can still see the same thing. Monitor fails, well you can pull up that camera on another monitor. All cameras are cross connected via multiple display computers, and display computers are powered via separate power busses. So a display computer failing does nothing, a power surge only affects half the system, and half your monitors can pull up half your cameras which still gets you a full view. In an extreme case like a power surge killing systems it shouldn't affect everything, but you still only get a degraded system, not a failed system.
Also don't forget that power systems are many times redundant on planes (any engine can power it, APU can power it, battery can power it, and ram air generator can power it) and have to go through certifications that they don't fail in a way that causes damage (usually implemented by putting breakers on the power systems, if it surges it disconnects and lets the backup take over). And on top of that you can still fly by instruments alone. Something as simple as a short or loss of multiple engines does not kill power on a modern commercial plane.
Nah, legally it's not that bad for them. They'll claim they got a government contract, and all is good. If the court agrees with that the the logical conclusion is to sue the state for failure to bid the contract and a whole bunch of government contracting laws, and you'll also end up with that SWAT isn't government, so there are probably legal issues and conflict of interest type things letting them handle a police type job.
In short either they are government, and open to all of this, or they are private and fucked up the contract. Either case they can get sued.
But they are not solving it, just using ARM does nothing, it's still developed by a company in an NSA friendly country. How is russia going to audit that code? If they want to get away from foreign hardware then get away from it and develop your own CPU. Write a new one from the ground up, it's really not that hard (performance is the hard part).
Not C, some weird OS somewhere had a sucky heap manager so they made their own (C just says you'll have something, over the years that something meant something different on different systems). And yea, the OpenSSL people were correct, never roll your own crypto because even a PhD in crypto doesn't really make you qualified in it. With that said, rewriting a known crypto algorithm is mostly fine, the issue OpenSSL had is bad programming, not bad crypto.
Don't worry, I work in a government agency, IE8 is the only authorized browser (with java of course), and if you gained access to that computer you would have plenty of access to sensitive (but not classified) stuff.
I don't know about any specifics for the UK, but that generally just falls under it's not yours. Public infrastructure isn't your to touch, just as your neighbors bed isn't yours to sleep in. Taking it is just considered theft, they don't tack on extra charges because you took it from the public (and they arguably should). As an example they do do something like that with police and government employees in the US. In NY Punching a random guy on the street is third degree assault (class A misdemeanor) and punishable by up to 1 year in prison, but if that guy is a cop or public bus driver (and a whole list of other public workers), then it's automatically bumped to a class D felony punishable by up to 7 years in prison (at least that's what I get attempting to interpret the law).
Re:Easy solution for all their technical problems.
on
Barbarians At the Gateways
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
How much? As someone who invests for the long term, I really don't see large spreads affecting me. Right now, looking at google, I see a spread of 16 cents on a $1000/share stock. If I invest in that stock, I'd probably consider anything under 1% in gains a wash, so the spread would have to be over $10 to even factor into my decision making. I don't care if the spreads go up 10x, to $1.50 on that stock, it won't affect me, yes I'll lose that extra dollar or so, but I'm trading on double digit gains/losses, if I buy at $700 and sell at $1000 I don't care about that $1.50, it doesn't materially hurt me. All that HFT does it make the stocks react faster to the news, and the cost is that the HFT people get to suck money out of the market for nothing (though make it liquid I suppose), But is that something we really need? I don't need it that liquid for my investments, and the businesses don't either.
If it was up to me I'd change the stock exchanges to process one trade per account per stock per day, all at 4pm (meaning you got the whole day to enter your trades, speed won't have an effect at all).
Depends how big the company is I suppose, but honestly if it was just one or two guys who really own it, for $7mil I'd seriously consider just moving to China. You are not going to get arrested trying to flee the country from a civil suit, and China or some other country that won't care about that type of business. Moving could very well be more cost effective than losing $7mil and your income.
But it would have to crop the image as the sensor is fixed to the phone, if that's what you want you can crop your portrait to landscape post processing and get a fugly video.
The modern near field charges basically prove this wrong. You don't need to radiate that much power to get your battery to absorb 1W. You can get the radiator to absorb the energy it radiated if nothing else absorbed it, meaning the field strength can far exceed the input power. In the end your device is better modeled as an air core transformer, the primary's input power is dependent on the secondary's output, if nothing is connected the transformer consumes negligible power.
With that said, trying to make that work at 30 feet is hard, and I tend to think that the frequencies required will mean that you will get serious EMI like issues when your system designed to transfer 1W into a AA accidently transfers 10W into the AC power lines, or it transfers 1W into the poorly shielded HDMI cable on your TV, etc.
No, they most likely don't have to. Root exploits are fairly well know and none of the phone manufacturers are that fast at fixing them (and this is how everyone roots their devices). As long as the NSA has a working root exploit for your phone (which may be kept open by google failing to notify Samsung of it's existence) then the NSA can use the exploit to root your phone, once rooted anything on the phone is readable, and encryption performed on the phone can be read on the clear side and the keys can be figured out if needed.
Of course they rarely need to do that type of thing, most people sync with Google, and Google forces much of that syncing on the users, so the NSA's access to google servers gives them your contact list (and the google play store could probably be used to push things to a particular phone if need be).
> Btw, is there any good reason why the idle power consumption of graphics cards increases significantly when more than one (or in some cases two) monitors are connected?
A few reasons, but if you have twice the pixels then the video card needs to read twice as much data out of it's output buffers (one 1080p@60fps monitor would require ~2.9Gbps of writing to DVI, two 1080p monitors would require 6Gbps of writing to DVI). For idle card that are not doing much, and especially one with a very weak GPU like many of the onboard ones that might be a good chunk of their power. But for the high end gaming GPUs, I don't think it should matter all that much, if the 3D application is drawing to more pixels then it will probably use more power, otherwise I don't think it would be a significant difference.
They work just fine, but require a decent camera. The issue is they are generally not linked to systems that do this. The metermaids have them to find ticketable cars, the red light cameras have the software (though probably don't run it real time), and the toll booths have it. The issue is they are all configures to ticket someone for one specific thing, they are tied into the system right there and generally only scan when an event happens. The cameras watching the sidwalks are just not setup to do this, and many of them are not linked into systems that can scan the plates anyways. In the end it's a money issue, the people who own the software probably want something ridiculous for their software/
If they try hard enough you can figure out the owner of that plate with a few well worded searches or alternatively ask a cop or something who probably knows. Once you figure that out you just go directly to the legislator with it, they have far more power and absolutely do want to make the ticket go away. They will handle it for you.
In the US they don't either (at least not in NY), the solution is to not fine the driver. They fine the vehicle owner, but it's not considered a violation against the driver, thus it doesn't show up on your record and it doesn't affect insurance. Basically it's done the same way parking tickets are handled (which also don't need anything other than a license plate).
Sounds to me like that's the root of the problem, the tickets are for the vehicle owner, and the legislator plates are not tied to the vehicle, thus the system can't pull the owner from the database. They could send it to the driver, but generally that doesn't stand up in court so the systems don't do that.
Exactly, they do operate at half power, easily, there is a steam accumulator, basically a big tank, hooked up to ships steam, they fill the tank to whatever pressure they need and then fire the catapult (they have to do it this way as the reactor does not generate enough steam in the second or so the catapult fires to do the job, it needs to be stored). The magnetic ones do the same thing but with a different method.
It's mostly a cost thing, the U2 flew very very high, the wiki puts it at 70,000 feet, very few planes can even fly that high, so planes can't really do an intercept, also it's altitude is above the design range of most radars. Radar searching for planes puts most of it's power in areas where they will find planes, so they are pointed to not look too much into the 70k ft flight area, they could probably pick it up, but it probably wouldn't track it through the whole coarse over the coverage area. The same radar could just be pointed up and it would do a much better job at tracking it, but that would significantly reduce the range of the radar. The only real option to take it out is then a SAM that can hit things at 70k ft, when the U2 came out, things just didn't fly that high, SAMs simply couldn't fly that high either, now with modern planes many will hit it, but ultimatly it is a cost tradeoff, like a space ship adding a little bit of range means more fuel, and you need more fuel to carry that extra fuel, it all adds up, twice the distance on the missile means much more than twice the size (and cost) without increasing any speed/damage/maneuverability specs. Once the missiles came out that could hit those altitudes they came out with an SR-71, basically even if you did see it, your missile would need a range of something like 100 miles at mach 5 to get an intercept coarse, that in a huge amount of fuel when you consider even today, things like a sidewinder only goes 22mi at mach 2.5.
If you are behind you can use stolen tech to accelerate your development, to a rate that exceeds the rate that the original developer achieved. Speed and position are not the same thing.
Exactly, Quality, Speed, Cost, pick any two, seems like all they care about is speed right now (maybe quality?), they can easily develop faster than the US, especially with the help of stolen tech.
Slashdot Mirror
In most states, including NY, the check is simply an ODBII test. This test simply asks the car for a list of components that need to work to meet emissions and a yes/no/maybe answer for if it's working. If all things work then the car must pass emissions. This is known to be true because the EPA requires that the manufacturer write up a report that proves they tested the emissions and it meets the standards when the emissions components are working and that the computer detects and reports when the emissions components don't work.
VW's problem is they lied on the report which and actual emissions are not tested for each car.
Yea, it's a weird situation, but we have already make people pay for things they don't want. A real big one is war, you are required to pay taxes to support a war. It's irrelevant that you may or may not approve of it, or that you might be against killing people, even if that's your religious belief. You are required to pay for the food for the soldiers, which may involve killing sacred animals. You are also required to pay for courts, that may preside over divorce cases.
That's the real issue, the government can and does make you pay for things you disagree with, and you don't have a say in it (other than your vote). So why can't the government make you pay for health care that you don't agree with? If the receiver disagrees with it, that's usually when your choice comes into play. But we found that doesn't really matter either, for example in a draft. Being against the war doesn't exempt you from being required to kill someone.
Yes, it's very worth it, it lets you move the cockpit so it doesn't interfere with aerodynamics. It will most likely result in an improved view (they can put cameras on the bottom so they can actually see crew on the tarmac when taxing). And removing the windows will help aerodynamics and save fuel. Considering the plane is already fly by wire, it's not a significant complexity addition.
In addition I wonder how this patent is even valid, the Virginia class submarine already does this, they have a photonics mast which means cameras are the only way to look outside. The benefits for them is that the periscope no longer enters the hull (safety), the control room no longer needs to be directly under the conning tower which means a bigger control room, and other items on the ship don't have a periscope they have to design around. Also the photonics mast is more capable as it's not limited by optical tech, they can put better cameras on it (IR) that you couldn't really do in a purely optical system.
I don't think it's much of an issue, you can put cameras on board that are much better than what you can normally see (like a couple IR cameras), and identify actual objects (like other planes) in the monitor. It results in a much more interesting display. Not to mention at cruising altitude there isn't all that much to look at anyways.
Airbus want this probably because they can move the cockpit, it no longer needs to protrude out the nose (and impact aerodynamics), it can save lots of fuel that way.
In a highly redundant system it should be enough to have multiple monitors inside, with multiple cameras outside whose field of view significantly overlaps. Camera fails? Well the other camera can still see the same thing. Monitor fails, well you can pull up that camera on another monitor. All cameras are cross connected via multiple display computers, and display computers are powered via separate power busses. So a display computer failing does nothing, a power surge only affects half the system, and half your monitors can pull up half your cameras which still gets you a full view. In an extreme case like a power surge killing systems it shouldn't affect everything, but you still only get a degraded system, not a failed system.
Also don't forget that power systems are many times redundant on planes (any engine can power it, APU can power it, battery can power it, and ram air generator can power it) and have to go through certifications that they don't fail in a way that causes damage (usually implemented by putting breakers on the power systems, if it surges it disconnects and lets the backup take over). And on top of that you can still fly by instruments alone. Something as simple as a short or loss of multiple engines does not kill power on a modern commercial plane.
Nah, legally it's not that bad for them. They'll claim they got a government contract, and all is good. If the court agrees with that the the logical conclusion is to sue the state for failure to bid the contract and a whole bunch of government contracting laws, and you'll also end up with that SWAT isn't government, so there are probably legal issues and conflict of interest type things letting them handle a police type job.
In short either they are government, and open to all of this, or they are private and fucked up the contract. Either case they can get sued.
But they are not solving it, just using ARM does nothing, it's still developed by a company in an NSA friendly country. How is russia going to audit that code? If they want to get away from foreign hardware then get away from it and develop your own CPU. Write a new one from the ground up, it's really not that hard (performance is the hard part).
Not C, some weird OS somewhere had a sucky heap manager so they made their own (C just says you'll have something, over the years that something meant something different on different systems). And yea, the OpenSSL people were correct, never roll your own crypto because even a PhD in crypto doesn't really make you qualified in it. With that said, rewriting a known crypto algorithm is mostly fine, the issue OpenSSL had is bad programming, not bad crypto.
Don't worry, I work in a government agency, IE8 is the only authorized browser (with java of course), and if you gained access to that computer you would have plenty of access to sensitive (but not classified) stuff.
I don't know about any specifics for the UK, but that generally just falls under it's not yours. Public infrastructure isn't your to touch, just as your neighbors bed isn't yours to sleep in. Taking it is just considered theft, they don't tack on extra charges because you took it from the public (and they arguably should). As an example they do do something like that with police and government employees in the US. In NY Punching a random guy on the street is third degree assault (class A misdemeanor) and punishable by up to 1 year in prison, but if that guy is a cop or public bus driver (and a whole list of other public workers), then it's automatically bumped to a class D felony punishable by up to 7 years in prison (at least that's what I get attempting to interpret the law).
How much? As someone who invests for the long term, I really don't see large spreads affecting me. Right now, looking at google, I see a spread of 16 cents on a $1000/share stock. If I invest in that stock, I'd probably consider anything under 1% in gains a wash, so the spread would have to be over $10 to even factor into my decision making. I don't care if the spreads go up 10x, to $1.50 on that stock, it won't affect me, yes I'll lose that extra dollar or so, but I'm trading on double digit gains/losses, if I buy at $700 and sell at $1000 I don't care about that $1.50, it doesn't materially hurt me. All that HFT does it make the stocks react faster to the news, and the cost is that the HFT people get to suck money out of the market for nothing (though make it liquid I suppose), But is that something we really need? I don't need it that liquid for my investments, and the businesses don't either.
If it was up to me I'd change the stock exchanges to process one trade per account per stock per day, all at 4pm (meaning you got the whole day to enter your trades, speed won't have an effect at all).
Depends how big the company is I suppose, but honestly if it was just one or two guys who really own it, for $7mil I'd seriously consider just moving to China. You are not going to get arrested trying to flee the country from a civil suit, and China or some other country that won't care about that type of business. Moving could very well be more cost effective than losing $7mil and your income.
But it would have to crop the image as the sensor is fixed to the phone, if that's what you want you can crop your portrait to landscape post processing and get a fugly video.
The modern near field charges basically prove this wrong. You don't need to radiate that much power to get your battery to absorb 1W. You can get the radiator to absorb the energy it radiated if nothing else absorbed it, meaning the field strength can far exceed the input power. In the end your device is better modeled as an air core transformer, the primary's input power is dependent on the secondary's output, if nothing is connected the transformer consumes negligible power.
With that said, trying to make that work at 30 feet is hard, and I tend to think that the frequencies required will mean that you will get serious EMI like issues when your system designed to transfer 1W into a AA accidently transfers 10W into the AC power lines, or it transfers 1W into the poorly shielded HDMI cable on your TV, etc.
No, they most likely don't have to. Root exploits are fairly well know and none of the phone manufacturers are that fast at fixing them (and this is how everyone roots their devices). As long as the NSA has a working root exploit for your phone (which may be kept open by google failing to notify Samsung of it's existence) then the NSA can use the exploit to root your phone, once rooted anything on the phone is readable, and encryption performed on the phone can be read on the clear side and the keys can be figured out if needed. Of course they rarely need to do that type of thing, most people sync with Google, and Google forces much of that syncing on the users, so the NSA's access to google servers gives them your contact list (and the google play store could probably be used to push things to a particular phone if need be).
Or BES just has an NSA backdoor.
> Btw, is there any good reason why the idle power consumption of graphics cards increases significantly when more than one (or in some cases two) monitors are connected?
A few reasons, but if you have twice the pixels then the video card needs to read twice as much data out of it's output buffers (one 1080p@60fps monitor would require ~2.9Gbps of writing to DVI, two 1080p monitors would require 6Gbps of writing to DVI). For idle card that are not doing much, and especially one with a very weak GPU like many of the onboard ones that might be a good chunk of their power. But for the high end gaming GPUs, I don't think it should matter all that much, if the 3D application is drawing to more pixels then it will probably use more power, otherwise I don't think it would be a significant difference.
They work just fine, but require a decent camera. The issue is they are generally not linked to systems that do this. The metermaids have them to find ticketable cars, the red light cameras have the software (though probably don't run it real time), and the toll booths have it. The issue is they are all configures to ticket someone for one specific thing, they are tied into the system right there and generally only scan when an event happens. The cameras watching the sidwalks are just not setup to do this, and many of them are not linked into systems that can scan the plates anyways. In the end it's a money issue, the people who own the software probably want something ridiculous for their software/
Android, it is linux by many standards, loads of incompetent users, loads of malware.
If they try hard enough you can figure out the owner of that plate with a few well worded searches or alternatively ask a cop or something who probably knows. Once you figure that out you just go directly to the legislator with it, they have far more power and absolutely do want to make the ticket go away. They will handle it for you.
In the US they don't either (at least not in NY), the solution is to not fine the driver. They fine the vehicle owner, but it's not considered a violation against the driver, thus it doesn't show up on your record and it doesn't affect insurance. Basically it's done the same way parking tickets are handled (which also don't need anything other than a license plate).
Sounds to me like that's the root of the problem, the tickets are for the vehicle owner, and the legislator plates are not tied to the vehicle, thus the system can't pull the owner from the database. They could send it to the driver, but generally that doesn't stand up in court so the systems don't do that.
Exactly, they do operate at half power, easily, there is a steam accumulator, basically a big tank, hooked up to ships steam, they fill the tank to whatever pressure they need and then fire the catapult (they have to do it this way as the reactor does not generate enough steam in the second or so the catapult fires to do the job, it needs to be stored). The magnetic ones do the same thing but with a different method.
It's mostly a cost thing, the U2 flew very very high, the wiki puts it at 70,000 feet, very few planes can even fly that high, so planes can't really do an intercept, also it's altitude is above the design range of most radars. Radar searching for planes puts most of it's power in areas where they will find planes, so they are pointed to not look too much into the 70k ft flight area, they could probably pick it up, but it probably wouldn't track it through the whole coarse over the coverage area. The same radar could just be pointed up and it would do a much better job at tracking it, but that would significantly reduce the range of the radar. The only real option to take it out is then a SAM that can hit things at 70k ft, when the U2 came out, things just didn't fly that high, SAMs simply couldn't fly that high either, now with modern planes many will hit it, but ultimatly it is a cost tradeoff, like a space ship adding a little bit of range means more fuel, and you need more fuel to carry that extra fuel, it all adds up, twice the distance on the missile means much more than twice the size (and cost) without increasing any speed/damage/maneuverability specs. Once the missiles came out that could hit those altitudes they came out with an SR-71, basically even if you did see it, your missile would need a range of something like 100 miles at mach 5 to get an intercept coarse, that in a huge amount of fuel when you consider even today, things like a sidewinder only goes 22mi at mach 2.5.
If you are behind you can use stolen tech to accelerate your development, to a rate that exceeds the rate that the original developer achieved. Speed and position are not the same thing.
Exactly, Quality, Speed, Cost, pick any two, seems like all they care about is speed right now (maybe quality?), they can easily develop faster than the US, especially with the help of stolen tech.