I've often been tempted, rather than fitting a locking gas cap to my pickup that gas thieves have several times stolen from, to replumb it so that I fuel it from behind the plastic paneling in the bed, while the normal fueling port leads to something that will ruin their engine.
I recently did the next best thing. I discovered that they like to nab gas cans after they stole three of them (and my toolbox) out of the back of my pickup when I stepped out to pick up my father while preparing for a trip. So I offered them a "bait" can (they took it the same evening I put it out). Oh, sure, the *top* two liters in the can were gasoline.... but the bottom two liters were hydrochloric acid. I considered sodium silicate instead of HCl, but I figured this would do the job even better, since even the fumes will aggressively rust steel.;) Maybe I should have tried adding some surfactants to try to make the two liquids miscible, so that the engine would never flood and they'd run the whole acid load through the engine. But meh, this is probably good enough even if it does flood;)
Are you talking about EEG or fMRI or the like? Not nearly the sort of resolution you're looking for, by many orders of magnitude. You can see a comparison of techniques here.
It's always seemed a losing battle to try to read out directly from neurons as they are, that you have to have modifications to make your task easier. Such as photoluminescence (as neurons are not totally opaque on those scales). Obviously you're never going to be able able to read out an entire mammalian brain with a single CCD sensor, but as for individual patches on a per-sensor basis...
Firing rates:
* Human neuron: a couple hundred milliseconds
* Chip: A couple dozen nanoseconds. (note: not microseconds!)
Size:
* Human neuron: 4-100um on each axis
* Chip: Currently 100nm square on a thin wafer, with a 90nm process; scalable to 14nm process.
Now, let's not get ahead of ourselves: they are far from demonstrating the ability to emulate a human brain here. But if they do manage to implement a system that properly models human neural activity, the potential to vastly outperform the brain should be obvious. The number of neurons that make up the human brain could be packed into a single layer chip a third of a square centimeter (times some factor to account for the interconnects) operating at ten million times the speed. To say nothing of the ease of integrating it directly with storage, networking, and general purpose computing hardware.
And there is motive to advance this field, too. Neural nets are starting to have direct consumer applications (leaps and bounds improvements in image recognition, image enhancement, bandwidth reduction, etc). And we're talking about neural net chips that could readily be sized as a coprocessor in a phone. If there's a market, they'll make them. And advance them with time.
No, IBM is far from having a "brain on a chip". But it's very interesting research, to say the least.
The US has jurisdiction on the ground the company plans to launch from and the airspace that they plan to fly through. You think that they don't need any approvals simply because of where their destination is?
1) complete their assigned task if they are automated in a Starcraft style of autonomy
You're confusing a drone with a cruise missile.
Drones are generally used to hover over an area with enemy activity, look for suspicious activity, and engage. Rarely are they used as "go to point X, drop a bomb, and return to base".
2) increase altitude and circle until the jamming is solved
And meanwhile, the enemies have free roam of the battlefield.
3) return home
Even that isn't invulnerable to attack.
Jamming can be dealt with pretty easy by employing multiple directional antennae and working across spectrums. It would be more or less impossible to effectively jam over any duration of time a single from every direction including up
Meanwhile, in the real world, no antenna is perfectly directional, and communications do get fully jammed despite the presence of multiple links.
Now, if you talking EM pulse and jamming the computers
No, I'm talking about the way jamming is actually used in modern battlefields: disabling comm links and sensors.
The ejection risk is to lightweight pilots ( < 136 lbs / 62 kg). The temporary solution thusfar has just been to ban lightweight pilots from flying it. Ejection is an inherently very stressful act on the body. For lightweight pilots on the F35, it's too stressful.
Only the F-35A has a 25mm cannon at all; obviously systems common to all aircraft have priority. The cannon is new - a lighter and more accurate version of the GAU-12/U. The schedule is for the gun to go online in 2017. It was on schedule last I checked.
As for the GP, I'll let actualpilots of the aircraft respond. And note that that is about dogfighting, an increasingly less relevant portion of an aircraft's activity. The whole philosophy behind the F-35 is to detect and engage targets from further away than they can detect and engage the F-35. Aka, if the F-35 is in a dogfight, it's already done something wrong to begin with.
The problem with drones is, of course, jamming. You can try to make drones "fail safe" when jammed, doing their best to return to base (although there are risks with even that). But in terms of selecting and engaging targets on its own without a communications link, that technology is not there yet (and would be *extremely* controversial, to say the least).
I just don't understand why in hell they had to have a single engine fighter
A single engine, for a given power output, is more efficient, lighter, smaller, lower radar signature, lower thermal signature, and lower maintenance than two engines. That's no small list of advantages to offset the disadvantages.
As a side note, what may seem like a disadvantage - engine failure - can also be an advantage. A high performance aircraft losing thrust on one side at high speed / maneuvering is a big deal in terms of loss of stability. A single engine craft losing power tends to remain upright and makes for easy ejection. The engine on a single engine aircraft is usually designed to be more failure-tolerant than those on twin engine aircraft as well.
They may have it operational but it'll be another 10 years before they'll have most of the bugs out of it.
As with any new aircraft.
They'd better start laying down plans for a new fighter now so they can have that ready to go in 20 years or so.
You think that nobody is looking ahead to the next generation of aircraft? It's a continuous process at each stage of a design's lifespan, from conception to retirement.
This was known and discussed. But they found microgravity to be a compounding effect of radiation exposure
This just drives home how much of a risk interplanetary flight is right now. And we really don't have great solutions that don't involve great masses of shielding. Artificial magnetosopheres for example are insufficient to deal with GCR.
Indeed, the sample size is small, but how are they supposed to get a larger sample? They did the logical followup, which is a mouse study that confirmed the (limited) human results.
In the sentence right before the part you're referencing, it says that it thought it might be a traffic sign because "it could not isolate the image of the trailer from the bright sky behind it. " Which again, sounds like overexposure, a big block of RGB(255,255,255)
I've "heard of" the car doing a lot of things, the majority of which were shown not to have been accurate. No greater excuse has ever been made in the automotive world for wrecking your car than "the car went and wrecked itself!".
I'm not so sure that a simple software fix can fix it. Some key notes:
About 4:40 p.m. eastern daylight time on Saturday, May 7, 2016, a 2015 Tesla Model S, traveling eastbound on US Highway 27A (US-27A), west of Williston, Florida, struck and passed beneath a 2014 Freightliner Cascadia truck-tractor in combination with a 53-foot semitrailer. At the time of the collision, the combination vehicle was making a left turn from westbound US-27A across the two eastbound travel lanes onto NE 140th Court, a local paved road. As a result of the initial impact, the battery disengaged from the electric motors powering the car. After exiting from underneath the semitrailer, the car coasted at a shallow angle off the right side of the roadway, traveled approximately 297 feet, and then collided with a utility pole. The car broke the pole and traveled an additional 50 feet, during which it rotated counterclockwise and came to rest perpendicular to the highway in the front yard of a private residence. The 40-year-old male driver and sole occupant of the Tesla died as a result of the crash.
US-27A is a four-lane highway with a posted speed limit of 65 mph. A 75-foot-wide median separates the two eastbound lanes from the two westbound lanes. Additionally, at the uncontrolled intersection with NE 140th Court, both eastbound and westbound lanes incorporate left turn lanes, allowing for a median opening of about 132 feet. At the time of the crash, it was daylight with clear and dry weather conditions.
Eastbound. Afternoon. May. Aka, the sun was right behind him. Clear and bright outside. This is a perfect recipe for light-colored objects ahead to be overexposed, against other overexposed objects, potentially including the road and the sky. If you have a big block of RGB(255,255,255), how do you determine the boundaries? The best you can do is recognize that it's a threat and disable autopilot, while warning the driver.
A more appropriate solution, if this was indeed the case, would be a hardware fix: read the *raw* data from the camera. A potential alternative, if the frame exposure time can be adjusted, would be to read out alternating short and long exposure frames and combine them.
The articles are mainly just screenshots of Wikileaks tweets. Do you have any substance to add to the issue, or is "the website that posted screenshots" all that you have?
To add to the horror of their Turkey leak: the information about female voters doesn't just include their names, addresses, phone numbers, and equivalents of social security numbers. It also includes whether they are members or not of Erdogan's AKP party. At a time when the country is in the middle of a bloody post-coup purge.
Yeah, seems everyone took out their camera that night to film either the rising fireball or the celebrations about it;) The rebels have tried several times to assault it in the past but always been beaten back. Reports on why it exploded are conflicting; one early report suggested that a helicopter full of explosives crashed on a warehouse in the complex. Firefighters from Assad-controlled areas all over Aleppo were called in because the al-Safirah fire department was overwhelmed, but they couldn't get close due to the intensity of the flames and risk of further explosions. A number of people living in the vicinity of the factories were admitted to the hospital on poisoning symptoms from the fumes.
It's now an open question as to how much they're going to be able to salvage and get back in operation; no question that's going to be top priority for them at this point.
Slashdot Mirror
I've often been tempted, rather than fitting a locking gas cap to my pickup that gas thieves have several times stolen from, to replumb it so that I fuel it from behind the plastic paneling in the bed, while the normal fueling port leads to something that will ruin their engine.
I recently did the next best thing. I discovered that they like to nab gas cans after they stole three of them (and my toolbox) out of the back of my pickup when I stepped out to pick up my father while preparing for a trip. So I offered them a "bait" can (they took it the same evening I put it out). Oh, sure, the *top* two liters in the can were gasoline.... but the bottom two liters were hydrochloric acid. I considered sodium silicate instead of HCl, but I figured this would do the job even better, since even the fumes will aggressively rust steel. ;) Maybe I should have tried adding some surfactants to try to make the two liquids miscible, so that the engine would never flood and they'd run the whole acid load through the engine. But meh, this is probably good enough even if it does flood ;)
1) Neither EEG nor fMRI are "invasive"
2) You can't just "get it better", that's the whole point.
Are you talking about EEG or fMRI or the like? Not nearly the sort of resolution you're looking for, by many orders of magnitude. You can see a comparison of techniques here.
It's always seemed a losing battle to try to read out directly from neurons as they are, that you have to have modifications to make your task easier. Such as photoluminescence (as neurons are not totally opaque on those scales). Obviously you're never going to be able able to read out an entire mammalian brain with a single CCD sensor, but as for individual patches on a per-sensor basis...
Firing rates:
* Human neuron: a couple hundred milliseconds
* Chip: A couple dozen nanoseconds. (note: not microseconds!)
Size:
* Human neuron: 4-100um on each axis
* Chip: Currently 100nm square on a thin wafer, with a 90nm process; scalable to 14nm process.
Now, let's not get ahead of ourselves: they are far from demonstrating the ability to emulate a human brain here. But if they do manage to implement a system that properly models human neural activity, the potential to vastly outperform the brain should be obvious. The number of neurons that make up the human brain could be packed into a single layer chip a third of a square centimeter (times some factor to account for the interconnects) operating at ten million times the speed. To say nothing of the ease of integrating it directly with storage, networking, and general purpose computing hardware.
And there is motive to advance this field, too. Neural nets are starting to have direct consumer applications (leaps and bounds improvements in image recognition, image enhancement, bandwidth reduction, etc). And we're talking about neural net chips that could readily be sized as a coprocessor in a phone. If there's a market, they'll make them. And advance them with time.
No, IBM is far from having a "brain on a chip". But it's very interesting research, to say the least.
The US has jurisdiction on the ground the company plans to launch from and the airspace that they plan to fly through. You think that they don't need any approvals simply because of where their destination is?
However, unlike the rockets in most parts of the world, their rockets are flightless, and the engines are vestigial.
You're confusing a drone with a cruise missile.
Drones are generally used to hover over an area with enemy activity, look for suspicious activity, and engage. Rarely are they used as "go to point X, drop a bomb, and return to base".
And meanwhile, the enemies have free roam of the battlefield.
Even that isn't invulnerable to attack.
Meanwhile, in the real world, no antenna is perfectly directional, and communications do get fully jammed despite the presence of multiple links.
No, I'm talking about the way jamming is actually used in modern battlefields: disabling comm links and sensors.
The ejection risk is to lightweight pilots ( < 136 lbs / 62 kg). The temporary solution thusfar has just been to ban lightweight pilots from flying it. Ejection is an inherently very stressful act on the body. For lightweight pilots on the F35, it's too stressful.
Only the F-35A has a 25mm cannon at all; obviously systems common to all aircraft have priority. The cannon is new - a lighter and more accurate version of the GAU-12/U. The schedule is for the gun to go online in 2017. It was on schedule last I checked.
As for the GP, I'll let actual pilots of the aircraft respond. And note that that is about dogfighting, an increasingly less relevant portion of an aircraft's activity. The whole philosophy behind the F-35 is to detect and engage targets from further away than they can detect and engage the F-35. Aka, if the F-35 is in a dogfight, it's already done something wrong to begin with.
The problem with drones is, of course, jamming. You can try to make drones "fail safe" when jammed, doing their best to return to base (although there are risks with even that). But in terms of selecting and engaging targets on its own without a communications link, that technology is not there yet (and would be *extremely* controversial, to say the least).
A single engine, for a given power output, is more efficient, lighter, smaller, lower radar signature, lower thermal signature, and lower maintenance than two engines. That's no small list of advantages to offset the disadvantages.
As a side note, what may seem like a disadvantage - engine failure - can also be an advantage. A high performance aircraft losing thrust on one side at high speed / maneuvering is a big deal in terms of loss of stability. A single engine craft losing power tends to remain upright and makes for easy ejection. The engine on a single engine aircraft is usually designed to be more failure-tolerant than those on twin engine aircraft as well.
As with any new aircraft.
You think that nobody is looking ahead to the next generation of aircraft? It's a continuous process at each stage of a design's lifespan, from conception to retirement.
Okay, here you go. Want another? ;)
This was known and discussed. But they found microgravity to be a compounding effect of radiation exposure
This just drives home how much of a risk interplanetary flight is right now. And we really don't have great solutions that don't involve great masses of shielding. Artificial magnetosopheres for example are insufficient to deal with GCR.
Indeed, the sample size is small, but how are they supposed to get a larger sample? They did the logical followup, which is a mouse study that confirmed the (limited) human results.
Hey, just wait for the next leak, which will probably be something like footage from a security camera they had installed over a dnc toilet.
Not when the thing isn't even on, which has been the case with most of these. And a non-autopilot car has just as much "capability to wreck itself"..
In the sentence right before the part you're referencing, it says that it thought it might be a traffic sign because "it could not isolate the image of the trailer from the bright sky behind it. " Which again, sounds like overexposure, a big block of RGB(255,255,255)
I've "heard of" the car doing a lot of things, the majority of which were shown not to have been accurate. No greater excuse has ever been made in the automotive world for wrecking your car than "the car went and wrecked itself!".
I'm not so sure that a simple software fix can fix it. Some key notes:
Eastbound. Afternoon. May. Aka, the sun was right behind him. Clear and bright outside. This is a perfect recipe for light-colored objects ahead to be overexposed, against other overexposed objects, potentially including the road and the sky. If you have a big block of RGB(255,255,255), how do you determine the boundaries? The best you can do is recognize that it's a threat and disable autopilot, while warning the driver.
A more appropriate solution, if this was indeed the case, would be a hardware fix: read the *raw* data from the camera. A potential alternative, if the frame exposure time can be adjusted, would be to read out alternating short and long exposure frames and combine them.
Are you seriously claiming that the ((())) marking of jews isn't antisemitic?
As an example: here's the raw "it wasn't an error" tweet from Wikileaks confirming that they doxxed on purpose.
The articles are mainly just screenshots of Wikileaks tweets. Do you have any substance to add to the issue, or is "the website that posted screenshots" all that you have?
To add to the horror of their Turkey leak: the information about female voters doesn't just include their names, addresses, phone numbers, and equivalents of social security numbers. It also includes whether they are members or not of Erdogan's AKP party. At a time when the country is in the middle of a bloody post-coup purge.
Not failed to scrub. Purposefully didn't scrub. Just like they didn't scrub anything when they doxxed every female voter in Turkey recently.
The only thing they've scrubbed of late is their own antisemitic tweet.
Yeah, seems everyone took out their camera that night to film either the rising fireball or the celebrations about it ;) The rebels have tried several times to assault it in the past but always been beaten back. Reports on why it exploded are conflicting; one early report suggested that a helicopter full of explosives crashed on a warehouse in the complex. Firefighters from Assad-controlled areas all over Aleppo were called in because the al-Safirah fire department was overwhelmed, but they couldn't get close due to the intensity of the flames and risk of further explosions. A number of people living in the vicinity of the factories were admitted to the hospital on poisoning symptoms from the fumes.
It's now an open question as to how much they're going to be able to salvage and get back in operation; no question that's going to be top priority for them at this point.