Compressed air and sillystring, or something similar.
(I am thinking a pvc pipe with a venturi constriction, attached to an air compressor, with a can of silly string feeding in through the venturi hole. Should be able to get really good distance on the silly string by having really good compression in the pipe.)
Get enough of that junk in the air, it will tangle the prop rotors, and down the drone without seriously damaging it, and raining silly string poses little harm to nearby humans. Drone down, drone undamaged, nobody hurt. Does not involve firearms of any kind. Win win win win.
It's an interesting idea, and one I have given a little thought to. ( it would enable a very fault tolerant computer architecture) however, unless you implement highly redundant interconnects/busses, you still have the N-devices fighting for a shared resource problem.
If you make the assertion that all nodes have a private direct connection with all other nodes, and thus eliminate the bottleneck that way, you now have to gracefully decide how to handle a downed private link.
I suppose a hybrid might work. Fully dedicated links, and one shared bus. When dedicated link fails, communicate over the shared bus.
Scaling such a design would become prohibitively costly though. A 200 node design would have orders of magnitude more dedicated links.
The idea I had for playing with this idea, was to use some cheap wired home routers, set up private vlans on the 5 or so ethernet ports each has, then put private patch cables on each port, then put all the Wan ports on a dumb hub.
The local copies of Linux on each system can handle management of local device resources, and a daemon running on each node then handles listening/responding on each interface.
Just what such a thing would be good at doing escapes me though. To be really useful, you would need some way to have nodes specialize, then cooperate, without a central authority.
That way, should we decide to use this network to process live video, one node decodes the input stream, then dispatches portions of the decoded stream to peer devices, who then take the decoded stream and do whatever processing is requested, before sending the processed streams to yet another peer device which assembles the processed stream, then shuttles that to the endpoint node, which reencodes the stream and writes it to the output device. (Or some similarly cellular process)
I suppose this is kinda similar to how a neural colum works, where locally interconnected nets are restricted in the number of true local peers they have, and then communicate collectively to other neUral columns by dedicated interconnects. (Video input source in the above, could be from a camera, but it could also be from another network's output stream.)
The major logical tasks are: Role selection in the assigned task for each local node. How to issue instructions to the mesh nodes in a decentralized manner
Depending on how far you wanted to extrapolate this, each mesh node could be treated as a logical unit, where each logical node then is part of another, higher level node of similar topology: each mesh has a direct connection to each other mesh inside its higher order node, and one communal link all nodes can talk on inside that node.
Eg, if I make 5, 5node networks made out of such routers, I need 7 ports on each router. 5 for direct local traffic. 1 for local shared connect, 1 for direct connect to another 5node group. Clever use of subnetting and routing on the shared net would enable there to be a dumb gateway device to allow the shared higher link to function. Each 5node network is connected to every other 5-node network in the scaled up version.
Decisions on how to process incoming data might be tied to which interface received it, or any number of other methods.
Spying on the system state of the whole system should be possible through the shared link infrastructure, though ideally any node you interact with the system with should be a proper peer in it, and nit something sitting on the shared net only.
The drawback of such a design will be signal propogation latency, and keepin all the subnodes, at all levels, synchronized. The human brain uses a support network of astrocytes and glial cells to guide dedicated link physical routing, and to tune propogation delay between neural columns through selective mylienation of trunk bundles.
You could probably fake it with introduced waitstates.
At some point though, the behavior of the whole will revolve around the basic logic baked inside each physical compute unit. Ideall
while being able to leverage that many compute units all a once is quite impressive, most tasks are still serial by nature. computers are not clairvoyant, so cannor know in advance what a branched logic chain will tell them to do for any arbitrary path depth, nor can they perform a computation on data that doesnt exist yet.
thhe benefits of more cores are from parallel execution, not from doing tasks faster. as such, most software is not going to benefit from having access to 8000 more threads.
Nonviolent revolution (a la, civil disobedience in India) has at least one reported instance of success.
However, the US electorate lacks a suitable cultural stereotype upon which to sustain nonviolence, in the face of government totalitarianism. Eg, when people start getting arrested and destroyed financially, people will either suddenly forget their morals, or will turn violent.
You asked for an alternative, the problem is that it does not look plausible for US culture.
The first step in addressing a problem, is acceptance that there is in fact a problem to address.
Rightly pointing out that all current choices are shit, is therefore the correct and proper direction toward addressing that problem, eg, by not voting for more political choices that are shit.
Hilariously, your rebuttle is whimsically absurd! Denial of the problem, will somehow result in correction of the problem-- and drawing attention to the fact that there is in fact a problem purpetuates the problem.
What really needs to happen is for the US to grow a pair and demand no confidence vote powers. That way when presented with the choice of 70 year old rancid tuna and 50+ year old trolls with verbal diarrhea, we can return the offered plate to the kitchen and demand they do it right this time.
Arguing bitterly over the pros and cons of rancid tuna over shitspeaking oompahloompahs does nothing to chastise the kitchen. Next time they wI'll serve you a festering blue waffle with whipped cream and shriveled oil baron salomi with a side of polluted tap water.
Unless you want to keep getting served shit, I suggest you address the problem of being served shit.
It is related to prison culture, and ghetto culture. The association with a specific racial group is a consequence of over expression of incidence in criminality and poverty in that racial group. Jumping straight to the racecard is itself racist; it defacto implies that the saggy pants, and the culture behind it, are intrinsically linked to that racial group. It is equally as onerous as saying "all black people are criminally minded."
Instead, saggy pants is just saggy pants. Complaints about the glorification of prominent displays of saggy pants is not racist, per the above reasoning. Counter-claims that such complaints are racism are themselves what is racist.
You were born with a powerful organ, refined through millions of years of evolution, for the primary functions of advanced abstract and critical thinking. Please use it responsibly.
But then our phones would probably explode under the pressure of fullscreen autostarating flash ads.
That and embedded java applets, fully interactive canvas elements, and millions of cross site activity trace pings.
Throw in some android specific attacks, and some other kinds of fun we don't know about yet, and it could be loads more entertaining to browse on a mobile device.
(I can hardly wait for the aggressive AR adverts of the near future.)
From ths perspective of people who like to watch, as the nsa does, telling the landlord about where all the best places to peep so they can be fixed, is counter intuitive.
That the same building techniques are used in thier own house, and that other people who like to watch can peep on them through them, is not seriously considered.
Instead, only the loss of really good ways to peep is what is considered. If the method of peeping is likely to be discovered, or the architecture behind the means of peeping changes such that the approach becomes less valuable, the peeping Tom may delude himself into thinking that he is doing a service to society and the landlord by pointing out how that peeping may happen. (See for instance, methods used to remotely observe what is displayed on a crt monitor by monitoring the em spectrum for telltale radio artifacts-- who uses crts these days?)
The nsa is sick, and likes to watch. The very idea that they would feel they should stopper up the holes they look through, or alert people that they are looking at them through them, is counter to their fetish. The very idea is absurd to them. Only somebody that sees by accident, and is disgusted by having seen, has motive to see to it that no such seeing ever happens again, apart of course, from somebody catching somebody peeping on them, and discovering the hole that way.
From the perspective of the nsa, if they have eno ugh places to peep through, you can putty up holes all day, and they can wack off to watching you do it. Telling you where all the holes are stops that from happening. They want to watch you. Not keep you safe from being peeped on.
Note in citizen 4, the first phase of the nsa's activity against Snowden was in sussing out his aberrent behavior, and surveiling his girlfriend, family, and Hawaii place of residence. This is what happens in phase 1) of my short list. A list of persons of interest is produced using psych details, and active monitoring starts. Connections maps are created. Points of surveillance are established, and monitoring priority increases. Phase one ideally (for the nsa) ends with apprehension of their leak, but the process does not end there.
After sussing out the entry point of the leaker, the companion network is either dismantled, or subtly repurposed for cointel. False intel is fed to the group. If the false intel causes the foriegn agency to suspect compromise, it sends the message to that foriegn agency that their action was detected, and that thier methods are not valid any longer. If the foriegn agency fails to change the operational behavior of the cell, then it may become beneficial to plant a double agent. This double agent can then cause the foriegn power to change its policies or public activities, through contaminated or misleading intelligence, created specifically for this purpose.
That they can conduct such a profoundly invasive phase one investigation using literally any internet connected, or broadcast capable device, along with your financial data, and the information about you provided by your so called friends on social media, is the primary thrust behind snowden's leaks. What the NSA will do, and why they will do it is not going to change. The leaks from snowden concerned the how and the what.
1) there will be a witch hunt. The nsa will investigate its own employees against its already existing psych profile sheets to see who is the most likely to have been motivated to steal the data. Then they will set up an internal emtrapment scenario to catch the leaker red handed. They will then be charged with federal espionage, and put into prison.
2) the same investigation will sift out accomplices and contacts. The trap will not be sprung until positive id has been made on all members of the cell.
3) the nsa will not directly move against the other members of the cell. Instead it will monitor, and selectively leak false intel to this cell, making it ineffectual, or worse, countereffectual to the foriegn government operating it.
4) if deemed useful to do so, the cell will be infiltrated with a new "insider", who will actually be collecting and analyzing the cells instructions to better predict and respond to the foriegn power's activities.
I ask, because these tiny, fully integrated and inexpensive devices look like very inexpensive, and easily concealed WPA password crackers, or network listening devices to me.
The one with the sdcard slot could be made to do quite a few things, if you don't mind wearing out the card using it for swap space. A combination of zram and sdcard spillover swap, some sensors, and an ext data partition on the card would let this thing do quite a lot, such as sticking it on the back of a USB printer to make the printer network enabled, to running an electronic door control, camera monitoring (using vfl capable cameras), making WiFi driven toy cars or drones, and quite a few others.
For many things, you don't need a whole lot of power. I have used an old router as a pvpgn server for some time, in fact. Works fine.
For a lot of possible projects, physical size of the package and power draw are the obstacles, not the memory size or the processor.
The issue with efuses is like welding the hood shut, so you cannot service the engine.
It forces "physical damage" to become necessary to gain the access you should have been able to get anyway. In the case of the welded hood: you have to cut through the welds. In the case of efuses protected boot loaders: the boot loader enforces strong crypto against custom kernels, preventing boot of devices without the magic number baked into them, and if you flash a new boot loader, bam, efuses blown.
When the hardware that gets damaged is little more than a "warranty void" sticker, just in digital form, the oems are stretching things pretty thin.
I would love to see them be told that they cannot do these kinds of things. Sadly, that is not how the world works today.
Unless it is USB 3.0, that port will saturate far faster than the sata2 port on the minnowboard.
An actual nvme based M.2 ssd put on would smoke both suggestions. If the device is running its own transactional database for object identification, having access times that fast becomes more than just a nice thing to have-- something i mention because of the suggested use case for the board, from intel themselves.
Complaints about racial discriminiation need to be taken seriously, but on the flipside, not everything that "feels" like racism actually is.
I posted earlier up, a pretty long explanation about what i mean by this. Sometimes, naked, raw ststistics present situations that "look" like discrimination, but really aren't.
Like standing in line at the checkout.
It is very easy to feel you are being discriminated against, when you are black, and nearly every single time you go to the store, the person at the front of the line is white.
You actually have to rationalize why the liklihood of this happening is so much higher than finding a black person at the front of the line, especially when the store is genuinely representative of the total population demographic, and not just a local demographic. White people outnumber black people in the US. Just this fact alone makes the probability that they will be in line ahead of you significantly higher. The checkout clerk is not telling black people to go to the back. They are cashing people out in the order they arrived in the line. Yet, every time you get there, sure enough, there's a white person ahead of you in line.
It feels like racism, but isnt. People that don't stop to thint about why this always happens will instinctively latch on to the idea that they are being discriminated against. They will make complaints about discrimination, a proper investigation will find that there us none, and now you have somebody that feels abandoned by the system, on top of feeling discriminated against, when in fact, no such thing has happened.
The race card makes these people feel better, but it does so through instituting REAL racism, and further, adds a sense of legitimacy to these percieved but not actual forms of discrimination.
The solution is better understanding of the circumstances behind their experiences, not trying to fight false racism with real racism.
If the headsets ever DO become mainstream, people will be looking through them all the time. If the devices are Internet enabled, and hackable, the NSA would be foolish not to make use of the millions of stereoscopic, highdef, and mobile camera feeds out there. They could be looking through your "eyes" any time they wanted, and if they did it right, you would never know.
Again, without seeing what the person is doing, standing there waving their arms around, there is no context to answer the internal question: what are they doing?
The guy waiting for the subway train could have a pronographic extrapolation app installed that renders all the women walking by in the subway naked. You would never know, because you don't see what he sees in his headset.
Likewise, again, kids looking like they are throwing things, possibly at each other, from a distance. They are throwing virtual pokeballs, but you don't know that. You don't see the mew 2 flying around.
The reason you don't see those things, and will never see those things, is because software makers will be terrified that if other AR users see the games they make without buying the game package, it will upset their business. EG, DRM will ensure that you are unable to see that rare pokemon, and the brightly colored AR pokeballs, unless you have pokemon go installed, and your copy of pokemon go is running.
You will have the same problem that plagued Google glass. People won't know you aren't recording them In full stereoscopic 3d, and wi presume that you always are.
A physician has a legitimate reason to be wearing a great big scanner on his head, as does a soldier.
Unless everyone sees the same AR experience, regardless of the apps installed (good luck with that one. DRM fetishism in the software space will assure that never happens.) This miscommunication will always happen.
When the racecard is used, you get absurd things attributed to racism.
Eg, we can say that white people outnumber black people 10:1. (For the sake of this example, just pretend this is true.) This means that if the rate of incidence in desire for gourmet coffee is identical in both races, 10x as many white people will show up at the coffee shop as black people. that means the likelihood that the first person in line is at least 10x more likely to be white than black. It has nothing to do with preferential treatment, it is just how the odds line up. A black patron visits the shop, and is more likely to wait in line behind a white person, than a white person is to wait in line behind a black person, simply because there are more white people.
When the racecard is presented as an option, THEN there is real, defacto racism involved, because now you are introducing real preferential treatment for the black patron to shorten their waiting times, based only on their skin color, out of some misguided idea that the wait times should be equal.
That causes a grudge to happen, which causes race hatred.
Nearly all of the problem with racism, and perceptions of racism that really arent, can be solved through better understanding, and by that, I do not mean the touchy Feely kind.
If i take a vacation to zimbabwe, i expect that i will wait in line behind lots of people with dark colored skin, because there are more people with dark skin than light skin there, and they got there first. It does not mean the supermarket owners are racist against whites, and i do not feel obliged to cut in line so my wait times are different from the people behind me at the checkout, just because my skin color is different.
Arguments about how some minority ethnicity suffer so terribly because they statistically have to wait behind majority ethnicities, ignores the truth: there are just a bunch of people standing in the line, and the only way it matters what race they are, is when race is MADE into an issue. When a line is statistically N persons long, the average is that you be in the middle of the line somewhere. You wait just as long if the line is made of white people as black people.
The question is not about how terrible it is that black people are typically served after white people-- it is why the black patrons find this offensive, when it is not actually the consequence of racism, and why they feel entitled to being treated priority based solely on the color of thier skin.
The race card makes this peoblem worse, not better.
Just wait in fucking line, and wait your turn, like everyone else.
In regards to the story at hand, the presumption of racism comes from some simple features:
Incarceration rates for black males is vastly higher than for white males.
Predominantly black neighborhoods tend to be lower income than predominantly white neighborhoods.
Lower income populations tend towards higher rates of criminality and recidivism.
Lower incomes are strongly correllated with lower educational achievement.
And if I may, a subjective observation: there is a difference of opinion concerning the value of education between mainstream black culture, and mainstream white culture.
I would therefore conjecture that the income disparity is not defacto racism, but is instead cultural. (Take the same culture and apply it to a different race, you will get the same result.) The income disparity results from the attitude toward education, which adversely affects earning potential, which adversely affects crime rate.
Are these cops being racist, by putting stingrays in black neighborhoods, or are the cops putting stingrays where the highest incidence of crime is, and circumstances just so happen to be that such areas are mostly black?
To me, the line is drawn on motivation. Is the motive this?
Black people commit the most crimes, so we deploy stingrays in heavilh black populated areas.
No, it would be more clear with Alloy in italics (to make it clear that the project is named Alloy, not that the project is a metaphorical alloy.), with either a colon (indicating the supporting phrase that follows is descriptive of "project alloy"), or an emdash, indicating a continuation on the thesis statement (the unveiling of project alloy by Intel corp.)
Grammar nazis get their panties all soiled when there is ambiguity, and either of those suggestions would make the headline very clear. But, there is then meta ambiguity about which one is the most proper to use.
This device does realworld object mapping and tracking already. It's just a few tweaks away from mapping a stereographic camera feed over each eye (digitally corrected for angle) with AR elements superimpsed. That's basically what the HUD in modt FPS games have these days. Having vector computation for something like a handgun's pointed direction for assisted targeting is getting much closer to reality.
I dont see ordinary people using these, but i could see physicians using it with backscatter and terrahertz imaging sources, and i can see the military using it.
Slashdot Mirror
Just use nondestructive countermeasures.
Compressed air and sillystring, or something similar.
(I am thinking a pvc pipe with a venturi constriction, attached to an air compressor, with a can of silly string feeding in through the venturi hole. Should be able to get really good distance on the silly string by having really good compression in the pipe.)
Get enough of that junk in the air, it will tangle the prop rotors, and down the drone without seriously damaging it, and raining silly string poses little harm to nearby humans. Drone down, drone undamaged, nobody hurt. Does not involve firearms of any kind. Win win win win.
Bonus if you use rainbow colors and glitter.
It's an interesting idea, and one I have given a little thought to. ( it would enable a very fault tolerant computer architecture) however, unless you implement highly redundant interconnects/busses, you still have the N-devices fighting for a shared resource problem.
If you make the assertion that all nodes have a private direct connection with all other nodes, and thus eliminate the bottleneck that way, you now have to gracefully decide how to handle a downed private link.
I suppose a hybrid might work. Fully dedicated links, and one shared bus. When dedicated link fails, communicate over the shared bus.
Scaling such a design would become prohibitively costly though. A 200 node design would have orders of magnitude more dedicated links.
The idea I had for playing with this idea, was to use some cheap wired home routers, set up private vlans on the 5 or so ethernet ports each has, then put private patch cables on each port, then put all the Wan ports on a dumb hub.
The local copies of Linux on each system can handle management of local device resources, and a daemon running on each node then handles listening/responding on each interface.
Just what such a thing would be good at doing escapes me though. To be really useful, you would need some way to have nodes specialize, then cooperate, without a central authority.
That way, should we decide to use this network to process live video, one node decodes the input stream, then dispatches portions of the decoded stream to peer devices, who then take the decoded stream and do whatever processing is requested, before sending the processed streams to yet another peer device which assembles the processed stream, then shuttles that to the endpoint node, which reencodes the stream and writes it to the output device. (Or some similarly cellular process)
I suppose this is kinda similar to how a neural colum works, where locally interconnected nets are restricted in the number of true local peers they have, and then communicate collectively to other neUral columns by dedicated interconnects. (Video input source in the above, could be from a camera, but it could also be from another network's output stream.)
The major logical tasks are:
Role selection in the assigned task for each local node.
How to issue instructions to the mesh nodes in a decentralized manner
Depending on how far you wanted to extrapolate this, each mesh node could be treated as a logical unit, where each logical node then is part of another, higher level node of similar topology: each mesh has a direct connection to each other mesh inside its higher order node, and one communal link all nodes can talk on inside that node.
Eg, if I make 5, 5node networks made out of such routers, I need 7 ports on each router. 5 for direct local traffic. 1 for local shared connect, 1 for direct connect to another 5node group. Clever use of subnetting and routing on the shared net would enable there to be a dumb gateway device to allow the shared higher link to function. Each 5node network is connected to every other 5-node network in the scaled up version.
Decisions on how to process incoming data might be tied to which interface received it, or any number of other methods.
Spying on the system state of the whole system should be possible through the shared link infrastructure, though ideally any node you interact with the system with should be a proper peer in it, and nit something sitting on the shared net only.
The drawback of such a design will be signal propogation latency, and keepin all the subnodes, at all levels, synchronized. The human brain uses a support network of astrocytes and glial cells to guide dedicated link physical routing, and to tune propogation delay between neural columns through selective mylienation of trunk bundles.
You could probably fake it with introduced waitstates.
At some point though, the behavior of the whole will revolve around the basic logic baked inside each physical compute unit. Ideall
while being able to leverage that many compute units all a once is quite impressive, most tasks are still serial by nature. computers are not clairvoyant, so cannor know in advance what a branched logic chain will tell them to do for any arbitrary path depth, nor can they perform a computation on data that doesnt exist yet.
thhe benefits of more cores are from parallel execution, not from doing tasks faster. as such, most software is not going to benefit from having access to 8000 more threads.
Nonviolent revolution (a la, civil disobedience in India) has at least one reported instance of success.
However, the US electorate lacks a suitable cultural stereotype upon which to sustain nonviolence, in the face of government totalitarianism. Eg, when people start getting arrested and destroyed financially, people will either suddenly forget their morals, or will turn violent.
You asked for an alternative, the problem is that it does not look plausible for US culture.
How delightfully backwards!
The first step in addressing a problem, is acceptance that there is in fact a problem to address.
Rightly pointing out that all current choices are shit, is therefore the correct and proper direction toward addressing that problem, eg, by not voting for more political choices that are shit.
Hilariously, your rebuttle is whimsically absurd! Denial of the problem, will somehow result in correction of the problem-- and drawing attention to the fact that there is in fact a problem purpetuates the problem.
What really needs to happen is for the US to grow a pair and demand no confidence vote powers. That way when presented with the choice of 70 year old rancid tuna and 50+ year old trolls with verbal diarrhea, we can return the offered plate to the kitchen and demand they do it right this time.
Arguing bitterly over the pros and cons of rancid tuna over shitspeaking oompahloompahs does nothing to chastise the kitchen. Next time they wI'll serve you a festering blue waffle with whipped cream and shriveled oil baron salomi with a side of polluted tap water.
Unless you want to keep getting served shit, I suggest you address the problem of being served shit.
Saggy pants is still not racist, per se.
It is related to prison culture, and ghetto culture. The association with a specific racial group is a consequence of over expression of incidence in criminality and poverty in that racial group. Jumping straight to the racecard is itself racist; it defacto implies that the saggy pants, and the culture behind it, are intrinsically linked to that racial group. It is equally as onerous as saying "all black people are criminally minded."
Instead, saggy pants is just saggy pants. Complaints about the glorification of prominent displays of saggy pants is not racist, per the above reasoning. Counter-claims that such complaints are racism are themselves what is racist.
You were born with a powerful organ, refined through millions of years of evolution, for the primary functions of advanced abstract and critical thinking. Please use it responsibly.
Agreed.
But then our phones would probably explode under the pressure of fullscreen autostarating flash ads.
That and embedded java applets, fully interactive canvas elements, and millions of cross site activity trace pings.
Throw in some android specific attacks, and some other kinds of fun we don't know about yet, and it could be loads more entertaining to browse on a mobile device.
(I can hardly wait for the aggressive AR adverts of the near future.)
What part of 2-way was hard to understand!?
Kimmy kims is gonna get center stage, both ways!
While his fangirls cheer!
No, the oIL platform next to them is significantly uglier, imho.
And neither is quite as ugly as your mentioned oil refineries in NJ.
For comparison, here is an authentic NJ refinery.
http://media.nj.com/business_i...
From ths perspective of people who like to watch, as the nsa does, telling the landlord about where all the best places to peep so they can be fixed, is counter intuitive.
That the same building techniques are used in thier own house, and that other people who like to watch can peep on them through them, is not seriously considered.
Instead, only the loss of really good ways to peep is what is considered. If the method of peeping is likely to be discovered, or the architecture behind the means of peeping changes such that the approach becomes less valuable, the peeping Tom may delude himself into thinking that he is doing a service to society and the landlord by pointing out how that peeping may happen. (See for instance, methods used to remotely observe what is displayed on a crt monitor by monitoring the em spectrum for telltale radio artifacts-- who uses crts these days?)
The nsa is sick, and likes to watch. The very idea that they would feel they should stopper up the holes they look through, or alert people that they are looking at them through them, is counter to their fetish. The very idea is absurd to them. Only somebody that sees by accident, and is disgusted by having seen, has motive to see to it that no such seeing ever happens again, apart of course, from somebody catching somebody peeping on them, and discovering the hole that way.
From the perspective of the nsa, if they have eno ugh places to peep through, you can putty up holes all day, and they can wack off to watching you do it. Telling you where all the holes are stops that from happening. They want to watch you. Not keep you safe from being peeped on.
I have.
Note in citizen 4, the first phase of the nsa's activity against Snowden was in sussing out his aberrent behavior, and surveiling his girlfriend, family, and Hawaii place of residence. This is what happens in phase 1) of my short list. A list of persons of interest is produced using psych details, and active monitoring starts. Connections maps are created. Points of surveillance are established, and monitoring priority increases. Phase one ideally (for the nsa) ends with apprehension of their leak, but the process does not end there.
After sussing out the entry point of the leaker, the companion network is either dismantled, or subtly repurposed for cointel.
False intel is fed to the group. If the false intel causes the foriegn agency to suspect compromise, it sends the message to that foriegn agency that their action was detected, and that thier methods are not valid any longer. If the foriegn agency fails to change the operational behavior of the cell, then it may become beneficial to plant a double agent. This double agent can then cause the foriegn power to change its policies or public activities, through contaminated or misleading intelligence, created specifically for this purpose.
That they can conduct such a profoundly invasive phase one investigation using literally any internet connected, or broadcast capable device, along with your financial data, and the information about you provided by your so called friends on social media, is the primary thrust behind snowden's leaks. What the NSA will do, and why they will do it is not going to change. The leaks from snowden concerned the how and the what.
1) there will be a witch hunt.
The nsa will investigate its own employees against its already existing psych profile sheets to see who is the most likely to have been motivated to steal the data. Then they will set up an internal emtrapment scenario to catch the leaker red handed. They will then be charged with federal espionage, and put into prison.
2) the same investigation will sift out accomplices and contacts. The trap will not be sprung until positive id has been made on all members of the cell.
3) the nsa will not directly move against the other members of the cell. Instead it will monitor, and selectively leak false intel to this cell, making it ineffectual, or worse, countereffectual to the foriegn government operating it.
4) if deemed useful to do so, the cell will be infiltrated with a new "insider", who will actually be collecting and analyzing the cells instructions to better predict and respond to the foriegn power's activities.
Really, this is not hard.
I ask, because these tiny, fully integrated and inexpensive devices look like very inexpensive, and easily concealed WPA password crackers, or network listening devices to me.
The one with the sdcard slot could be made to do quite a few things, if you don't mind wearing out the card using it for swap space. A combination of zram and sdcard spillover swap, some sensors, and an ext data partition on the card would let this thing do quite a lot, such as sticking it on the back of a USB printer to make the printer network enabled, to running an electronic door control, camera monitoring (using vfl capable cameras), making WiFi driven toy cars or drones, and quite a few others.
For many things, you don't need a whole lot of power. I have used an old router as a pvpgn server for some time, in fact. Works fine.
For a lot of possible projects, physical size of the package and power draw are the obstacles, not the memory size or the processor.
The issue with efuses is like welding the hood shut, so you cannot service the engine.
It forces "physical damage" to become necessary to gain the access you should have been able to get anyway. In the case of the welded hood: you have to cut through the welds. In the case of efuses protected boot loaders: the boot loader enforces strong crypto against custom kernels, preventing boot of devices without the magic number baked into them, and if you flash a new boot loader, bam, efuses blown.
When the hardware that gets damaged is little more than a "warranty void" sticker, just in digital form, the oems are stretching things pretty thin.
I would love to see them be told that they cannot do these kinds of things. Sadly, that is not how the world works today.
You have to be kidding.
Unless it is USB 3.0, that port will saturate far faster than the sata2 port on the minnowboard.
An actual nvme based M.2 ssd put on would smoke both suggestions. If the device is running its own transactional database for object identification, having access times that fast becomes more than just a nice thing to have-- something i mention because of the suggested use case for the board, from intel themselves.
That's another point entirely, and one I wholly agree on.
Complaints about racial discriminiation need to be taken seriously, but on the flipside, not everything that "feels" like racism actually is.
I posted earlier up, a pretty long explanation about what i mean by this. Sometimes, naked, raw ststistics present situations that "look" like discrimination, but really aren't.
Like standing in line at the checkout.
It is very easy to feel you are being discriminated against, when you are black, and nearly every single time you go to the store, the person at the front of the line is white.
You actually have to rationalize why the liklihood of this happening is so much higher than finding a black person at the front of the line, especially when the store is genuinely representative of the total population demographic, and not just a local demographic. White people outnumber black people in the US. Just this fact alone makes the probability that they will be in line ahead of you significantly higher. The checkout clerk is not telling black people to go to the back. They are cashing people out in the order they arrived in the line. Yet, every time you get there, sure enough, there's a white person ahead of you in line.
It feels like racism, but isnt.
People that don't stop to thint about why this always happens will instinctively latch on to the idea that they are being discriminated against. They will make complaints about discrimination, a proper investigation will find that there us none, and now you have somebody that feels abandoned by the system, on top of feeling discriminated against, when in fact, no such thing has happened.
The race card makes these people feel better, but it does so through instituting REAL racism, and further, adds a sense of legitimacy to these percieved but not actual forms of discrimination.
The solution is better understanding of the circumstances behind their experiences, not trying to fight false racism with real racism.
Possibly.
If the headsets ever DO become mainstream, people will be looking through them all the time. If the devices are Internet enabled, and hackable, the NSA would be foolish not to make use of the millions of stereoscopic, highdef, and mobile camera feeds out there. They could be looking through your "eyes" any time they wanted, and if they did it right, you would never know.
Again, without seeing what the person is doing, standing there waving their arms around, there is no context to answer the internal question: what are they doing?
The guy waiting for the subway train could have a pronographic extrapolation app installed that renders all the women walking by in the subway naked. You would never know, because you don't see what he sees in his headset.
Likewise, again, kids looking like they are throwing things, possibly at each other, from a distance. They are throwing virtual pokeballs, but you don't know that. You don't see the mew 2 flying around.
The reason you don't see those things, and will never see those things, is because software makers will be terrified that if other AR users see the games they make without buying the game package, it will upset their business. EG, DRM will ensure that you are unable to see that rare pokemon, and the brightly colored AR pokeballs, unless you have pokemon go installed, and your copy of pokemon go is running.
I say get rid of both.
Get rid of the race card.
Get rid of racist policing.
Keeping either one, as an excuse of the other, is absurd.
You will have the same problem that plagued Google glass. People won't know you aren't recording them In full stereoscopic 3d, and wi presume that you always are.
A physician has a legitimate reason to be wearing a great big scanner on his head, as does a soldier.
The kids playing full AR Pokémon go across the street? Not so much. When the kids are all ogling your lawn, and you don't see the epic Pokémon battle going on there, you just see them all waving their arms and making throwing motions, a lot can be lost in context, and a lot of miscommunication can happen, and that means fights and violence.
Unless everyone sees the same AR experience, regardless of the apps installed (good luck with that one. DRM fetishism in the software space will assure that never happens.) This miscommunication will always happen.
I would argue otherwise.
When the racecard is used, you get absurd things attributed to racism.
Eg, we can say that white people outnumber black people 10:1. (For the sake of this example, just pretend this is true.) This means that if the rate of incidence in desire for gourmet coffee is identical in both races, 10x as many white people will show up at the coffee shop as black people. that means the likelihood that the first person in line is at least 10x more likely to be white than black. It has nothing to do with preferential treatment, it is just how the odds line up. A black patron visits the shop, and is more likely to wait in line behind a white person, than a white person is to wait in line behind a black person, simply because there are more white people.
When the racecard is presented as an option, THEN there is real, defacto racism involved, because now you are introducing real preferential treatment for the black patron to shorten their waiting times, based only on their skin color, out of some misguided idea that the wait times should be equal.
That causes a grudge to happen, which causes race hatred.
Nearly all of the problem with racism, and perceptions of racism that really arent, can be solved through better understanding, and by that, I do not mean the touchy Feely kind.
If i take a vacation to zimbabwe, i expect that i will wait in line behind lots of people with dark colored skin, because there are more people with dark skin than light skin there, and they got there first. It does not mean the supermarket owners are racist against whites, and i do not feel obliged to cut in line so my wait times are different from the people behind me at the checkout, just because my skin color is different.
Arguments about how some minority ethnicity suffer so terribly because they statistically have to wait behind majority ethnicities, ignores the truth: there are just a bunch of people standing in the line, and the only way it matters what race they are, is when race is MADE into an issue. When a line is statistically N persons long, the average is that you be in the middle of the line somewhere. You wait just as long if the line is made of white people as black people.
The question is not about how terrible it is that black people are typically served after white people-- it is why the black patrons find this offensive, when it is not actually the consequence of racism, and why they feel entitled to being treated priority based solely on the color of thier skin.
The race card makes this peoblem worse, not better.
Just wait in fucking line, and wait your turn, like everyone else.
In regards to the story at hand, the presumption of racism comes from some simple features:
Incarceration rates for black males is vastly higher than for white males.
Predominantly black neighborhoods tend to be lower income than predominantly white neighborhoods.
Lower income populations tend towards higher rates of criminality and recidivism.
Lower incomes are strongly correllated with lower educational achievement.
And if I may, a subjective observation: there is a difference of opinion concerning the value of education between mainstream black culture, and mainstream white culture.
I would therefore conjecture that the income disparity is not defacto racism, but is instead cultural. (Take the same culture and apply it to a different race, you will get the same result.) The income disparity results from the attitude toward education, which adversely affects earning potential, which adversely affects crime rate.
Are these cops being racist, by putting stingrays in black neighborhoods, or are the cops putting stingrays where the highest incidence of crime is, and circumstances just so happen to be that such areas are mostly black?
To me, the line is drawn on motivation. Is the motive this?
Black people commit the most crimes, so we deploy stingrays in heavilh black populated areas.
Because that is racism-- it
Unnecessary, but not necessarily incorrect to include. ;)
Some English style guides assert that a comma should be inserted in lists with two members.
No, it would be more clear with Alloy in italics (to make it clear that the project is named Alloy, not that the project is a metaphorical alloy.), with either a colon (indicating the supporting phrase that follows is descriptive of "project alloy"), or an emdash, indicating a continuation on the thesis statement (the unveiling of project alloy by Intel corp.)
Grammar nazis get their panties all soiled when there is ambiguity, and either of those suggestions would make the headline very clear. But, there is then meta ambiguity about which one is the most proper to use.
In other words, whoosh mother fucker. Whoosh.
This device does realworld object mapping and tracking already. It's just a few tweaks away from mapping a stereographic camera feed over each eye (digitally corrected for angle) with AR elements superimpsed. That's basically what the HUD in modt FPS games have these days. Having vector computation for something like a handgun's pointed direction for assisted targeting is getting much closer to reality.
I dont see ordinary people using these, but i could see physicians using it with backscatter and terrahertz imaging sources, and i can see the military using it.