There are also the problems of alerting the suspect and risk of being shot as a home invader. Even minimal precautions by a suspect make this a risky proposition.
And as far as his comments about black-body radiation from such a structure, it doesn't seem terribly unreasonable for a civilization capable of such engineering such a megastructure in the first place, to have figured out how to convert heat energy into something more usable/consumable.
Like more heat at a lower temperature?
Forget Dyson Spheres. When they reverse thermodynamics, *then* I will be impressed.
If the person writing the file generates the hash as well, that makes things easy and no hash is needed. Just attach an evil bit and description of the file as metadata and select based on that.
The Stored Communications Act already makes a distinction between documents which you store yourself versus documents which you store on a third party server with the later having less protection from search and seizure.
What about false positives - like if a document has been mass-mailed or put as a part of a story etc.?
I an imagine that we would end up into a situation of "guilty unless proven innocent".
People who find themselves on the Terrorist Watch List which denies them various rights can always spend a decade in court getting themselves removed like with the current No Fly List. Then the government can add them again.
The data was voluntarily handed over to the service provider so it can be seized and searched at any time. As a practical manner, the government is going to do this anyway whether they say so or not making "should" and "legal" irrelevant despite laws like the Electronics Communications Privacy Act. If you want anything sent over the internet to remain private, encrypt it.
Note that encryption does *not* create an expectation of privacy. If the government can seize the data, then there is nothing to prevent them from decrypting it if they can.
I'm of the opinion that Microsoft sees this as their main chance, with the near term arrival of "instant suspend / resume" in the laptop form factor, because otherwise, who the hell cares about the 3% annual performance increment that Intel presently eeks out year over year?
If their "instant suspend/resume" works as well as their current and previous "suspend/resume/hibernate", then it will be unusable.
The heads on a hard drive cannot be read in parallel without separate actuators because more than one cannot be in alignment. Track density has been so high for more than a decade that various mechanical errors like wobbling of the disk stack, run-out, and the temperature coefficient of expansion create displacement errors greater than the track to track spacing.
Since written pages are part of larger blocks which have to be erased all at once, a page with discarded data may exist without being erased until either all of the pages in the block are discarded and the block is erased or used pages are copied to a new block and the old block is erased. Individual pages cannot be erased.
That's what seems odd to me. Why would police disclose that they're able to do this? Isn't this the kind of capability you'd want to keep under wraps? Almost seems like they want people to avoid BB. I wonder why.
I do not know the merits of their claim however the next best thing to breaking the encryption is to say you have broken the encryption so users move to a less secure system.
I am sure they have 100s to 1000s of channels and FPGAs are probably the cheapest solution not because of speed but because of high integration and ease of use. The alternative would be either an ASIC or board level integration.
The kid was wearing clothes which "moved in or that otherwise affected interstate or foreign commerce", right? What about any schools supplies or books he was carrying?
However, education is one place they actually drew a line in the sand. It was a federal gun legislation case, and SCOTUS basically said "If gun violence == educational impact == interstate commerce, then literally everything is interstate commerce and nothing will be within the purview of state/local government."
The court's line drawing had no practical effect to the Gun-Free School Zones Act. Congress added "that has moved in or that otherwise affects interstate or foreign commerce" to place the law under their power to regulate interstate commerce and the courts have since upheld it.
The challenge to the Violence Against Women Act of 1994 would be a closer match:
Boxer and Feinstein and certain other politicians used to mention gun confiscation but have gotten better about not advertising their goals.
California had that whole SKS fiasco where they declined to allow people with certain SKS like rifles to register them, then decided that they actually did need to register them but since it was past the date they would accept late registrations, and then decided that they could not so then they informally went after the people who voluntarily registered their rifles. Both California and New York have systematically confiscated firearms under dubious pretenses.
Then there was that whole Katrina episode or would you argue that those firearms were not confiscated? They were certainly taken by the authorities and then destroyed.
Internally, all SSDs essentially implement a database of disk sectors, the equivalent of a log structured filesystem with a single file, due to the inability to overwrite existing data in place. A power loss without backup capacitors places the integrity of that database at risk, which is why any power loss can lead to the loss of completely unrelated areas of the logical device, not just areas with pending in flight writes, and often the contents of the device in its entirety.
It is conceivable that with extremely careful design an SSD could be designed to provide power loss protection without backup capacitors but apparently no one has managed to do that yet - or at least not with adequate performance. Take a good look at the design of something like ZFS for a clue as to how one might go about doing that.
The failure mode is worse than you describe and has to do with the nature of NAND Flash memory. During a program (and erase?) operation, power loss can cause corruption of other pages in the NAND array so short of implementing a NAND Flash memory IC which is immune to this, having enough backup power to complete the operation is the only solution.
I would presume that pairs of SSD's would be raid connected, and as was the case with some Raid systems, the cache to the drives were (lead) acid battery backed up along with sufficient power to insure the last operation is/was safely completed..
I am a little surprised nobody makes an interposer for the SSD power connection in so that power to the drive is maintained long enough for the SSD to complete any internal operations. I wonder though if this would be enough if the SSD implements scrubbing since in that case, a write and state update could be in progress even during idle times.
The failure mode when unexpectedly being powered down is specific to SSDs and how they use Flash memory.
SSDs like hard drives include a data structure for translating virtual to physical sectors. On hard drives this is used for masking bad physical sectors and "relocating them" but on SSDs, every sector has to be translated because of how the erase and write cycle works and every write updates this table. Flash memory however can corrupt data *other* than the data being written when power is lost so if power is lost while updating the translation data structures, so much state information can be lost that contents of the drive are also lost and in many cases, the drive becomes unusable because the saved state is corrupt.
The solution is for the SSD to always have enough internal backup power to complete updates to its own data structures but it is no surprise that most do not. In the tests which have been done over the past years looking into SSD reliability, most drives eventually failed when power was lost unexpectedly.
They're essentially reusing the steel cylinder. Presumably they strip it, media-blast it to remove all traces of its previous use down to bare metal, inspect it with sonic or magnaflux or X-ray or pressure test, along the way somewhere confirming its dimensions are still within spec and haven't ballooned due to use, then if it passes, clean again and build it in a similar fashion to if it had been a new steel cylinder being built as a rocket motor...
Part of the refurbishment procedure included using a hydraulic press to squeeze the steel booster segments back into shape because the force between the main tank attachment and the skirt attachment which held the entire structure to the ground after the shuttle engines were started would bend the booster segments out of round. This bending became significantly worse before Challenger after the launch procedure was changed to hold the shuttle down longer after engine ignition.
One of the observations from the Challenger inquiry was that after the hold down procedure was changed, the booster segments were coming back so bent up that the hydraulic press no longer had enough force to reform them safely. The force was measured and if above a threshold the booster segment was suppose to be discarded but instead a mechanical press was added to bypass this.
I think someone confused hydrogen bomb with boosted fission bomb. They both use tritium but the later could be small enough to be delivered by the missiles that North Korea has and would would be the next step in their atomic bomb project.
If that is the case, then why have the loaded firearm or even a firearm at all? An Airsoft should be just as effective, right? Fire extinguishers are unlikely to ever be used to stop a fire so inspections are unneeded. How many people are likely to ever be in a traffic collision where seat belts or air bags make a difference?
The problem with this is that the deterrence of firearms is predicated on their reliability. Individuals using a firearm for self defense may hope that mere threat (*) or brandishing is sufficient to deter an attacker but the safest course of action is always going to be to plan on shooting the attacker immediately and without warning. The training which goes along with that is that you do not draw or reveal that you have a firearm until the situation already justifies the use of deadly force. Doing so with a known to be unreliable firearm, and all smart gun implementations so far have been unreliable, will significantly change that calculation making the firearm useless for self defense which is part of the plan for some who advocate these technologies while excusing law enforcement from using them. Would law enforcement put up with using a firearm which was known to be less reliable based on most law enforcement officers never actually having to shoot someone?
(*) As the Kansas supreme court case from a couple of years ago shows, threatening to use a firearm without using it can entail significant legal risks. In Kansas until recently when their legislature changed the law, threatening lethal force was unlawful in a self defense situation while actually using lethal force was not and there are other US jurisdictions with the same problem whether it is caused by statutory law or overzealous prosecutors.
Mass shootings are such a small part of gun violence that making policy based on them is asinine. "Assault weapons" are the same way in being used for so few homicides. Most people who are shot get shot by a handgun and it is worth noting that the original National Firearms Act of 1934 which regulates machine guns, short shotguns, and other weapons included all handguns in its list of regulated weapons.
It is not mass shootings or firearms related violence which is acceptable in the US; it is violence in general. We have similarly high rates of violence involving knives and blunt instruments so unless those are somehow caused by lack firearm laws, the wrong problem is being considered.
Not true. Licenses are already required for those "engaged in the business of selling firearms" and background checks are required for those purchasing from said licensees and this executive action doesn't change that.
The licenses are required but if they decide that you are not actually going to be in the "business of selling firearms", then they will not issue the license to you yet this does not protect you from being charged for selling firearms without the license which you sought and they denied.
Slashdot Mirror
There are also the problems of alerting the suspect and risk of being shot as a home invader. Even minimal precautions by a suspect make this a risky proposition.
Like more heat at a lower temperature?
Forget Dyson Spheres. When they reverse thermodynamics, *then* I will be impressed.
http://www.projectrho.com/publ...
It is one of those new fangled compact fluorescent or LED stars.
If the person writing the file generates the hash as well, that makes things easy and no hash is needed. Just attach an evil bit and description of the file as metadata and select based on that.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
The Stored Communications Act already makes a distinction between documents which you store yourself versus documents which you store on a third party server with the later having less protection from search and seizure.
People who find themselves on the Terrorist Watch List which denies them various rights can always spend a decade in court getting themselves removed like with the current No Fly List. Then the government can add them again.
The data was voluntarily handed over to the service provider so it can be seized and searched at any time. As a practical manner, the government is going to do this anyway whether they say so or not making "should" and "legal" irrelevant despite laws like the Electronics Communications Privacy Act. If you want anything sent over the internet to remain private, encrypt it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Note that encryption does *not* create an expectation of privacy. If the government can seize the data, then there is nothing to prevent them from decrypting it if they can.
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/pa...
If their "instant suspend/resume" works as well as their current and previous "suspend/resume/hibernate", then it will be unusable.
The heads on a hard drive cannot be read in parallel without separate actuators because more than one cannot be in alignment. Track density has been so high for more than a decade that various mechanical errors like wobbling of the disk stack, run-out, and the temperature coefficient of expansion create displacement errors greater than the track to track spacing.
There are specialized epoxy resins which can produce a metal, glass, or ceramic seal which is hermetic.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Since written pages are part of larger blocks which have to be erased all at once, a page with discarded data may exist without being erased until either all of the pages in the block are discarded and the block is erased or used pages are copied to a new block and the old block is erased. Individual pages cannot be erased.
I do not know the merits of their claim however the next best thing to breaking the encryption is to say you have broken the encryption so users move to a less secure system.
I am sure they have 100s to 1000s of channels and FPGAs are probably the cheapest solution not because of speed but because of high integration and ease of use. The alternative would be either an ASIC or board level integration.
The kid was wearing clothes which "moved in or that otherwise affected interstate or foreign commerce", right? What about any schools supplies or books he was carrying?
The court's line drawing had no practical effect to the Gun-Free School Zones Act. Congress added "that has moved in or that otherwise affects interstate or foreign commerce" to place the law under their power to regulate interstate commerce and the courts have since upheld it.
The challenge to the Violence Against Women Act of 1994 would be a closer match:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Is Senator Feinstein on the left?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Boxer and Feinstein and certain other politicians used to mention gun confiscation but have gotten better about not advertising their goals.
California had that whole SKS fiasco where they declined to allow people with certain SKS like rifles to register them, then decided that they actually did need to register them but since it was past the date they would accept late registrations, and then decided that they could not so then they informally went after the people who voluntarily registered their rifles. Both California and New York have systematically confiscated firearms under dubious pretenses.
Then there was that whole Katrina episode or would you argue that those firearms were not confiscated? They were certainly taken by the authorities and then destroyed.
The failure mode is worse than you describe and has to do with the nature of NAND Flash memory. During a program (and erase?) operation, power loss can cause corruption of other pages in the NAND array so short of implementing a NAND Flash memory IC which is immune to this, having enough backup power to complete the operation is the only solution.
I am a little surprised nobody makes an interposer for the SSD power connection in so that power to the drive is maintained long enough for the SSD to complete any internal operations. I wonder though if this would be enough if the SSD implements scrubbing since in that case, a write and state update could be in progress even during idle times.
Easier of course is just to use a UPS.
The failure mode when unexpectedly being powered down is specific to SSDs and how they use Flash memory.
SSDs like hard drives include a data structure for translating virtual to physical sectors. On hard drives this is used for masking bad physical sectors and "relocating them" but on SSDs, every sector has to be translated because of how the erase and write cycle works and every write updates this table. Flash memory however can corrupt data *other* than the data being written when power is lost so if power is lost while updating the translation data structures, so much state information can be lost that contents of the drive are also lost and in many cases, the drive becomes unusable because the saved state is corrupt.
The solution is for the SSD to always have enough internal backup power to complete updates to its own data structures but it is no surprise that most do not. In the tests which have been done over the past years looking into SSD reliability, most drives eventually failed when power was lost unexpectedly.
Part of the refurbishment procedure included using a hydraulic press to squeeze the steel booster segments back into shape because the force between the main tank attachment and the skirt attachment which held the entire structure to the ground after the shuttle engines were started would bend the booster segments out of round. This bending became significantly worse before Challenger after the launch procedure was changed to hold the shuttle down longer after engine ignition.
One of the observations from the Challenger inquiry was that after the hold down procedure was changed, the booster segments were coming back so bent up that the hydraulic press no longer had enough force to reform them safely. The force was measured and if above a threshold the booster segment was suppose to be discarded but instead a mechanical press was added to bypass this.
I think someone confused hydrogen bomb with boosted fission bomb. They both use tritium but the later could be small enough to be delivered by the missiles that North Korea has and would would be the next step in their atomic bomb project.
If that is the case, then why have the loaded firearm or even a firearm at all? An Airsoft should be just as effective, right? Fire extinguishers are unlikely to ever be used to stop a fire so inspections are unneeded. How many people are likely to ever be in a traffic collision where seat belts or air bags make a difference?
The problem with this is that the deterrence of firearms is predicated on their reliability. Individuals using a firearm for self defense may hope that mere threat (*) or brandishing is sufficient to deter an attacker but the safest course of action is always going to be to plan on shooting the attacker immediately and without warning. The training which goes along with that is that you do not draw or reveal that you have a firearm until the situation already justifies the use of deadly force. Doing so with a known to be unreliable firearm, and all smart gun implementations so far have been unreliable, will significantly change that calculation making the firearm useless for self defense which is part of the plan for some who advocate these technologies while excusing law enforcement from using them. Would law enforcement put up with using a firearm which was known to be less reliable based on most law enforcement officers never actually having to shoot someone?
(*) As the Kansas supreme court case from a couple of years ago shows, threatening to use a firearm without using it can entail significant legal risks. In Kansas until recently when their legislature changed the law, threatening lethal force was unlawful in a self defense situation while actually using lethal force was not and there are other US jurisdictions with the same problem whether it is caused by statutory law or overzealous prosecutors.
Mass shootings are such a small part of gun violence that making policy based on them is asinine. "Assault weapons" are the same way in being used for so few homicides. Most people who are shot get shot by a handgun and it is worth noting that the original National Firearms Act of 1934 which regulates machine guns, short shotguns, and other weapons included all handguns in its list of regulated weapons.
It is not mass shootings or firearms related violence which is acceptable in the US; it is violence in general. We have similarly high rates of violence involving knives and blunt instruments so unless those are somehow caused by lack firearm laws, the wrong problem is being considered.
The licenses are required but if they decide that you are not actually going to be in the "business of selling firearms", then they will not issue the license to you yet this does not protect you from being charged for selling firearms without the license which you sought and they denied.