We are saying the same thing... I'm saying that this "dark matter" theory may be obvious, but we are short on details given that our attempts to experimentally verify the details are failing... It's time to go back to other promising ideas and see if we can either prove or eliminate them too, we may have conflated unrelated observations here.... Keep thinking and looking...
Well, it might be time to think about what evidence we have and come up with some alternative theories about what "dark matter" might actually be. Somehow, it seems that we might have a situation where the "settled" part of the science might explain the evidence quite well, but the reality is we are wrong because the next logical step doesn't line up with the theories.
I'm not saying we are wrong about this, only that the longer we fail to construct experiments that give us the expected results, the more likely we may need to do some more thinking about our theories. I'm saying there are valid reasons to question the theory as it now stands and value in thinking and perusing other ideas given the lack of experimental evidence..
... budget for lots of equipment including high end FPGAs to be located in a mine shaft. What shall we say we're doing with it?.
actually there's someone out there already working on a way to hack into their network so that they can run bitcoin mining on them. i bet however that they'll probably find that the scientists secretly installed bitcoin mining on them already... ostensibly to help justify the insane cost of the equipment. so now you know the _real_ reason why they haven't found any so-called dark matter....
Yea, until somebody went through and put SETI clients on all of the systems.... No intelligent life found here... Beam us up!
I'm guessing that the "issue" is that our theories about what dark matter actually IS are wrong enough that we don't understand how to detect it.... Or, there is some observation lens that makes "dark matter" appear to be necessary to account for things, but it's really just appears that way do to local conditions or doesn't exist here, deep in a gravity well next to a star. Ah, some physicist's PHD thesis awaits...
But what do I know.. I'm just a computer programmer who's late to get lunch and has had too much caffeine today who didn't stay at a Holiday Inn express last night..
Perhaps because they are cheap off the shelf commodity items that carry lots of bandwidth and they didn't have the money to reinvent a wheel? Naw, couldn't be...
It's ATFE now.... And it's the "E" part that gets them interested in kitchen grease. However how illegal dumping of same is that interesting to them is beyond me..
One man's truth is another's propaganda you know...
What do you THINK they are saying? I'm guessing that it's something like, "Come on over the DMZ the water is warm over here, we will welcome you with open arms and help you." Along with stuff like "Un is lying to you... " and "A unified Korea is possible!"
another free break for corps and the rich. Thanks. Anyone else notice how everytime you go through a checkout they hit you up for some charity or another? Charities are all well and good but having my donation be some company's tax dodge really pisses me off...
Not exactly.... This isn't a "tax doge", it's just making providing credit monitoring to employees and customers a non-taxable event for the receiver but retains the expense as a tax write off for the company.
So if Target chooses to provide credit monitoring services to their employees and customers, Target gets to write it off as an expense (like they can now) and the employees and customers don't have to claim it as income (like they used to). Seems this benefits the customer and employees.
They (the North) are just making noise so their own people cannot hear the propaganda from the south. Is this so hard to understand? EVERYTHING the North does is about how it plays INTERNALLY which is why they come across so nutty to the outside world. NK must carefully control the "truth" as it is commonly understood within their country.
If the reality of the situation where ever understood by the North Korean masses they would be in open revolt and fleeing their country. If they ever caught on that the majority of the world isn't starving and generally laughs at their "supreme leader" as being a fat slob who keeps his people poor and destitute in his quest for keeping power it would all be over in days. That North Korea is generally considered a joke, and that it's military power, though dangerous, is out matched, out gunned and out manned. That the minefields in the DMZ do more to keep citizens in North Korea than keeping military forces from the south out. That they are starving, only because the "Little Un" must stay in power.
So they are pointing their speakers the same direction as the South's are. They are all pointed north. Which is why you cannot hear them in the South, because it wouldn't matter and North Korea knows it.
About all this says over what we previously knew is that apparently the attackers picked the time of the outage and then had multiple attack points to prevent the operator from being able to effectively disrupt what the attackers where doing. This is different from some virus infection that just so happed to disrupt the operation of the equipment.
But this all matters to me why? Ukraine isn't known for it's security, physical or network. Ukraine isn't known for using the best of technology in their power generation equipment given the worst nuclear accident in history took place here. This attack had an incredibly small affected area and only involved 80,000 customers. This is roughly equal to vandalizing a subway train with spray paint in front of a sleeping transit cop. Yea, it looks bad, but it only happened because somebody was asleep on the job in an ex-soviet country awash in Vodka and violence...
Radar frequencies exist above and below the 2.4Ghz band... However, phased arrays for transmit are usually higher frequencies due to the physical size of the radiating elements required. Where you can do phased radar arrays down into the HF spectrum (and some have) the antennas start getting really big, heavy and bulky and the control systems get really big too..
You *can* do all sorts of things, but at 2.4 GHz doing it using a phased array on transmit is usually going to involve either a large physical size or acceptance of limited beam control. There is a trade off, as always.
However, my biggest argument here is not really the physical size, but the ability to accurately control where you are putting your jamming signal close enough. You may have the ability to put a signal that's 0.1 degrees wide out, but it's *really* hard to know where you want to point that beam with sufficient accuracy when you are trying to hit moving targets from large distances. Remember you have to get enough RF to hit the desired receiving antenna to disrupt the signal but not disrupt other things, so as you make your beam widths wider and your antenna simpler to point you have to crank up the power, which in turn increases the likelihood you are blasting both the desired data link and a bunch of other ones. My contention is that in order to make the antenna pointing problem sufficiently doable (detect, calculate direction and point), you are going to need a fairly wide beam width. And that beam width is going to require a lot more power than you suspect to disrupt the data link with any kind of assurance... AND the combination of these two trade offs will be that you are likely going to be disrupting a whole host of other things which are NOT desired....
But hey... I'm just a software engineer that used to work on radio systems that involved data links and directional phased arrays.... Who happens to have a EE degree.. Don't mind me.
Why do we willingly accept swimming pools, bathtubs and electrical outlets...l
There is a movement to put fences around swimming pools to prevent toddlers from falling in. Electrical plugs outlets have child safety plugs. We are OK with technology that restricts access to these things and that is very similar to smart guns.
I would like to point out that accidental drowning is one of the leading causes of accidental death for toddlers known to man even with all the fence building.... But all that aside....
My point here is that the answer to children's safety is not about having "smart guns" but appropriate parenting and supervision. If you *accidently* let your toddler handle your loaded handgun, you blame the adult who let it happen and not the gun. The same with drowning. The trick in both cases is to layer your protections and not leave the gate open and the patio doors unlocked. Plus you put in an alarm that goes off with something gets into the pool. Just like you put your weapon in a safe place and not laying on the table in your purse.
So, for example, my handgun is in a safe *anytime* it is not on my person. It may be loaded and ready to fire but should a toddler happen upon my safe and I'm not there, they are not getting into the safe. I don't have toddlers anymore either, but 15 and 21 year olds who are both fully trained in handling ALL the weapons in the home, who know how to safely handle them. Because, like teaching a toddler how to swim and get out of the pool should they fall in protects them from drowning, knowing how to safely handle a firearm (when age appropriate) by having actually done things like knowing how to verify the gun is unloaded and actually unloading one themselves protects them.
Smart guns are not an answer to keeping toddlers safe. A loaded gun is ALWAYS a dangerous thing, smart or not, and should NEVER find occasion to be in the hands of a toddler unsupervised. Any adult that inadvertently allows this has made a huge series of mistakes, they didn't lock the gun up, they left it loaded, where the kid could find it, AND they where not supervising the child sufficiently.
You see, I reject this argument that we need "smart guns" as a stupid one. In reality, they don't help with gun safety except perhaps on the margins. In the case of young children, parental education is more effective in preventing accidents anyway because not everybody will have smart guns for a long time anyway. Advocate for Trigger locks, safes, storing weapons unloaded and separate from the ammunition are all more effective solutions. Heck, hand out trigger locks to parents with young children for free, it will be cheaper and more effective than spending half a billion on smart guns...
The problem is your constitution's second amendment.
Instead of working an end run around what is meant to be a fundamental right to bear arms, what you should actually be discussing is how you amend the constitution. The framers of that document put in place specific mechanisms recognizing the need may arise to do so in the future.
This has been done in the past, even the recent past. (e.g. prohibition).
Why can't it be done now?
If the amendment is not possible, then you will have a discussion about weapons, and as a nation, accept the consequences of those actions - it may will be that the defense of liberty is such that the collateral damage is acceptable to many. This seems fundamentally more honest than the approaches being put forth by the executive branch.
I haven't heard this in the discussion, and it's puzzling.
$0.02 cdn.
The reason this is NOT being discussed is that the advocates of "gun control" know two things...
1. They'd never succeed in amending the constitution to do away with the 2nd amendment.
2. If they *where* successful, one of their major vote producing emotional arguments would be rendered mute.
It's the say reason they don't advocate tying the minimum wage to inflation. Not that it wouldn't work, but that it would take away a way to whip the sheep into a frenzy so they will turn out to vote.
Had mom properly secured the weapon and had been watching the child it wouldn't have happened either...
Like it or not, the trick with toddler's and gun safety is to provide monitoring of their activities and keep them out of their reach, just like you do with electrical receptacles, drain cleaner, medications, bathtubs, swimming pools and other household dangers. Do folks realize how many toddlers drown in the backyard pool or get run over by cars in their own driveways?
Why do we willingly accept swimming pools, bathtubs and electrical outlets as dangers around the home but go all weak in the knees when there is a gun in the house?
I wouldnt want to be owning any EA shares right now... How do shorts work?
Shorts are easy, you sell something you don't actually own and promise to repay (cover your position) later by buying what you previously sold. If the price goes up before you cover a short position, you loose money, but if it goes down you make a profit. I used to have stock options though my company and I often would sell short above the option price to lock in the gains, then cover the short by exercising the option and sending the stock to my broker. I used this to take the risk out of the process because it would take a couple of weeks to get the shares once I paid the option price. I think they call that "shorting the box" where you sell a security short in your trading account but you actually hold it someplace else. However, selling short is not that hard to understand. Just remember your risk is literally unlimited (the stock price can always go up) and your profit is limited to your short price (the Stock price can only fall to zero and no more).
Might I suggest "options" as a better alternative. In options trading, you can leverage a bit more and if you are careful you can limit your risk. Options are a bit more complex to understand and effectively use, but basically you are buying or selling Calls and Puts which are contracts which entitle their owner to either buy or sell a security at a specified price before a specified date. You make money in options in two ways, selling contracts and exercising contracts you own which are "in the money". I'll leave it to you to figure out the strategy of options trading, but I caution you to carefully think though all the "what if" scenarios before you start selling contracts because your risks can be greater than your investment when selling contracts. Buying contracts is not so risky, in that you can only loose your initial investment if the contract expires before it's "in the money". If you are careful though, you can make more money on the same amount of stock price movement in options with about the same level of risk as trading the stock directly, but I cannot stress enough that you need to know what you are doing or you will get slaughtered by the program trading houses...
Any kind of GPS jamming/spoofing could, inadvertently, cause GPS problems for nearby aircraft operations. It's partially why such devices are verboten in the USA, you never really know for sure. I guarantee you that the FAA won't allow these things to be used around airports without placing restrictions on aircraft using GPS for navigation.
Now if the Department of Corrections wants to do this around some prison, OK, that might be possible. Or if the Secret Service wants to set up this equipment to protect somebody in their charge, they can do that too. However, one of the first things they will need to do is publish a NOTAM and establish restricted airspace around the area. The FAA isn't going to let you operate a Jammer/spoofer unless you first get them to close the airspace, so using such equipment to protect an airport is simply not going to happen, private or not.
That would be Joseph to you.... And I'm pretty sure it was Mary who was making the claim not Joseph. Last time I when though the story it was Joseph who was dubious about this and was going to refuse to go through with the marriage to the pregnant girl. At least that's how the recorded story goes. According to tradition, Jesus wasn't involved in fathering any children.
Slashdot Mirror
We are saying the same thing... I'm saying that this "dark matter" theory may be obvious, but we are short on details given that our attempts to experimentally verify the details are failing... It's time to go back to other promising ideas and see if we can either prove or eliminate them too, we may have conflated unrelated observations here.... Keep thinking and looking...
I know what the "E" stands for, sorry if that wasn't clear....
Well, it might be time to think about what evidence we have and come up with some alternative theories about what "dark matter" might actually be. Somehow, it seems that we might have a situation where the "settled" part of the science might explain the evidence quite well, but the reality is we are wrong because the next logical step doesn't line up with the theories.
I'm not saying we are wrong about this, only that the longer we fail to construct experiments that give us the expected results, the more likely we may need to do some more thinking about our theories. I'm saying there are valid reasons to question the theory as it now stands and value in thinking and perusing other ideas given the lack of experimental evidence..
actually there's someone out there already working on a way to hack into their network so that they can run bitcoin mining on them. i bet however that they'll probably find that the scientists secretly installed bitcoin mining on them already... ostensibly to help justify the insane cost of the equipment. so now you know the _real_ reason why they haven't found any so-called dark matter....
Yea, until somebody went through and put SETI clients on all of the systems.... No intelligent life found here... Beam us up!
I'm guessing that the "issue" is that our theories about what dark matter actually IS are wrong enough that we don't understand how to detect it.... Or, there is some observation lens that makes "dark matter" appear to be necessary to account for things, but it's really just appears that way do to local conditions or doesn't exist here, deep in a gravity well next to a star. Ah, some physicist's PHD thesis awaits...
But what do I know.. I'm just a computer programmer who's late to get lunch and has had too much caffeine today who didn't stay at a Holiday Inn express last night..
Perhaps because they are cheap off the shelf commodity items that carry lots of bandwidth and they didn't have the money to reinvent a wheel? Naw, couldn't be...
It's ATFE now.... And it's the "E" part that gets them interested in kitchen grease. However how illegal dumping of same is that interesting to them is beyond me..
Ah, What a wiz bang noble idea....
It doesn't pass the smell test.
Neither does the grease...
Darn, they slipped away!
Dumping grease on the grass, so we got to set up cameras and catch the slimy devils.
So just 3D print your next firearm.... Don't think the ammo is coming off the printer, but the bullets sure could...
One man's truth is another's propaganda you know...
What do you THINK they are saying? I'm guessing that it's something like, "Come on over the DMZ the water is warm over here, we will welcome you with open arms and help you." Along with stuff like "Un is lying to you... " and "A unified Korea is possible!"
It's Monday.... Forgive the type-o.
Please apply the following... "doge" => "dodge"
another free break for corps and the rich. Thanks. Anyone else notice how everytime you go through a checkout they hit you up for some charity or another? Charities are all well and good but having my donation be some company's tax dodge really pisses me off...
Not exactly.... This isn't a "tax doge", it's just making providing credit monitoring to employees and customers a non-taxable event for the receiver but retains the expense as a tax write off for the company.
So if Target chooses to provide credit monitoring services to their employees and customers, Target gets to write it off as an expense (like they can now) and the employees and customers don't have to claim it as income (like they used to). Seems this benefits the customer and employees.
They (the North) are just making noise so their own people cannot hear the propaganda from the south. Is this so hard to understand? EVERYTHING the North does is about how it plays INTERNALLY which is why they come across so nutty to the outside world. NK must carefully control the "truth" as it is commonly understood within their country.
If the reality of the situation where ever understood by the North Korean masses they would be in open revolt and fleeing their country. If they ever caught on that the majority of the world isn't starving and generally laughs at their "supreme leader" as being a fat slob who keeps his people poor and destitute in his quest for keeping power it would all be over in days. That North Korea is generally considered a joke, and that it's military power, though dangerous, is out matched, out gunned and out manned. That the minefields in the DMZ do more to keep citizens in North Korea than keeping military forces from the south out. That they are starving, only because the "Little Un" must stay in power.
So they are pointing their speakers the same direction as the South's are. They are all pointed north. Which is why you cannot hear them in the South, because it wouldn't matter and North Korea knows it.
About all this says over what we previously knew is that apparently the attackers picked the time of the outage and then had multiple attack points to prevent the operator from being able to effectively disrupt what the attackers where doing. This is different from some virus infection that just so happed to disrupt the operation of the equipment.
But this all matters to me why? Ukraine isn't known for it's security, physical or network. Ukraine isn't known for using the best of technology in their power generation equipment given the worst nuclear accident in history took place here. This attack had an incredibly small affected area and only involved 80,000 customers. This is roughly equal to vandalizing a subway train with spray paint in front of a sleeping transit cop. Yea, it looks bad, but it only happened because somebody was asleep on the job in an ex-soviet country awash in Vodka and violence...
Radar frequencies exist above and below the 2.4Ghz band... However, phased arrays for transmit are usually higher frequencies due to the physical size of the radiating elements required. Where you can do phased radar arrays down into the HF spectrum (and some have) the antennas start getting really big, heavy and bulky and the control systems get really big too..
You *can* do all sorts of things, but at 2.4 GHz doing it using a phased array on transmit is usually going to involve either a large physical size or acceptance of limited beam control. There is a trade off, as always.
However, my biggest argument here is not really the physical size, but the ability to accurately control where you are putting your jamming signal close enough. You may have the ability to put a signal that's 0.1 degrees wide out, but it's *really* hard to know where you want to point that beam with sufficient accuracy when you are trying to hit moving targets from large distances. Remember you have to get enough RF to hit the desired receiving antenna to disrupt the signal but not disrupt other things, so as you make your beam widths wider and your antenna simpler to point you have to crank up the power, which in turn increases the likelihood you are blasting both the desired data link and a bunch of other ones. My contention is that in order to make the antenna pointing problem sufficiently doable (detect, calculate direction and point), you are going to need a fairly wide beam width. And that beam width is going to require a lot more power than you suspect to disrupt the data link with any kind of assurance... AND the combination of these two trade offs will be that you are likely going to be disrupting a whole host of other things which are NOT desired....
But hey... I'm just a software engineer that used to work on radio systems that involved data links and directional phased arrays.... Who happens to have a EE degree.. Don't mind me.
Why do we willingly accept swimming pools, bathtubs and electrical outlets ...l
There is a movement to put fences around swimming pools to prevent toddlers from falling in. Electrical plugs outlets have child safety plugs. We are OK with technology that restricts access to these things and that is very similar to smart guns.
I would like to point out that accidental drowning is one of the leading causes of accidental death for toddlers known to man even with all the fence building.... But all that aside....
My point here is that the answer to children's safety is not about having "smart guns" but appropriate parenting and supervision. If you *accidently* let your toddler handle your loaded handgun, you blame the adult who let it happen and not the gun. The same with drowning. The trick in both cases is to layer your protections and not leave the gate open and the patio doors unlocked. Plus you put in an alarm that goes off with something gets into the pool. Just like you put your weapon in a safe place and not laying on the table in your purse.
So, for example, my handgun is in a safe *anytime* it is not on my person. It may be loaded and ready to fire but should a toddler happen upon my safe and I'm not there, they are not getting into the safe. I don't have toddlers anymore either, but 15 and 21 year olds who are both fully trained in handling ALL the weapons in the home, who know how to safely handle them. Because, like teaching a toddler how to swim and get out of the pool should they fall in protects them from drowning, knowing how to safely handle a firearm (when age appropriate) by having actually done things like knowing how to verify the gun is unloaded and actually unloading one themselves protects them.
Smart guns are not an answer to keeping toddlers safe. A loaded gun is ALWAYS a dangerous thing, smart or not, and should NEVER find occasion to be in the hands of a toddler unsupervised. Any adult that inadvertently allows this has made a huge series of mistakes, they didn't lock the gun up, they left it loaded, where the kid could find it, AND they where not supervising the child sufficiently.
You see, I reject this argument that we need "smart guns" as a stupid one. In reality, they don't help with gun safety except perhaps on the margins. In the case of young children, parental education is more effective in preventing accidents anyway because not everybody will have smart guns for a long time anyway. Advocate for Trigger locks, safes, storing weapons unloaded and separate from the ammunition are all more effective solutions. Heck, hand out trigger locks to parents with young children for free, it will be cheaper and more effective than spending half a billion on smart guns...
The problem is your constitution's second amendment.
Instead of working an end run around what is meant to be a fundamental right to bear arms, what you should actually be discussing is how you amend the constitution. The framers of that document put in place specific mechanisms recognizing the need may arise to do so in the future.
This has been done in the past, even the recent past. (e.g. prohibition).
Why can't it be done now?
If the amendment is not possible, then you will have a discussion about weapons, and as a nation, accept the consequences of those actions - it may will be that the defense of liberty is such that the collateral damage is acceptable to many. This seems fundamentally more honest than the approaches being put forth by the executive branch.
I haven't heard this in the discussion, and it's puzzling.
$0.02 cdn.
The reason this is NOT being discussed is that the advocates of "gun control" know two things...
1. They'd never succeed in amending the constitution to do away with the 2nd amendment.
2. If they *where* successful, one of their major vote producing emotional arguments would be rendered mute.
It's the say reason they don't advocate tying the minimum wage to inflation. Not that it wouldn't work, but that it would take away a way to whip the sheep into a frenzy so they will turn out to vote.
Had mom properly secured the weapon and had been watching the child it wouldn't have happened either...
Like it or not, the trick with toddler's and gun safety is to provide monitoring of their activities and keep them out of their reach, just like you do with electrical receptacles, drain cleaner, medications, bathtubs, swimming pools and other household dangers. Do folks realize how many toddlers drown in the backyard pool or get run over by cars in their own driveways?
Why do we willingly accept swimming pools, bathtubs and electrical outlets as dangers around the home but go all weak in the knees when there is a gun in the house?
I wouldnt want to be owning any EA shares right now... How do shorts work?
Shorts are easy, you sell something you don't actually own and promise to repay (cover your position) later by buying what you previously sold. If the price goes up before you cover a short position, you loose money, but if it goes down you make a profit. I used to have stock options though my company and I often would sell short above the option price to lock in the gains, then cover the short by exercising the option and sending the stock to my broker. I used this to take the risk out of the process because it would take a couple of weeks to get the shares once I paid the option price. I think they call that "shorting the box" where you sell a security short in your trading account but you actually hold it someplace else. However, selling short is not that hard to understand. Just remember your risk is literally unlimited (the stock price can always go up) and your profit is limited to your short price (the Stock price can only fall to zero and no more).
Might I suggest "options" as a better alternative. In options trading, you can leverage a bit more and if you are careful you can limit your risk. Options are a bit more complex to understand and effectively use, but basically you are buying or selling Calls and Puts which are contracts which entitle their owner to either buy or sell a security at a specified price before a specified date. You make money in options in two ways, selling contracts and exercising contracts you own which are "in the money". I'll leave it to you to figure out the strategy of options trading, but I caution you to carefully think though all the "what if" scenarios before you start selling contracts because your risks can be greater than your investment when selling contracts. Buying contracts is not so risky, in that you can only loose your initial investment if the contract expires before it's "in the money". If you are careful though, you can make more money on the same amount of stock price movement in options with about the same level of risk as trading the stock directly, but I cannot stress enough that you need to know what you are doing or you will get slaughtered by the program trading houses...
Any kind of GPS jamming/spoofing could, inadvertently, cause GPS problems for nearby aircraft operations. It's partially why such devices are verboten in the USA, you never really know for sure. I guarantee you that the FAA won't allow these things to be used around airports without placing restrictions on aircraft using GPS for navigation.
Now if the Department of Corrections wants to do this around some prison, OK, that might be possible. Or if the Secret Service wants to set up this equipment to protect somebody in their charge, they can do that too. However, one of the first things they will need to do is publish a NOTAM and establish restricted airspace around the area. The FAA isn't going to let you operate a Jammer/spoofer unless you first get them to close the airspace, so using such equipment to protect an airport is simply not going to happen, private or not.
That would be Joseph to you.... And I'm pretty sure it was Mary who was making the claim not Joseph. Last time I when though the story it was Joseph who was dubious about this and was going to refuse to go through with the marriage to the pregnant girl. At least that's how the recorded story goes. According to tradition, Jesus wasn't involved in fathering any children.
Dato joints.