Cosmic Radiation comes from LOTS of things out there and it's not just the rate of exposure that's the problem here, but the *duration* of the exposure during the trip.
The nearest planet in the "goldilocks zone" is something like 1,000 light years away. The nearest neighbor star something like 10 light years. If we could get something going at say 50% of C, that means we have a 20+ year round trip to the nearest star or a 2,000+ year round trip to the nearest possible habitable planet and back.
The background cosmic radiation exposure rate might be less than we see in LEO or on the Moon, but it's still there. Living though 20 years of constant exposure just isn't a viable option, not to mention that 20 years of weightlessness would be a SERIOUS health issue. Even a year is difficult with today's technology. Doing 2,000 years of all this is a sure way to sterilize any practical conveyance we could build of any and all kinds of life that might find it's way onboard.
No, we and our offspring die here, in this Solar system.
Um... IF that's what is happening to you, you are doing it wrong.
In corporate networks this is VERY common for controlling and monitoring internet access by employees. You have a corporate CA which is invalid outside the company but trusted by clients INSIDE the company. Then you put proxies at the border entry points. Volia, you can monitor and filter what your employees are doing at the proxy. This is how a lot of content filters actually work and with everything getting tunneled over https in a false attempt at being "secure" you have to be able to look at https content to actually filter stuff.
The problems you describe are likely caused by improper configuration of the clients and what CA's they will accept. Likely you will have to add the internal CA to clients on the inside of your network to make them work and if the client is OUTSIDE your network, you will need a fully vetted PUBLIC cert to be applied when the traffic is headed outside the network. It could also be that the filter appliances don't have trusted CA's signing their certs (as in they are self signed by the device). In which case you are doing it wrong and need to create your own internal CA and issue the appliances certs from it.... Or not, and just blindly accept the self signed cert from the appliance every time it gets updated.
Why do they need to see the decrypted packet payloads? Surely throttling could be done based on a device's behavior (e.g. bandwidth used) without having to know exactly what the user is doing.
My guess is that they want to control the advertisements you see, even on encrypted pages and that the CTO is blowing smoke because he doesn't want to tell you this (and/or really doesn't know how all this works). If they *really* are trying to filter https bandwidth, this was a sorry way to do it. Not only is it ineffective and not very simple, it is risky for the customer.
Right now, GoGo needs to have it's certificates yanked by the authority they use, or if they are self signed, GoGo needs to be removed from everybody's trusted authority lists. Then, if they INSIST on doing this they will need to be sure to include verbiage in their contracts with users to allow them to do it and then require an opt in action for a user to install a temporary CA which is good for a limited time (say the duration of the flight).
Short of a full understanding that GoGo would then have the ability to snoop on your https interactions (say with your bank or broker) they should NOT be doing this kind of thing.
Isn't this a classic man in the middle attack, where somebody is issuing bogus site certs using authority they really don't legally have? Who is their certificate authority?
Wouldn't this be a violation of their CA agreement? I mean, signing certs for websites that YOU don't own or control is surely a way to get either busted by the authority that issued your signing keys, or if you are your own authority, get yourself removed from everybody's "trusted authority" lists.
At the very LEAST their certs should be revoked along with their authority to create more... And It should happen NOW.
It feels like they're just using a cheap solution to control their bandwith. (Maybe weight of equipment plays a significant role in these applications, too.)
Or they may be bad. I don't know. Either way it's a no go; think of something better.
My bet is that they think #1 is true, but given my experience with them it really is that they are that bad at network management... Well that and they thought nobody would notice them doing this when they tried to get away with something.
I know somebody who works for them up in the windy city, I'll have to ask why they thought this was necessary. Based on my past experience with this person, my guess is pretty much your guess, that they where/are up to no good and got caught. If they really didn't mean anything bad, it just says what I've always suspected, they don't really know what they are doing (which I'm totally sure describes the person who I know that works for GoGo).
Not even close to being able to work. Radiation is sure to kill all living things on any space ship short of the size of a small planet, likely before you could get such a massive object out of the solar system.
Before we can "invest in technology" we need to have some theoretical basis for said technology to work. Our current understanding of physics provides no plausible mechanism for a living human to travel to these planets. Unless there is a fatal flaw in relativity, it is possible (if not probable) that practical interstellar travel is essentially impossible.
Totally agree, but you are attacking the SyFi culture where it's just expected that Captain Kirk can just order up "warp 8". Einstein pretty much condemned us and our offspring to die with the confines of the Solar System and the chances he was wrong do seem pretty remote so far.
-The presidential election will be decided by one vote... on the supreme court.
The margin of victory was more than one vote and the outcome of the election was decided on the day the governor of Florida certified the election results the first time. The appeal to the Supreme court was pointless as it had no power to reverse the decision of the electoral college nor change the vote of the Florida delegates. Gore lost on every front, the initial count (the legal one) AND the following three recounts. The supreme court ruling was just icing on the cake of his defeat. Get over it.
-There will be a nuclear terrorist attack on New York, perpetrated by Israel, the Bush administration, and the Pentagon, with obvious evidence right out in the open, and nobody will question it.
If you are referring to 9/11, there was and is zero evidence of a "nuclear" attack and just about the same amount that Israel had anything to do with it. Somebody is pretty fond of their tin foil hat to really believe this line of thought.
-The attack will be used as bait and switch to wage a $3 trillion war against a country which didn't even have anything to do with the patsies, let alone the actual attack.
Now you are just off into La La land.... Most of the rest of your claims are in a similar ilk.
I hope the doctor has prescribed the proper medications and that you keep taking them like you should...
Problem is that with current knowledge and technology we would NEVER be able to get out of our solar system alive, much less actually make it to the nearest star. We *might* be able to send probes, but we are talking about missions that will have to last multiple decades on internal power supplies and whatever fuel they start with. There is no way that humans would survive the trip on any craft we could hope to construct in our lifetimes.
The exploration of "space" we do will be limited to our solar system by physics and our biology and without some kind of break though in getting things moving faster than light, it is within this solar system we and our offspring will all die.
Just like Fox is losing networks left and right now because the fact of the matter is most people just want a "news channel" and CNN is just fine for that and doesn't have a giant group of people that hate them like Fox does.
Fox New has the biggest audience in between the cable news outlets and the only reason it has been removed from any networks is because it has started to command more fees from the distributors and cable operators (which is why dish turned them off). If cable operators are looking for space (which they are not) there are plenty of lesser watched networks they can ditch.
According to the Neilson ratings, the pecking order is Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, CNBC, Fox Business News, and Headline news, in that order. Cable providers sell advertisement space on these channels so they want you to watch so they can claim higher fees for the ad time. Trust me, they will ditch the channel that is the most profitable for them and that is decidedly NOT going to be Fox News, unless Fox is trying to squeeze them too hard, or like in the case of Dish, if the provider can afford to play hardball with them.
Get four history professors who have divergent viewpoints and hate each other. Get somebody cool for a moderator, like Jon Stewart. Then let those boys go at it.
Stewart? PLEASE think of somebody else... I'd rather have Candy Crawley or some other lifeless NPR host over Jon... How about a BBC new reader or something? Heck, dust off Allen Colmes and Newt to tag team or something... Other than that, I LIKE the idea..
If you believe your rights come at the end of a gun, and you sit around bitching about ensuring you have access to guns, and you ignore when they take away the rest of your rights... you're just a bunch of children who want your guns and nothing else.
Again, you are not properly representing Gun Rights advocates perspective on how to defend their rights. No responsible party or organization would advocate that we use weapons and commit murder to protect our 2nd amendment rights and even the nuttiest of gun rights advocates I know of don't support that. How do you keep implying such things? Obviously this false idea comes from you...
Your charge that we should somehow now meet your expectations and support YOUR cause of the day with the same intensity as we advocate for gun rights is truly misplaced and a logical fallacy on your part. It would be like me expecting you to start picketing the local abortion provider in your area to protect the "right to life" should you choose to picket outside WalMart advocating for unionization, then dismissing your argument for organized labor because you refused to protect the rights of the unborn...
I am not responsible for what nutjobs with guns do. Nutjobs with guns are.
Perhaps, but there is no sense in egging them on with your senseless blather about killing people to prove they are serious. It's akin to incitement to riot.. Not to mention it makes you look like a nut case.
But pointing out the hypocrisy of bitching about this one right and ignoring the erosion of every other one? Nope, not gonna stop that.
Then maybe I'm misreading what you are saying, because I'm hearing you say that if one is upset about gun laws, we should go out and shoot people who you claim are violating their other rights too. YOU are saying that we should react with violence to such, but gun rights advocates like the NRA are saying exactly the opposite, even about defending our rights to own and carry firearms. They are saying we should be engaged in legal efforts to protect our rights not illegal ones.
If you are only prepared to defend (figuratively, rhetorically, and then possibly literally) ONE right, you don't deserve any of the rest of them.
The gun rights advocates I know, while they major in the one area, do not advocate you act differently about other rights abuses. No national organization for gun rights is encouraging their supporters to kill to protect their gun rights, surely the NRA doesn't, not even the borderline crazy Open Carry Texas folks are advocating violence in their misguided attempts to secure their rights. So your insistence that we "be consistent" or shut up and go home is invalid on a number of grounds.
So when these gun advocates ignore the rest of this shit, and bray loudly about the right to open carry and own assault weapons... I conclude these people are either hypocrites, or really only gun nuts who don't care about anything else.
As an aside, you do understand that the term "assault weapons" is a legal one right? The difference between a weapon that IS an assault weapon an done that ISN'T can be as simple as what kind of stock you put on it. Two weapons can be assembled with exactly the same components except the stock, shoot identical rounds at identical rates and one is considered an assault weapon and the other isn't. Generally the differences are cosmetic, as are most of the laws that depend on the federal definition of "assault weapon". Such laws are about show, and don't really address the problems they are touted to have solved by the politicians who where slumming for your votes..
Neither deserves my respect.
Your choice, but I think your critique is a bit misplaced as your logic is pretty skewed about this...
If you have software which assumes a minute is always 60 seconds, an hour is always 60, 60 second minutes, etc., you're doing it wrong.
Only once every 40 years or so. Not so wrong in reality, for most applications anyway.
The alternative is pretty a pretty complex bit of programming to "do it right". Those applications that do need to be that accurate, need the complex bits of code, the bulk can just keep using the constants you learned in first grade. All this reminds me of the Y2K hoopla, which was much ado about nothing, or the DST changes of the last few decades which where rife with fear mongering for profit.
I'd say that if your application is more complex than necessary or fails to work as required, THEN you are "doing it wrong" so if 60 seconds in a min fulfills your requirements and that's what you used, you did it right.
Slashdot Mirror
Cosmic Radiation comes from LOTS of things out there and it's not just the rate of exposure that's the problem here, but the *duration* of the exposure during the trip.
The nearest planet in the "goldilocks zone" is something like 1,000 light years away. The nearest neighbor star something like 10 light years. If we could get something going at say 50% of C, that means we have a 20+ year round trip to the nearest star or a 2,000+ year round trip to the nearest possible habitable planet and back.
The background cosmic radiation exposure rate might be less than we see in LEO or on the Moon, but it's still there. Living though 20 years of constant exposure just isn't a viable option, not to mention that 20 years of weightlessness would be a SERIOUS health issue. Even a year is difficult with today's technology. Doing 2,000 years of all this is a sure way to sterilize any practical conveyance we could build of any and all kinds of life that might find it's way onboard.
No, we and our offspring die here, in this Solar system.
Um... IF that's what is happening to you, you are doing it wrong.
In corporate networks this is VERY common for controlling and monitoring internet access by employees. You have a corporate CA which is invalid outside the company but trusted by clients INSIDE the company. Then you put proxies at the border entry points. Volia, you can monitor and filter what your employees are doing at the proxy. This is how a lot of content filters actually work and with everything getting tunneled over https in a false attempt at being "secure" you have to be able to look at https content to actually filter stuff.
The problems you describe are likely caused by improper configuration of the clients and what CA's they will accept. Likely you will have to add the internal CA to clients on the inside of your network to make them work and if the client is OUTSIDE your network, you will need a fully vetted PUBLIC cert to be applied when the traffic is headed outside the network. It could also be that the filter appliances don't have trusted CA's signing their certs (as in they are self signed by the device). In which case you are doing it wrong and need to create your own internal CA and issue the appliances certs from it.... Or not, and just blindly accept the self signed cert from the appliance every time it gets updated.
I like your idea, but why don't they just say that? There is also the prospect of inserting their own ads, which seems likely too.
As it stands that CTO guy sounds like a buffoon who is trying to hide something.
Why do they need to see the decrypted packet payloads? Surely throttling could be done based on a device's behavior (e.g. bandwidth used) without having to know exactly what the user is doing.
My guess is that they want to control the advertisements you see, even on encrypted pages and that the CTO is blowing smoke because he doesn't want to tell you this (and/or really doesn't know how all this works). If they *really* are trying to filter https bandwidth, this was a sorry way to do it. Not only is it ineffective and not very simple, it is risky for the customer.
Right now, GoGo needs to have it's certificates yanked by the authority they use, or if they are self signed, GoGo needs to be removed from everybody's trusted authority lists. Then, if they INSIST on doing this they will need to be sure to include verbiage in their contracts with users to allow them to do it and then require an opt in action for a user to install a temporary CA which is good for a limited time (say the duration of the flight).
Short of a full understanding that GoGo would then have the ability to snoop on your https interactions (say with your bank or broker) they should NOT be doing this kind of thing.
Isn't this a classic man in the middle attack, where somebody is issuing bogus site certs using authority they really don't legally have? Who is their certificate authority?
Wouldn't this be a violation of their CA agreement? I mean, signing certs for websites that YOU don't own or control is surely a way to get either busted by the authority that issued your signing keys, or if you are your own authority, get yourself removed from everybody's "trusted authority" lists.
At the very LEAST their certs should be revoked along with their authority to create more... And It should happen NOW.
It feels like they're just using a cheap solution to control their bandwith. (Maybe weight of equipment plays a significant role in these applications, too.) Or they may be bad. I don't know. Either way it's a no go; think of something better.
My bet is that they think #1 is true, but given my experience with them it really is that they are that bad at network management... Well that and they thought nobody would notice them doing this when they tried to get away with something.
I know somebody who works for them up in the windy city, I'll have to ask why they thought this was necessary. Based on my past experience with this person, my guess is pretty much your guess, that they where/are up to no good and got caught. If they really didn't mean anything bad, it just says what I've always suspected, they don't really know what they are doing (which I'm totally sure describes the person who I know that works for GoGo).
There is a third way too.... Don't be a sports fan..... You decide which it is.
You do sound superior. How do you watch live sports?
By personally attending the events I'm interested in..... Captcha: Season Tickets!
Quit pointing out cool planets. I wanna GO there!
Like dating the head cheerleader, never going to happen dude..
Physics and Biology pretty much tell us that every human alive and all their offspring will die, here in THIS solar system. No exceptions..
Keep dreaming though..
Not even close to being able to work. Radiation is sure to kill all living things on any space ship short of the size of a small planet, likely before you could get such a massive object out of the solar system.
Before we can "invest in technology" we need to have some theoretical basis for said technology to work. Our current understanding of physics provides no plausible mechanism for a living human to travel to these planets. Unless there is a fatal flaw in relativity, it is possible (if not probable) that practical interstellar travel is essentially impossible.
Totally agree, but you are attacking the SyFi culture where it's just expected that Captain Kirk can just order up "warp 8". Einstein pretty much condemned us and our offspring to die with the confines of the Solar System and the chances he was wrong do seem pretty remote so far.
Tips for shelling my secure shell?
By the sea shore no less.....
-The presidential election will be decided by one vote... on the supreme court.
The margin of victory was more than one vote and the outcome of the election was decided on the day the governor of Florida certified the election results the first time. The appeal to the Supreme court was pointless as it had no power to reverse the decision of the electoral college nor change the vote of the Florida delegates. Gore lost on every front, the initial count (the legal one) AND the following three recounts. The supreme court ruling was just icing on the cake of his defeat. Get over it.
-There will be a nuclear terrorist attack on New York, perpetrated by Israel, the Bush administration, and the Pentagon, with obvious evidence right out in the open, and nobody will question it.
If you are referring to 9/11, there was and is zero evidence of a "nuclear" attack and just about the same amount that Israel had anything to do with it. Somebody is pretty fond of their tin foil hat to really believe this line of thought.
-The attack will be used as bait and switch to wage a $3 trillion war against a country which didn't even have anything to do with the patsies, let alone the actual attack.
Now you are just off into La La land.... Most of the rest of your claims are in a similar ilk.
I hope the doctor has prescribed the proper medications and that you keep taking them like you should...
Problem is that with current knowledge and technology we would NEVER be able to get out of our solar system alive, much less actually make it to the nearest star. We *might* be able to send probes, but we are talking about missions that will have to last multiple decades on internal power supplies and whatever fuel they start with. There is no way that humans would survive the trip on any craft we could hope to construct in our lifetimes.
The exploration of "space" we do will be limited to our solar system by physics and our biology and without some kind of break though in getting things moving faster than light, it is within this solar system we and our offspring will all die.
Sure we can.... Light years....
Sorry... I'm still working on the cleanup from Y2K fallout and looking forward to Unix time running out in 2038....
What is the statute of limitations on respecting the dead?
Depends on if they are, in fact, actually verifiably currently dead and who they where when alive.
Because we're bothered that he's not found.
I'm not... I'm more bothered that we've not found the Malaysian Airline flight that went down in the middle of the ocean yet...
Just like Fox is losing networks left and right now because the fact of the matter is most people just want a "news channel" and CNN is just fine for that and doesn't have a giant group of people that hate them like Fox does.
Fox New has the biggest audience in between the cable news outlets and the only reason it has been removed from any networks is because it has started to command more fees from the distributors and cable operators (which is why dish turned them off). If cable operators are looking for space (which they are not) there are plenty of lesser watched networks they can ditch.
According to the Neilson ratings, the pecking order is Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, CNBC, Fox Business News, and Headline news, in that order. Cable providers sell advertisement space on these channels so they want you to watch so they can claim higher fees for the ad time. Trust me, they will ditch the channel that is the most profitable for them and that is decidedly NOT going to be Fox News, unless Fox is trying to squeeze them too hard, or like in the case of Dish, if the provider can afford to play hardball with them.
You bet they have.. Chief offenders are the cable news channels with maybe one exception......
Get four history professors who have divergent viewpoints and hate each other. Get somebody cool for a moderator, like Jon Stewart. Then let those boys go at it.
Stewart? PLEASE think of somebody else... I'd rather have Candy Crawley or some other lifeless NPR host over Jon... How about a BBC new reader or something? Heck, dust off Allen Colmes and Newt to tag team or something... Other than that, I LIKE the idea..
If you believe your rights come at the end of a gun, and you sit around bitching about ensuring you have access to guns, and you ignore when they take away the rest of your rights ... you're just a bunch of children who want your guns and nothing else.
Again, you are not properly representing Gun Rights advocates perspective on how to defend their rights. No responsible party or organization would advocate that we use weapons and commit murder to protect our 2nd amendment rights and even the nuttiest of gun rights advocates I know of don't support that. How do you keep implying such things? Obviously this false idea comes from you...
Your charge that we should somehow now meet your expectations and support YOUR cause of the day with the same intensity as we advocate for gun rights is truly misplaced and a logical fallacy on your part. It would be like me expecting you to start picketing the local abortion provider in your area to protect the "right to life" should you choose to picket outside WalMart advocating for unionization, then dismissing your argument for organized labor because you refused to protect the rights of the unborn...
I am not responsible for what nutjobs with guns do. Nutjobs with guns are.
Perhaps, but there is no sense in egging them on with your senseless blather about killing people to prove they are serious. It's akin to incitement to riot.. Not to mention it makes you look like a nut case.
But pointing out the hypocrisy of bitching about this one right and ignoring the erosion of every other one? Nope, not gonna stop that.
Then maybe I'm misreading what you are saying, because I'm hearing you say that if one is upset about gun laws, we should go out and shoot people who you claim are violating their other rights too. YOU are saying that we should react with violence to such, but gun rights advocates like the NRA are saying exactly the opposite, even about defending our rights to own and carry firearms. They are saying we should be engaged in legal efforts to protect our rights not illegal ones.
If you are only prepared to defend (figuratively, rhetorically, and then possibly literally) ONE right, you don't deserve any of the rest of them.
The gun rights advocates I know, while they major in the one area, do not advocate you act differently about other rights abuses. No national organization for gun rights is encouraging their supporters to kill to protect their gun rights, surely the NRA doesn't, not even the borderline crazy Open Carry Texas folks are advocating violence in their misguided attempts to secure their rights. So your insistence that we "be consistent" or shut up and go home is invalid on a number of grounds.
So when these gun advocates ignore the rest of this shit, and bray loudly about the right to open carry and own assault weapons ... I conclude these people are either hypocrites, or really only gun nuts who don't care about anything else.
As an aside, you do understand that the term "assault weapons" is a legal one right? The difference between a weapon that IS an assault weapon an done that ISN'T can be as simple as what kind of stock you put on it. Two weapons can be assembled with exactly the same components except the stock, shoot identical rounds at identical rates and one is considered an assault weapon and the other isn't. Generally the differences are cosmetic, as are most of the laws that depend on the federal definition of "assault weapon". Such laws are about show, and don't really address the problems they are touted to have solved by the politicians who where slumming for your votes..
Neither deserves my respect.
Your choice, but I think your critique is a bit misplaced as your logic is pretty skewed about this...
If you have software which assumes a minute is always 60 seconds, an hour is always 60, 60 second minutes, etc., you're doing it wrong.
Only once every 40 years or so. Not so wrong in reality, for most applications anyway.
The alternative is pretty a pretty complex bit of programming to "do it right". Those applications that do need to be that accurate, need the complex bits of code, the bulk can just keep using the constants you learned in first grade. All this reminds me of the Y2K hoopla, which was much ado about nothing, or the DST changes of the last few decades which where rife with fear mongering for profit.
I'd say that if your application is more complex than necessary or fails to work as required, THEN you are "doing it wrong" so if 60 seconds in a min fulfills your requirements and that's what you used, you did it right.