This is a "close cover before striking" diploma mill in the middle of the Mediterranean Sea. Taking BitCoin is just out of a desire to avoid the costs of getting money into/out of Cyprus which is in serious trouble. Looking at their website though proves that it's all Greek to me...
Most of the time a charger (proper one anyway) will set a certain voltage on the DATA+ and DATA- pins of the USB cable and the charging device senses this to know when it is appropriate to draw more power
Unfortunately, that method is not reliable, because every manufacturer implements it differently - it is not a part of the USB spec.
And you have hit the crux of this issue. There is no standard for this so manufacturers have implemented *dumb* ways around this which are incompatible.
Personally, I think there should be to additions to the standard that include the "dumb" option for devices needing up to 1 Amp. If the hub/charger can do 1 amp, hold the pins the right way and supply 1 amp. If the device requires more than 1 amp, then make it mandatory for the device to request what it wants using the USB data bus and the source device can choose to supply what it can in reply. We will need a maximum current in the specification, and I think 3-5 amps (15-25 watts) is about all that would be safe on the current cables out there.
An volt meter is just an amp meter that has a resister in series with it..
Also, it might be better to use a volt meter and a very small shut resister to measure a current in a circuit you don't want to disrupt. Such a scheme could be less disruptive to the circuit. Having all the current flow though your meter and the leads to/from the meter is more likely to be disruptive.
Any device that reacts badly to too much current is poorly designed or defective.
That's therese electricity works, you're half amp light bulb doesn't explode when there's nothing else in the house because there's too many amps available.
A device that issues is most likely already shorted out.
Safety demands that you *never* depend on the unknown thing to be properly designed or to function properly if you can help it. If you are providing power to something, you need to limit their power draw *somehow* to keep a malfunction from causing damage. It is why fuses and circuit breakers where invented and why modern power supplies will shut down if they are asked to supply more than their rated current/power. Any device that risks permanent damage because some other product draws too much current, especially if the device risks starting a fire, is inherently unsafe and should not be used.
Well, if you can get a drone within 50 yards of me, I could possibly hit it with the shotgun. Outside of that range, things get a whole lot more difficult and it's going to be impossible outside of about 100 yards. Trying to hit a drone using a rifle is about the best you can hope for beyond 100 yards, and those shots would be one in a million.
So, if the drone is flying higher than about 150 feet it is unlikely to be in danger from any kinetic weapon carried by the perp.
I think it's mostly meant as a contrast to a tank, airplaine or any regular car, which are not vulnerable to this type of weapon.
Who says they are not vulnerable? They are to varying degrees.
In fact, each of these items you mention are *tested* or have design tolerance to such weapons. The military pays close attention to such things when they buy them and I've seen the results of testing on commercially available cars.
The REAL issue here is how vulnerable drones are to disruptions in communications and navigation data that flows over RF based links. That is the reason we don't want to be solely dependent on them.
Remember that you can only get *actual* damages in small claims and you will need proof of these costs. Also, you are going to spend a LOT of money going to court because you have to get a process server to hand the lawsuit to LG for small claims, THEN (assuming you win) you will have to sue again to collect the debt in a jurisdiction where LG has something you can actually take (paying the process server there). With filing fees and paying the process servers, you are going to be out a chunk of cash (north of $500 at a minimum).
So you could possibly win in small claims, but actually collecting from LG (a foreign company) is going to require a lot of work and expense and all you are likely to get is a useless lien on something.
I have some beach front property in West Virgina to sell you. Ocean front view and moonshine...
There may not be an formal charge to arrest him right *now* but that could change in a blink of an eye should they find him strolling the streets here in the US of A. But at this point, who cares? He's sitting in some embassy on foreign soil and apart from an act of war there is nothing the USA can do but sit and wait. At least legally that's all they can do. Of course, if he was anyplace but the middle of London, you might have already seen a quick drone strike. I'm sure the CIA has his number and would pull the trigger if he wasn't sitting in an embassy in the middle of a close allie's capital city.
This "unidentified" law enforcement official is either uninformed, stupid, deluded or all three. You KNOW they'd snatch him up if given the chance, if nothing else to "hand him over to the swedes to answer questions". Extraordinary rendition is what would happen, no documentation, one way, no return trips to anywhere.
Since the NSA has backdoored encryption schemes in the past, how can Yahoo determine if the scheme they implement is actually going to prevent the NSA from decrypting it?
You have to understand that any key based encryption technique is breakable. It doesn't matter what key based technique you use, it can eventually be brute forced. All you can hope to do is make it take a very long time to decode, so long that the message becomes not worth the effort.
There are "unbreakable" techniques, but they all require a one use a random pad that both parties know, but never disclose or reuse. That's about the *only* way to make sure the NSA cannot decode your stuff. Good luck doing that Yahoo.
They are just starting to move fuel assemblies which where removed from their reactors prior to the earthquake. Where it will be a good thing to get these things out of the leaky cooling pools the real work has still not started. It's not really going to be possible to start working on the reactors which melted down for a few more years. Even then, it won't be possible for humans to approach so the work will require invention of remotely operated tools that can deal with the unique situation, and tasks necessary to clean up this mess.
It took 14 years to decommission Three Mile Island after the accident there which was exceedingly less complicated because the containment structures where not blown open and there was only one reactor involved. We are decades away from being done here with multiple reactors at least partially melted down, sea water being used for coolant and the extensive damage to the containment structures.
This is a great start, but until they get all of the high level material into an inherently stable condition and/or offsite we won't be able to breath easy. Keep it going TEPCO."
I'm not going to defend the obvious mistakes made in the Iran Air 655 case or the political aftermath this incident created. I'm only going to point out that if one learns from mistakes, you change your procedures. Which is why I surmise that they don't go around off of the coast of CA firing weapons unless they are *really* sure.
This was my reaction too. Allow you to monitor and refine your version of GPS so you can more easily and accurately target their weapons which may be pointed in my direction? Um.. No, not in my back yard. Also, I would fear that these systems would be used to collect intelligence. So, no again.
Chancellorsville has one of the most advanced air defense systems in the Navy[...]
But it could not defend itself against a runaway drone. Very impressive.
Seriously, that drone was *supposed* to be in the area. You don't sail around in peace time with the system on hair trigger and shoot at everything you can or cannot identify just because it it gets close. You need to be REALLY sure before you shoot down something or really bad things can result.
To quote Forrest Gump... Stupid is as Stupid does.
I'm still not impressed with some script kiddy that cries into his cheerios because he's getting more punishment than he thinks is fair. Such nonsense doesn't do anything for his cause and makes him look like a crybaby. Step up, pay the price...
I simply cannot see a good reason to automate all of this. With dairy operations you really need to personally interact with the cows on a regular basis. There is no better way to keep in touch with how the cows are doing than to observe them regularly. If you automate everything, you will loose the chance to catch and treat common ailments before the become real problems because you won't be with the cows.
Beef cow operations are the same. You want to be regularly looking at your stock, if not every day, every week for the exact same reason. You need to know that they are doing well, have water, feed etc.
Feeder operations might have a use for robots to handle stock, but I don't think they can afford expensive equipment for this. It's not that hard to not spook cattle that are being moved, if you have the fences and gates arranged correctly. Most feed operations I've seen are built with cattle movement in mind. I'm also going to say that getting a robot to move around a feed lot is going to be a good trick. They are usually pretty sloppy muddy messes that could likely cause trouble for just about any vehicle I can think of.
Oh, and one more thing... We already HAVE automated ways to move cows around in small spaces. I've seen moving gates to crowd them into the right direction which moved on their own. You could call this robot I suppose, but they existed four decades ago.
Your lawyer? Any real slashdotter would represent himself all the way to the Supreme Court of the United States and change every other precedent set before them.
Most maybe, but not all would do this. Maybe I'm not a "real" shashdotter, but I would NEVER recommend going to court as a litigant without competent legal advice. Trust me, I know from experience that it is NOT a good idea, even in traffic court.
What's that saying... A man who is his own lawyer has a fool for a client. It's true and I'm not doing that again..
Slashdot Mirror
OOPS... But the situation is still the same. Cyprus is in serious financial trouble and University of Nicosia is a diploma mill, albeit a bit less..
AND it's still Greek to me, although they might be speaking Turkish too..
No the dingo did.... Really.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dingoes_ate_my_baby
If you could hit it, I suppose you are right. Hitting a moving drone with a 50 cal is going to require some real unusual shooting skills.
Is it BitCoin or the Euro that's doing this? Cyprus, Greece, Spain etc are in serious trouble right now.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Cyprus
This is a "close cover before striking" diploma mill in the middle of the Mediterranean Sea. Taking BitCoin is just out of a desire to avoid the costs of getting money into/out of Cyprus which is in serious trouble. Looking at their website though proves that it's all Greek to me...
Unfortunately, that method is not reliable, because every manufacturer implements it differently - it is not a part of the USB spec.
And you have hit the crux of this issue. There is no standard for this so manufacturers have implemented *dumb* ways around this which are incompatible.
Personally, I think there should be to additions to the standard that include the "dumb" option for devices needing up to 1 Amp. If the hub/charger can do 1 amp, hold the pins the right way and supply 1 amp. If the device requires more than 1 amp, then make it mandatory for the device to request what it wants using the USB data bus and the source device can choose to supply what it can in reply. We will need a maximum current in the specification, and I think 3-5 amps (15-25 watts) is about all that would be safe on the current cables out there.
An volt meter is just an amp meter that has a resister in series with it..
Also, it might be better to use a volt meter and a very small shut resister to measure a current in a circuit you don't want to disrupt. Such a scheme could be less disruptive to the circuit. Having all the current flow though your meter and the leads to/from the meter is more likely to be disruptive.
Any device that reacts badly to too much current is poorly designed or defective. That's therese electricity works, you're half amp light bulb doesn't explode when there's nothing else in the house because there's too many amps available. A device that issues is most likely already shorted out.
Safety demands that you *never* depend on the unknown thing to be properly designed or to function properly if you can help it. If you are providing power to something, you need to limit their power draw *somehow* to keep a malfunction from causing damage. It is why fuses and circuit breakers where invented and why modern power supplies will shut down if they are asked to supply more than their rated current/power. Any device that risks permanent damage because some other product draws too much current, especially if the device risks starting a fire, is inherently unsafe and should not be used.
Well, if you can get a drone within 50 yards of me, I could possibly hit it with the shotgun. Outside of that range, things get a whole lot more difficult and it's going to be impossible outside of about 100 yards. Trying to hit a drone using a rifle is about the best you can hope for beyond 100 yards, and those shots would be one in a million.
So, if the drone is flying higher than about 150 feet it is unlikely to be in danger from any kinetic weapon carried by the perp.
I think it's mostly meant as a contrast to a tank, airplaine or any regular car, which are not vulnerable to this type of weapon.
Who says they are not vulnerable? They are to varying degrees.
In fact, each of these items you mention are *tested* or have design tolerance to such weapons. The military pays close attention to such things when they buy them and I've seen the results of testing on commercially available cars.
The REAL issue here is how vulnerable drones are to disruptions in communications and navigation data that flows over RF based links. That is the reason we don't want to be solely dependent on them.
Remember that you can only get *actual* damages in small claims and you will need proof of these costs. Also, you are going to spend a LOT of money going to court because you have to get a process server to hand the lawsuit to LG for small claims, THEN (assuming you win) you will have to sue again to collect the debt in a jurisdiction where LG has something you can actually take (paying the process server there). With filing fees and paying the process servers, you are going to be out a chunk of cash (north of $500 at a minimum).
So you could possibly win in small claims, but actually collecting from LG (a foreign company) is going to require a lot of work and expense and all you are likely to get is a useless lien on something.
Good luck with that..
I have some beach front property in West Virgina to sell you. Ocean front view and moonshine...
There may not be an formal charge to arrest him right *now* but that could change in a blink of an eye should they find him strolling the streets here in the US of A. But at this point, who cares? He's sitting in some embassy on foreign soil and apart from an act of war there is nothing the USA can do but sit and wait. At least legally that's all they can do. Of course, if he was anyplace but the middle of London, you might have already seen a quick drone strike. I'm sure the CIA has his number and would pull the trigger if he wasn't sitting in an embassy in the middle of a close allie's capital city.
This "unidentified" law enforcement official is either uninformed, stupid, deluded or all three. You KNOW they'd snatch him up if given the chance, if nothing else to "hand him over to the swedes to answer questions". Extraordinary rendition is what would happen, no documentation, one way, no return trips to anywhere.
Since the NSA has backdoored encryption schemes in the past, how can Yahoo determine if the scheme they implement is actually going to prevent the NSA from decrypting it?
You have to understand that any key based encryption technique is breakable. It doesn't matter what key based technique you use, it can eventually be brute forced. All you can hope to do is make it take a very long time to decode, so long that the message becomes not worth the effort.
There are "unbreakable" techniques, but they all require a one use a random pad that both parties know, but never disclose or reuse. That's about the *only* way to make sure the NSA cannot decode your stuff. Good luck doing that Yahoo.
They are just starting to move fuel assemblies which where removed from their reactors prior to the earthquake. Where it will be a good thing to get these things out of the leaky cooling pools the real work has still not started. It's not really going to be possible to start working on the reactors which melted down for a few more years. Even then, it won't be possible for humans to approach so the work will require invention of remotely operated tools that can deal with the unique situation, and tasks necessary to clean up this mess.
It took 14 years to decommission Three Mile Island after the accident there which was exceedingly less complicated because the containment structures where not blown open and there was only one reactor involved. We are decades away from being done here with multiple reactors at least partially melted down, sea water being used for coolant and the extensive damage to the containment structures.
This is a great start, but until they get all of the high level material into an inherently stable condition and/or offsite we won't be able to breath easy. Keep it going TEPCO."
In this case, there where apparently NO survivors...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655
I'm not going to defend the obvious mistakes made in the Iran Air 655 case or the political aftermath this incident created. I'm only going to point out that if one learns from mistakes, you change your procedures. Which is why I surmise that they don't go around off of the coast of CA firing weapons unless they are *really* sure.
Sounds like the national "get off my lawn" anthem.
Both sides can sing the same tune any time they like. Seems fair to me.
This was my reaction too. Allow you to monitor and refine your version of GPS so you can more easily and accurately target their weapons which may be pointed in my direction? Um.. No, not in my back yard. Also, I would fear that these systems would be used to collect intelligence. So, no again.
Chancellorsville has one of the most advanced air defense systems in the Navy[...]
But it could not defend itself against a runaway drone. Very impressive.
Seriously, that drone was *supposed* to be in the area. You don't sail around in peace time with the system on hair trigger and shoot at everything you can or cannot identify just because it it gets close. You need to be REALLY sure before you shoot down something or really bad things can result.
Number Five, NOT alive...
To quote Forrest Gump... Stupid is as Stupid does.
I'm still not impressed with some script kiddy that cries into his cheerios because he's getting more punishment than he thinks is fair. Such nonsense doesn't do anything for his cause and makes him look like a crybaby. Step up, pay the price...
Darn spell check.... Man, the mental image of someone taking the fame off this lady's picture is funny.
I suppose it would there Mr. Donner... But we never had that situation to deal with.
I simply cannot see a good reason to automate all of this. With dairy operations you really need to personally interact with the cows on a regular basis. There is no better way to keep in touch with how the cows are doing than to observe them regularly. If you automate everything, you will loose the chance to catch and treat common ailments before the become real problems because you won't be with the cows.
Beef cow operations are the same. You want to be regularly looking at your stock, if not every day, every week for the exact same reason. You need to know that they are doing well, have water, feed etc.
Feeder operations might have a use for robots to handle stock, but I don't think they can afford expensive equipment for this. It's not that hard to not spook cattle that are being moved, if you have the fences and gates arranged correctly. Most feed operations I've seen are built with cattle movement in mind. I'm also going to say that getting a robot to move around a feed lot is going to be a good trick. They are usually pretty sloppy muddy messes that could likely cause trouble for just about any vehicle I can think of.
Oh, and one more thing... We already HAVE automated ways to move cows around in small spaces. I've seen moving gates to crowd them into the right direction which moved on their own. You could call this robot I suppose, but they existed four decades ago.
Your lawyer? Any real slashdotter would represent himself all the way to the Supreme Court of the United States and change every other precedent set before them.
Most maybe, but not all would do this. Maybe I'm not a "real" shashdotter, but I would NEVER recommend going to court as a litigant without competent legal advice. Trust me, I know from experience that it is NOT a good idea, even in traffic court.
What's that saying... A man who is his own lawyer has a fool for a client. It's true and I'm not doing that again..