The Weimar Constitution did have all but the 2nd amendment and it was not abolished after the NSDAP take-over.
The relevant articles are Artikel 109 - 165.
It just the same as it is now, nobody enforced those basic rights against the state.
And the 2nd amendment totally helps you against the federal government...
GP's claim seems to be that there should never be a reason for the driver to take control, i.e. that the car can autonomously handle people, bird, other wildlife and any condition the road can be in.
Sure if that system is faulty then the passengers are in trouble, but that is not in any way a fundamental difference from the way it is now. Just one of the software systems in your car is a bit more complex. Probably not by that much since you already have all those fancy assistance systems anyway (e.g. line keeping assistants).
Well they also actually showed it on their "birthday" event, their PR is probably betting on everyone (or at least the automobile-centrics, e.g. journalists) watching the CG commercials thinking that can not be possibly real and then seeing the real thing.
Also they are most likely driving this prototype only on private property, much laxer laws there...
That car looks really interesting even without the self-driving part.
The wind-shield of the wheels of the car
(side view) actually stretches (streched right) and relaxes (unstreched right) to get an nice drag coefficient (cW) of 0.18-0.19.
The BMW car itself is also real. They actually showed it on their "birthday" party...
It is really hard to tell what is CG and what is not but this seems to be a actual photo:
Vision 100
The car is real. I am unsure about the self-driving part and what is CG and what is not...
But you can find footage of their birthday party that is at least partially real and shows that car driving around...
It is a real car (they showed it on their "birthday" party). But it is really hard to tell what footage is CG and what is not.
Even the (partially) real footage looks unreal: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Yes I do, kind of.
I do not have an iPhone so I can not verify, but wikipedia [1] claims that a jailbreak "[..] loads Apple's own kernel initially.".
So I assume that it also loads the initial signed firmware first, which would presumably implements the passcode wipe (after x failed attempts) and the update to a new signed firmware.
So you need an Apple signed firmware to run anything on an iPhone.
It might be possible to exploit the running OS and turn it into anything you like,
but booting is only possible to an approved firmware.
The interesting thing now is if you can exploit the boot/passcode screen already and if so if you
can then override the firmware's decision to wipe the passcode (I doubt the last part).
That also makes perfect sense, because otherwise the FBI would just install some jail-breaked firmware version themself, since they just want to brute-force the passcode.
That is what this is actually about. The FBI wants to be able to brute force the passcode, but the iPhone can (potentially) wipe itself after 10 (?) failed attempts.
The code leaking would not be a problem as long as Apple's signing key is not also leaked.
If the signing key is leaked iPhones would anyway be compromised (well hello there NSA).
Now, I do not see any technical issues that prevent Apple from creating a firmware that just runs on this one device (check for ECID/CPU ID/...).
And they are not ask to give access to it here either.
The FBI wants a firmware for this particular device that allows it to brute force the passcode used to access the encryption key.
Now the firmware is (afaik) signed, so there is nothing stopping Apple to create a firmware that checks that it runs on that device and only that device (check for something that is not changable and uniquely identifing a iPhone, my bet would be an ECID/CPU id or similar).
That said I am still against Apple beeing force to write such a firmware, but I am doubtful that there are actual technical problems that can not be solved without compromising other iPhones.
Thanks that looks interesting, but apparently only effects some (Visa-style?) EMV standards.
The German SECCOS EMV standard (used for debitcards) seems to require the verifications (since before 2005) that were/are missing in the British standard.
In Germany we used to have a "moduliertes Merkmal" which is essentially a dielectric code that the machine could verify with a capacitive sensor.
So even with a strip there was never a problem inside Germany. All the fakes had to use a ATM outside Germany that did not check the dielectric code...
Not sure how theft, burglary, etc are a problem if you do not write down your pin?
Sure robberies are different but I rather lose my money/pin then my eyes...
No its not. The earth is rotating and the north pole is one of the two points on the surface that are on the rotation axis.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
"Windgas" or "Power-to-gas" where you just produce hydrogen or even methan with renewable energy (mildly efficient: 50-67% power -> gas -> power) and inject it into the gas network. There already working prototypes (granted I think they are all sub MW stations). But they improved from 25kW to 500kW within 3 years (2009 - 2012). Nice sideeffect is that in theory renewable energy could in the long run power our gas-cars and gas-heating and highly efficient gas-power stations.
Slashdot Mirror
The Weimar Constitution did have all but the 2nd amendment and it was not abolished after the NSDAP take-over. The relevant articles are Artikel 109 - 165. It just the same as it is now, nobody enforced those basic rights against the state. ...
And the 2nd amendment totally helps you against the federal government
It is possible if you have the resources, have a look at seL4 a verified microkernel.
GP's claim seems to be that there should never be a reason for the driver to take control, i.e. that the car can autonomously handle people, bird, other wildlife and any condition the road can be in. Sure if that system is faulty then the passengers are in trouble, but that is not in any way a fundamental difference from the way it is now. Just one of the software systems in your car is a bit more complex. Probably not by that much since you already have all those fancy assistance systems anyway (e.g. line keeping assistants).
Well they also actually showed it on their "birthday" event, their PR is probably betting on everyone (or at least the automobile-centrics, e.g. journalists) watching the CG commercials thinking that can not be possibly real and then seeing the real thing.
...
Also they are most likely driving this prototype only on private property, much laxer laws there
That car looks really interesting even without the self-driving part.
The wind-shield of the wheels of the car (side view) actually stretches (streched right) and relaxes (unstreched right) to get an nice drag coefficient (cW) of 0.18-0.19.
The BMW car itself is also real. They actually showed it on their "birthday" party ...
It is really hard to tell what is CG and what is not but this seems to be a actual photo: Vision 100
The car is real. I am unsure about the self-driving part and what is CG and what is not ...
...
But you can find footage of their birthday party that is at least partially real and shows that car driving around
It is a real car (they showed it on their "birthday" party). But it is really hard to tell what footage is CG and what is not.
Even the (partially) real footage looks unreal: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Yes I do, kind of.
I do not have an iPhone so I can not verify, but wikipedia [1] claims that a jailbreak "[..] loads Apple's own kernel initially.". So I assume that it also loads the initial signed firmware first, which would presumably implements the passcode wipe (after x failed attempts) and the update to a new signed firmware. So you need an Apple signed firmware to run anything on an iPhone. It might be possible to exploit the running OS and turn it into anything you like, but booting is only possible to an approved firmware. The interesting thing now is if you can exploit the boot/passcode screen already and if so if you can then override the firmware's decision to wipe the passcode (I doubt the last part). That also makes perfect sense, because otherwise the FBI would just install some jail-breaked firmware version themself, since they just want to brute-force the passcode.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
That is what this is actually about. The FBI wants to be able to brute force the passcode, but the iPhone can (potentially) wipe itself after 10 (?) failed attempts.
The code leaking would not be a problem as long as Apple's signing key is not also leaked.
If the signing key is leaked iPhones would anyway be compromised (well hello there NSA).
Now, I do not see any technical issues that prevent Apple from creating a firmware that just runs on this one device (check for ECID/CPU ID/...).
And they are not ask to give access to it here either.
The FBI wants a firmware for this particular device that allows it to brute force the passcode used to access the encryption key.
Now the firmware is (afaik) signed, so there is nothing stopping Apple to create a firmware that checks that it runs on that device and only that device (check for something that is not changable and uniquely identifing a iPhone, my bet would be an ECID/CPU id or similar).
That said I am still against Apple beeing force to write such a firmware, but I am doubtful that there are actual technical problems that can not be solved without compromising other iPhones.
How is that supposed to work? If you connect to an ad-server with an IP+HTTP Header they are able to track you and which site you are visiting.
Yes. Let subscribers moderate summaries :)
Thanks that looks interesting, but apparently only effects some (Visa-style?) EMV standards.
The German SECCOS EMV standard (used for debitcards) seems to require the verifications (since before 2005) that were/are missing in the British standard.
In Germany we used to have a "moduliertes Merkmal" which is essentially a dielectric code that the machine could verify with a capacitive sensor. So even with a strip there was never a problem inside Germany. All the fakes had to use a ATM outside Germany that did not check the dielectric code ...
Thanks! Fair points.
Also our pin readers usually have a screen to prevent to easy spying. Something at least like this which is usually sufficient.
Not sure how theft, burglary, etc are a problem if you do not write down your pin? Sure robberies are different but I rather lose my money/pin then my eyes ...
Also I would have used it now ;)
I really hope your extremely careful about edits ...
No its not. The earth is rotating and the north pole is one of the two points on the surface that are on the rotation axis. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
I thought this was our cave?
Actually it is 1990's $550 million. With estimated 83% inflation [1] [1] https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=inflation+since+1990
Honest question: Is there any source to back that up?
"Windgas" or "Power-to-gas" where you just produce hydrogen or even methan with renewable energy (mildly efficient: 50-67% power -> gas -> power) and inject it into the gas network. There already working prototypes (granted I think they are all sub MW stations). But they improved from 25kW to 500kW within 3 years (2009 - 2012). Nice sideeffect is that in theory renewable energy could in the long run power our gas-cars and gas-heating and highly efficient gas-power stations.