Of course children are "at risk of robot influence. They are also at risk of Barbie and G.I. Joe influence, and in that case it's the children themselves making up the "influence". Playing with Robots means learning with Robots, because play is how children learn. They're also 'at risk of Ice Cream influence" and... well... everything they encounter, basically.
Was there someone who was under the impression that children were immune to Robot influence? Anybody?
* A dozen indoor/outdoor municipal lifeguarded pools and about 80 non-lifeguared (two staff, but also indoor and outdoor playrooms and structures) municipal wading pools. An unknown number of private indoor and outdoor pools. Pop 230,000.
300 children drowning deaths over just a few months (summer) is an extraordinarily high number by my local and national standards. There must be more to it than just negligent parents using cellphones.
Canadian parents use smartphones as much as anyone in a first-world country. Below is a comparison with Germany
Note: I did not find specific data on children only in Germany, so we are comparing the news story's 300 over summer with Canada's annual numbers.
Format: Germany// Canada
Population (2018 estimate to Wed Aug 16) 82,315,335// 36,992,745 Population Ratio: 2.22:1
Children Drowning Deaths Age 0~19 300 (?)// 68
Children Drowning Deaths Age 5~14 300 (?)// 17
** Expected number of deaths in Germany with adjustment for equivalent population (2.22 multiplier) at Canada's rate: Age 0-19: 151 Age 5~14: 38
Deaths per age group 5~14 by ype of waterbody: Unsupervised pools, lakes, rivers: 16 Lifeguarded pools, lakes, beaches: 1
So obviously it isn't just parents on smartphones that is the root cause. Canadian children have massive opportunity to enter water... more freshwater than any country on earth, and using my city as an example* numerous city swimming / wading facilities. So opportunity for drowning certainly exists. Germany should explore overall water safety issues that obviously exist rather than focusing on a somewhat sensationalist "cause" that may or may not be valid.
But probably still more expensive than Canada-made boxes.
I'm not sure what motivated this comment, but Canada makes very inexpensive paper products because... well... we have the trees, and cheap electricity (not counting the incompetent idiots running Ontario... you HAD cheap electricity but bungled and squandered that advantage all by yourselves) for the pulp mills and paper mills.
The US actually applies tariffs to Canadian paper products not because of unfair trade practices (the tariffs are routinely deemed invalid by the usual appeal processes, whereupon the US withdraws that one and a new one is imposed... this has been going on for 50 years) but because all forestry in America is owned by small lot owners who simply hold out for higher timber rights prices. In Canada private landowners have to court forestry companies to cut their timber as the supply is virtually limitless. Public land is sold at prices commensurate with the private land rights prices, which the US claims represents a subsidy.
At least paper products are made from re-forrested land so quality is similar between Canadian and US made product. Not so with timber, where there is virtually no old-growth sources in America with some western states possessing the last stocks, on private land, with rights at high prices. In Canada there is still better than what-was-in-1800's-America levels of old-growth forest. Compounded with the Asian insect invasion of the last 30 years which has killed vast areas of the western Canadian forest canopy. That timber can sit for perhaps 10 years before it deteriorates and cannot be harvested, so there is tremendous pressure to harvest it all very quickly right now.
New-growth timber is less dense, partly because it's younger, like all trees would be, and partly because forestry companies prefer fast-growing species to re-forest the cut old growth timber species. That's fine, for most things, but some parts of a house require the strength and density of old-growth forest timber. Because the US cannot possibly harvest enough of this timber to meet demand for the US housing industry, they must import some from Canada. The tariffs on timber from Canada are simple price supports for US timber, both new-growth and old-growth. Given their druthers, builders would make entire homes out of old-growth timber, which the US doesn't really have much of. Thus the tariffs which are simply there to support an industry that has lost it's natural advantage and cannot get it back. Canada allows unlimited tariff-free imports of US lumber and pulp / paper products.
Although Canada would prefer to sell it's old-growth timber to the US, the Japanese and Asians (including China) are eager to buy what America won't, so the industry is doing fine, and lumber is cheaper in Canada than in America so our home construction costs are lower by probably about $10,000 per 1000 ft2.
offer consumers a variety of prices, qualities and relative values.
Yes, and but many companies offer luxury goods. And the cost to produce luxury goods never scales identically with the price. Case Labs sold luxury cases, and I guarantee that it did not cost them $450 to produce the cases they sold for $500.
Yes I think you could guarantee that. But not because of the reason you implied.
They could have been making commodity cases, selling for $50, and I guarantee that it would not cost $45 to manufacture one. Maybe $25, maybe $33, but almost certainly no more than that for a $50 product. So their "$450" cost would probably have been closer to $250.
If they were priced similarly to typical "luxury" goods (automobiles excepted, jewelry and clothing included) their cost would be more on the order of $160 for a $500 item.
You forgot to mention that the import is cheaper because China can shit all over their workers and the environment to produce the steel cheaply enough that they can sell it for less... even after shipping it halfway around the world.
Making steel is not "cheap" no matter where you make it. Employee wages, in the grand scheme of things, do not demonstrably affect the cost to the end user. Shipping is the greatest cost, raw materials next, and capital investment overshadow both of those. Occupational Health and Safety has both costs and benefits to a company; it is not simply a net outflow of cash, despite what some might suggest. A clean environment is a near necessity when unemployment is low and with very low barriers to employee mobility in the US, workers can choose simply to move to a nicer city and now you can't support full production. As heavy industry goes, steel mills are not particularly pollutive anyway.
That is why large international steel companies, such as Russia-based EVRAZ own steel pipe manufacturing plants in Regina SK Canada (a city with almost no heavy industry; without the steel plant and an oil refinery, none) and Pueblo, Colorado USA because of their proximity to the Oil Patch, even though they could import Russian made pipe if they wanted, which would enjoy most of the advantages you claim represent the difference between North American and non-G7 economy pipe.
The cost of building a corporate head office building and land is higher in San Francisco than in Great Falls, MT, and the cost of an acre of farmland in eastern California is higher than an acre outside of Great Falls MT not because the land or building itself is any different, but because the external forces surrounding that land and building differ. Employees with "good jobs" in each city (say, the people who would construct such buildings) can buy similar amounts of goods and services with their after-tax disposable income (after rents, other fixed costs) even though the actual wages may differ.
None of those things will change unless you change the local external forces that govern them, and those forces are notoriously stubborn and carry remarkable inertia... governments worldwide have been trying, mostly un-successfully, to turn their Great Falls into San Franciscos for centuries, because when you have a higher cost economy it matters little locally, but you gain a huge wealth advantage versus the Great Falls of the world. Which allows you to do things like import their cheap products and allows them to do things like make more products than they can sell locally.
The tariffs have played a major role raising prices by almost 80 percent (partly due to associated shortages)
Can someone explain? The tariffs are designed to help American manufacturing, they make American products cheaper than foreign products. And as for shortages, a PC case manufacturer needs thin sheet steel, paint, plastic, and LEDs. Don't tell me you cannot get sheet steel in America any longer? Also, the margins on cases should be astronomical, 5 lbs of steel and a few LEDs, an ounce of black paint and a few plastic parts probably take 5-8 dollars in material costs. The only problem in the industry should be that China can make them cheaper which can be solved with the appropriate tariffs.
Probably the effect of the tariffs being "recent".
This causes disruption in the supply chain, as any predictable price adjustment would. What importers do is make large orders based on expected mid-term demand, in contrast to their usual (what business school teaches these days) on-demand or "just-in-time" parts inventory practice. This can stress the financials of the importer, as they have new, unplanned costs (large order financing, new inventory & storage costs, delayed return on investment... parts will be in inventory, paid for, for a longer period of time before they can recover the cost through sales, versus "normal" import volumes ).
Or Not. It may also be that downstream wholesale buyers will have upped their orders from the importer, eliminating the long term storage and cost recovery period issues but possibly causing shortages (cannot fill all orders completely) amongst businesses that are ultimately competitors. Prices may rise (as they always do to reflect higher demand than supply) out of proportion to the increased import cost. If you have unfilled orders and the price of a part in shortage has risen 400% (even though the tariff might have only increased cost to the importer by 10%)... what do you do? Allow the buyer to cancel the order and hit your annual bottom line, or pay the 400% and ship the product, possibly at a loss, to keep people working and customers happy?
I would imaging the parts the OP's firm is referring to as increasing product cost would be power supplies typically included with case orders. (Just a guess, I've never looked at their site but if they don't offer PS upgrades, maybe they did deserve to go bankrupt, or at least should have read a book on marketing and business theory). Maybe they also included the option to add things like HDDs or SSDs at competitive prices, which would be dangerously narrow margins.
Regardless, those are all items not manufactured in the USA, so would have to be imported from somewhere; typically Asia as the costs to fill a Bill Of Materials (BoM) for electronics in Asia is significantly lower than in North America. It's even cheaper to buy electronic components in Australia than North America due to it's proximity to the manufacturing sites, not all of which are in China.
Oz (and New Zealand) have surprisingly robust electronics manufacturing industries, despite their first-world economies and small population sizes. Compare that with Mexico, which has comparable labour costs to China... where is the cheap electronics assembly industry there? Doesn't exist at anywhere near the scale of Asia so obviously there are factors other than labour costs at play in that industry.
There are lots of challenges when a disruptive element enters business planning. Some of it is unpredictable and some of it carries unintended consequences. This is always the case, there is nothing particularly unique about new tariffs on Chinese manufactured goods in that respect. One day we can expect the tariffs will fall or be eliminated (either that, or there is a Hidden Agenda since tariff reduction is the carrot dangled to China should it change wha
Harley Davidson outsourced long before Trump showed up. Plenty of 'Made In Japan' parts, and that's going back over 20 years.
Ah, Millennials. Everything started in 2000 by their quaint concepts of history. Sort of like how on television, all the documentaries are about WWII or later, because there is almost no film prior to the 1930's, and about half the film from the 1930's was shot by toadies of you-know-who (or maybe you don't. Some guy with the initials AH).
Perhaps by "over 20 years" you are referring to such things as the Kehin carburetors and Showa forks found on 1970's Shovelheads?
I'm not sue about the Operating Room thing, but I do more than one person who has had a first heart attack, had the operation and (typically) have stints and arteries replaced. They all are i excellent health today; the oldest had his operation nearly 20 years ago and none have had a post-operative attack. So the ER surgeons are doing something right.
With women, Estrogen protects them from heart disease until menopause (typically early 40's to mid-50's) but from that point onward heart disease is just as likely as a male. Women's bodies are survival-tuned so they live longer than males and if they don't have issues in childbirth they have lower mortality until old age.
But, look at employed females. They have a much higher rate of desk jobs than males. Desk Jobs are heart killers. 10 to 25 years after menopause, desk job, children out of the home, so a high likelihood of sedentary lifestyle and no Estrogen protection before retirement. That is plenty of time and lifestyle to introduce Heart Disease. Add in obesity which tends to worsen as someone who tends toward overweight ages, diabetes Type 2 risk (which will kill your heart if you manage to survive the other ways it attacks the body and organs), and the final issue... if you are elderly and in "perfect" health, you always die of a Heart Attack.
Some of these health risk rates are also suspect. Everybody these days in a modern society gets examined by a doctor when they die. Every doctor is required by law to put in a cause of death. You could be 105 and puttering in the garden, and the doc must put "Heart Failure" as the cause of death, because that's all he's got for a "natural death" and not putting a cause in there is not legal. Since women's bodies are designed for survival, it's the heart that gets them in their 70's, 80's, 90's and post 100's.
This has a side effect of making death stats from heart disease higher than they sensibly should be, and Heart Foundations don't see this as a problem as it helps with fundraising. So you have to take any heart related numbers with a healthy dose of skepticism.
From TFA: (italics mine) "... According to outside auditors like Fakespot and ReviewMeta, more than half the reviews for certain popular products are questionable. [i]Amazon disputes those estimates.[/i]
"Our approximation is that less than 1 percent of reviews are inauthentic," says Sharon Chiarella, vice president of community shopping at Amazon. She adds that "sometimes individual products have more suspicious activity."..."
"individual products" is equivalent to "certain popular products".
Amazon does not dispute those estimates, at least based on the evidence proposed in the article, which is non-existant. And they confirm that certain products have a higher incidence of fake reviews than the overall marketplace does.
If someone's looking to exploit they're likely going with the latest. More systems will be exposed to a new exploit than to an older, patch-able one. I suppose it's even possible that newer exploits won't even be possible on the older OS.
XP would be compromised within 20 minutes of being connected to the internet
Yeah, no. If true that was probably with a machine with the local firewall disabled and no router or any kind of ISP filtering. In other words, not a real world case. For Joe Desktop who's careful with his browsing and email, XP security shouldn't be an issue. YMMV.
You could put the machine behind adequate defences, and it wasn't 20 minutes (exactly), if you monitored your Intrusion Detection app you'd see a long list of attacks within five minutes of being online (I've seen it). For ordinary users, who would update XP online, it might be exposed for hours to download and install the updates. Naturally no-one who knew what they were doing would update that way, but that doesn't describe ordinary users either.
I'd never buy test equipment that requires a computer connected to be usable. Never, ever. That's as bad as my flex radio that I never use for the same reason, garbage. Every time I sit down, I just turn on my old kenwood ts-430 instead. If it's a self contained device that requires no network connection, maybe. If there are software updates, they need to be installable offline. Mostly analog is ideal though.
Sometimes "never" is not an option. One electronic test equipment that revolutionized the industry is the Audio Precision line of Distortion Analyzers. Virtually everyone involved in electronic design, testing or repair owns one, and they are almost hobbyist-priced (a new basic unit can be had for less than $US 10,000). The revolutionary part of AP analyzers is they connect to a PC to do the math.
Now, somewhat on topic, AP is very good at updating their SW interfaces and older machines can use modern versions of the WinOS. They also are not themselves normally required to be connected to outside networks, provided you use a dedicated PC on the bench and not one used for general computing. So much of the problems are solved using good management practices.
If you want to be anywhere near current, you need an AP. I don't own one; I send my stuff to another engineer who does to test, but he charges $200/Hr. He has the most advanced unit, somewhere near or north of $US 20K. Plus a Windows PC and a printer if you want output charts, of course. My Distortion Analyzer is adequate (Keithley, a unit of Tektronix, $US 6,000) but only measures to the fifth harmonic.
It is a standalone device, but unless you want to dig around for an old 70's~80's era machine from HP, Tek, Boonton, a Sound Technology 1700B, etc that pre-date the inexpensive computing power era, the norm these days is software / PC / Appropriate Sound Card for low cost measurement. So now you need, again, a dedicated PC and most hobbyists use the same machine for general computing. But the cost is *way* lower than a standalone machine or an AP.
If you fudge the numbers, it comes down to a classic standalone machine (they still sell for almost four figures and sometimes a couple of thousand) or software like ARTA and a good sound card, maybe $400 worth of stuff total in addition to a basic working PC of some kind. You can fight with your wallet or just give up and go PC-enabled.
I don't know what is going on here, somehow/. has managed to post a topic that is something it's members might actually be interested in, instead of squabble-bait. Mods must be off their meds today.
No surprised that many of the 60,000,000+ voters that voted for trump are not showing it off, just look at what happens when someone wears MAGA hat or shows support for Trump in public.
People are losing friends, family and jobs for supporting Trump.
That explains your observations.
Posting as AC for obvious reasons.
After the first Obama election, for the first time in nearly 30 years, and something I was until then positive I would never hear, multiple clients of mine, all US citizens, opined that someone should shoot him. The nature of my business was rather remote outdoor recreation, I spent upwards of 50 hours with a client, and aside from the usual common-sense reluctance to discuss religion or politics, sometimes clients would bring it up. The adventures are expensive and virtually all the clients were Republicans, which should surprise no-one. But it was a shock the first time I heard it and a surprise how many times afterward I heard it. So, it's not just Trump that generates strong emotional responses.
And your taxes in SF on that kind of income top out at 33% federal, plus 10% state, plus sales tax, and doesn't include health insurance. The tax difference is negligible compared apples to apples.
Canada has a lower Federal income tax rate on it's highest bracket than the US.* However a simple tax rate is virtually useless when it comes to determining actual tax paid so the comparison is of limited value. Presented simply as a FYI.
With regard to housing, in the US you can deduct the interest portion of your mortgage. Not so in Canada, however there are no Capital Gains on the sale of your home, meaning you can take 100% of your equity and apply it to a new mortgage (or do what many do and retire to a low-cost area and spend the kid's inheritance. Or not... no Estate Taxes either).
* ----- Unmarried used as it's the generally highest rates; highest tax bracket cited; Federal only:
Canada: Net income after deductions: more than $205,841: $47,670 plus 33% of the portion above $205,841 (Highest Bracket)
US: Net income after deductions: $$191,651 to $416,700: $46,637.72 plus 33% of that portion above $191,651 (Similar to Canada's Highest Bracket)
Net income after deductions: $418,401 or more: $120,903.17 plus 39.6% on that portion above $416,651 (US Highest Bracket)
Want to know the difference between Toronto and SF? The average person in SF makes nearly $60k/year(converted) more then the average person in Toronto. The average housing price in Toronto is $1.58m as well. On top of that, your average taxes(all combined) in Ontario is around 43-45% of your yearly income.
Well have to use January 2018 numbers here, since it's the most recent with the housing type breakdown I could quickly find (first Google hit, CBC News). 416 Area Code. July 25 Exchange Rate.
From what I've seen, Toronto's housing prices aren't actually much better than SF. Average home price is like $1m. Average home price in SF is only $1.35m. The Bay as a whole is more in line with other urban places at $825k
NYC is $680k, but that's the entire city. Manhattan is $1.35m, but Brooklyn is only $788k (and all the tech people I know live here.) Seattle is $765k.
But for sure some of the smaller tech centers have better prices, though many of those have sky rocketed in the last 10 years. Even Oakland County, Michigan has gone up a lot.
Not quite. As of June 2018 the average selling price of a home in Toronto (according to the Toronto Real Estate Board) was $C $807,871 which is equal to (at today's exchange rate, which hasn't changed much over the last two years) $US 631,218. So less than half the average in SF if we assume your number for that market is correct.
If libraries are being used by a lot of people, then they are providing value. If there are little or no people using them, then they are providing little value.
If certain books haven't been checked out in 20 years, maybe its best to have an on-line version available and kiosks instead of shelves.
Although I can see a utility argument I do not agree that a library article that "haven't been checked out in 20 years" should be replaced with only fast-turnover articles, or replaced with a digital version (which, probably, would come up against copyright owner issues, whether that be cost or simple refusal to publish in that form, which is hardly unheard of).
A collection of rarely read books is in some ways the fundamental purpose of a library.
I should add that the borrower's risk of repayment is the most important part of all the above. If you don't pay back the loan, the bank has to reduce it's lending because is screws with the 10% or whatever amount is required as deposits. So they literally have to start calling in loans to get more cash on deposit (as many business loans are "demand loans" which means the bank can demand the money you borrowed back at any moment they choose. As long as the loan is out, the business only pays the monthly interest).
Same when there is a "run on the bank" when depositors get anxious and start withdrawing cash. Reduce the deposits and you have to start calling in loans.
Just as loans create money out of thin air, calling in loans reduces the amount of money in the economy. That runs a risk of recession, layoffs, etc.
Banks hate cash. It requires physical handling. It can be stolen. It wears out. It "isn't working for us" as it sits in a vault, an ATM, or an armored car. Electronic money can be working all the time - earning interest, being leveraged, being arbitraged, whatever. Cash is so "static" compared to electronic funds.
The Brave New World is almost here. Add an implant and the process will be complete. Can you imagine being arrested on suspicion of a serious crime because 30 minutes prior to the crime, in the "walking distance" proximity, you bought a pack of gum with your implant (or your debit card, or your smartphone)?
I'm rather old, my friends, and as you revel in your youth (assuming you are there), marvel at how anyone could be happy to be older. This world is yours. I'll be in it for a little longer, but not nearly as long as so many of you. I suppose cashless is your future - not so much mine.
Actually, cash and any / all deposits and withdraws whether by check, electronic transaction etc starts "working" every night as it's reconciled with the Federal Reserve (or any nation's Central Bank). The true means that bank deposits start "working" is when a Bank makes a loan, which creates money out of thin air... when they make a loan, they write a check to you (or deposit funds in your account) and that money from that moment exists. Prior to the loan, it didn't exist. That's how banking works (and why it's a critical step in the prosperity of the economy).
Those transactions as well are reconciled with the Central Banks. Central Banks control the money supply by manipulating interest rates... higher rates mean loans are harder to make, lower rates mean loans are easier to make. Banks only keep a small portion of their loan portfolio in deposits. It varies but can be below 10% deposits to 90% loans. The asset to loan ratio is also manipulated by Central Banks to control the money supply.
So 100 million in cash and checks puttering around a city in an Armoured Car are not only working, they are enabling the bank to make $900 million (for example) in new loans created out of thin air (the borrower's risk of paying it back is the real currency of banking).
Easy Credit is good for the economy although it also runs the risk of inflation, so they can't just do what they want without repercussions. But it creates money that otherwise would not exist, that money is spent (the old Econ textbooks would say a new dollar is spent 7 times, creating $7 in economic benefit. That multiplier might have changed since I was in college, but not by much and with electronic transactions, because they are so quick, it might even be higher than 7x now).
I realize that laws regarding pay differ in the US, but in Canada, if you quit your job, you are automatically deemed ineligible for EI (Employment Insurance) and your claim will be rejected.
You can still get benefits if you meet certain criteria (were harassed at work and can prove it, for example) but the bar is pretty high. You will have a long (many months) fight on your hands with no guarantee you will be successful, and you will be without income unless you find new work (at which point you would be ineligible for benefits in any case).
What is the threat model for needing three redundant control systems? Are they worried about hacking or viruses, in which case why did they connect it to the internet or even have writeable media for storage? And three networks... Well, okay, the networks might get damaged by enemy fire, the usual way you deal with that is to have separate, self contained systems in different parts of the ship and operators you can contact via phone or radio and who are fairly antonymous anyway.
Then there is this full-auto mode. Firstly, the friend or foe identification system better be amazing or you will end up with a drifting, abandoned frigate that shoots at anything in range. And by the time everyone on board is either dead or gone, the ship must be in such a state as to be next to useless anyway.
Modern naval planning tends to assume that once the ship is hit then it's probably out of the fight. The focus is on not getting hit, not having some crazy AI carry on fighting afterwards. Aside from anything there would be a very real risk of it attacking any friendly ships that came to rescue the crew.
Your idea of naval warfare is pretty much an 1980's and earlier situation. The phalanx naval defence system, for example, only fires on close encounter threats, and is fully automated tracking and fire. It IS coming at you. All modern aircraft use IFF (identify friend or foe) AI. And so on. Obviously voice communication is still used extensively in warfare, but ship systems can be set to automated response, with or without human interaction. And note that this particular class of vessel is being replaced; the example I gave is one of aging assets. Anything newer will be far more automated.
What is the threat model for needing three redundant control systems? Are they worried about hacking or viruses, in which case why did they connect it to the internet or even have writeable media for storage? And three networks... Well, okay, the networks might get damaged by enemy fire, the usual way you deal with that is to have separate, self contained systems in different parts of the ship and operators you can contact via phone or radio and who are fairly antonymous anyway.
Then there is this full-auto mode. Firstly, the friend or foe identification system better be amazing or you will end up with a drifting, abandoned frigate that shoots at anything in range. And by the time everyone on board is either dead or gone, the ship must be in such a state as to be next to useless anyway.
Modern naval planning tends to assume that once the ship is hit then it's probably out of the fight. The focus is on not getting hit, not having some crazy AI carry on fighting afterwards. Aside from anything there would be a very real risk of it attacking any friendly ships that came to rescue the crew.
I never said "it was connected to the internet"
Yes, the mainframes are located at three separate areas of the ship.
The use of different OSes is a tampering reduction feature.
NATO nations know who the friendlies and the non-aligned military assets, including rogue actors, that are around them. Threat management is determined by the action of other assets... is that a fighter jet profile heading towards you? Area of detection for aircraft is classified but known to be near 100 miles (for example). Again the actual number of threats that can be monitored simultaneously is classified, but it is known to be "more than 20". And without some form of AI, your fear is justified; with it, maybe not so much.
Further to interoperability with friendlies, Canadian Frigates of this class have spent deployments as part of USN Carrier Task Force(s) in carrier protection role, both as part of threat war games and as full extended deployment.
No other nations have ever (or since) been allowed to participate in that role. By all accounts it performed admirably, being notable for being the only asset that detected and simulated destruction of diesel electric submarine infiltration in at least one exercise. The US began and has now completed a Frigate class program that was in part established due to the performance of the RCN vessel in that role.
Top speed is also classified, but is "more than 30 knots". The ship can, from a standing start, come up to full speed and to a full stop in less than it's length.
I have done a lot of online purchasing, and starting fairly early in the game, before the new millennium, and plenty since. Some years it exceeded five figures.
I only had one problem, where a small vendor was the victim of a php injection attack. I noticed it but it didn't "click" that I was being served a lookalike page to enter my CC details. When the transaction didn't go through, it dawned on me what was going on.
My CC company (VISA) caught the suspicious activity on my card fairly quickly... the thieves apparently tried three transactions, and they denied the second and third. The first (and when I talked to VISA, they said it was very common) was to pay for web hosting for three months, to a Texas based provider. The other two were in quick succession and originated at different locales, which triggered the fraud alert.
I was issued a new card (new account #) and that was the end of it for me... I didn't have to pay for the one charge they made. I also alerted the vendor, who was reluctant to believe me, but apparently had the smarts to hire someone who confirmed the php injection and made changes, and later sent me a message thanking me for the alert.
But that was it. Hundreds if not thousands of transactions at every stage of eCommerce development.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course children are "at risk of robot influence. They are also at risk of Barbie and G.I. Joe influence, and in that case it's the children themselves making up the "influence". Playing with Robots means learning with Robots, because play is how children learn. They're also 'at risk of Ice Cream influence" and ... well ... everything they encounter, basically.
Was there someone who was under the impression that children were immune to Robot influence? Anybody?
MIssing footnote from previous post:
* A dozen indoor/outdoor municipal lifeguarded pools and about 80 non-lifeguared (two staff, but also indoor and outdoor playrooms and structures) municipal wading pools. An unknown number of private indoor and outdoor pools. Pop 230,000.
300 children drowning deaths over just a few months (summer) is an extraordinarily high number by my local and national standards. There must be more to it than just negligent parents using cellphones.
Canadian parents use smartphones as much as anyone in a first-world country. Below is a comparison with Germany
Note: I did not find specific data on children only in Germany, so we are comparing the news story's 300 over summer with Canada's annual numbers.
Format: Germany // Canada
Population (2018 estimate to Wed Aug 16) // 36,992,745
82,315,335
Population Ratio:
2.22:1
Children Drowning Deaths Age 0~19 // 68
300 (?)
Children Drowning Deaths Age 5~14 // 17
300 (?)
**
Expected number of deaths in Germany with adjustment for equivalent population (2.22 multiplier) at Canada's rate:
Age 0-19: 151
Age 5~14: 38
Deaths per age group 5~14 by ype of waterbody:
Unsupervised pools, lakes, rivers: 16
Lifeguarded pools, lakes, beaches: 1
So obviously it isn't just parents on smartphones that is the root cause. Canadian children have massive opportunity to enter water ... more freshwater than any country on earth, and using my city as an example* numerous city swimming / wading facilities. So opportunity for drowning certainly exists. Germany should explore overall water safety issues that obviously exist rather than focusing on a somewhat sensationalist "cause" that may or may not be valid.
But probably still more expensive than Canada-made boxes.
I'm not sure what motivated this comment, but Canada makes very inexpensive paper products because ... well ... we have the trees, and cheap electricity (not counting the incompetent idiots running Ontario ... you HAD cheap electricity but bungled and squandered that advantage all by yourselves) for the pulp mills and paper mills.
The US actually applies tariffs to Canadian paper products not because of unfair trade practices (the tariffs are routinely deemed invalid by the usual appeal processes, whereupon the US withdraws that one and a new one is imposed ... this has been going on for 50 years) but because all forestry in America is owned by small lot owners who simply hold out for higher timber rights prices. In Canada private landowners have to court forestry companies to cut their timber as the supply is virtually limitless. Public land is sold at prices commensurate with the private land rights prices, which the US claims represents a subsidy.
At least paper products are made from re-forrested land so quality is similar between Canadian and US made product. Not so with timber, where there is virtually no old-growth sources in America with some western states possessing the last stocks, on private land, with rights at high prices. In Canada there is still better than what-was-in-1800's-America levels of old-growth forest. Compounded with the Asian insect invasion of the last 30 years which has killed vast areas of the western Canadian forest canopy. That timber can sit for perhaps 10 years before it deteriorates and cannot be harvested, so there is tremendous pressure to harvest it all very quickly right now.
New-growth timber is less dense, partly because it's younger, like all trees would be, and partly because forestry companies prefer fast-growing species to re-forest the cut old growth timber species. That's fine, for most things, but some parts of a house require the strength and density of old-growth forest timber. Because the US cannot possibly harvest enough of this timber to meet demand for the US housing industry, they must import some from Canada. The tariffs on timber from Canada are simple price supports for US timber, both new-growth and old-growth. Given their druthers, builders would make entire homes out of old-growth timber, which the US doesn't really have much of. Thus the tariffs which are simply there to support an industry that has lost it's natural advantage and cannot get it back. Canada allows unlimited tariff-free imports of US lumber and pulp / paper products.
Although Canada would prefer to sell it's old-growth timber to the US, the Japanese and Asians (including China) are eager to buy what America won't, so the industry is doing fine, and lumber is cheaper in Canada than in America so our home construction costs are lower by probably about $10,000 per 1000 ft2.
offer consumers a variety of prices, qualities and relative values.
Yes, and but many companies offer luxury goods. And the cost to produce luxury goods never scales identically with the price. Case Labs sold luxury cases, and I guarantee that it did not cost them $450 to produce the cases they sold for $500.
Yes I think you could guarantee that. But not because of the reason you implied.
They could have been making commodity cases, selling for $50, and I guarantee that it would not cost $45 to manufacture one. Maybe $25, maybe $33, but almost certainly no more than that for a $50 product. So their "$450" cost would probably have been closer to $250.
If they were priced similarly to typical "luxury" goods (automobiles excepted, jewelry and clothing included) their cost would be more on the order of $160 for a $500 item.
You forgot to mention that the import is cheaper because China can shit all over their workers and the environment to produce the steel cheaply enough that they can sell it for less... even after shipping it halfway around the world.
Making steel is not "cheap" no matter where you make it. Employee wages, in the grand scheme of things, do not demonstrably affect the cost to the end user. Shipping is the greatest cost, raw materials next, and capital investment overshadow both of those. Occupational Health and Safety has both costs and benefits to a company; it is not simply a net outflow of cash, despite what some might suggest. A clean environment is a near necessity when unemployment is low and with very low barriers to employee mobility in the US, workers can choose simply to move to a nicer city and now you can't support full production. As heavy industry goes, steel mills are not particularly pollutive anyway.
That is why large international steel companies, such as Russia-based EVRAZ own steel pipe manufacturing plants in Regina SK Canada (a city with almost no heavy industry; without the steel plant and an oil refinery, none) and Pueblo, Colorado USA because of their proximity to the Oil Patch, even though they could import Russian made pipe if they wanted, which would enjoy most of the advantages you claim represent the difference between North American and non-G7 economy pipe.
The cost of building a corporate head office building and land is higher in San Francisco than in Great Falls, MT, and the cost of an acre of farmland in eastern California is higher than an acre outside of Great Falls MT not because the land or building itself is any different, but because the external forces surrounding that land and building differ. Employees with "good jobs" in each city (say, the people who would construct such buildings) can buy similar amounts of goods and services with their after-tax disposable income (after rents, other fixed costs) even though the actual wages may differ.
None of those things will change unless you change the local external forces that govern them, and those forces are notoriously stubborn and carry remarkable inertia ... governments worldwide have been trying, mostly un-successfully, to turn their Great Falls into San Franciscos for centuries, because when you have a higher cost economy it matters little locally, but you gain a huge wealth advantage versus the Great Falls of the world. Which allows you to do things like import their cheap products and allows them to do things like make more products than they can sell locally.
U.S.-based PC case manufacturer
The tariffs have played a major role raising prices by almost 80 percent (partly due to associated shortages)
Can someone explain? The tariffs are designed to help American manufacturing, they make American products cheaper than foreign products. And as for shortages, a PC case manufacturer needs thin sheet steel, paint, plastic, and LEDs. Don't tell me you cannot get sheet steel in America any longer? Also, the margins on cases should be astronomical, 5 lbs of steel and a few LEDs, an ounce of black paint and a few plastic parts probably take 5-8 dollars in material costs. The only problem in the industry should be that China can make them cheaper which can be solved with the appropriate tariffs.
Probably the effect of the tariffs being "recent".
This causes disruption in the supply chain, as any predictable price adjustment would. What importers do is make large orders based on expected mid-term demand, in contrast to their usual (what business school teaches these days) on-demand or "just-in-time" parts inventory practice. This can stress the financials of the importer, as they have new, unplanned costs (large order financing, new inventory & storage costs, delayed return on investment ... parts will be in inventory, paid for, for a longer period of time before they can recover the cost through sales, versus "normal" import volumes ).
Or Not. It may also be that downstream wholesale buyers will have upped their orders from the importer, eliminating the long term storage and cost recovery period issues but possibly causing shortages (cannot fill all orders completely) amongst businesses that are ultimately competitors. Prices may rise (as they always do to reflect higher demand than supply) out of proportion to the increased import cost. If you have unfilled orders and the price of a part in shortage has risen 400% (even though the tariff might have only increased cost to the importer by 10%) ... what do you do? Allow the buyer to cancel the order and hit your annual bottom line, or pay the 400% and ship the product, possibly at a loss, to keep people working and customers happy?
I would imaging the parts the OP's firm is referring to as increasing product cost would be power supplies typically included with case orders. (Just a guess, I've never looked at their site but if they don't offer PS upgrades, maybe they did deserve to go bankrupt, or at least should have read a book on marketing and business theory). Maybe they also included the option to add things like HDDs or SSDs at competitive prices, which would be dangerously narrow margins.
Regardless, those are all items not manufactured in the USA, so would have to be imported from somewhere; typically Asia as the costs to fill a Bill Of Materials (BoM) for electronics in Asia is significantly lower than in North America. It's even cheaper to buy electronic components in Australia than North America due to it's proximity to the manufacturing sites, not all of which are in China.
Oz (and New Zealand) have surprisingly robust electronics manufacturing industries, despite their first-world economies and small population sizes. Compare that with Mexico, which has comparable labour costs to China ... where is the cheap electronics assembly industry there? Doesn't exist at anywhere near the scale of Asia so obviously there are factors other than labour costs at play in that industry.
There are lots of challenges when a disruptive element enters business planning. Some of it is unpredictable and some of it carries unintended consequences. This is always the case, there is nothing particularly unique about new tariffs on Chinese manufactured goods in that respect. One day we can expect the tariffs will fall or be eliminated (either that, or there is a Hidden Agenda since tariff reduction is the carrot dangled to China should it change wha
Harley Davidson outsourced long before Trump showed up. Plenty of 'Made In Japan' parts, and that's going back over 20 years.
Ah, Millennials. Everything started in 2000 by their quaint concepts of history. Sort of like how on television, all the documentaries are about WWII or later, because there is almost no film prior to the 1930's, and about half the film from the 1930's was shot by toadies of you-know-who (or maybe you don't. Some guy with the initials AH).
Perhaps by "over 20 years" you are referring to such things as the Kehin carburetors and Showa forks found on 1970's Shovelheads?
I'm not sue about the Operating Room thing, but I do more than one person who has had a first heart attack, had the operation and (typically) have stints and arteries replaced. They all are i excellent health today; the oldest had his operation nearly 20 years ago and none have had a post-operative attack. So the ER surgeons are doing something right.
With women, Estrogen protects them from heart disease until menopause (typically early 40's to mid-50's) but from that point onward heart disease is just as likely as a male. Women's bodies are survival-tuned so they live longer than males and if they don't have issues in childbirth they have lower mortality until old age.
But, look at employed females. They have a much higher rate of desk jobs than males. Desk Jobs are heart killers. 10 to 25 years after menopause, desk job, children out of the home, so a high likelihood of sedentary lifestyle and no Estrogen protection before retirement. That is plenty of time and lifestyle to introduce Heart Disease. Add in obesity which tends to worsen as someone who tends toward overweight ages, diabetes Type 2 risk (which will kill your heart if you manage to survive the other ways it attacks the body and organs), and the final issue ... if you are elderly and in "perfect" health, you always die of a Heart Attack.
Some of these health risk rates are also suspect. Everybody these days in a modern society gets examined by a doctor when they die. Every doctor is required by law to put in a cause of death. You could be 105 and puttering in the garden, and the doc must put "Heart Failure" as the cause of death, because that's all he's got for a "natural death" and not putting a cause in there is not legal. Since women's bodies are designed for survival, it's the heart that gets them in their 70's, 80's, 90's and post 100's.
This has a side effect of making death stats from heart disease higher than they sensibly should be, and Heart Foundations don't see this as a problem as it helps with fundraising. So you have to take any heart related numbers with a healthy dose of skepticism.
From TFA: (italics mine) ...
"
According to outside auditors like Fakespot and ReviewMeta, more than half the reviews for certain popular products are questionable. [i]Amazon disputes those estimates.[/i]
"Our approximation is that less than 1 percent of reviews are inauthentic," says Sharon Chiarella, vice president of community shopping at Amazon. She adds that "sometimes individual products have more suspicious activity." ..."
"individual products" is equivalent to "certain popular products".
Amazon does not dispute those estimates, at least based on the evidence proposed in the article, which is non-existant. And they confirm that certain products have a higher incidence of fake reviews than the overall marketplace does.
If someone's looking to exploit they're likely going with the latest. More systems will be exposed to a new exploit than to an older, patch-able one. I suppose it's even possible that newer exploits won't even be possible on the older OS.
Yeah, no. If true that was probably with a machine with the local firewall disabled and no router or any kind of ISP filtering. In other words, not a real world case. For Joe Desktop who's careful with his browsing and email, XP security shouldn't be an issue. YMMV.
You could put the machine behind adequate defences, and it wasn't 20 minutes (exactly), if you monitored your Intrusion Detection app you'd see a long list of attacks within five minutes of being online (I've seen it). For ordinary users, who would update XP online, it might be exposed for hours to download and install the updates. Naturally no-one who knew what they were doing would update that way, but that doesn't describe ordinary users either.
I'd never buy test equipment that requires a computer connected to be usable. Never, ever.
That's as bad as my flex radio that I never use for the same reason, garbage. Every time I sit down, I just turn on my old kenwood ts-430 instead.
If it's a self contained device that requires no network connection, maybe. If there are software updates, they need to be installable offline. Mostly analog is ideal though.
Sometimes "never" is not an option. One electronic test equipment that revolutionized the industry is the Audio Precision line of Distortion Analyzers. Virtually everyone involved in electronic design, testing or repair owns one, and they are almost hobbyist-priced (a new basic unit can be had for less than $US 10,000). The revolutionary part of AP analyzers is they connect to a PC to do the math.
Now, somewhat on topic, AP is very good at updating their SW interfaces and older machines can use modern versions of the WinOS. They also are not themselves normally required to be connected to outside networks, provided you use a dedicated PC on the bench and not one used for general computing. So much of the problems are solved using good management practices.
If you want to be anywhere near current, you need an AP. I don't own one; I send my stuff to another engineer who does to test, but he charges $200/Hr. He has the most advanced unit, somewhere near or north of $US 20K. Plus a Windows PC and a printer if you want output charts, of course. My Distortion Analyzer is adequate (Keithley, a unit of Tektronix, $US 6,000) but only measures to the fifth harmonic.
It is a standalone device, but unless you want to dig around for an old 70's~80's era machine from HP, Tek, Boonton, a Sound Technology 1700B, etc that pre-date the inexpensive computing power era, the norm these days is software / PC / Appropriate Sound Card for low cost measurement. So now you need, again, a dedicated PC and most hobbyists use the same machine for general computing. But the cost is *way* lower than a standalone machine or an AP.
If you fudge the numbers, it comes down to a classic standalone machine (they still sell for almost four figures and sometimes a couple of thousand) or software like ARTA and a good sound card, maybe $400 worth of stuff total in addition to a basic working PC of some kind. You can fight with your wallet or just give up and go PC-enabled.
I don't know what is going on here, somehow /. has managed to post a topic that is something it's members might actually be interested in, instead of squabble-bait. Mods must be off their meds today.
" ... Posting as AC for obvious reasons. ..."
Oops. I KNOW I checked that box. Oh well.
No surprised that many of the 60,000,000+ voters that voted for trump are not showing it off, just look at what happens when someone wears MAGA hat or shows support for Trump in public.
People are losing friends, family and jobs for supporting Trump.
That explains your observations.
Posting as AC for obvious reasons.
After the first Obama election, for the first time in nearly 30 years, and something I was until then positive I would never hear, multiple clients of mine, all US citizens, opined that someone should shoot him. The nature of my business was rather remote outdoor recreation, I spent upwards of 50 hours with a client, and aside from the usual common-sense reluctance to discuss religion or politics, sometimes clients would bring it up. The adventures are expensive and virtually all the clients were Republicans, which should surprise no-one. But it was a shock the first time I heard it and a surprise how many times afterward I heard it. So, it's not just Trump that generates strong emotional responses.
And your taxes in SF on that kind of income top out at 33% federal, plus 10% state, plus sales tax, and doesn't include health insurance. The tax difference is negligible compared apples to apples.
Canada has a lower Federal income tax rate on it's highest bracket than the US.* However a simple tax rate is virtually useless when it comes to determining actual tax paid so the comparison is of limited value. Presented simply as a FYI.
With regard to housing, in the US you can deduct the interest portion of your mortgage. Not so in Canada, however there are no Capital Gains on the sale of your home, meaning you can take 100% of your equity and apply it to a new mortgage (or do what many do and retire to a low-cost area and spend the kid's inheritance. Or not ... no Estate Taxes either).
* -----
Unmarried used as it's the generally highest rates; highest tax bracket cited; Federal only:
Canada: Net income after deductions: more than $205,841: $47,670 plus 33% of the portion above $205,841 (Highest Bracket)
US: Net income after deductions: $$191,651 to $416,700: $46,637.72 plus 33% of that portion above $191,651 (Similar to Canada's Highest Bracket)
Net income after deductions: $418,401 or more: $120,903.17 plus 39.6% on that portion above $416,651 (US Highest Bracket)
Want to know the difference between Toronto and SF? The average person in SF makes nearly $60k/year(converted) more then the average person in Toronto. The average housing price in Toronto is $1.58m as well. On top of that, your average taxes(all combined) in Ontario is around 43-45% of your yearly income.
Well have to use January 2018 numbers here, since it's the most recent with the housing type breakdown I could quickly find (first Google hit, CBC News). 416 Area Code. July 25 Exchange Rate.
Detached home $C $1,283,981 [$US 1,003,219]
Semi-Detached home $C $936,623 [$US 731,816]
Townhome $C 712,186 [$US 556,456]
Condominium $C $543,279 [$US 424,483]
From what I've seen, Toronto's housing prices aren't actually much better than SF. Average home price is like $1m. Average home price in SF is only $1.35m. The Bay as a whole is more in line with other urban places at $825k
NYC is $680k, but that's the entire city. Manhattan is $1.35m, but Brooklyn is only $788k (and all the tech people I know live here.) Seattle is $765k.
But for sure some of the smaller tech centers have better prices, though many of those have sky rocketed in the last 10 years. Even Oakland County, Michigan has gone up a lot.
Not quite. As of June 2018 the average selling price of a home in Toronto (according to the Toronto Real Estate Board) was $C $807,871 which is equal to (at today's exchange rate, which hasn't changed much over the last two years) $US 631,218. So less than half the average in SF if we assume your number for that market is correct.
If libraries are being used by a lot of people, then they are providing value. If there are little or no people using them, then they are providing little value.
If certain books haven't been checked out in 20 years, maybe its best to have an on-line version available and kiosks instead of shelves.
Although I can see a utility argument I do not agree that a library article that "haven't been checked out in 20 years" should be replaced with only fast-turnover articles, or replaced with a digital version (which, probably, would come up against copyright owner issues, whether that be cost or simple refusal to publish in that form, which is hardly unheard of).
A collection of rarely read books is in some ways the fundamental purpose of a library.
I should add that the borrower's risk of repayment is the most important part of all the above. If you don't pay back the loan, the bank has to reduce it's lending because is screws with the 10% or whatever amount is required as deposits. So they literally have to start calling in loans to get more cash on deposit (as many business loans are "demand loans" which means the bank can demand the money you borrowed back at any moment they choose. As long as the loan is out, the business only pays the monthly interest).
Same when there is a "run on the bank" when depositors get anxious and start withdrawing cash. Reduce the deposits and you have to start calling in loans.
Just as loans create money out of thin air, calling in loans reduces the amount of money in the economy. That runs a risk of recession, layoffs, etc.
Banks hate cash. It requires physical handling. It can be stolen. It wears out. It "isn't working for us" as it sits in a vault, an ATM, or an armored car. Electronic money can be working all the time - earning interest, being leveraged, being arbitraged, whatever. Cash is so "static" compared to electronic funds.
The Brave New World is almost here. Add an implant and the process will be complete. Can you imagine being arrested on suspicion of a serious crime because 30 minutes prior to the crime, in the "walking distance" proximity, you bought a pack of gum with your implant (or your debit card, or your smartphone)?
I'm rather old, my friends, and as you revel in your youth (assuming you are there), marvel at how anyone could be happy to be older. This world is yours. I'll be in it for a little longer, but not nearly as long as so many of you. I suppose cashless is your future - not so much mine.
Actually, cash and any / all deposits and withdraws whether by check, electronic transaction etc starts "working" every night as it's reconciled with the Federal Reserve (or any nation's Central Bank). The true means that bank deposits start "working" is when a Bank makes a loan, which creates money out of thin air ... when they make a loan, they write a check to you (or deposit funds in your account) and that money from that moment exists. Prior to the loan, it didn't exist. That's how banking works (and why it's a critical step in the prosperity of the economy).
Those transactions as well are reconciled with the Central Banks. Central Banks control the money supply by manipulating interest rates ... higher rates mean loans are harder to make, lower rates mean loans are easier to make. Banks only keep a small portion of their loan portfolio in deposits. It varies but can be below 10% deposits to 90% loans. The asset to loan ratio is also manipulated by Central Banks to control the money supply.
So 100 million in cash and checks puttering around a city in an Armoured Car are not only working, they are enabling the bank to make $900 million (for example) in new loans created out of thin air (the borrower's risk of paying it back is the real currency of banking).
Easy Credit is good for the economy although it also runs the risk of inflation, so they can't just do what they want without repercussions. But it creates money that otherwise would not exist, that money is spent (the old Econ textbooks would say a new dollar is spent 7 times, creating $7 in economic benefit. That multiplier might have changed since I was in college, but not by much and with electronic transactions, because they are so quick, it might even be higher than 7x now).
" ... Uber drivers who had quit over low pay ..."
I realize that laws regarding pay differ in the US, but in Canada, if you quit your job, you are automatically deemed ineligible for EI (Employment Insurance) and your claim will be rejected.
You can still get benefits if you meet certain criteria (were harassed at work and can prove it, for example) but the bar is pretty high. You will have a long (many months) fight on your hands with no guarantee you will be successful, and you will be without income unless you find new work (at which point you would be ineligible for benefits in any case).
Sounds like a very odd design if true.
What is the threat model for needing three redundant control systems? Are they worried about hacking or viruses, in which case why did they connect it to the internet or even have writeable media for storage? And three networks... Well, okay, the networks might get damaged by enemy fire, the usual way you deal with that is to have separate, self contained systems in different parts of the ship and operators you can contact via phone or radio and who are fairly antonymous anyway.
Then there is this full-auto mode. Firstly, the friend or foe identification system better be amazing or you will end up with a drifting, abandoned frigate that shoots at anything in range. And by the time everyone on board is either dead or gone, the ship must be in such a state as to be next to useless anyway.
Modern naval planning tends to assume that once the ship is hit then it's probably out of the fight. The focus is on not getting hit, not having some crazy AI carry on fighting afterwards. Aside from anything there would be a very real risk of it attacking any friendly ships that came to rescue the crew.
Your idea of naval warfare is pretty much an 1980's and earlier situation. The phalanx naval defence system, for example, only fires on close encounter threats, and is fully automated tracking and fire. It IS coming at you. All modern aircraft use IFF (identify friend or foe) AI. And so on. Obviously voice communication is still used extensively in warfare, but ship systems can be set to automated response, with or without human interaction. And note that this particular class of vessel is being replaced; the example I gave is one of aging assets. Anything newer will be far more automated.
Sounds like a very odd design if true.
What is the threat model for needing three redundant control systems? Are they worried about hacking or viruses, in which case why did they connect it to the internet or even have writeable media for storage? And three networks... Well, okay, the networks might get damaged by enemy fire, the usual way you deal with that is to have separate, self contained systems in different parts of the ship and operators you can contact via phone or radio and who are fairly antonymous anyway.
Then there is this full-auto mode. Firstly, the friend or foe identification system better be amazing or you will end up with a drifting, abandoned frigate that shoots at anything in range. And by the time everyone on board is either dead or gone, the ship must be in such a state as to be next to useless anyway.
Modern naval planning tends to assume that once the ship is hit then it's probably out of the fight. The focus is on not getting hit, not having some crazy AI carry on fighting afterwards. Aside from anything there would be a very real risk of it attacking any friendly ships that came to rescue the crew.
I never said "it was connected to the internet"
Yes, the mainframes are located at three separate areas of the ship.
The use of different OSes is a tampering reduction feature.
NATO nations know who the friendlies and the non-aligned military assets, including rogue actors, that are around them. Threat management is determined by the action of other assets ... is that a fighter jet profile heading towards you? Area of detection for aircraft is classified but known to be near 100 miles (for example). Again the actual number of threats that can be monitored simultaneously is classified, but it is known to be "more than 20". And without some form of AI, your fear is justified; with it, maybe not so much.
Further to interoperability with friendlies, Canadian Frigates of this class have spent deployments as part of USN Carrier Task Force(s) in carrier protection role, both as part of threat war games and as full extended deployment.
No other nations have ever (or since) been allowed to participate in that role. By all accounts it performed admirably, being notable for being the only asset that detected and simulated destruction of diesel electric submarine infiltration in at least one exercise. The US began and has now completed a Frigate class program that was in part established due to the performance of the RCN vessel in that role.
Top speed is also classified, but is "more than 30 knots". The ship can, from a standing start, come up to full speed and to a full stop in less than it's length.
So, it's trusted by allies and it works.
I have done a lot of online purchasing, and starting fairly early in the game, before the new millennium, and plenty since. Some years it exceeded five figures.
I only had one problem, where a small vendor was the victim of a php injection attack. I noticed it but it didn't "click" that I was being served a lookalike page to enter my CC details. When the transaction didn't go through, it dawned on me what was going on.
My CC company (VISA) caught the suspicious activity on my card fairly quickly ... the thieves apparently tried three transactions, and they denied the second and third. The first (and when I talked to VISA, they said it was very common) was to pay for web hosting for three months, to a Texas based provider. The other two were in quick succession and originated at different locales, which triggered the fraud alert.
I was issued a new card (new account #) and that was the end of it for me ... I didn't have to pay for the one charge they made. I also alerted the vendor, who was reluctant to believe me, but apparently had the smarts to hire someone who confirmed the php injection and made changes, and later sent me a message thanking me for the alert.
But that was it. Hundreds if not thousands of transactions at every stage of eCommerce development.