It is hard to maker a good analogy and I find most of those posted far off the track.
I see it differently: imagine a library. You know, books, of the paper variety. A lot of them, all available for public use. Somehow careless library management put in there their finance book. Someone found it and picked up for rental. Person at the checkout out did not object.
It is negligence of the people who let the financial info get in the library, not the one who rented it.
Article is very light in details (except "Libraries of Congress" things), but it looks like those guys implemented a kind of error correction code (ECC) to recover lost data through extra data found in other packets. This has been in use for various types of networks (optical, DSL, GSM) for years.
Of course it is all down to how good the actual algorithm ("algebra") is in terms of overhead vs extent/capability of error correction vs introduced coding delay. There is always a trade-off, but a particular algorithm can take into account technology specifics (WiFi) and optimize it very well for a given task (whole packet lost, but not so often).
Journalists like to put BIG BUZZWORDS to well known things.
It's even mentioned in the original article, but left out by submitter and editors (are there any true editors here?).
I guess that's why so many people say their experience has been different - they learn under different teaching systems.
My experience is also opposite. Teachers were inciting to find new solutions and think in scientific way how to make progress rather than "catalogue facts" and remember them as, say, historicians do.
Guy lost his gov-issued iPad. Local IT admin said he can recover all his data and burn on CD, so MP doesn't need to worry it's lost. Data including his _private_ emails that was on iPad.
This is what set him off to return the iPad. Not Apple control.
Original iPad wasn't found he bought a replacement one from private money and returned it. Good guy!
As a form of protest he posted "Admins have access to everything!" on his Facebook before returning device. 300 of government officials (out of 460) use such iPads for work.
This is as much stealing as turning over pages in printed magazines without watching ads on them. I used to tear out all ad pages before reading those magazines that had dedicated ad pages without actual content. I have also stopped buying certain magazines that ran over reasonable ad:content ratio.
In a way this is sad, because often printed magazines keep afloat not with money from sold ones, but with money from advertisers. Cost of printing and distribution is pretty high, and even with electronic magazines it might be substituted by the costs of keeping up a website and paying for bandwidth, at least in case of larger popular magazines (did not run calculations).
Could always be, because any implementation might have holes.
You could be even closer than you think - rememeber that "hacking power strip from DARPA"? It could easily generate wrong power signal that could damage devices - depending on protections they have.
Power features in Power over Ethernet (802.3af) are negotiated, but it seems that a lot of logics is on the side supplying power, not the receiving one.
Various companies make overvoltage/overcurrent protection and surge suppression mechanisms that would need to be integrated in powered device to prevent attacks.
Take a look - it's not just Russia with high scores, but also Belarus, Czech Republic, Poland, Slovakia and Ukraine.
Western nations fare much worse, especially as a percentage of guys who make throught. It seems as if more people in USA were convinced of their skills and participated, while EE attracted only those who actually have the skill. This corresponds with real life and self-confidence. EE people seem to judge themselfes harder than others and don't participate in such events even if they have skills.
In any case it's sad to notice that excellent programming skills do not translate to excellent commercial success - many of those talented work for Western companies, do not create good domestic ones.
It would be great if someone used terms more familiar to those international folks who don't know British law:-)
Does it mean they went bankrupt (as summary seems to say), under investigation (which forced closing the stores), became a public administration entity (who then decided to close some of the shops), or what?
> Wrong. Unless compared to ancient ABS systems, > even professional race car drivers can't beat ABS.
For braking they can. I've driven with race drivers and when asked they show how ABS goes haywire when it can't properly "guess" parameters, and how it can bork your attempt at braking or avoiding obstacle. Worst part is that you can't control it - when you go through the course most of the time it will guess right, but a few times in the same conditions it will do surprisingly bad. I am talking about ABS installed in production cars, not racing systems.
As far as beating ABS goes even I can show how to beat it easily on icy surface. ABS will keep wheels unlocked forever because they keep blocking. Slamming on brakes without ABS and keeping wheels locked is more effective here. Tested on a professional course.
Taking quote from the same forum you did: ChrisTipper: "when Prost drove with it he said it made the car still unstable and unprediable underbraking in the wet."
> "...The Audi R8 GT3s..."
You can't compare sport systems to what we drive. Audi R8 has "race ABS and minutely adjustable traction control (ASR)".
Also reply to this post on forum you quoted was: "Not sure what your point is. The BMW also raced at Spa 1000km and N24 and used ABS for the N24 only."
> "...Ferrari F430 GTC..."
Again, racing quality ABS and traction control. Not your run-of-the-mill ABS-only car.
> "decent ABS system is a net benefit on any car be it road or race"
Exactly!
This quote does NOT say that ABS will _SHORTEN_ braking distance, it says it will benefit. I wrote that ABS provides benefits, and the main one is in fact having more control over the car. Your quote does not contradict that, just supports me:-)
> no driver can individually modulate 4 wheels like a > modern 4 channel ABS can.
Here you write about traction control aka electronic stability control (ESP) rather than ABS. You are absolutely right that driver can't do that. Those features will help to keep control when car begins to skid after turning wheel, not only while braking. Again - keep control, save car from spinning, give driver a better chance to avoid an obstacle. Not just brake in a straight line.
PS: to make sure we attribute - all your quotes are from F1 Technical forum, posted there by users ubrben, Patrickl, Pandamasque and others.
ABS does not shorten braking distance, as many people think. It often makes braking distance longer (compared to proper braking), like described by the previous poster.
Goal of ABS is to provide control while braking - ability to turn the car and avoid an obstacle. Without ABS you need to release the brake to restore control, which is not something people without training would do.
Given the choice of "just shorten braking distance" and "allow people to brake/control car instead of spinning it" the latter is probably the lesser evil.
If you mean "ping response time", which is a good approximation of "round trip delay" for travelling back and forth to the servers AND including additional time for servers to respond, your number may be good. May, if servers add delay. Answering pings is not a priority of a networked device. That's why "ping" is not that much useful except for verifying if a host/server is alive.
If this is only network part, one-way delay of 300ms would be excessive. Even 150ms (assuming original figure was two-way) seems a bit high. In USA you should get about 50-100ms from coast to coast inside telco network, adding under 50ms for your access link (higher for satellite or mobile, obviously).
For DSL your local link latency may be increased due to interleaving and other advanced encoding to cope with the length of copper wire you are on (if far from DSL concentrator). This is fairly low, on order of 30ms though.
(Note: this is of course a huge simplification, so please do not point out "mistakes", but add more information as you feel necessary)
Warsaw University of Science and Technology has already launched an experimental satellite to check for feasibility of faster debris deorbiting. It has a deployable tail that significantly reduces (via drag) orbiting time.
You can imagine this technology used for cleaning space, either by using such mechanisms on new satellites to burn them faster when no longer needed, or attach them (tbd how) to existing debris.
Yes, it's hard to put quantity or quality on each country's industrial espionage, but it is fairly universal around the world. I suspect USA has the most resources and media devoted to uncovering "the others" as bad guys and hiding their own dealings there. Airbus example, and this China scare are examples of that.
BTW: China's Huawei is currently the "most innovative company", with about 50 thousands of patents applied for. They (Chinese companies) are going to improve their research over the coming years, even if initially this is "embrace&enhance" of Western ideas. Agreed, number of patents is not the best measure for R&D, but still - it makes you think.
How do you know that USA does not do similar "covert" operations"?
Echelon is just one example of a covert industrial espionage mechanism established and run by Americans. I would not think US does not do the same things as China, Russia, France or other countries. China is just so convenient to be a scapegoat. If you believe this is just to "catch criminals", you've been convinced by the dark side;-)
In any case this article is a valuable reminder that nothing is "private" these days, that every electronic device is susceptible to be used against you.
Yet another problem is that while tens if thousands "like" the event on social sites and promise to protest, there is only a hundred to a few hundred who actually come and do. Media has a field day saying that "would-be-protesters" do not walk their talk.
Main influence could be that young people try to defend their freedom (=internet) during the next elections - if they remember about it in 3.5 years time.
> The reason I keep using PGP, however, is because of > digital signing: there's a good guarantee that signed > messages were actually sent by me.
One of reasons I don't use PGP is exactly due to that feature! It signs emails - they can be attributed to me. Secret services or other people would be sure it was me who sent those emails. Right now I can claim the email was a mistake, a hack, something I did not do - if needed. With PGP it would be a legal proof.
There is a lot of places where PGP _should_ be used though, especially for official communication from banks, service providers (e-bills instead of paper ones) and so on. They do not do it for reasons given by many others - people just don't know how to read/verify such messages...
Article is about advance in technology that allows to use it in authoritarian countries. My point is that this advance in technology is applicable to all countries for specified purposes.
I do not claim that democratic countries are authoritarian, just that they use the same technology, and often for the same goal, just not always so openly.
Discussion here would be similar to discussion about guns. Gun itself is not good or bad. It can be used by a good policeman or a bad policeman, enemy soldier or own soldier.
No, I do not think USA has a fascist government. No need to learn more;-) I wrote however that they are a prime example of spying and collecting data due to 1) being considered a "free" country for such a long time, 2) being far from that stereotype. You would not be surprised Soviet Russia did it, or East Germany, or Libia. But USA?:-)
As far as collecting information on people goes, USA is IMVHO very advanced, it's just not that you get impression this data is used very visibly, as in "authoritarian" countries.
In any case the article should not single out "authoritarian" countries, as the technology is available to all.
Funny that article writer wrote "authoritarian". This applies to almost any country - with USA being the prime example (CarrierIQ^3), or ubiquitous cameras in UK.
If people think their governments do not spy on them just as in "authoritarian" regimes, they are so wrong...
...wait, it's true, only in Corporate USofA and today!
Read P.K.Dick on world taken over by corporations. He wa a visionary, like so many S-F writers. They have foreseen all things that happen, technically and morally.
Slashdot Mirror
It is hard to maker a good analogy and I find most of those posted far off the track.
I see it differently: imagine a library. You know, books, of the paper variety. A lot of them, all available for public use.
Somehow careless library management put in there their finance book. Someone found it and picked up for rental. Person at the checkout out did not object.
It is negligence of the people who let the financial info get in the library, not the one who rented it.
Article is very light in details (except "Libraries of Congress" things), but it looks like those guys implemented a kind of error correction code (ECC) to recover lost data through extra data found in other packets. This has been in use for various types of networks (optical, DSL, GSM) for years.
Of course it is all down to how good the actual algorithm ("algebra") is in terms of overhead vs extent/capability of error correction vs introduced coding delay. There is always a trade-off, but a particular algorithm can take into account technology specifics (WiFi) and optimize it very well for a given task (whole packet lost, but not so often).
Journalists like to put BIG BUZZWORDS to well known things.
It's even mentioned in the original article, but left out by submitter and editors (are there any true editors here?).
I guess that's why so many people say their experience has been different - they learn under different teaching systems.
My experience is also opposite. Teachers were inciting to find new solutions and think in scientific way how to make progress rather than "catalogue facts" and remember them as, say, historicians do.
Not Psygonis or Psygnonis.
Please shows some respect and check spelling of last names and company names at the very least. Basic Editor skillz, rigot?
Guy lost his gov-issued iPad.
Local IT admin said he can recover all his data and burn on CD, so MP doesn't need to worry it's lost. Data including his _private_ emails that was on iPad.
This is what set him off to return the iPad. Not Apple control.
Original iPad wasn't found he bought a replacement one from private money and returned it. Good guy!
As a form of protest he posted "Admins have access to everything!" on his Facebook before returning device. 300 of government officials (out of 460) use such iPads for work.
Exactly.
This is as much stealing as turning over pages in printed magazines without watching ads on them.
I used to tear out all ad pages before reading those magazines that had dedicated ad pages without actual content.
I have also stopped buying certain magazines that ran over reasonable ad:content ratio.
In a way this is sad, because often printed magazines keep afloat not with money from sold ones, but with money from advertisers. Cost of printing and distribution is pretty high, and even with electronic magazines it might be substituted by the costs of keeping up a website and paying for bandwidth, at least in case of larger popular magazines (did not run calculations).
It's different because Cisco publicly announces their security advisories and publishes security bug information. Full disclosures:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/products_security_advisories_listing.html
Other companies (such as Juniper) are a bit less public, but seem to offer more information than Huawei to their customers too:
http://s-tools1.juniper.net/support/security/report_vulnerability.html
Could always be, because any implementation might have holes.
You could be even closer than you think - rememeber that "hacking power strip from DARPA"? It could easily generate wrong power signal that could damage devices - depending on protections they have.
Power features in Power over Ethernet (802.3af) are negotiated, but it seems that a lot of logics is on the side supplying power, not the receiving one.
Various companies make overvoltage/overcurrent protection and surge suppression mechanisms that would need to be integrated in powered device to prevent attacks.
Take a look - it's not just Russia with high scores, but also Belarus, Czech Republic, Poland, Slovakia and Ukraine.
Western nations fare much worse, especially as a percentage of guys who make throught. It seems as if more people in USA were convinced of their skills and participated, while EE attracted only those who actually have the skill. This corresponds with real life and self-confidence. EE people seem to judge themselfes harder than others and don't participate in such events even if they have skills.
In any case it's sad to notice that excellent programming skills do not translate to excellent commercial success - many of those talented work for Western companies, do not create good domestic ones.
Feel free to point out if I'm wrong here.
Thanks - media made "Chapter 11" much more understandable world-wide.
It would be great if someone used terms more familiar to those international folks who don't know British law :-)
Does it mean they went bankrupt (as summary seems to say), under investigation (which forced closing the stores), became a public administration entity (who then decided to close some of the shops), or what?
> Wrong. Unless compared to ancient ABS systems,
> even professional race car drivers can't beat ABS.
For braking they can. I've driven with race drivers and when asked they show how ABS goes haywire when it can't properly "guess" parameters, and how it can bork your attempt at braking or avoiding obstacle. Worst part is that you can't control it - when you go through the course most of the time it will guess right, but a few times in the same conditions it will do surprisingly bad. I am talking about ABS installed in production cars, not racing systems.
As far as beating ABS goes even I can show how to beat it easily on icy surface. ABS will keep wheels unlocked forever because they keep blocking. Slamming on brakes without ABS and keeping wheels locked is more effective here. Tested on a professional course.
Taking quote from the same forum you did:
ChrisTipper: "when Prost drove with it he said it made the car still unstable and unprediable underbraking in the wet."
> "...The Audi R8 GT3s..."
You can't compare sport systems to what we drive. Audi R8 has "race ABS and minutely adjustable traction control (ASR)".
Also reply to this post on forum you quoted was:
"Not sure what your point is. The BMW also raced at Spa 1000km and N24 and used ABS for the N24 only."
> "...Ferrari F430 GTC..."
Again, racing quality ABS and traction control. Not your run-of-the-mill ABS-only car.
> "decent ABS system is a net benefit on any car be it road or race"
Exactly!
This quote does NOT say that ABS will _SHORTEN_ braking distance, it says it will benefit. I wrote that ABS provides benefits, and the main one is in fact having more control over the car. Your quote does not contradict that, just supports me :-)
> no driver can individually modulate 4 wheels like a
> modern 4 channel ABS can.
Here you write about traction control aka electronic stability control (ESP) rather than ABS. You are absolutely right that driver can't do that. Those features will help to keep control when car begins to skid after turning wheel, not only while braking. Again - keep control, save car from spinning, give driver a better chance to avoid an obstacle. Not just brake in a straight line.
PS: to make sure we attribute - all your quotes are from F1 Technical forum, posted there by users ubrben, Patrickl, Pandamasque and others.
ABS does not shorten braking distance, as many people think. It often makes braking distance longer (compared to proper braking), like described by the previous poster.
Goal of ABS is to provide control while braking - ability to turn the car and avoid an obstacle. Without ABS you need to release the brake to restore control, which is not something people without training would do.
Given the choice of "just shorten braking distance" and "allow people to brake/control car instead of spinning it" the latter is probably the lesser evil.
If you mean "ping response time", which is a good approximation of "round trip delay" for travelling back and forth to the servers AND including additional time for servers to respond, your number may be good.
May, if servers add delay. Answering pings is not a priority of a networked device. That's why "ping" is not that much useful except for verifying if a host/server is alive.
If this is only network part, one-way delay of 300ms would be excessive. Even 150ms (assuming original figure was two-way) seems a bit high. In USA you should get about 50-100ms from coast to coast inside telco network, adding under 50ms for your access link (higher for satellite or mobile, obviously).
For DSL your local link latency may be increased due to interleaving and other advanced encoding to cope with the length of copper wire you are on (if far from DSL concentrator). This is fairly low, on order of 30ms though.
(Note: this is of course a huge simplification, so please do not point out "mistakes", but add more information as you feel necessary)
Warsaw University of Science and Technology has already launched an experimental satellite to check for feasibility of faster debris deorbiting. It has a deployable tail that significantly reduces (via drag) orbiting time.
http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/PW_Sat_Poland_first_satellite_launched_into_orbit_999.html
You can imagine this technology used for cleaning space, either by using such mechanisms on new satellites to burn them faster when no longer needed, or attach them (tbd how) to existing debris.
That one, or "Haendel". Or maybe simply "handle". In the current form this isn't really a play on words.
Yes, it's hard to put quantity or quality on each country's industrial espionage, but it is fairly universal around the world. I suspect USA has the most resources and media devoted to uncovering "the others" as bad guys and hiding their own dealings there. Airbus example, and this China scare are examples of that.
BTW: China's Huawei is currently the "most innovative company", with about 50 thousands of patents applied for. They (Chinese companies) are going to improve their research over the coming years, even if initially this is "embrace&enhance" of Western ideas.
Agreed, number of patents is not the best measure for R&D, but still - it makes you think.
How do you know that USA does not do similar "covert" operations"?
Echelon is just one example of a covert industrial espionage mechanism established and run by Americans. I would not think US does not do the same things as China, Russia, France or other countries. China is just so convenient to be a scapegoat. If you believe this is just to "catch criminals", you've been convinced by the dark side ;-)
In any case this article is a valuable reminder that nothing is "private" these days, that every electronic device is susceptible to be used against you.
Submitter or editor made a spelling mistake. Site apparently uses a lot of PDF, which is a proprietary Portable Document Format.
Yet another problem is that while tens if thousands "like" the event on social sites and promise to protest, there is only a hundred to a few hundred who actually come and do.
Media has a field day saying that "would-be-protesters" do not walk their talk.
Main influence could be that young people try to defend their freedom (=internet) during the next elections - if they remember about it in 3.5 years time.
> The reason I keep using PGP, however, is because of
> digital signing: there's a good guarantee that signed
> messages were actually sent by me.
One of reasons I don't use PGP is exactly due to that feature! It signs emails - they can be attributed to me. Secret services or other people would be sure it was me who sent those emails. Right now I can claim the email was a mistake, a hack, something I did not do - if needed. With PGP it would be a legal proof.
There is a lot of places where PGP _should_ be used though, especially for official communication from banks, service providers (e-bills instead of paper ones) and so on. They do not do it for reasons given by many others - people just don't know how to read/verify such messages...
Article is about advance in technology that allows to use it in authoritarian countries. My point is that this advance in technology is applicable to all countries for specified purposes.
I do not claim that democratic countries are authoritarian, just that they use the same technology, and often for the same goal, just not always so openly.
Discussion here would be similar to discussion about guns. Gun itself is not good or bad. It can be used by a good policeman or a bad policeman, enemy soldier or own soldier.
No, I do not think USA has a fascist government. No need to learn more ;-) :-)
I wrote however that they are a prime example of spying and collecting data due to 1) being considered a "free" country for such a long time, 2) being far from that stereotype. You would not be surprised Soviet Russia did it, or East Germany, or Libia. But USA?
As far as collecting information on people goes, USA is IMVHO very advanced, it's just not that you get impression this data is used very visibly, as in "authoritarian" countries.
In any case the article should not single out "authoritarian" countries, as the technology is available to all.
Funny that article writer wrote "authoritarian". This applies to almost any country - with USA being the prime example (CarrierIQ^3), or ubiquitous cameras in UK.
If people think their governments do not spy on them just as in "authoritarian" regimes, they are so wrong...
...wait, it's true, only in Corporate USofA and today!
Read P.K.Dick on world taken over by corporations. He wa a visionary, like so many S-F writers. They have foreseen all things that happen, technically and morally.