The problem with frequency hopping is it’s hard to keep it from stepping all over someone else’s allocation.
No, it actually increases available spectrum. There's lots of band for free use by civilians, and the hopping takes place within that band. When the hops are on the order of a millisecond you can get a lot more overlap than you could fit into the band otherwise and it just sounds a little distorted instead of two people talking at the same time.
The problem with crypto is it’s hard to tell it from jamming signals.
No it's not. Jamming signals are much more powerful than communications traffic.
Why is this a bad combo? Because you’re jamming the radio gear used by lots of deep-pocketed companies at once. Someone will be able to make life unpleasant enough for the FCC to motivate them to track you down.
This stuff is illegal even on the civilian bands open for literal walkie-talkies.
If you’re going to do FHSS and encryption, don’t be an idiot - keep it in an ISM band.
Again, also illegal. The frequency hopping part isn't outright illegal, but the crypto part is. The FCC forbids civilians who aren't police to use any form of crypto radio which doesn't have a published key.
Who has more incentive to "review bomb" a comic book derived thing? Internet trolls, who would derive basically no amusement from that activity because nobody actually gives a shit about it to be offended. Or the guys getting paid to defend against "internet trolls?" You should pick up a Symantec anti-spam subscription some time, then cancel it and watch how much more spam you get - that's how marketing and sales work: you create a need then you offer a solution.
There's a difference between a dumbfire weapon post-deployment and a Human-seeking weapon post-deployment. The latter variety is a threat to even have that software developed because the software is the threat, not the deployment process. The deployment process is always going to be open to manipulation to the extent that 1 guy could potentially control an entire nation's military forces without checks and balances at every level. The thing which makes Human warriors better than AI warriors (from the standpoint of basically any Human) is that Humans will question orders at every level of the chain of command, even if only silently and in agreement (which is not always the case.) Think of all the rapes, tortures, and horrendous ways of death in war over the course of Human history - AI weapons would be worse because they wouldn't get shell shock, they wouldn't be questioning if they've gone too far, they would never stop to think of a better solution or even entertain the notion of mutiny. AI has no place in war.
The issue with killer robots isn't that they kill people, it's that they are automated in any way shape or form. They will end up being used against citizens eventually because the only thing keeping the government from having already curb-stomped the population into submission is that the population is armed to the teeth and even the military value freedom. As it stands the military wouldn't help subvert freedom in the US on a large scale, the moment automated killer robots exist in any capacity the rules change because it only takes 1 corrupt bastard at the controls to attack everyone.
User modded RF devices are legal in the US, though if you want to do something like add frequency hopping and crypto to a walkie talkie without making the keys publicly available the FCC will have you raped.
I had no skin in this one and wouldn't waste my time on "review bombing," probably done by the marketing department to convince the people paying for the marketing department to increase their wages since it would take so much effort to overcome the "trolling." Obvious psy-op is obvious.
Campaigning against encryption when everyone else has it just means your hackers won't have it if you succeed. Sure, your hackers might not be on your side directly, but there's hackers in nearly every nation and the ones in yours share your culture, acting in your shared interests. Seeking to take away their ability to encrypt shit is just going to hamstring your own nation in the long-run, because regardless of differences you have more in common with them than with hackers in foreign nations (which you can't legislate away regardless of how hard you try.)
Does Silicon Valley only work if there is some exclusion, some selectivity, and some prestige? Or can access to what makes a startup a success -- the right connections, the right money, the right know-how -- be available to everyone who signs up?
Basically, Silicon Valley has gotten so detached from reality that they believe they earned shit when it's all back-room deals. They apparently acknowledge it's back-room deals with the "right connections" part, yet, they are still deluded in thinking every single person on Earth doesn't already know that all it takes to succeed is wealth and connections.
The only thing I've argued is that Fox News Channel is product of the Republicans rather than a conspiracy by "globalist liberals" to discredit conservatism.
Yes, I'm aware. Your only argument being wrong is what sparked this discussion.
Or he's another Silicon Valley hack out for world domination who has a bunch of friends and a mentality that he can get away with anything because he's rich. The regulations in place work to keep every other American down (you'd experience similar if you started a company making wild claims,) what's wrong with them applying to him?
That's not how plebs think. They don't have well reasoned beliefs and ideals and such (on either side,) they are born into a culture and they perpetuate that culture. They can't be convinced to do the right thing (on either side,) so the best way to manipulate is to pigeon-hole them into sets of conflicting superficial beliefs over non-issues. This ensures neither side is focused on a thing that matters to change anything in their interest or otherwise.
People who watch CNN generally agree with the viewpoints presented Naturally, it follows that people who watch Fox News Channel generally agree with the viewpoints presented.
My point wasn't that people don't agree, it was that most people are literally retarded - as in they don't have the capacity to form their own views and process what conservative or liberal actually mean from whichever set of base principles they have. People adopting the views of Fox News aren't conservative any more than people adopting the views of CNN are liberal - both groups are just dumb plebs so lazy or incapable of thought that they parrot what they hear. People who have well enough developed perspectives of either side don't need to watch the MSM to receive confirmation bias, because those concepts have already been internalized.
Putting aside that it would literally be the dumbest con ever, why do so many conservatives watch Fox New Channel daily if it conflicts badly with their conservative views?
For the same reason a bunch of liberals watch CNN: most people are retarded.
Liberal for: true.
Since of course, when there's ANYTHING about a thing they dislike which is wrong, it is a total lie, and spun as 100% wrong.
The news outlets only pretend there's anything there when they can't pull at a thread to say the whole thing is wrong.
You don't have to be white to not be a traitor to your own country. Globalists are idiots and leaders with ambitions bigger than they should be, they aren't the good guys. If you start with 100 nations and you end with 1 globalist society, you've destroyed at least 99 (and probably all 100) distinct and diverse cultures to pound them into one shitty mold.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem with frequency hopping is it’s hard to keep it from stepping all over someone else’s allocation.
No, it actually increases available spectrum. There's lots of band for free use by civilians, and the hopping takes place within that band. When the hops are on the order of a millisecond you can get a lot more overlap than you could fit into the band otherwise and it just sounds a little distorted instead of two people talking at the same time.
The problem with crypto is it’s hard to tell it from jamming signals.
No it's not. Jamming signals are much more powerful than communications traffic.
Why is this a bad combo? Because you’re jamming the radio gear used by lots of deep-pocketed companies at once. Someone will be able to make life unpleasant enough for the FCC to motivate them to track you down.
This stuff is illegal even on the civilian bands open for literal walkie-talkies.
If you’re going to do FHSS and encryption, don’t be an idiot - keep it in an ISM band.
Again, also illegal. The frequency hopping part isn't outright illegal, but the crypto part is. The FCC forbids civilians who aren't police to use any form of crypto radio which doesn't have a published key.
ORANGE MAN BAD!
Who has more incentive to "review bomb" a comic book derived thing? Internet trolls, who would derive basically no amusement from that activity because nobody actually gives a shit about it to be offended. Or the guys getting paid to defend against "internet trolls?" You should pick up a Symantec anti-spam subscription some time, then cancel it and watch how much more spam you get - that's how marketing and sales work: you create a need then you offer a solution.
There's a difference between a dumbfire weapon post-deployment and a Human-seeking weapon post-deployment. The latter variety is a threat to even have that software developed because the software is the threat, not the deployment process. The deployment process is always going to be open to manipulation to the extent that 1 guy could potentially control an entire nation's military forces without checks and balances at every level. The thing which makes Human warriors better than AI warriors (from the standpoint of basically any Human) is that Humans will question orders at every level of the chain of command, even if only silently and in agreement (which is not always the case.) Think of all the rapes, tortures, and horrendous ways of death in war over the course of Human history - AI weapons would be worse because they wouldn't get shell shock, they wouldn't be questioning if they've gone too far, they would never stop to think of a better solution or even entertain the notion of mutiny. AI has no place in war.
The issue with killer robots isn't that they kill people, it's that they are automated in any way shape or form. They will end up being used against citizens eventually because the only thing keeping the government from having already curb-stomped the population into submission is that the population is armed to the teeth and even the military value freedom. As it stands the military wouldn't help subvert freedom in the US on a large scale, the moment automated killer robots exist in any capacity the rules change because it only takes 1 corrupt bastard at the controls to attack everyone.
User modded RF devices are legal in the US, though if you want to do something like add frequency hopping and crypto to a walkie talkie without making the keys publicly available the FCC will have you raped.
I had no skin in this one and wouldn't waste my time on "review bombing," probably done by the marketing department to convince the people paying for the marketing department to increase their wages since it would take so much effort to overcome the "trolling." Obvious psy-op is obvious.
Manning is a traitor, but so are secret courts.
Can rarely be trusted with US based campaigners, why would anyone in their right mind expect to get anything back from a Chinese one?
Campaigning against encryption when everyone else has it just means your hackers won't have it if you succeed. Sure, your hackers might not be on your side directly, but there's hackers in nearly every nation and the ones in yours share your culture, acting in your shared interests. Seeking to take away their ability to encrypt shit is just going to hamstring your own nation in the long-run, because regardless of differences you have more in common with them than with hackers in foreign nations (which you can't legislate away regardless of how hard you try.)
People pretty much will collect anything and everything if possible.
Thus confirming the conspiracy theory that were seeded on Earth as a mining solution to gather up a bunch of shit by some really low-effort aliens.
It is unfair though that the same movie can be up for an Oscar and an Emmy. If Netflix wants an Oscar then they need to show the film in a cinema.
lol, nobody actually cares but people who live in Hollywood. The awards are all bought beforehand anyway, it's just a dated marketing tool.
Does Silicon Valley only work if there is some exclusion, some selectivity, and some prestige? Or can access to what makes a startup a success -- the right connections, the right money, the right know-how -- be available to everyone who signs up?
Basically, Silicon Valley has gotten so detached from reality that they believe they earned shit when it's all back-room deals. They apparently acknowledge it's back-room deals with the "right connections" part, yet, they are still deluded in thinking every single person on Earth doesn't already know that all it takes to succeed is wealth and connections.
If you can't trust the assessment of anyone outside of Silicon Valley over someone who made a fortune there you're already hopelessly lost in life.
The only thing I've argued is that Fox News Channel is product of the Republicans rather than a conspiracy by "globalist liberals" to discredit conservatism.
Yes, I'm aware. Your only argument being wrong is what sparked this discussion.
Or he's another Silicon Valley hack out for world domination who has a bunch of friends and a mentality that he can get away with anything because he's rich. The regulations in place work to keep every other American down (you'd experience similar if you started a company making wild claims,) what's wrong with them applying to him?
So you're an expert in propaganda...arguing that the MSM is truth..shocking.
That's not how plebs think. They don't have well reasoned beliefs and ideals and such (on either side,) they are born into a culture and they perpetuate that culture. They can't be convinced to do the right thing (on either side,) so the best way to manipulate is to pigeon-hole them into sets of conflicting superficial beliefs over non-issues. This ensures neither side is focused on a thing that matters to change anything in their interest or otherwise.
People who watch CNN generally agree with the viewpoints presented Naturally, it follows that people who watch Fox News Channel generally agree with the viewpoints presented.
My point wasn't that people don't agree, it was that most people are literally retarded - as in they don't have the capacity to form their own views and process what conservative or liberal actually mean from whichever set of base principles they have. People adopting the views of Fox News aren't conservative any more than people adopting the views of CNN are liberal - both groups are just dumb plebs so lazy or incapable of thought that they parrot what they hear. People who have well enough developed perspectives of either side don't need to watch the MSM to receive confirmation bias, because those concepts have already been internalized.
You must be awfully butt-mad to write all those words nobody will read.
Putting aside that it would literally be the dumbest con ever, why do so many conservatives watch Fox New Channel daily if it conflicts badly with their conservative views?
For the same reason a bunch of liberals watch CNN: most people are retarded.
...bunch of bs...
Globalist liberals frequently pretend to be conservatives to discredit the policies, just look at McCain.
fox news
Literally liberal propaganda: liberals portraying conservative values in the dumbest way possible so as to discredit them.
Liberal for: true.
Since of course, when there's ANYTHING about a thing they dislike which is wrong, it is a total lie, and spun as 100% wrong.
The news outlets only pretend there's anything there when they can't pull at a thread to say the whole thing is wrong.
You don't have to be white to not be a traitor to your own country. Globalists are idiots and leaders with ambitions bigger than they should be, they aren't the good guys. If you start with 100 nations and you end with 1 globalist society, you've destroyed at least 99 (and probably all 100) distinct and diverse cultures to pound them into one shitty mold.