That's the stupidest thing I've read in a while. We're filtering IP traffic, the layer 4 protocol is completely fucking irrelevant. The tier2/tier3 carriers should be filtering egress traffic based on the network address space they announce to their upstream peers.
Let's say I'm an ISP, Acme Internet. I purchase bandwidth from AT&T and Cogent and SWIP some address space from ARIN and get myself a portable AS. Now I peer via BGP with AT&T and Cogent and announce my new address space and AS. Now I go to the interfaces where that BGP peering takes place and I write an ACL that looks like this:
permit ip [my network address range] [my network mask] any
deny any
Then I apply it to the interfaces on the router where I'm peering in the "out" direction (read: leaving my network). Now explain to me how the fucking transport protocol has anything to do with blocking that traffic based on source address? None what-so-fucking-ever.
Now let's say Customer Y comes along and says: Hey, I'd like to buy internet service from you. I've got my own portable address space and here's an LOA and I want you to announce it for me. You say, no problem! You connect their equipment, peer with them via BGP using their private/public AS. Then, you go back to your ACL on your routers and you add this line:
permit ip [my network address range] [my network mask] any
permit ip [my customers network range] [my customers network range mask] any
deny any any
It's the default BIND configuration, unless they've changed it recently. If you take a (at least CentOS/RHEL) linux machine, install BIND and turn it on, you're now an open recursive resolver. I don't know if it's the distro's default bind configuration or if it's the one that ships from ISC when the package maintainers built the RPM, or what. It's your responsibility to write a bind ACL to restrict recursive resolution to particular subnets or secure it in some other way (rate limiting, etc).
Completely irrelevant. If I call my friends faggots as a joke, does that make it less offensive to homosexual men? It's clearly an offensive word to homosexual men. The word "assclown" is tasteless at best and grossly discriminatory at worst.
1. One whose stupidity and/or ineptitude exceeds the descriptive potential of both the terms ass and clown in isolation, and in so doing demands to be referred to as the conjugate of the two. 2. A male who engages in homosexual behaviors.
What definition of UAV are you using? It just stands for unmanned aerial vehicle. What part of that implies automation? A paper airplane is an unmanned aerial vehicle. But even with that said, I think you underestimate the amount of "automation" that's built into stabilizing these things inside the flight controller.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law
relating to the incorporation of unmanned aircraft systems into
Federal Aviation Administration plans and policies, including this
subtitle, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration
may not promulgate any rule or regulation regarding a model
aircraft, or an aircraft being developed as a model aircraft, if—
(1) the aircraft is flown strictly for hobby or recreational
use;
So they had to get the FAA waiver, because it's not for hobby/recreational use.
Pluses for the Quads are: they fly very much like a coaxial machine, they have the "do it yourself" build element that you can't achieve with a helicopter, they are a good stable aerial photography platform at a reasonable cost, the control software is open source (have a look at the diydrones.com or multiwiicopter.com sites), they can be fitted with a variety of low cost sensors (GPS, Magnetometer, Barometer, Accelerometer, Gyro etc) to link with the Aurdino board, they can take off and land on a dime, are somewhat insensitive to wind, and finally they gives a good flying platform to experiement with FPV and autopilot programming to make it behave like a drone. A well built Quad should give you a 10 min flight time.
On the minus side, they are not really for doing serious aerobatics like a collective pitch heli ( though you can see people looping them) and when a motor craps out it all falls out of the sky. A 6 or 8 motor multicopter is less sensitive to the motor failure issue. Finally the visual cues are a real bugger with a multicopter. What is forward and what is backwards, sideways. It is easy to get it wrong.
All good fun though.
Phil
That's a good point about motor failure. Not only is the vehicle itself expensive, so is the camera it's carrying.
Being both a bit of a cinematographer and an R/C heli pilot, let me see if I can clear this up.
As far as consumer-level helicopters go, the multi-rotor copters are much easier to fly and much more stable. However, their stability works against them outdoors when you need a fast, responsive helicopter to deal with any wind. While the multi-rotor helis can fly outdoors, they will fly ONLY if there is ZERO wind. (Trust me; I know.)
The multi-rotors are good for first learning how to fly, but they get boring fast once you get good on the sticks.
The key thing to remember with helicopters is that they are inherently unstable. This means if you take your hands off the sticks for even one second to scratch your nose or slap a mosquito, you WILL crash. (Trust me; if you think I am kidding, go fly a single-rotor helicopter outside and just see if you can scratch your nose!)
Therefore, unless you are getting into the commercial end of the market, the only helicopter that will work for your purposes is a single-rotor with the traditional tail rotor blade. Consumer-level multi-rotor helicopters will NOT work unless all your flying is indoors.
The other thing to remember is that learning to fly a radio-control helicopter is actually HARDER to fly than the real thing. (I fly both.) The learning curve is VERY VERY steep. Most people try it, crash a few times and give it up. It takes a LOT of work. (It is a lot like learning to ride a unicycle... blind... with a nest of wasps on your head...)
The nice thing though is that once you start to 'get' it on the controls, it is a lot of fun... and next thing you know you will have 10 different helicopters in your basement and try to think of ways to sneak your latest purchase past your wife.
(Wife: "Why do you need all these helicopters for anyway? You can only fly one - badly, by the way - at a time?"
Moi: "Well, you have more than one pair of shoes don't you, and you can only wear one pair of shoes at a time?"
Wife: "Call me when you can fly as good with your helicopter as I can walk with my shoes!"
Moi: "D'oh!")
There is a reason why the helicopter is referred to as the "crack cocaine of the R/C world."
As someone who owns a couple of RC Helis (including a blade eflite 450) I can absolutely back up what's he's saying. Literally scratching your nose can result in a crash if you're not careful. I've never flown a multi-rotor copter, so I can't comment on that.
Maybe it's much easier to write software to stabilize a multirotor copter so the video is better? Possibly less vibration from lots of small rotors? I don't know, it's a really good question actually. It seems like multirotor copters are the vastly preferred platform for video.
Holy shit, thank you so much for this. I've been trying to find the actual law that regulates model aircraft forever. All I could ever find was the AMA "guidance".
"Can't see the additional detail so why give up battery life to drive more pixels."
Compared to what? The S3? It's a larger screen so the resolution had to be increased to try and keep a similar (or I assume, better) pixel density. Otherwise it would have looked worse.
The problem is the millions of people who are incapable of "looking out for themselves". Those are the machines that compromise the botnets spewing spam, brute forcing services and scanning for new nodes to add to the hive collective. If everyone was like you or I, this would be a non-issue.
No, we won't. We can't "lose control of the internet". We control the root nameservers, the majority anyway. The only thing close to this would be for the rest of the world to build their own Internet separate from the US Internet. Great! Please do! Good riddance! We'd still be connected to Europe of course, and hopefully Australia and Japan and the rest of the world can take a long walk off a short pier.
Oh, how about this one. Start a program where every year you find the most prominent ad (presumably the company who paid the MOST) then everyone in town takes their phone book and "delivers" it to the business's parking lot. If the court say it's not littering then we can't get in trouble -- right? Do this for a couple years and I think most people would be scared to death to advertise in the Yellow Pages.
It's not littering, people have tried to use that argument before. The best solution is to just cut off the money. Refuse to do business with anyone that advertises in the Yellow Pages.
Of course, but I'm not sure how that's relevant. We're talking about correlating gun ownership to overall crime. The post I replied to said because the US had more guns, they had more ROBBERIES and RAPES. Turns out, England has more of both!
Slashdot Mirror
That's the stupidest thing I've read in a while. We're filtering IP traffic, the layer 4 protocol is completely fucking irrelevant. The tier2/tier3 carriers should be filtering egress traffic based on the network address space they announce to their upstream peers.
Let's say I'm an ISP, Acme Internet. I purchase bandwidth from AT&T and Cogent and SWIP some address space from ARIN and get myself a portable AS. Now I peer via BGP with AT&T and Cogent and announce my new address space and AS. Now I go to the interfaces where that BGP peering takes place and I write an ACL that looks like this:
permit ip [my network address range] [my network mask] any
deny any
Then I apply it to the interfaces on the router where I'm peering in the "out" direction (read: leaving my network). Now explain to me how the fucking transport protocol has anything to do with blocking that traffic based on source address? None what-so-fucking-ever.
Now let's say Customer Y comes along and says: Hey, I'd like to buy internet service from you. I've got my own portable address space and here's an LOA and I want you to announce it for me. You say, no problem! You connect their equipment, peer with them via BGP using their private/public AS. Then, you go back to your ACL on your routers and you add this line:
permit ip [my network address range] [my network mask] any
permit ip [my customers network range] [my customers network range mask] any
deny any any
It's the default BIND configuration, unless they've changed it recently. If you take a (at least CentOS/RHEL) linux machine, install BIND and turn it on, you're now an open recursive resolver. I don't know if it's the distro's default bind configuration or if it's the one that ships from ISC when the package maintainers built the RPM, or what. It's your responsibility to write a bind ACL to restrict recursive resolution to particular subnets or secure it in some other way (rate limiting, etc).
After 20 years of professional Visual Basic programmers this sort of thing doesn't really surprise me anymore.
Completely irrelevant. If I call my friends faggots as a joke, does that make it less offensive to homosexual men? It's clearly an offensive word to homosexual men. The word "assclown" is tasteless at best and grossly discriminatory at worst.
How are you going to enforce this?
The same way we do now, I suppose?
1. One whose stupidity and/or ineptitude exceeds the descriptive potential of both the terms ass and clown in isolation, and in so doing demands to be referred to as the conjugate of the two. 2. A male who engages in homosexual behaviors.
PyCon isn't a conference for professionals. It's a python conference. Some professional python programmers attend.
What definition of UAV are you using? It just stands for unmanned aerial vehicle. What part of that implies automation? A paper airplane is an unmanned aerial vehicle. But even with that said, I think you underestimate the amount of "automation" that's built into stabilizing these things inside the flight controller.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law relating to the incorporation of unmanned aircraft systems into Federal Aviation Administration plans and policies, including this subtitle, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration may not promulgate any rule or regulation regarding a model aircraft, or an aircraft being developed as a model aircraft, if— (1) the aircraft is flown strictly for hobby or recreational use;
So they had to get the FAA waiver, because it's not for hobby/recreational use.
http://www.helifreak.com/showthread.php?t=376123
Pluses for the Quads are: they fly very much like a coaxial machine, they have the "do it yourself" build element that you can't achieve with a helicopter, they are a good stable aerial photography platform at a reasonable cost, the control software is open source (have a look at the diydrones.com or multiwiicopter.com sites), they can be fitted with a variety of low cost sensors (GPS, Magnetometer, Barometer, Accelerometer, Gyro etc) to link with the Aurdino board, they can take off and land on a dime, are somewhat insensitive to wind, and finally they gives a good flying platform to experiement with FPV and autopilot programming to make it behave like a drone. A well built Quad should give you a 10 min flight time. On the minus side, they are not really for doing serious aerobatics like a collective pitch heli ( though you can see people looping them) and when a motor craps out it all falls out of the sky. A 6 or 8 motor multicopter is less sensitive to the motor failure issue. Finally the visual cues are a real bugger with a multicopter. What is forward and what is backwards, sideways. It is easy to get it wrong. All good fun though. Phil
That's a good point about motor failure. Not only is the vehicle itself expensive, so is the camera it's carrying.
http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/micro-pov-camera-systems/488817-r-c-helicopter-vs-quad-fpv-camera-flight.html
Being both a bit of a cinematographer and an R/C heli pilot, let me see if I can clear this up. As far as consumer-level helicopters go, the multi-rotor copters are much easier to fly and much more stable. However, their stability works against them outdoors when you need a fast, responsive helicopter to deal with any wind. While the multi-rotor helis can fly outdoors, they will fly ONLY if there is ZERO wind. (Trust me; I know.) The multi-rotors are good for first learning how to fly, but they get boring fast once you get good on the sticks. The key thing to remember with helicopters is that they are inherently unstable. This means if you take your hands off the sticks for even one second to scratch your nose or slap a mosquito, you WILL crash. (Trust me; if you think I am kidding, go fly a single-rotor helicopter outside and just see if you can scratch your nose!) Therefore, unless you are getting into the commercial end of the market, the only helicopter that will work for your purposes is a single-rotor with the traditional tail rotor blade. Consumer-level multi-rotor helicopters will NOT work unless all your flying is indoors. The other thing to remember is that learning to fly a radio-control helicopter is actually HARDER to fly than the real thing. (I fly both.) The learning curve is VERY VERY steep. Most people try it, crash a few times and give it up. It takes a LOT of work. (It is a lot like learning to ride a unicycle ... blind ... with a nest of wasps on your head ...)
The nice thing though is that once you start to 'get' it on the controls, it is a lot of fun ... and next thing you know you will have 10 different helicopters in your basement and try to think of ways to sneak your latest purchase past your wife.
(Wife: "Why do you need all these helicopters for anyway? You can only fly one - badly, by the way - at a time?"
Moi: "Well, you have more than one pair of shoes don't you, and you can only wear one pair of shoes at a time?"
Wife: "Call me when you can fly as good with your helicopter as I can walk with my shoes!"
Moi: "D'oh!")
There is a reason why the helicopter is referred to as the "crack cocaine of the R/C world."
As someone who owns a couple of RC Helis (including a blade eflite 450) I can absolutely back up what's he's saying. Literally scratching your nose can result in a crash if you're not careful. I've never flown a multi-rotor copter, so I can't comment on that.
Maybe it's much easier to write software to stabilize a multirotor copter so the video is better? Possibly less vibration from lots of small rotors? I don't know, it's a really good question actually. It seems like multirotor copters are the vastly preferred platform for video.
Holy shit, thank you so much for this. I've been trying to find the actual law that regulates model aircraft forever. All I could ever find was the AMA "guidance".
"Can't see the additional detail so why give up battery life to drive more pixels." Compared to what? The S3? It's a larger screen so the resolution had to be increased to try and keep a similar (or I assume, better) pixel density. Otherwise it would have looked worse.
The problem is the millions of people who are incapable of "looking out for themselves". Those are the machines that compromise the botnets spewing spam, brute forcing services and scanning for new nodes to add to the hive collective. If everyone was like you or I, this would be a non-issue.
No, we won't. We can't "lose control of the internet". We control the root nameservers, the majority anyway. The only thing close to this would be for the rest of the world to build their own Internet separate from the US Internet. Great! Please do! Good riddance! We'd still be connected to Europe of course, and hopefully Australia and Japan and the rest of the world can take a long walk off a short pier.
You should try that, and then use the Yellowpages delivery as a precedent. Maybe we can convince the courts to reconsider their position.
Is this a portrait-landscape-portrait setup? Got any pictures to share? I'm considering going from 2x24 to some type of 3x setup in PLP.
Oh, how about this one. Start a program where every year you find the most prominent ad (presumably the company who paid the MOST) then everyone in town takes their phone book and "delivers" it to the business's parking lot. If the court say it's not littering then we can't get in trouble -- right? Do this for a couple years and I think most people would be scared to death to advertise in the Yellow Pages.
It really comes down to the perspective. To you it's trash and littering, to them its a product being delivered.
There is no other way to describe it.
Sure there is -- "delivery".
It's not littering, people have tried to use that argument before. The best solution is to just cut off the money. Refuse to do business with anyone that advertises in the Yellow Pages.
Of course, but I'm not sure how that's relevant. We're talking about correlating gun ownership to overall crime. The post I replied to said because the US had more guns, they had more ROBBERIES and RAPES. Turns out, England has more of both!
http://www.reddit.com/r/battlestations
Great place to get some ideas and inspiration for your home setup.
That's my point exactly. Correlating gun ownership to these crimes makes ZERO sense.