The claim was "allowing nearly the entire globe to receive an accurate time signal..."
Even with no path length variation, good luck determining the path length to any specific location to micrometers in order to correct for the delay. Good luck doing so even within 15 meters (50 ns).
Using long term averaging, one might get frequency accuracy close to the claim, but not time (unless you have a hydrogen maser, I suppose). GPS is the best global time time distribution system available. If you look at BIPM Circular T, even national time labs have a hard time tracking UTC within 100 ns over a month. So, if you get GPS time accurate to 50 ns, (which is base off UTC(USNO), you're doing well.
The other factor is that the time isn't actually known until after the fact - UTC is a weighted average. UTC(NIST), which is what's being broadcast, can differ by ~4e-8/s (~40 ns) from the actual time, a billion times worse than the claim.
WWVB time propagation isn't accurate to 1.4 e-14, as stated. The souce might be, but propagation delays and variability make it so you can get nowhere close to that upon reception. GPS is better in all respects, other than perhaps reception in some particular locations.
Both sources said the calls were being made to the witness. The courtroom was seeing the prosecutor's screen. I'm pretty sure the calls were being made to the prosecutor's account, not the witness's.
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.
- Article II, Section 1.
He's usurping the Constitution by illegally spying on US citizens, and by failing to perform his primary duty - to execute the law as required.
...he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed...
No direct criticism of the summary, it was following the terminology in the article.
Just a case of MSM not editing or understanding what they're reporting on.
I could also complain about claiming an "invention" (it's really a discovery - nothing new found or created, just a new [?] application of something already known), but I'm not sure where that claim came from.
The summary and article are incorrect. The Peltier effect is converting a voltage difference into a temperature difference. In this case, it is the Seebeck effect being used to convert a temperature difference into a voltage difference. So-called "Peltier devices" can work both ways, but aren't typically called thermocouples ("thermocouple" usually used for a device intended to convert temperature to voltage), even if they are in strictly technical terms.
The Seebeck effect was discovered first, so referring to it as the Peltier effect should be considered inappropriate (if not insulting to Thomas Johann Seebeck).
No. ROMs are manufactured with their data. Perhaps you're thinking of PROMs, which can be programmed (written to) once.
But, the GP is still incorrect - flash or eeprom are made to support change. A particular version of OS/software is not a ROM. Maybe ROP (read-only programming) or something similar, but ROM references the physical memory, not what's stored in it.
You're being disingenuous. What might be metadata about an SMS or data connection, isn't "we only collect metadata on your phone calls."
The tracking data provide by all of this stands alone - just be honest and admit it. The term "metadata" is not being used with the public in its formal sense, but to hide the fact that a vast amount of personal data is being collected with illegitimate warrants.
I suspect (without seeing the actual data provided), that it includes information associated not only with calls, but SMSs and data usage, perhaps even cell tower registration where there's no user communication. If so, then they're not just collecting "call metadata."
Nope. It's metadata only in very specific reference to phone calls. In every other sense, it's data, pure and simple. It's data in terms of location tracking. If you had tracking information from a GPS, that would be data. If they were tracking you by machine reading license plates, taken from security camera, that would be data. If they followed you around and recorded your location, that would be data. Just because the tracking info comes from a cell provider's records, doesn't make it any less than tracking data.
When they say they're only collecting "metadata, not the calls themselves," they're being deliberately, disingenuously, misleading.
People confuse unlocked bootloaders with rooted phones because they're closely related in practice. What's your excuse for calling software which can be loaded onto flash memory a "rom" (Read Only Memory)?
Slashdot Mirror
"Once you correct for the speed-of-light delay for the distance between you and Fort Collins, WWVB results are highly accurate and repeatable. "
But the only way to do that is to have a better time source to begin with. And if you have that, why do you need WWVB?
Good point. Better if it had said "more than 99% under budget."
Mostly using GPS.
NIST changed the broadcast format to include some phase modulation.
The claim was "allowing nearly the entire globe to receive an accurate time signal..."
Even with no path length variation, good luck determining the path length to any specific location to micrometers in order to correct for the delay. Good luck doing so even within 15 meters (50 ns).
Using long term averaging, one might get frequency accuracy close to the claim, but not time (unless you have a hydrogen maser, I suppose). GPS is the best global time time distribution system available. If you look at BIPM Circular T, even national time labs have a hard time tracking UTC within 100 ns over a month. So, if you get GPS time accurate to 50 ns, (which is base off UTC(USNO), you're doing well.
The other factor is that the time isn't actually known until after the fact - UTC is a weighted average. UTC(NIST), which is what's being broadcast, can differ by ~4e-8/s (~40 ns) from the actual time, a billion times worse than the claim.
ntp
WWVB time propagation isn't accurate to 1.4 e-14, as stated. The souce might be, but propagation delays and variability make it so you can get nowhere close to that upon reception. GPS is better in all respects, other than perhaps reception in some particular locations.
45.45 bps Baudot.
Both sources said the calls were being made to the witness. The courtroom was seeing the prosecutor's screen. I'm pretty sure the calls were being made to the prosecutor's account, not the witness's.
" I don't see Bruce complaining about UPS, FedEx, etc. doing the same. Get over it"
Try to send something anonymously through one of those. See the difference?
You forgot the Indiana Jones exception.
- Article II, Section 1.
He's usurping the Constitution by illegally spying on US citizens, and by failing to perform his primary duty - to execute the law as required.
- Article II, Section 3.
Is this delay specifically authorized by the law, or is the Obama administration simply going to fail to uphold a law they pushed to get passed?
No direct criticism of the summary, it was following the terminology in the article.
Just a case of MSM not editing or understanding what they're reporting on.
I could also complain about claiming an "invention" (it's really a discovery - nothing new found or created, just a new [?] application of something already known), but I'm not sure where that claim came from.
That seems like the definition of "cross purposes" to me. Go figure, them wasting all the transmission losses.
The summary and article are incorrect. The Peltier effect is converting a voltage difference into a temperature difference. In this case, it is the Seebeck effect being used to convert a temperature difference into a voltage difference. So-called "Peltier devices" can work both ways, but aren't typically called thermocouples ("thermocouple" usually used for a device intended to convert temperature to voltage), even if they are in strictly technical terms.
The Seebeck effect was discovered first, so referring to it as the Peltier effect should be considered inappropriate (if not insulting to Thomas Johann Seebeck).
No. ROMs are manufactured with their data. Perhaps you're thinking of PROMs, which can be programmed (written to) once.
But, the GP is still incorrect - flash or eeprom are made to support change. A particular version of OS/software is not a ROM. Maybe ROP (read-only programming) or something similar, but ROM references the physical memory, not what's stored in it.
Fortunately, they have batteries. Unfortunately, they're not replaceable.
You're being disingenuous. What might be metadata about an SMS or data connection, isn't "we only collect metadata on your phone calls."
The tracking data provide by all of this stands alone - just be honest and admit it. The term "metadata" is not being used with the public in its formal sense, but to hide the fact that a vast amount of personal data is being collected with illegitimate warrants.
"Which would be the case here, right? Talking about phone calls and all?"
RTFA. In the case here, the data included information on not only telephone calls, but SMS and data connections.
linky
I suspect (without seeing the actual data provided), that it includes information associated not only with calls, but SMSs and data usage, perhaps even cell tower registration where there's no user communication. If so, then they're not just collecting "call metadata."
Nope. It's metadata only in very specific reference to phone calls. In every other sense, it's data, pure and simple. It's data in terms of location tracking. If you had tracking information from a GPS, that would be data. If they were tracking you by machine reading license plates, taken from security camera, that would be data. If they followed you around and recorded your location, that would be data. Just because the tracking info comes from a cell provider's records, doesn't make it any less than tracking data.
When they say they're only collecting "metadata, not the calls themselves," they're being deliberately, disingenuously, misleading.
People confuse unlocked bootloaders with rooted phones because they're closely related in practice. What's your excuse for calling software which can be loaded onto flash memory a "rom" (Read Only Memory)?
The NSA would like to thank Motorola for their cooperation.
I'm thinking more about how Futurama got it wrong.