"won't be used to increase the ratio of flights-per-controller" The article directly states that this will increase the amount of traffic that can be handled, so yes, I am almost certain individual controller traffic will increase. This is totally in line with providing ATC with all kinds of tools over the past century from analog radar and vhf radios to computerized traffic tracking systems.
The article still is not about replacing controllers with AI software.
No, the title asks if AI software and cameras replace a tower. It does not say replace controllers or create AI ATC. The article itself refers to enhancing controller information with AI analysis of remote sensing and replacing a local tower with cameras which feed to a remote ACC.
I think people just assume that removing a physical structure means replacing the people with computers. Nothing actually says that; not stated and not implied.
A lot of misreading going on. Replacing the tower with remote sensing is not replacing the controller. Instead, the controller moves to an area control centre and deals with screens instead of glass windows.
Really two stories here: automated queue event notification, and remote tower operations.
The AI system is an improvement on existing queue software that is already in use. The system may indicate that a clearance enabling event has occurred but ATC still has to provide the clearance to the aircraft in question. The AI part is analysis of sensor inputs to provide queue info to ATC. The expected performance improvement should allow inbound aircraft to bunch up more, and increase the rate of takeoffs.
I did not get that they are replacing controllers. They are providing additional tools and remote sensing. The system does not provide automated clearances to pilots as far as I understand it.
"Views from the cameras will be fed into an artificial intelligence platform from Canada’s Searidge Technologies Inc. that will interpret the images and reveal to controllers when a particular aircraft has cleared the runway, allowing them to clear the next flight to come in to land."
Uh, not about replacing ATC's. It is about providing better information tools and replacing local towers with remote sensing. It still all feeds to controllers who sit in a quiet control centre environment instead of in a tower. They have screens with camera displays and sensor information instead of windows and binoculars. Hopefully this eliminates blind spots that all local towers suffer from.
Remote ATC and automated air traffic queue systems have been around for decades. I would view this as an incremental improvement of existing systems and processes.
Remote ATC has been in operation for at least 50 years. This is just a natural extension of existing operations. For example: the Edmonton FIR (maybe world's largest) uses remote VHF transceivers to provide direct control of Northern locations. The controller is in Edmonton but talks directly to traffic in the Yukon, NW, and Nunavet Territories.
High definition cameras may provide better operational coverage than a local tower. There is a real opportunity to integrate infrared sensing and ground radar systems to provide useful information even in bad weather. Control of ground operations in a busy airport can be a nightmare with unexpected and asynchronous events causing all sorts of problems. Replacing the glass window and binoculars with screens may reduce environmental distractions and lower controller anxiety. Good information and no blind spots goes a long way to improving safety.
Once the tower controller's view is changed from a window to a screen, it really doesn't matter where the controller sits as long as the communication link is reliable and has low latency. As always, better networks create opportunities for new services.
Remote presence tech is well established. This is no surprise.
Though at least the cost isn't large, because AFAIK there is no license fee for Widevine. It does add some complexity to the device manufacturing process because keys have to be injected, but on a per-unit basis that's negligible.
True this. Last time I had anything to do with Widevine was before Google. Still becomes part of the streaming infrastructure and is both an implementation cost and ongoing expense.
This level of protection is valuable too. For unprotected content it will likely be stolen from your cdns - you will pay for storage and transfer but someone else will get revenue by offering this content on their site/app. Also widevine is free outside of initial implementation dev time.
Yes. Let's make sure the pipe does not leak while pumping everything into an open bucket.
Recording is trivial. Near real time re-streaming is easy.
Initial implementation and ongoing support can be expensive but you are right, Google has made Widevine effectively free to use. More being seen to protect; a political issue of particular importance to Google.
Widevine is used on stream transport and you almost certainly have watched something that was wrapped & unwrapped by their DRM code. Unlikely you will ever run across a consumer product that says "Widevine enabled".
And this break means that the termination condition on those contracts is triggered and people without the latest hardware lose their legitimate access to the content.
Uh, no.
I don't think there are any delusions at the executive level and this certainly does nothing to contracts. Stream DRM is demanded by contract. This is a boiler plate thing about being seen to protect. The headend does their bit to implement DRM and delivers the protected stream to the user end point; c'est fini.
What hardware issues? Either ignore the issue (unlikely, although this is not a high value exploit), or patch the code and move on.
No service disruption; no revenue disruption.
The interesting aspect of this story is the amateur implementation at L3. Raises questions about the rest of their code but again: who the hell cares? It does nothing anyways.
With respect to piracy of entertainment streams, what does it matter when HDCP is so eminently hackable? Widevine has been around forever and has not made any difference to unauthorized recording and distribution of video and audio.
Widevine protects the stream down to the user's endpoint where it is conveniently stripped of any effective protection. I don't see how the entire stream path can ever be completely locked down.
Widevine exists only to satisfy contract demands by content providers to protect the streams. Lot$ spent (and passed on to the consumer) to do nothing.
I think it is a mistake to say virtual currencies have no relationship to economic size. Bitcoin may not be tied to any particular national economy but it is certainly tied to a virtual economy where Bitcoins characteristics are valued. This economy is only "virtual" in that it is not defined by any particular national borders or nationally defined economic output. The economy that is the productivity tied to bitcoin transactions is very real, just hard to pin down and count separately from non-bitcoin transactions.
It does lack a central bank controlling currency production but the supply side is limited by difficulty of production which in turn seems to be tied to power and infrastructure cost. Perhaps a bit of a worry.
I don't know who said it first, I thought it was Galbraith but apparently not. Similar quotes abound in economic literature. It is a phrase that likely has been around since the day money was first substituted for barter exchange.
The value of any currency is tied to the belief that if it is accepted for payment today then it will be accepted tomorrow.
That's it. Nothing else.
The belief that currency value must be supported by some physical item such as gold has long been shown to be false. It is all about the actors in the market having confidence in the exchange unit. A currency probably does not even need the original national source to continue as a unit of trade.
It helps if the currency has certain usability characteristics such as the ability to be used without difficulty. Demand, and therefor value, is driven upwards if it has characteristics desired by market place traders. If the market no longer demands the bitcoin characteristics that set it apart from government backed national currencies, then the demand for it will fall.
An "appraisal" is a supposedly independent valuation of the home and is required by the mortgage lender. They want to make sure that if the loan ends up in default they can get their money back out of it. It might be a stretch to call value appraisals a scam but it is a kind of financial voodoo; the appraiser tries to guess what the open market value of a home is. Markets float up and down, and a home is only worth what someone is willing to pay. I don't see anything wrong with pulling the human out of the equation.
Maybe not a scam or voodoo, but certainly CYA for the mortgage approver. (Cover Your Ass)
A home inspection service is optional and is usually paid for by the buyer. It's purpose is to ensure that the home meets code and is sound. They look for things like wiring, wood rot, plumbing, etc.
I don't know about the US but in Canada there is also a "real property report" or RPR which is produced by a licensed/registered land surveyor. It shows the boundaries of the property and the location of all structures. It's purpose is to show that all structures on the property are compliant with local bylaws especially regarding encroachment on boundaries. That is, most municipalities will have rules about how close a structure like a detached garage, permanent out building, or deck, may be to the property line. The purchaser usually makes the seller produce an RPR as part of the condition of sale.
Hardly sending anonymously. Last I looked at an iPhone, their interface totally hides the ability to determine the true sender of an email, and they do that purposefully.
Certainly should be fixed and leads to questions about what else is lurking in the code. On the severity side seems low; just another method available for phishing.
Machine code on a PDP-8 at Tech school then ASM then MACRO then FOCAL, Fortran, and Basic along with MACRO-11 (& TECO) and an understanding of the 11's microcode.
However, the province has no jurisdiction over internet providers and their networks even if the ISP has it's servers in the province. Ottawa has jurisdiction; end of story.
Slashdot Mirror
Pretty much sure. Yeah. Read the article.
"won't be used to increase the ratio of flights-per-controller"
The article directly states that this will increase the amount of traffic that can be handled, so yes, I am almost certain individual controller traffic will increase. This is totally in line with providing ATC with all kinds of tools over the past century from analog radar and vhf radios to computerized traffic tracking systems.
The article still is not about replacing controllers with AI software.
So some consolidation may occur, what of it. The workload is what it is whether at a local tower location or at a remote ACC.
The point is that this is not AI software replacing humans. Good grief, get a grip.
Yeah, "AI" is now a meaningless marketing term instead of a meaningless computing term.
No, the title asks if AI software and cameras replace a tower. It does not say replace controllers or create AI ATC. The article itself refers to enhancing controller information with AI analysis of remote sensing and replacing a local tower with cameras which feed to a remote ACC.
I think people just assume that removing a physical structure means replacing the people with computers. Nothing actually says that; not stated and not implied.
A lot of misreading going on. Replacing the tower with remote sensing is not replacing the controller. Instead, the controller moves to an area control centre and deals with screens instead of glass windows.
Really two stories here: automated queue event notification, and remote tower operations.
The AI system is an improvement on existing queue software that is already in use. The system may indicate that a clearance enabling event has occurred but ATC still has to provide the clearance to the aircraft in question. The AI part is analysis of sensor inputs to provide queue info to ATC. The expected performance improvement should allow inbound aircraft to bunch up more, and increase the rate of takeoffs.
Not revolutionary by any means.
I did not get that they are replacing controllers. They are providing additional tools and remote sensing. The system does not provide automated clearances to pilots as far as I understand it.
"Views from the cameras will be fed into an artificial intelligence platform from Canada’s Searidge Technologies Inc. that will interpret the images and reveal to controllers when a particular aircraft has cleared the runway, allowing them to clear the next flight to come in to land."
Uh, not about replacing ATC's. It is about providing better information tools and replacing local towers with remote sensing. It still all feeds to controllers who sit in a quiet control centre environment instead of in a tower. They have screens with camera displays and sensor information instead of windows and binoculars. Hopefully this eliminates blind spots that all local towers suffer from.
Remote ATC and automated air traffic queue systems have been around for decades. I would view this as an incremental improvement of existing systems and processes.
Remote ATC has been in operation for at least 50 years. This is just a natural extension of existing operations. For example: the Edmonton FIR (maybe world's largest) uses remote VHF transceivers to provide direct control of Northern locations. The controller is in Edmonton but talks directly to traffic in the Yukon, NW, and Nunavet Territories.
High definition cameras may provide better operational coverage than a local tower. There is a real opportunity to integrate infrared sensing and ground radar systems to provide useful information even in bad weather. Control of ground operations in a busy airport can be a nightmare with unexpected and asynchronous events causing all sorts of problems. Replacing the glass window and binoculars with screens may reduce environmental distractions and lower controller anxiety. Good information and no blind spots goes a long way to improving safety.
Once the tower controller's view is changed from a window to a screen, it really doesn't matter where the controller sits as long as the communication link is reliable and has low latency. As always, better networks create opportunities for new services.
Remote presence tech is well established. This is no surprise.
If you use any IPTV service then you have had content wrapped with Widevine
RE: desire to use raw stream vs hdmi output
True enough from the viewpoint of a purist.
With respect to piracy, inability to grab the raw stream is of almost zero significance as long as there is a hackable end point.
Though at least the cost isn't large, because AFAIK there is no license fee for Widevine. It does add some complexity to the device manufacturing process because keys have to be injected, but on a per-unit basis that's negligible.
True this. Last time I had anything to do with Widevine was before Google. Still becomes part of the streaming infrastructure and is both an implementation cost and ongoing expense.
This level of protection is valuable too. For unprotected content it will likely be stolen from your cdns - you will pay for storage and transfer but someone else will get revenue by offering this content on their site/app.
Also widevine is free outside of initial implementation dev time.
Yes. Let's make sure the pipe does not leak while pumping everything into an open bucket.
Recording is trivial.
Near real time re-streaming is easy.
Initial implementation and ongoing support can be expensive but you are right, Google has made Widevine effectively free to use. More being seen to protect; a political issue of particular importance to Google.
Widevine is used on stream transport and you almost certainly have watched something that was wrapped & unwrapped by their DRM code. Unlikely you will ever run across a consumer product that says "Widevine enabled".
And this break means that the termination condition on those contracts is triggered and people without the latest hardware lose their legitimate access to the content.
Uh, no.
I don't think there are any delusions at the executive level and this certainly does nothing to contracts. Stream DRM is demanded by contract. This is a boiler plate thing about being seen to protect. The headend does their bit to implement DRM and delivers the protected stream to the user end point; c'est fini.
What hardware issues? Either ignore the issue (unlikely, although this is not a high value exploit), or patch the code and move on.
No service disruption; no revenue disruption.
The interesting aspect of this story is the amateur implementation at L3. Raises questions about the rest of their code but again: who the hell cares? It does nothing anyways.
With respect to piracy of entertainment streams, what does it matter when HDCP is so eminently hackable? Widevine has been around forever and has not made any difference to unauthorized recording and distribution of video and audio.
Widevine protects the stream down to the user's endpoint where it is conveniently stripped of any effective protection. I don't see how the entire stream path can ever be completely locked down.
Widevine exists only to satisfy contract demands by content providers to protect the streams. Lot$ spent (and passed on to the consumer) to do nothing.
I think it is a mistake to say virtual currencies have no relationship to economic size. Bitcoin may not be tied to any particular national economy but it is certainly tied to a virtual economy where Bitcoins characteristics are valued. This economy is only "virtual" in that it is not defined by any particular national borders or nationally defined economic output. The economy that is the productivity tied to bitcoin transactions is very real, just hard to pin down and count separately from non-bitcoin transactions.
It does lack a central bank controlling currency production but the supply side is limited by difficulty of production which in turn seems to be tied to power and infrastructure cost. Perhaps a bit of a worry.
Money is just an idea backed by confidence.
I don't know who said it first, I thought it was Galbraith but apparently not. Similar quotes abound in economic literature. It is a phrase that likely has been around since the day money was first substituted for barter exchange.
The value of any currency is tied to the belief that if it is accepted for payment today then it will be accepted tomorrow.
That's it. Nothing else.
The belief that currency value must be supported by some physical item such as gold has long been shown to be false. It is all about the actors in the market having confidence in the exchange unit. A currency probably does not even need the original national source to continue as a unit of trade.
It helps if the currency has certain usability characteristics such as the ability to be used without difficulty. Demand, and therefor value, is driven upwards if it has characteristics desired by market place traders. If the market no longer demands the bitcoin characteristics that set it apart from government backed national currencies, then the demand for it will fall.
All currency are "mindset" valued.
An "appraisal" is a supposedly independent valuation of the home and is required by the mortgage lender. They want to make sure that if the loan ends up in default they can get their money back out of it. It might be a stretch to call value appraisals a scam but it is a kind of financial voodoo; the appraiser tries to guess what the open market value of a home is. Markets float up and down, and a home is only worth what someone is willing to pay. I don't see anything wrong with pulling the human out of the equation.
Maybe not a scam or voodoo, but certainly CYA for the mortgage approver. (Cover Your Ass)
A home inspection service is optional and is usually paid for by the buyer. It's purpose is to ensure that the home meets code and is sound. They look for things like wiring, wood rot, plumbing, etc.
I don't know about the US but in Canada there is also a "real property report" or RPR which is produced by a licensed/registered land surveyor. It shows the boundaries of the property and the location of all structures. It's purpose is to show that all structures on the property are compliant with local bylaws especially regarding encroachment on boundaries. That is, most municipalities will have rules about how close a structure like a detached garage, permanent out building, or deck, may be to the property line. The purchaser usually makes the seller produce an RPR as part of the condition of sale.
Hardly sending anonymously. Last I looked at an iPhone, their interface totally hides the ability to determine the true sender of an email, and they do that purposefully.
Certainly should be fixed and leads to questions about what else is lurking in the code. On the severity side seems low; just another method available for phishing.
That's not Linus; the real LT is in an alien pod.
That's Pod Linus
... when in contact with a saline environment it produces crystals of "ice-nine"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
install it in a new sleeve a la "altered carbon"
Die every day and live forever... if you are rich enough.
NO DOUBLE SLEEVING!
... Hobbits are not Orcs.
(apologies to all the Ents out there. You are not as slow as congress.)
Machine code on a PDP-8 at Tech school
then
ASM
then
MACRO
then
FOCAL, Fortran, and Basic along with MACRO-11 (& TECO) and an understanding of the 11's microcode.
then
C
that was magic
Yes. If the gambling site is in QC.
However, the province has no jurisdiction over internet providers and their networks even if the ISP has it's servers in the province. Ottawa has jurisdiction; end of story.