That will be delayed pretty much until drones are an _actual_ danger. That has not happened yet. At the moment it is basically fear of the unknown (birds are a real danger, but nobody seems to care), and fear-mongering for political reasons.
And in actual reality, things were just as safe as normal the whole time, just some fear-mongers and people that what to inflate their own perceived importance saw an opportunity.
You can. The question is how difficult it is and how nice the language you get in addition is. For Python, it is very easy. The only language I know where it is easier is Lua. I will not touch JavaScript with a 10-foot pole...
Indeed. Python is great for glue-code and great for prototyping those C libraries. In particular, you can code almost anything really fast, if speed matters little. Once the code works, you can port the critical parts over to C pretty easily and can use the Python code as the basis for some nice randomized testing or as "contracts" in addition.
That is my point: A lie-detector does not work by detecting lies in general circumstances. It works by making people scared of it, so they either a) do not dare to lie or b) are so very nervous when lying that the thing can actually detect something.
Incidentally, the same mechanism is used in other areas, for example in data-leakage-prevention systems: They are completely useless against anybody competent, but they serve to scare people into thinking they would get caught. That the are frequently set far too sensitive is part of that.
And we have detected a bullshit-campaign. Lie-Detectors do not exist. The only thing that exists is elaborate pseudo-science scams that scare people into thinking their lies could be detected.
Probably some people calculated how much getting this amount of attention would cost them conventionally and found that 100k plus, say, another 100k of work was actually very cheap.
Well, my plan is to go to a Zen-2 next year with a gaming-only Win10. No browsing, no email, no nothing. For that I have a Linux-machine that I can actually trust to not send all my personal stuff and behavior to the vendor and that I can trust to not screw me over at any and all updates.
"Crypto" is short for cryptography, end of story. It is already abbreviated in "cryptocurrency". Also, cryptography is mostly an honorable business, while cryptocurrencies are mostly scam.
Slashdot Mirror
"Isolated single case" = "we screwed up massively, but we are not admitting it"
I highly doubt that. Industrial drones are _expensive_.
That would also explain why there apparently was no real effort finding the drone-controllers.
That will be delayed pretty much until drones are an _actual_ danger. That has not happened yet. At the moment it is basically fear of the unknown (birds are a real danger, but nobody seems to care), and fear-mongering for political reasons.
Naaa, there is no political gain in claiming birds are a danger to planes. Especially because, unlike your average drone, birds _are_ a danger.
... everything would have continued to be safe?
And in actual reality, things were just as safe as normal the whole time, just some fear-mongers and people that what to inflate their own perceived importance saw an opportunity.
You don't. You do get a language that requires some actual skill and knowledge and many doe not have that. Then they blame the tool...
You can. The question is how difficult it is and how nice the language you get in addition is. For Python, it is very easy. The only language I know where it is easier is Lua. I will not touch JavaScript with a 10-foot pole...
If that even matters to you, then you are not a programmer, but just an amateur with a keyboard.
Indeed. Python is great for glue-code and great for prototyping those C libraries. In particular, you can code almost anything really fast, if speed matters little. Once the code works, you can port the critical parts over to C pretty easily and can use the Python code as the basis for some nice randomized testing or as "contracts" in addition.
JRR Tolkien was a Nazi? You seem to be confused...
Naa, the SJW scum think form is much, much more important than function. Pretty much the definition of fundamental incompetence in any tech field.
Obviously, we are moving more towards NewSpeak. It seems nobody reads the classics anymore and the same evil mistakes are getting prevalent again.
That is my point: A lie-detector does not work by detecting lies in general circumstances. It works by making people scared of it, so they either a) do not dare to lie or b) are so very nervous when lying that the thing can actually detect something.
Incidentally, the same mechanism is used in other areas, for example in data-leakage-prevention systems: They are completely useless against anybody competent, but they serve to scare people into thinking they would get caught. That the are frequently set far too sensitive is part of that.
Almost half of all adults are expected to get a nuero-degenerative disease in the course of their life.
And that is the wrong number. How many adults do get brain-surgery? Right...
A slim risk in a rare case is "you get run over a car while crossing a road". Not something that prevents you from crossing roads, is it?
And we have detected a bullshit-campaign. Lie-Detectors do not exist. The only thing that exists is elaborate pseudo-science scams that scare people into thinking their lies could be detected.
Probably some people calculated how much getting this amount of attention would cost them conventionally and found that 100k plus, say, another 100k of work was actually very cheap.
Indeed.
Well, my plan is to go to a Zen-2 next year with a gaming-only Win10. No browsing, no email, no nothing. For that I have a Linux-machine that I can actually trust to not send all my personal stuff and behavior to the vendor and that I can trust to not screw me over at any and all updates.
Seriously, panic much?
"Crypto" is short for cryptography, end of story. It is already abbreviated in "cryptocurrency". Also, cryptography is mostly an honorable business, while cryptocurrencies are mostly scam.
Indeed. Very much so.
No matter. They screwed over their customers the last few years, and hence I will not even remotely consider buying from them now.
Not that there is much "fingerprint" to begin with.
Naa, they ask some random orange used car salesmen personality who he wants to be blamed...