I agree with you with, in principle. Unfortunately, the fact that these technological advances are happening means that a psychopath may have access to these weapons. Not preparing in advance means the psychopath has the upper hand.
On a cessna 150 "Black boxes" will be found only if black boxes were used for luggage.... It's a two seat aircraft (pilot + one other perso), used mostly for recreation. What are popularly called "Black boxes" are mostly used on aircraft that are much larger .
The crusades were a power and money grab by European princes. The excuse was "Let's kill the infidels and take back the cradle of our religion", but the aim was to maintain or gain control over the populace and get land and riches. The sack of Constantinople (capital of a Christian albeit Orthodox state) very much shows this ("Unable to capture lands from the moors ? No problem, let' s plunder these nice fellows that are on the way").
It is NOT "God's" fault (after all, how can an imaginary entity be at fault).
The fault is most certainly on very real people. It is on those who exploit religion and manipulate people to their own ends, and those that, by omission or actively, allow or encourage their allies to exploit it.
The fault lies with the dictators who use it to maintain control, the upstarts that use it to gain control, and also the politicians that close their eyes when someone that is somehow usefull exploits the people this way.
This has been going on forever (ex.s : Rome's state paganism against christianity, islamic invasions of southern europe, The various crusades, the religious schisms and wars in europe, the european fascist states from the 1920 , the "Troubles" in Ireland, the sorry state of affairs in the Middle East, The Talibans/ Al Qaida/ ISIL, the ongoing attempts at intolerant christian polarization in some western countries , Buddhists oppressing the Royingas in Myanmar, etc...)
And when anyone tries to reduce this issue to "Us against Them", is either falling prey to these tyrants or has an agenda.
You have two very successful cases for nation (re)building. Japan and Germany, post WWII. But that involves: - Time (on a scale that people aren't willing to think nowadays). - Money (lots of it). To repair infra-structure, and lots and lots of education. - Be willing to accept that you can't transplant one's political system to very different sociological and psychological conditions. - Be willing to occupy and fully control the geography (which imply there will be casualties) The rewards are immense, as can be witnessed by the stability of Japan and W. Europe since WWII, which allowed the US to reap significant economic and political gains
In contrast you have the disaster of post-soviet invasion Afghanistan (where a lot of money was invested on defeating the USSR, but almost none in helping the resulting "free" country), and the missed opportunity of "war on terror" Afghanistan (where the US got distracted by "OMG Sadam Hussein has WMDs" , and the resources to fully pacify Afghanistan got diverted).
In the development of our current civil aviation environment, it has been found that the following process results in MORE safety. If a certain technology is new: - DO NOT allow widespread operation until such time that RISKS are well UNDERSTOOD and MITIGATED. - Do a comprehensive (which means veeeery lengthy and expensive) test regime - Account for risks (in terms of safety, security, etc...) - Find ways to mitigate risk - Create the relevant regulations - Allow operation within the regulations
This means: NO commercial operations before this process is complete.
All aircraft manufacturers put their new designs (and in most cases , modifications of designs) through a demanding test regime. Not doing so has been proven to be very very (very !!!!) bad ! Reading accident reports from the 1950 will show exactly why this is needed.
In this case, it is not only the design, but the mode of operation, which is significantly different from the remainder of aircraft (routes, density , etc..). Any responsible regulator will be very careful with this.
With regards on commercial delivery operations on territories not under FAA regulations, I believe most advanced countries have the same kind of restrictions. Most of the Civil Aviation authorities of advanced countries, will have regulation regarding experimental aircraft, and these will exclude commercial operations.
All this said, I believe most major Civil Aviation Authorities are looking into comercial drone operations.
Or are we going to have to put up with an idiotically asynchronous connection like we already do with DSL (768K) now?
You probably mean Asymmetric.
I would think consumer and small business Internet access will keep on being asymmetric for the most part, whatever the technology. Most users on those markets are consumers and not producers of data, which means more downloads than uploads.
Combine that with bandwidth being ALWAY scarce, you will have Engineers , network architects, product managers and management designing their products taking that into account.
The market need for a symmetrical or a reverse ratio of uploads to downloads on the consumer segment is minuscule.
So right , I propose a grass roots movement: Citizens agains chemicals on food
We should start with lobying the food industry in order to ban hydrogen and oxygen , those two are EVERYWHERE !!! Think about the children!!!!!111!!!one
I would guess the "everyone" you are refering to is some subset of the countries on the report.
If you look closely, you will see that some put some very stringent limitations on what info can be obtained, when can it be intercepted and by whom. And , gasp , some even report the number of intersections and requests.
Not being a US citizen/resident, it's none of my bussiness what the NSA does in the US, but I do take offence at their actions abroad, specifficaly those that impact MY leaders, MY country and MY liberties.
The Bugatti 100 wasn't a JET , much less an "advanced fighter jet". (Note to the author: Jet isn't synonym with combat aircraft).
It wouldn't be computer controlled . No computers with the right size and speed for controlling an aircraft where available (also, for the size, the control surfaces would be "muscle" powered, as where all aircraft of comparable size and era).
Being on the prototype stage, it would not ever be combat ready and in wide operational use for it to make any difference on the Battle of Britain (The prototypes for the Spitfire and the bf109 had first flights in 1936 and 1935 , operational around 1938 and 1937).
Compared to the previous issues, the "zero-drag cooling system" is of little consequence.
Also, no excuse for the author not being an "expert" on the subject . Some basic fact checking ("oh, look it s got a propeller" or "when was the first flight control computer introduced ?") would keep the piece honest. (but would certainly intrude upon the the sensationalist tone).
If you have to be "polite" because you fear someone shoots you because you may sound "disrespectfull/unfriendly/annoying" the "politeness" is completely hollow and is in fact fear. Social norm would then be "who has the biggest most prominent guns wins/has right of way/is right". Sounds too much like medieval times...
And don't tell me that if everyone has a gun it will be a level playing field. (think weapon, fitness, health, mood, social settings, fear of injuring someone you love or have some responsibility over, etc..., etc..,etc...)
Doesn't that make it even worse ? (and it was the Bolivian President's aircraft, and he wasn't intercepted, was rerouted as overflight clearences were whitdrawn and had is aircraft searched in Vienna ).
Had it been the "Air Force One", there would have been a war....
A dark episode on Europe's foreign relations, now (unfortunately) forgotten.
If a state is willing to strong-arm other states into viollationg international law, diplomatic immunity and common courtesy to an head-of-state, then it certainly only has good intentions....
By the way things are going, the "EU legal system" part may be unavailable some time in the future....
The insistence on exceptionalism with regard to rules that apply to all the remaining member states is starting tho chaffe, and the constant "euro-ceptic" noises are starting to get a different reponse from people I know (It has change from "Why ?" to "Leave already").
The UK public should be aware that some day their government will insist on another exception (threatening to leave if they don't get their way) and they will be told "Then leave". Europe as a political and economic entity will be weaker, the UK will be much much weaker (and it's citizens will loose access to a different legal safety net). The winners will be : China, Russia, etc...
Why should any product (commercial or otherwise) be the future of education ? The future of education isn't on buzzwords/marketing items/products with a limited shelf life. It's on philosophies, methods and concepts.
I Keep seeing this argument "X also does it" , but the proponents seem to forget that other Electronics intelligence agencies don't have the capacity to do data collection on the same scale as the NSA (Not even close). They don't have: - The manpower. - The bilateral agreements with the same number of inteligence agencies - The scale of technical infra-structure - The number of locations where to implement listening posts (military bases, diplomatic posts, comercial entreprises).
This means that they won't have the capability to get the same volume of information as the NSA, and as a consequence, have less access to information they shouldn't have.
For Brazil (which isn't next door to Sweden), this means they will be less intruded on by the FRA than by the NSA.
Yes it is a freedom of speech issue (well , depending on jurisdiction...), which means that people who disagree or feel ofended also have a right to voice their offense and disagreement.
No only that, but she is a professional that deals with Image and relates with the Public. By public, i mean everyone that _may_ have any relation with the company she represents: - Customers - Advertisers - Share holders - Etc....
Some of these will NOT wan't to be associated with that kind of remarks (irrespective of aggreeing with them or not). This reflects directly on that person's professional ability, and also on that person's image, as well as the companies represented.
This makes it a major and very public PROFESSIONAL AND SOCIAL FAIL.
I'm running KDE on Ubuntu 13.04 (installed from the standard dvd download). All i had to do is apt-get the relevant (meta?)package . No need to download the Kubuntu dvd.
Using cables has an enormous advantage: It doesn't foul up the RF spectrum (or not as much as with Radio emitters).
Wireless may be a lot more convenient (in terms of equipment connectivity and installation), but has some serious capacity limitations: - RF spectrum occupancy. (In which they will be in competition with : TV, radio, satellite, baby cams, wifi, Air traffic control, police, the list goes on and on and on...) - Limited number of possible clients for each location and frequency. (if you need to enable access to more endpoints in the same location, you need another set of frequencies. In some cases you will also need both more antennas and more Radio equipment) - Very expensive base station equipment. Energy usage is also a lot lot higher.
Whatever advances you may get in RF that enable more bandwidth, you will almost certainly have the same with cable technologies. It will be a long time (if ever) until we are fully wireless.
Western Europe did have authoritarian governments, right leaning ones, on both Portugal and Spain up to the mid 1970s.
The Portuguese dictatorship, although not as violent and repressive as the Spanish or the East European comunisms (at least on the european portion, the colonies where a whole different thing) was still pretty awfull. Political Police, Imprisonments, internal and external exile, the odd assassination, complete absence of any freedoms of speech, and also a very regimented economic regime. To all this add the behaviour on the colonies (pretty much all of what you have heard from apartheid South Africa).
I certainly do not want a return to those times. "Free speech" is already regulated (of note: slander). Restricting access to the public and civic arenas to those who which to restrict ALL of free speech (and willing to cause serious physical harm to those who opose them) is a necessary evil. Doesn't mean we don't have to be vigilant on how that impacts political and civic life.
Comparing this directly with "constitutional rights" in the US, which has a very different sociological make-up and a VERY different recent history (to both Germany and Portugal) is a non-starter.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree with you with, in principle.
Unfortunately, the fact that these technological advances are happening means that a psychopath may have access to these weapons.
Not preparing in advance means the psychopath has the upper hand.
Pandora's box is permanently open.
On a cessna 150 "Black boxes" will be found only if black boxes were used for luggage....
It's a two seat aircraft (pilot + one other perso), used mostly for recreation.
What are popularly called "Black boxes" are mostly used on aircraft that are much larger .
History ?
How on earth can you call the contents of any religious book history.
They may be part of history, may shape and frame history (as is happening now) .
Maybe story ?
The crusades were a power and money grab by European princes.
The excuse was "Let's kill the infidels and take back the cradle of our religion", but the aim was to maintain or gain control over the populace and get land and riches.
The sack of Constantinople (capital of a Christian albeit Orthodox state) very much shows this ("Unable to capture lands from the moors ? No problem, let' s plunder these nice fellows that are on the way").
Religion as a tool of political control...
Absolutely not.
It is NOT "God's" fault (after all, how can an imaginary entity be at fault).
The fault is most certainly on very real people.
It is on those who exploit religion and manipulate people to their own ends, and those that, by omission or actively, allow or encourage their allies to exploit it.
The fault lies with the dictators who use it to maintain control, the upstarts that use it to gain control, and also the politicians that close their eyes when someone that is somehow usefull exploits the people this way.
This has been going on forever (ex.s : Rome's state paganism against christianity, islamic invasions of southern europe, The various crusades, the religious schisms and wars in europe, the european fascist states from the 1920 , the "Troubles" in Ireland, the sorry state of affairs in the Middle East, The Talibans/ Al Qaida/ ISIL, the ongoing attempts at intolerant christian polarization in some western countries , Buddhists oppressing the Royingas in Myanmar, etc...)
And when anyone tries to reduce this issue to "Us against Them", is either falling prey to these tyrants or has an agenda.
Not entirely correct.
You have two very successful cases for nation (re)building. Japan and Germany, post WWII.
But that involves:
- Time (on a scale that people aren't willing to think nowadays).
- Money (lots of it). To repair infra-structure, and lots and lots of education.
- Be willing to accept that you can't transplant one's political system to very different sociological and psychological conditions.
- Be willing to occupy and fully control the geography (which imply there will be casualties)
The rewards are immense, as can be witnessed by the stability of Japan and W. Europe since WWII, which allowed the US to reap significant economic and political gains
In contrast you have the disaster of post-soviet invasion Afghanistan (where a lot of money was invested on defeating the
USSR, but almost none in helping the resulting "free" country),
and the missed opportunity of "war on terror" Afghanistan (where the US got distracted by "OMG Sadam Hussein has WMDs" ,
and the resources to fully pacify Afghanistan got diverted).
Unless ?
It WILL compete for resources.
At the very least, Energy.
Count also on competition for materials for replication , enhancement of capabilites, and continuation of it's own life (AKA survival).
In the development of our current civil aviation environment, it has been found that the following process results in MORE safety.
If a certain technology is new:
- DO NOT allow widespread operation until such time that RISKS are well UNDERSTOOD and MITIGATED.
- Do a comprehensive (which means veeeery lengthy and expensive) test regime
- Account for risks (in terms of safety, security, etc...)
- Find ways to mitigate risk
- Create the relevant regulations
- Allow operation within the regulations
This means: NO commercial operations before this process is complete.
All aircraft manufacturers put their new designs (and in most cases , modifications of designs) through a demanding test regime.
Not doing so has been proven to be very very (very !!!!) bad !
Reading accident reports from the 1950 will show exactly why this is needed.
In this case, it is not only the design, but the mode of operation, which is significantly different from the remainder of aircraft (routes, density , etc..).
Any responsible regulator will be very careful with this.
With regards on commercial delivery operations on territories not under FAA regulations, I believe most advanced countries have the same kind of restrictions.
Most of the Civil Aviation authorities of advanced countries, will have regulation regarding experimental aircraft, and these will exclude commercial operations.
All this said, I believe most major Civil Aviation Authorities are looking into comercial drone operations.
Or are we going to have to put up with an idiotically asynchronous connection like we already do with DSL (768K) now?
You probably mean Asymmetric.
I would think consumer and small business Internet access will keep on being asymmetric for the most part, whatever the technology.
Most users on those markets are consumers and not producers of data, which means more downloads than uploads.
Combine that with bandwidth being ALWAY scarce, you will have Engineers , network architects, product managers
and management designing their products taking that into account.
The market need for a symmetrical or a reverse ratio of uploads to downloads on the consumer segment is minuscule.
So right , I propose a grass roots movement: Citizens agains chemicals on food
We should start with lobying the food industry in order to ban hydrogen and oxygen , those two are EVERYWHERE !!!
Think about the children!!!!!111!!!one
I would guess the "everyone" you are refering to is some subset of the countries on the report.
If you look closely, you will see that some put some very stringent limitations on what info can be obtained, when can it be intercepted and by whom.
And , gasp , some even report the number of intersections and requests.
Not being a US citizen/resident, it's none of my bussiness what the NSA does in the US, but I do take offence at their actions abroad, specifficaly those that impact MY leaders, MY country and MY liberties.
Unbelievably bad !
The Bugatti 100 wasn't a JET , much less an "advanced fighter jet". (Note to the author: Jet isn't synonym with combat aircraft).
It wouldn't be computer controlled . No computers with the right size and speed for controlling an aircraft where available (also, for the size, the control surfaces would be "muscle" powered, as where all aircraft of comparable size and era).
Being on the prototype stage, it would not ever be combat ready and in wide operational use for it to make any difference on the Battle of Britain (The prototypes for the Spitfire and the bf109 had first flights in 1936 and 1935 , operational around 1938 and 1937).
Compared to the previous issues, the "zero-drag cooling system" is of little consequence.
Also, no excuse for the author not being an "expert" on the subject .
Some basic fact checking ("oh, look it s got a propeller" or "when was the first flight control computer introduced ?") would keep the piece honest. (but would certainly intrude upon the the sensationalist tone).
An armed society is a FEARFULL society. FTFY
If you have to be "polite" because you fear someone shoots you because you may sound "disrespectfull/unfriendly/annoying" the "politeness" is completely hollow and is in fact fear.
Social norm would then be "who has the biggest most prominent guns wins/has right of way/is right".
Sounds too much like medieval times...
And don't tell me that if everyone has a gun it will be a level playing field. (think weapon, fitness, health, mood, social settings, fear of injuring someone you love or have some responsibility over, etc..., etc.. ,etc...)
The fear is that the US may be able to get Snowden's location by backtracing his connection, not what he may be saying.
Inferiority complex much ?
Doesn't that make it even worse ? (and it was the Bolivian President's aircraft, and he wasn't intercepted, was rerouted as overflight clearences were whitdrawn and had is aircraft searched in Vienna ).
Had it been the "Air Force One", there would have been a war....
A dark episode on Europe's foreign relations, now (unfortunately) forgotten.
If a state is willing to strong-arm other states into viollationg international law, diplomatic immunity and common courtesy to an head-of-state, then it certainly only has good intentions....
By the way things are going, the "EU legal system" part may be unavailable some time in the future....
The insistence on exceptionalism with regard to rules that apply to all the remaining member states is starting tho chaffe, and the constant "euro-ceptic" noises are starting to get a different reponse from people I know (It has change from "Why ?" to "Leave already").
The UK public should be aware that some day their government will insist on another exception (threatening to leave if they don't get their way) and they will be told "Then leave". ...
Europe as a political and economic entity will be weaker, the UK will be much much weaker (and it's citizens will loose access to a different legal safety net). The winners will be : China, Russia, etc
Brazil ?!?!
I believe Brazil hasn't any claim over the Falklands/Malvinas (although they support Argentina's claim)
-20 , Title is moronic.
Why should any product (commercial or otherwise) be the future of education ?
The future of education isn't on buzzwords/marketing items/products with a limited shelf life.
It's on philosophies, methods and concepts.
I Keep seeing this argument "X also does it" , but the proponents seem to forget that other Electronics intelligence agencies don't have the capacity to do data collection on the same scale as the NSA (Not even close).
They don't have:
- The manpower.
- The bilateral agreements with the same number of inteligence agencies
- The scale of technical infra-structure
- The number of locations where to implement listening posts (military bases, diplomatic posts, comercial entreprises).
This means that they won't have the capability to get the same volume of information as the NSA, and as a consequence, have less access to information they shouldn't have.
For Brazil (which isn't next door to Sweden), this means they will be less intruded on by the FRA than by the NSA.
As a PR professional she MUST take a really good look at what she says and writes.
If there is even the slightest possibility that it might be mis-interpreted it WILL, and should be stated differently.
Still a fail.
Yes it is a freedom of speech issue (well , depending on jurisdiction...),
which means that people who disagree or feel ofended also have a right to voice their offense and disagreement.
No only that, but she is a professional that deals with Image and relates with the Public.
By public, i mean everyone that _may_ have any relation with the company she represents:
- Customers
- Advertisers
- Share holders
- Etc....
Some of these will NOT wan't to be associated with that kind of remarks (irrespective of aggreeing with them or not).
This reflects directly on that person's professional ability, and also on that person's image, as well as the companies represented.
This makes it a major and very public PROFESSIONAL AND SOCIAL FAIL.
I'm running KDE on Ubuntu 13.04 (installed from the standard dvd download).
All i had to do is apt-get the relevant (meta?)package .
No need to download the Kubuntu dvd.
Everyone knows ?
I don't.
Using cables has an enormous advantage:
It doesn't foul up the RF spectrum (or not as much as with Radio emitters).
Wireless may be a lot more convenient (in terms of equipment connectivity and installation), but has some serious capacity limitations:
- RF spectrum occupancy. (In which they will be in competition with : TV, radio, satellite, baby cams, wifi, Air traffic control, police, the list goes on and on and on...)
- Limited number of possible clients for each location and frequency. (if you need to enable access to more endpoints in the same location, you need another set of frequencies. In some cases you will also need both more antennas and more Radio equipment)
- Very expensive base station equipment.
Energy usage is also a lot lot higher.
Whatever advances you may get in RF that enable more bandwidth, you will almost certainly have the same with cable technologies.
It will be a long time (if ever) until we are fully wireless.
Western Europe did have authoritarian governments, right leaning ones, on both Portugal and Spain up to the mid 1970s.
The Portuguese dictatorship, although not as violent and repressive as the Spanish or the East European comunisms (at least on the european portion, the colonies where a whole different thing) was still pretty awfull. Political Police, Imprisonments, internal and external exile, the odd assassination, complete absence of any freedoms of speech, and also a very regimented economic regime. To all this add the behaviour on the colonies (pretty much all of what you have heard from apartheid South Africa).
I certainly do not want a return to those times.
"Free speech" is already regulated (of note: slander).
Restricting access to the public and civic arenas to those who which to restrict ALL of free speech (and willing to cause serious physical harm to those who opose them) is a necessary evil.
Doesn't mean we don't have to be vigilant on how that impacts political and civic life.
Comparing this directly with "constitutional rights" in the US, which has a very different sociological make-up and a VERY different recent history (to both Germany and Portugal) is a non-starter.