Every few years I crawl out of my sandbox and absorb any useful changes in the browser scene.
The last time I tried CSS selectors every one I wanted to use either didn't work at all or worked great until I tried the same thing in a different browser.
"information services" are exempt from CALEA. CALEA is only for access providers not web sites and information services.
Having the FBI say they don't seek to expand their existing authority while concurrently seeking to have CALEA apply to "information services" is nonsensical doubletalk.
Under CALEA and common sense you cannot be compelled to cough up keys you don't have so the only choice is to go after information services which is a breathtaking new grant of authority *explicitly* excluded from all existing CALEA legislation.
Note TFA also talks specifically about communications between peers without a centralized intermediary....ie direct communications between two XMPP clients. How the hell do you technically accomplish this without fundementally turning the Internet and general purpose execution environment into a locked down police state?
LEA needs to come to terms with the fact they don't get to wholesale easedrop on all communication in clear violation of the law anymore. Its not like they can't already get a warrant for emails from messaging providers and its not like we don't already have fucked up legal regimes like the third party doctrine which effectivly bypasses our rights to privacy when our information is stored on third party systems.
Part of the problem is everytime the government decides to invent absurd concepts out of thin air like free reign on emails > 180 days or grant immunity from civil action when telcoms break existing law more and more people and technologists deploy more and more encryption by default. SMTP between mail systems, IMAP..etc now often using TLS by default..etc. Part of this is government getting what it deserves for acting more like a nation of kings rather than a nation of laws.
It is hard for me to understand with the blessing that is facebook and the rise of massive messaging providers why LEA continues to complain. Full visibility into virtually all bit torrent downloads... They actually have it better than ever before but nothing will ever be enough.
Try to heatmap or do hierarchical clustering on a billion rows in a few milliseconds with just the aid of indexes - not all applications need lots of cores and high memory bandwidth - but some do.
Even your examples are I/O rather than processor limited. Sending billions of rows to a GPU over the southbridge aint free.
NASA reports asteroid on collision course for earth expected to "obliterate" housing market.
sell sell sell
Gold prices expected to reach a 20 year low as Lord Ganesh spotted on Indian TV favoring peanuts over gold.
sell sell sell
Acme Toothpick Company announces it will be laying off 1 million workers as the last tree in the amazon rain forest is cut down.
sell sell sell
North Korea launches devastating nuclear attack against giant sea turtles invading its territorial waters. Fears of radioactive fish expected to have catastrophic effects on east Asian seafood markets.
When the software is EOL'd before the hardware fails, the lifespan is too short. New versions of MS tools have a habit of breaking everything they touch. This stands in stark contrast to the *NIX variants where software tends to work across all versions of the OS, and often across different variants as well.
hahaha hehe haha (rolling on the floor) now THAT is hi-llariously funny. In the real world all I see commercial software vendors doing is releasing multiple versions of their software for multiple distributions, kernel versions and c-libraries with endless stories of people routinely bitching about not being able to upgrade cause vendor x does not support version y.
The only thing linux is reasonably good at is ABI backwards compatibility assuming you have no external dependancies (unlikely) otherwise its a shit experience. The standard answer for everything linux is shared lib versioning which is receipt for disaster. Previous versions are sparsely distributed with operating systems out of the box and with distributions being strapped for space and willingness to accept a reality where foreign software is not "compiled" as part of the installation process.
Next time you are at your dentist's office, have a look at the software they are using - and then please advise me how one (especially a doctor!) can put together something like that. Note that you will need an interface to the digital X-ray machine; the thing should be distributed or centralized, but it must allow operation from any terminal, and often concurrently (a doctor writes up her notes, and the receptionist is scheduling your next appointment.) The software must be also operable by minimally trained personnel, and that goes for everyone in the doctor's office (they are trained in other, and more complex, things.)
Well, 100W at 20 volts is fine. The wires will as you said be thick. But the real problem is the connection. I sincerely doubt the USB connector is specified for that kind of ampereage.
Checking USB power delivery information on the USB web site... unless superspeed means something different from power delivery TFA is full of it when they say existing cables can be reused.
From USB PD presentation cables actually need to be power aware and the mini A/B connectors are limited to 60 watts which all makes a lot of sense to me.
I also very much appreciate the power profile categories so people are not left wondering whether source a will be enough to power gadget b.
USB 2.0 section 7.2.1.2.1 says 5 A max as in when you hit it the protection circuit kicks in and limits or shuts down current.
To actually pull 5A means the required protection circuit would need to trip above 5A to be useful which violates this section.
The more reality based problem is 28 gauge wire over 10-16 FT of cable carrying 5 amps is really stretching it...the voltage losses in that scenario will significantly pull down the actual watts being delivered into heating the wire.
At 10 ft the voltage drop when pulling 5 amps is ~6 volts. At 16 ft the drop is a staggering ~10 volts.
Unless there is a whole lot of intelligence to probe wire losses as part of the power specification and take the wire itself into consideration when calculating maximum current availability 100 watts over only 20 volts is really stretching it.
You mean export? Only you are allowed to have your private key file, so the browser needs to generate it (unless you are going to install openssl and do it manually). You then export your public key file, and send that to Microsoft.
Or do you suggest some kind of broken model where Microsoft generates the key that only you are allowed to ever have a copy of, and sends it to you through some insecure communication medium like the internet or phone network?
Both options are completely acceptable to me. At some point you would have had to create an account using some pre-existing trust relationship. This is typically done online using an SSL session with trusted roots stored in a browser. At this point when you are sending your passwords and all associated data to the remote server if the server wants to send you back neat file with public/private key pairs I have no problem with that.
The only reason for having the client cert is to provide strong identity to the server so if the server provides all the keys to do this in a neatly packaged easy to install bundle who cares? I would hope alternate options are available to allow users to submit a signing request if they wanted to protect against compromise of setup of initial trust relationship...practically if that occured it is game over regardless.
Also, using certificate-based authentication is that it makes the "something you have" your computer, rather than a separate device. There are threat models in which that's a better solution than having your phone be the second factor device, but there are also models in which it's much worse.
This is a dangerous illusion we've seen explioted ad nauseum (e.g. token cards) If you don't trust your computer then using it anyway is completely nonsensical.
I posit that the majority of webmail users have used someone else's machine to check their e-mail within the last year. I know I have. In
If you don't care about security then why would you bother enabling two-factor authentication in the first place at all?
I am not advocating this as the only solution suitable for everyones needs. My only observation is the option should be made available for people who care about security.
addition, for me, there's the fact that I have too many machines, and change machines too often. Right now, for example, I authenticate to Google regularly from a MacBook Air, two Ubuntu desktop machines, two Chromebooks, two tablets and a phone. Having to manually propagate a.p12 file to all of these would be enough of a pain that it might deter me using stronger authentication at all. Heck right now I have a new Chromebook that I've had for a week and still haven't gone through the process of installing a certificate needed to allow it on the corporate network. It's a simple process, but it's enough of an obstacle that it deters me.
Clicking on a file is not a big deal no matter how many computers you have.
If you don't want to exert the effort that is your perogative. Nobody is forcing you or saying you you must only use client certs. Certainly not my words or my intent.
I can sit here and rail against the (in)convienence of any security measure. They are all tradeoffs and they all suck to someone.
I think we all get the basics of oversubscription in dense areas but one thing I never understood from news reports it seems people had active calls dropped on them. Why does that happen?
I know next to nothing about cellular TE but my understanding has been once your call has been admitted whatever bandwidth/timeslot allocated stays that way. This is not like IP networks where every packet competes anew for limited resource.
I can understand not being able to make a call but I don't understand dropped calls or conditions which essentially amount to congestive collapse.
And when you use a different browser, say while at a friend's house?
There are corner cases for all solutions including passwords. Security is fundementally a tradeoff.
Last time I used someone elses computer to login to anything was 10 years ago. I would argue using a "friends" or otherwise untrusted guest computer is insecure and unwise.
Client certs are one of the few viable options to provide cryptographic binding of identity to session encryption.
client certificates are a retarded system for users, they only result in a user not using anything. That is like giving someone a 10 pound sledge hammer to push in a thumbtack.
Why? Import a pk12 file into a browser takes seconds. What is the big deal?
As much as I try I don't understand why people are interested in adding soo much complexity to what should just be dumbass pipes backed by a distributed topology optimization problem. The physical layout of the network is not software defined so why pretend otherwise? The answer is the same reason why virtual machines are soo popular...The OS stack vendors are too stupid to develop an operating system with the management characteristics required so rather than fixing the problem they just add another layer of indirection.
People are constantly doing shit at the wrong layer and refusing to comphrend why what they are doing is wrong. With each iteration global complexity skyrockets.
For example I tried to understand LISP but behind every bullet point of why it is better all I saw was the same problems BGP faces just shifted into different systems with new terminology and problems. For example how does multi-homing in LISP scale any better than BGP? The answer is tunnels!! Logical overlays on top of physical networks is a receipt for complex failure, security nightmares and poor quality of service but hey thats one less route in the DFZ.
Mobile IP are great and all but to do it on metal you need redirect which is the biggest single idiotic networking concept in the history of the universe so PPL invent all of this shit to do traveling tunnels which is fine I suppose until you ask the question why can't the protocol stack just deal with that?
Firewalls and "network" security are equally fundementally nonsensical concepts. Don't secure the network secure the peers!! Securing the network is a complete waste of time and resources especially since most damaging attacks are inside jobs but this does not stop people from adding layers upon layers of security gunk which either does not work without a "signature" or actually increase attack surface of the overall system.
SDN seems to be about control capwap/openflow type thing and are complex systems in their own right. There are a million different ways to manage the shit you have if more options helps solve anything then I'm supportive.. however it seems to me starting with the right configuration and dynamic protocols stands to minimize necessity for central management (and accompanying potential for catastrophic failure) of everything.
If MS really cared that much about security they would offer the use of client certificates. Much more secure than SMS.
Judging by what passes for acceptable practice today my guess this is all likely all effectivly a moot point as convenience password recovery measures effectivly curtail actual security gains.
Lithium Ion != Lithium Iron... i.e. WTF are you bringing up LiFe for? Not part of this conversation
Please RTFA.
Actually, you have that backwards.
The reverse of what I said would be memory effects in batteries which is not occuring.
The batteries have degradation. The electronics are wrong because they remember capacity based on the charge/discharge cycle of the battery when it was new. Over time it degrades, this is not memory, its just degradation... wear.
Normally it is a simple loss of synchronization rather than meaningful change to capacity. The most common issue stems from self discharge not being accounted for over prolonged periods of nonuse.
When you 'deep cycle' the battery, all you are doing is allowing the device to actually see how the battery is currently performing
Thanks for agreeing with me.
rather than how it was expected to perform a hundred charges ago.
No, no I did not. I stated first and foremost my concern was for the people of Boston. The
Yes, yes you so did that. Anyone can go back and check what you have actually said.
second point was to address how stupid it is to argue against any gun legislation at all.
Stupid me.. I get it now... as long as you start by saying how concerned you are *then* it becomes acceptable to talk about guns. You don't even have to wait a months time before you feed an obvious troll.
Observations that gun legislation exists in many forms already are not lectures. Which side was the GP arguing for?
Your question is irrelevant to the hypocracy issue. The point is you came here and lectured a troll about how we ought to respond and then proceeded immediatly to spending most of your word count talking guns.
people are likely dead and the first comment is political horseshit.
And your comment is a comment about political horseshit. I don't see much difference here.
Immediate concerns should be focused on the victims, their families, their friends, their coworkers and then the investigation into who or what did this. A month later, you can start your political monkey shitfight okay?
No it isnt. Who are you to declare for others what their priorities ought to be?
We still don't know what happened and I, personally, am concerned first and foremost for the safety of the people of Boston.
Good for you. I'd give you a cookie but some fat ass with dangerously high colesterol ate the last one.
Secondly whenever anything bad happens, do you show up and ask how gun legislation would have prevented this? Gun legislation isn't going to prevent deaths from drunk driving... but that's not sound logic to block gun legislation.
If you make it legal to shoot drunk drivers it might.
By the way, I think even the most idiotic gun nuts think we should have some legislation covering guns like, you know, background checks to weed out felons. There is a need for some gun legislation, the debate is how much. Are you saying it should be legal for underage kids to bring guns to school? Are you saying parents shouldn't be held accountable when they leave a fully loaded handgun for their kid to find? Are you saying your neighbor shouldn't be able to have celebratory gunfire into the sky daily? All of that is technically gun legislation.
Can you scream "I am a hypocrite" any louder? The lecture on priorities followed immediatly by political lecture on gun issue is quite amusing.
First of all of LiFePO4 are not commonly used in any of our portable gadgets.
Second memory effects we are seeing in our gear are illusions based on memory effects in the electronics that help figure out capacity. Deep cycling lion batteries works to clear these effects as what you are actually doing is resetting the "gas gauge" to synchronize with reality of the battery.
RF receiver with coverage of at least 200khz thru 5ghz with at least 50 mhz sampling bandwidth and an external mini bnc connector. Transmitting would be nice too within at least the 6 and 13mhz ISM.
Transducer/sonar for looking thru walls, distance, speed and crap.
Always on combo LCD/eink display.
A real ring lazer gyro to replace mems crap.
A small physical keyboard of some kind or better yet a touch screen with software defined depressible regions. It needs to feel like a real keyboard... no haptic crap.
Lazer with class selection so we can use it for presentations or goofing off (lazer tag..etc) freespace communications..etc. Oh and a mems mirror lense for lazer light shows.
Cheap IR transeceiver to control TVs and crap..the old PDAs had these and it was cool.
IR blackbody temperature sensor.
Flashlight a real one not some crap camera flash thing.
Highly sensitive 3D magnetometer able to track fields from any orientation.
Multimeter/oscope mode with port to attach probes.
Reliable hardware..chipkill memory, transactional buses, multi-core quorum modes..etc.
Persistant storage that does not suck power/time or has a limited cycle life (memristers..etc)
Hyperspectral camera and geiger tube
Spectrometer
Unfoldable/sliding display for increased viewing area.
Waterproof and floats in water.
Freedom to install anything and full baseband access.
Virtually all of air/sea transportation use non-integrity protected signals and carriers with near zero resistance to intentional jamming. Access to GPS can be trivially denied. GPS position can be spoofed even if using encrypted channels without having access to encrpytion keys.
Personally I prefer in the clear better than alternative where every airport and every plane in the world has to establish some form of trust relationship. There are too many people and interests involved to where it is not reasonable to believe keys won't leak out or in some other way be compromised.
It is better to design systems working in the clear with associated scope limitations and healthy doeses of paranoia than to have instances of engineers saying or thinking "well this is secure".. as long as its only used to improve safety margins, refine fixes based on flight plan/radar and any disagreement is flaged this might stand a chance of being a reasonable decision in light of practical limitations on trust.
Slashdot Mirror
Every few years I crawl out of my sandbox and absorb any useful changes in the browser scene.
The last time I tried CSS selectors every one I wanted to use either didn't work at all or worked great until I tried the same thing in a different browser.
"information services" are exempt from CALEA. CALEA is only for access providers not web sites and information services.
Having the FBI say they don't seek to expand their existing authority while concurrently seeking to have CALEA apply to "information services" is nonsensical doubletalk.
Under CALEA and common sense you cannot be compelled to cough up keys you don't have so the only choice is to go after information services which is a breathtaking new grant of authority *explicitly* excluded from all existing CALEA legislation.
Note TFA also talks specifically about communications between peers without a centralized intermediary....ie direct communications between two XMPP clients. How the hell do you technically accomplish this without fundementally turning the Internet and general purpose execution environment into a locked down police state?
LEA needs to come to terms with the fact they don't get to wholesale easedrop on all communication in clear violation of the law anymore. Its not like they can't already get a warrant for emails from messaging providers and its not like we don't already have fucked up legal regimes like the third party doctrine which effectivly bypasses our rights to privacy when our information is stored on third party systems.
Part of the problem is everytime the government decides to invent absurd concepts out of thin air like free reign on emails > 180 days or grant immunity from civil action when telcoms break existing law more and more people and technologists deploy more and more encryption by default. SMTP between mail systems, IMAP..etc now often using TLS by default..etc. Part of this is government getting what it deserves for acting more like a nation of kings rather than a nation of laws.
It is hard for me to understand with the blessing that is facebook and the rise of massive messaging providers why LEA continues to complain. Full visibility into virtually all bit torrent downloads... They actually have it better than ever before but nothing will ever be enough.
Try to heatmap or do hierarchical clustering on a billion rows in a few milliseconds with just the aid of indexes - not all applications need lots of cores and high memory bandwidth - but some do.
Even your examples are I/O rather than processor limited. Sending billions of rows to a GPU over the southbridge aint free.
sell sell sell
NASA reports asteroid on collision course for earth expected to "obliterate" housing market.
sell sell sell
Gold prices expected to reach a 20 year low as Lord Ganesh spotted on Indian TV favoring peanuts over gold.
sell sell sell
Acme Toothpick Company announces it will be laying off 1 million workers as the last tree in the amazon rain forest is cut down.
sell sell sell
North Korea launches devastating nuclear attack against giant sea turtles invading its territorial waters. Fears of radioactive fish expected to have catastrophic effects on east Asian seafood markets.
sell sell sell
A: Indexes that don't suck.
Using GPUs and massivelly parallel blah blah blah is cool and all but most databases are not processor limited so why should we care?
When the software is EOL'd before the hardware fails, the lifespan is too short. New versions of MS tools have a habit of breaking everything they touch. This stands in stark contrast to the *NIX variants where software tends to work across all versions of the OS, and often across different variants as well.
hahaha hehe haha (rolling on the floor) now THAT is hi-llariously funny. In the real world all I see commercial software vendors doing is releasing multiple versions of their software for multiple distributions, kernel versions and c-libraries with endless stories of people routinely bitching about not being able to upgrade cause vendor x does not support version y.
The only thing linux is reasonably good at is ABI backwards compatibility assuming you have no external dependancies (unlikely) otherwise its a shit experience. The standard answer for everything linux is shared lib versioning which is receipt for disaster. Previous versions are sparsely distributed with operating systems out of the box and with distributions being strapped for space and willingness to accept a reality where foreign software is not "compiled" as part of the installation process.
Next time you are at your dentist's office, have a look at the software they are using - and then please advise me how one (especially a doctor!) can put together something like that. Note that you will need an interface to the digital X-ray machine; the thing should be distributed or centralized, but it must allow operation from any terminal, and often concurrently (a doctor writes up her notes, and the receptionist is scheduling your next appointment.) The software must be also operable by minimally trained personnel, and that goes for everyone in the doctor's office (they are trained in other, and more complex, things.)
MS access with OLE embedding.
Well, 100W at 20 volts is fine. The wires will as you said be thick. But the real problem is the connection. I sincerely doubt the USB connector is specified for that kind of ampereage.
Checking USB power delivery information on the USB web site... unless superspeed means something different from power delivery TFA is full of it when they say existing cables can be reused.
From USB PD presentation cables actually need to be power aware and the mini A/B connectors are limited to 60 watts which all makes a lot of sense to me.
I also very much appreciate the power profile categories so people are not left wondering whether source a will be enough to power gadget b.
USB 2.0 section 7.2.1.2.1 says 5 A max as in when you hit it the protection circuit kicks in and limits or shuts down current.
To actually pull 5A means the required protection circuit would need to trip above 5A to be useful which violates this section.
The more reality based problem is 28 gauge wire over 10-16 FT of cable carrying 5 amps is really stretching it...the voltage losses in that scenario will significantly pull down the actual watts being delivered into heating the wire.
At 10 ft the voltage drop when pulling 5 amps is ~6 volts. At 16 ft the drop is a staggering ~10 volts.
Unless there is a whole lot of intelligence to probe wire losses as part of the power specification and take the wire itself into consideration when calculating maximum current availability 100 watts over only 20 volts is really stretching it.
You mean export? Only you are allowed to have your private key file, so the browser needs to generate it (unless you are going to install openssl and do it manually). You then export your public key file, and send that to Microsoft.
Or do you suggest some kind of broken model where Microsoft generates the key that only you are allowed to ever have a copy of, and sends it to you through some insecure communication medium like the internet or phone network?
Both options are completely acceptable to me. At some point you would have had to create an account using some pre-existing trust relationship. This is typically done online using an SSL session with trusted roots stored in a browser. At this point when you are sending your passwords and all associated data to the remote server if the server wants to send you back neat file with public/private key pairs I have no problem with that.
The only reason for having the client cert is to provide strong identity to the server so if the server provides all the keys to do this in a neatly packaged easy to install bundle who cares? I would hope alternate options are available to allow users to submit a signing request if they wanted to protect against compromise of setup of initial trust relationship...practically if that occured it is game over regardless.
Also, using certificate-based authentication is that it makes the "something you have" your computer, rather than a separate device. There are threat models in which that's a better solution than having your phone be the second factor device, but there are also models in which it's much worse.
This is a dangerous illusion we've seen explioted ad nauseum (e.g. token cards) If you don't trust your computer then using it anyway is completely nonsensical.
I posit that the majority of webmail users have used someone else's machine to check their e-mail within the last year. I know I have. In
If you don't care about security then why would you bother enabling two-factor authentication in the first place at all?
I am not advocating this as the only solution suitable for everyones needs. My only observation is the option should be made available for people who care about security.
addition, for me, there's the fact that I have too many machines, and change machines too often. Right now, for example, I authenticate to Google regularly from a MacBook Air, two Ubuntu desktop machines, two Chromebooks, two tablets and a phone. Having to manually propagate a .p12 file to all of these would be enough of a pain that it might deter me using stronger authentication at all. Heck right now I have a new Chromebook that I've had for a week and still haven't gone through the process of installing a certificate needed to allow it on the corporate network. It's a simple process, but it's enough of an obstacle that it deters me.
Clicking on a file is not a big deal no matter how many computers you have.
If you don't want to exert the effort that is your perogative. Nobody is forcing you or saying you you must only use client certs. Certainly not my words or my intent.
I can sit here and rail against the (in)convienence of any security measure. They are all tradeoffs and they all suck to someone.
I think we all get the basics of oversubscription in dense areas but one thing I never understood from news reports it seems people had active calls dropped on them. Why does that happen?
I know next to nothing about cellular TE but my understanding has been once your call has been admitted whatever bandwidth/timeslot allocated stays that way. This is not like IP networks where every packet competes anew for limited resource.
I can understand not being able to make a call but I don't understand dropped calls or conditions which essentially amount to congestive collapse.
And when you use a different browser, say while at a friend's house?
There are corner cases for all solutions including passwords. Security is fundementally a tradeoff.
Last time I used someone elses computer to login to anything was 10 years ago. I would argue using a "friends" or otherwise untrusted guest computer is insecure and unwise.
Client certs are one of the few viable options to provide cryptographic binding of identity to session encryption.
client certificates are a retarded system for users, they only result in a user not using anything. That is like giving someone a 10 pound sledge hammer to push in a thumbtack.
Why? Import a pk12 file into a browser takes seconds. What is the big deal?
As much as I try I don't understand why people are interested in adding soo much complexity to what should just be dumbass pipes backed by a distributed topology optimization problem. The physical layout of the network is not software defined so why pretend otherwise? The answer is the same reason why virtual machines are soo popular...The OS stack vendors are too stupid to develop an operating system with the management characteristics required so rather than fixing the problem they just add another layer of indirection.
People are constantly doing shit at the wrong layer and refusing to comphrend why what they are doing is wrong. With each iteration global complexity skyrockets.
For example I tried to understand LISP but behind every bullet point of why it is better all I saw was the same problems BGP faces just shifted into different systems with new terminology and problems. For example how does multi-homing in LISP scale any better than BGP? The answer is tunnels!! Logical overlays on top of physical networks is a receipt for complex failure, security nightmares and poor quality of service but hey thats one less route in the DFZ.
Mobile IP are great and all but to do it on metal you need redirect which is the biggest single idiotic networking concept in the history of the universe so PPL invent all of this shit to do traveling tunnels which is fine I suppose until you ask the question why can't the protocol stack just deal with that?
Firewalls and "network" security are equally fundementally nonsensical concepts. Don't secure the network secure the peers!! Securing the network is a complete waste of time and resources especially since most damaging attacks are inside jobs but this does not stop people from adding layers upon layers of security gunk which either does not work without a "signature" or actually increase attack surface of the overall system.
SDN seems to be about control capwap/openflow type thing and are complex systems in their own right. There are a million different ways to manage the shit you have if more options helps solve anything then I'm supportive.. however it seems to me starting with the right configuration and dynamic protocols stands to minimize necessity for central management (and accompanying potential for catastrophic failure) of everything.
If MS really cared that much about security they would offer the use of client certificates. Much more secure than SMS.
Judging by what passes for acceptable practice today my guess this is all likely all effectivly a moot point as convenience password recovery measures effectivly curtail actual security gains.
This whole every-aspect-of-our-lives-must-be-in-the-context-of-1984 conspiracy stuff has really gotten out of hand ...
"How start?"
Lithium Ion != Lithium Iron ... i.e. WTF are you bringing up LiFe for? Not part of this conversation
Please RTFA.
Actually, you have that backwards.
The reverse of what I said would be memory effects in batteries which is not occuring.
The batteries have degradation. The electronics are wrong because they remember capacity based on the charge/discharge cycle of the battery when it was new. Over time it degrades, this is not memory, its just degradation ... wear.
Normally it is a simple loss of synchronization rather than meaningful change to capacity. The most common issue stems from self discharge not being accounted for over prolonged periods of nonuse.
When you 'deep cycle' the battery, all you are doing is allowing the device to actually see how the battery is currently performing
Thanks for agreeing with me.
rather than how it was expected to perform a hundred charges ago.
It is more complicated than this.
No, no I did not. I stated first and foremost my concern was for the people of Boston. The
Yes, yes you so did that. Anyone can go back and check what you have actually said.
second point was to address how stupid it is to argue against any gun legislation at all.
Stupid me.. I get it now... as long as you start by saying how concerned you are *then* it becomes acceptable to talk about guns. You don't even have to wait a months time before you feed an obvious troll.
Observations that gun legislation exists in many forms already are not lectures. Which side was the GP arguing for?
Your question is irrelevant to the hypocracy issue. The point is you came here and lectured a troll about how we ought to respond and then proceeded immediatly to spending most of your word count talking guns.
First off,
First off this does not belong on slashdot.
people are likely dead and the first comment is political horseshit.
And your comment is a comment about political horseshit. I don't see much difference here.
Immediate concerns should be focused on the victims, their families, their friends, their coworkers and then the investigation into who or what did this. A month later, you can start your political monkey shitfight okay?
No it isnt. Who are you to declare for others what their priorities ought to be?
We still don't know what happened and I, personally, am concerned first and foremost for the safety of the people of Boston.
Good for you. I'd give you a cookie but some fat ass with dangerously high colesterol ate the last one.
Secondly whenever anything bad happens, do you show up and ask how gun legislation would have prevented this? Gun legislation isn't going to prevent deaths from drunk driving ... but that's not sound logic to block gun legislation.
If you make it legal to shoot drunk drivers it might.
By the way, I think even the most idiotic gun nuts think we should have some legislation covering guns like, you know, background checks to weed out felons. There is a need for some gun legislation, the debate is how much. Are you saying it should be legal for underage kids to bring guns to school? Are you saying parents shouldn't be held accountable when they leave a fully loaded handgun for their kid to find? Are you saying your neighbor shouldn't be able to have celebratory gunfire into the sky daily? All of that is technically gun legislation.
Can you scream "I am a hypocrite" any louder? The lecture on priorities followed immediatly by political lecture on gun issue is quite amusing.
First of all of LiFePO4 are not commonly used in any of our portable gadgets.
Second memory effects we are seeing in our gear are illusions based on memory effects in the electronics that help figure out capacity. Deep cycling lion batteries works to clear these effects as what you are actually doing is resetting the "gas gauge" to synchronize with reality of the battery.
RF receiver with coverage of at least 200khz thru 5ghz with at least 50 mhz sampling bandwidth and an external mini bnc connector. Transmitting would be nice too within at least the 6 and 13mhz ISM.
Transducer/sonar for looking thru walls, distance, speed and crap.
Always on combo LCD/eink display.
A real ring lazer gyro to replace mems crap.
A small physical keyboard of some kind or better yet a touch screen with software defined depressible regions. It needs to feel like a real keyboard... no haptic crap.
Lazer with class selection so we can use it for presentations or goofing off (lazer tag..etc) freespace communications..etc. Oh and a mems mirror lense for lazer light shows.
Cheap IR transeceiver to control TVs and crap..the old PDAs had these and it was cool.
IR blackbody temperature sensor.
Flashlight a real one not some crap camera flash thing.
Highly sensitive 3D magnetometer able to track fields from any orientation.
Multimeter/oscope mode with port to attach probes.
Reliable hardware..chipkill memory, transactional buses, multi-core quorum modes..etc.
Persistant storage that does not suck power/time or has a limited cycle life (memristers..etc)
Hyperspectral camera and geiger tube
Spectrometer
Unfoldable/sliding display for increased viewing area.
Waterproof and floats in water.
Freedom to install anything and full baseband access.
Virtually all of air/sea transportation use non-integrity protected signals and carriers with near zero resistance to intentional jamming. Access to GPS can be trivially denied. GPS position can be spoofed even if using encrypted channels without having access to encrpytion keys.
Personally I prefer in the clear better than alternative where every airport and every plane in the world has to establish some form of trust relationship. There are too many people and interests involved to where it is not reasonable to believe keys won't leak out or in some other way be compromised.
It is better to design systems working in the clear with associated scope limitations and healthy doeses of paranoia than to have instances of engineers saying or thinking "well this is secure" .. as long as its only used to improve safety margins, refine fixes based on flight plan/radar and any disagreement is flaged this might stand a chance of being a reasonable decision in light of practical limitations on trust.