At first I was surprised that they even cared about public opinion at all. Then I remembered that this is SE Asia, where the importance of "saving face" is taught along with potty training. Remember the 1996 rocket crash in China? A small village was razed, they detained journalists for hours, and days later Xinhua only admitted to six deaths, blaming failure on a "sudden gust of wind". Then you have the tragically comical DPRK.
His most ardent followers are downright fanatical. For everyone else, like or not the guy was the epicenter of the government and many announcements were made amid his endless prattle. Supporters were expecting new handouts, and detractors feared new expropriations, threats and draconian abuse of power. I knew that I'd have a full report on the web the day after, tops.
This. I've seen the moderation triggers implemented in a Spanish-speaking forum but you could work around it with misspellings and leetspeak. I'm not familiar with Chinese but there may be less ways to put a concept in ideograms furtively, perhaps with homophones, and those can be covered too.
I meant, whatever sensors it used to map the place as a primary mission. Namely:
By analyzing the position and force of its collisions, the AirBurr is able to gradually map out its surroundings, establishing where the various boundaries lie
Of course, I expect it to bump all the way back, but knowing left from right would be enough to trace back the maze. Worst case, it could radio its rough position as it goes, so you know where it ended up. Here's the project's page including a long exposure photo showing the bumpy path; I have to wait until I get home to watch the video.
The saved weight should help a bit. Have you seen quadcopter videos in YouTube? Also, I figure that it might have path-integration capabilities to know when the charge is just enough to go home ("bingo fuel").
1. Make it light enough. At any rate, it doesn't *crash* so much as "bump its feelers" in traditional robotics lab fashion. 2. Well, there's no [stereo] camera[s], and just enough storage for the flight log.
Mapping closed spaces, perhaps recording sounds or sniffing chemicals and reporting back, as suggested in TFA. Maybe we've read too much about military/police applications. Make it smaller and you won't worry about knocking anything important, and it'll be able to slip through smaller openings.
What the hell, Soulskill?! After reading the lengthy self-aggrandizing pitch, I hovered over the links, half-expecting them to offer me cheap Nikes o handbags:
You're welcome. I read it as "a Russian knockoff/equivalent of a well-known device made by Racal". Keep in mind that the translator mistakenly used "the" instead of "a" several times all over.
I suspect a typo or translation error. 6 Km is 2-3 times the horizontal range of the biggest rifles, and even if they meant 6 Km altitude instead of elevation, most of Yemen is below 3,000 m. which leaves another 3,000 m of vertical distance. You surely see the difficulty here.
I wondered about that one too. Maybe they intend to broadcast motor commutator noise, but I'm not sure how that would work or how long they'll last as shining RF beacon that in opposition to the rest of the tips.
21 – In frequently targeted areas, use smoke as cover by burning tires. 22 – As for the leaders or those sought after, they should not use communications equipment because the enemy usually keeps a voice tag through which they can identify the speaking person and then locate him.
It's mostly about hiding from the drones, "jamming" their communications (low tech), and general asymmetric-warfare advice:
1 – It is possible to know the intention and the mission of the drone by using the Russian-made “sky grabber” device to infiltrate the drone’s waves and the frequencies. The device is available in the market for $2,595 and the one who operates it should be a computer know-how. 2 – Using devices that broadcast frequencies or pack of frequencies to disconnect the contacts and confuse the frequencies used to control the drone. The Mujahideen have had successful experiments using the Russian-made “Racal.” 3 – Spreading the reflective pieces of glass on a car or on the roof of the building. 4 – Placing a group of skilled snipers to hunt the drone, especially the reconnaissance ones because they fly low, about six kilometers or less. 5 – Jamming of and confusing of electronic communication using the ordinary water-lifting dynamo fitted with a 30-meter copper pole. 6 – Jamming of and confusing of electronic communication using old equipment and keeping them 24-hour running because of their strong frequencies and it is possible using simple ideas of deception of equipment to attract the electronic waves devices similar to that used by the Yugoslav army when they used the microwave (oven) in attracting and confusing the NATO missiles fitted with electromagnetic searching devices. 7 – Using general confusion methods and not to use permanent headquarters. 8 – Discovering the presence of a drone through well-placed reconnaissance networks and to warn all the formations to halt any movement in the area. 9 – To hide from being directly or indirectly spotted, especially at night. 10 – To hide under thick trees because they are the best cover against the planes. 11 – To stay in places unlit by the sun such as the shadows of the buildings or the trees. 12 – Maintain complete silence of all wireless contacts. 13 – Disembark of vehicles and keep away from them especially when being chased or during combat. 14 – To deceive the drone by entering places of multiple entrances and exits. 15 – Using underground shelters because the missiles fired by these planes are usually of the fragmented anti-personnel and not anti-buildings type. 16 – To avoid gathering in open areas and in urgent cases, use building of multiple doors or exits. 17 – Forming anti-spies groups to look for spies and agents. 18 – Formation of fake gatherings such as using dolls and statutes to be placed outside false ditches to mislead the enemy. 19 – When discovering that a drone is after a car, leave the car immediately and everyone should go in different direction because the planes are unable to get after everyone. 20 – Using natural barricades like forests and caves when there is an urgent need for training or gathering.
Slashdot has never been a place to get fresh hot scoops, but rather for (reasoned?) discussion and additional information. For the former purpose, there are dozens other sites like CNN.com. Enjoy the trolling and deaf arguments there.
. I'll rephrase: a device under these rules is expected to have interference around it, and the owners and manufacturer have no recourse *if* it malfunctions due to said interference (not that it *has* to). And I sincerely doubt that HARMs are specified under Part 15 rules.
That's the FCC's Code of Federal Regulations Title 47, Part 15, and "accept" means here that it's up to the manufacturer to "deal with it", exactly because you're operating in an unregulated band. Otherwise line filters, shielded enclosures etc. would be illegal !
*sigh*... I can hardly defend something that's not under attack. I posted some information that may or may not be useful to someone afraid of Perl, and it's up to said person to consider it, take it at face value, or throw it away with prejudice. Everyone is free to use it even if someone else hates it or trolls against it, and I'm happy using it for what it's good for. Cheers.
That TIMTOWTDI meme is somewhat exaggerated, and not the same as expressiveness (which is what I was talking aboui). Likely, among the 3-4 ways that you may find to do something, some are obsolete or too complicated, some are misleading to anyone else reading the code, and you're left with one that's simple and "natural" for your purpose. Let me explain:
As the name suggests, map() is most useful to do something (hopefully short) to every member of a list and get a second list with the results, at the price of putting your variable at the end, so why?
for (@names) {
. . .
$_ = transform($_);
. . . }
A-ha! Plus, if you're already using $_ because you're inside a typical while(<>){...} loop, you can always use another variable for iterating through @names.
This "good taste" is acquired after a bit of experience. Maybe it's a bit like cooking - you have so much available and no book could tell you all good combinations or all the bad ones.
No oxymoron here. Perl frees you to create real messes, but that's mostly because it's very expressive, which also helps you code with less temp variables, shorter loops, etc., which can be actually easier to read if you know the language (Perl has a higher "cognitive load" than other languages that may alienate casual participants).
OTOH there are best-practices and style guides to ease things for the next lucky person to read your masterpiece (possibly a future you). So don't blame the language; hell, there's even a module that critiques your code.
So with some discipline and common programmer smarts you can write succint code that may be more readable than "fluffier" implementations. In practice, I've found that in any language, superfluous steps and variables, bad naming, and not-so-logical flow is a bigger penalty to readability than anything else. No language forces good style on you.
Slashdot Mirror
My patronage
At first I was surprised that they even cared about public opinion at all. Then I remembered that this is SE Asia, where the importance of "saving face" is taught along with potty training. Remember the 1996 rocket crash in China? A small village was razed, they detained journalists for hours, and days later Xinhua only admitted to six deaths, blaming failure on a "sudden gust of wind". Then you have the tragically comical DPRK.
His most ardent followers are downright fanatical. For everyone else, like or not the guy was the epicenter of the government and many announcements were made amid his endless prattle. Supporters were expecting new handouts, and detractors feared new expropriations, threats and draconian abuse of power. I knew that I'd have a full report on the web the day after, tops.
This. I've seen the moderation triggers implemented in a Spanish-speaking forum but you could work around it with misspellings and leetspeak. I'm not familiar with Chinese but there may be less ways to put a concept in ideograms furtively, perhaps with homophones, and those can be covered too.
Maybe with pictures, Instagram-like?
And each message will be read by (at most) one person. Not a terribly efficient way to spread ideas.
I meant, whatever sensors it used to map the place as a primary mission. Namely:
By analyzing the position and force of its collisions, the AirBurr is able to gradually map out its surroundings, establishing where the various boundaries lie
Of course, I expect it to bump all the way back, but knowing left from right would be enough to trace back the maze. Worst case, it could radio its rough position as it goes, so you know where it ended up. Here's the project's page including a long exposure photo showing the bumpy path; I have to wait until I get home to watch the video.
Accelerometers. It mapped the place as it went about, right? There may be a few more bumps on the way back due to linearity/quantization errors.
The saved weight should help a bit. Have you seen quadcopter videos in YouTube? Also, I figure that it might have path-integration capabilities to know when the charge is just enough to go home ("bingo fuel").
1. Make it light enough. At any rate, it doesn't *crash* so much as "bump its feelers" in traditional robotics lab fashion.
2. Well, there's no [stereo] camera[s], and just enough storage for the flight log.
Mapping closed spaces, perhaps recording sounds or sniffing chemicals and reporting back, as suggested in TFA. Maybe we've read too much about military/police applications. Make it smaller and you won't worry about knocking anything important, and it'll be able to slip through smaller openings.
What the hell, Soulskill?! After reading the lengthy self-aggrandizing pitch, I hovered over the links, half-expecting them to offer me cheap Nikes o handbags:
http://www.propublica.org/about/
http://slashdot.org/index2.pl?fhfilter= propublica
http://www.propublica.org/nerds/item/our-news-app-tech
http://www.propublica.org/nerds/item/propublicas-news-app-guides
http://www.propublica.org/tools/
http://www.propublica.org/nerds/item/how-to-edit-52000-stories-at-once
http://rubyonrails.org/
https://www.djangoproject.com/
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/29/us/cnn-and-foxs-supreme-court-mistake.html
ProPublica is a non-profit corporation, and is exempt from taxes under Section 501(c)(3).
Their public-awareness tactics sure don't look like it.
You're welcome. I read it as "a Russian knockoff/equivalent of a well-known device made by Racal". Keep in mind that the translator mistakenly used "the" instead of "a" several times all over.
I suspect a typo or translation error. 6 Km is 2-3 times the horizontal range of the biggest rifles, and even if they meant 6 Km altitude instead of elevation, most of Yemen is below 3,000 m. which leaves another 3,000 m of vertical distance. You surely see the difficulty here.
I wondered about that one too. Maybe they intend to broadcast motor commutator noise, but I'm not sure how that would work or how long they'll last as shining RF beacon that in opposition to the rest of the tips.
21 – In frequently targeted areas, use smoke as cover by burning tires.
22 – As for the leaders or those sought after, they should not use communications equipment because the enemy usually keeps a voice tag through which they can identify the speaking person and then locate him.
Not too different from the first 20, though.
It's mostly about hiding from the drones, "jamming" their communications (low tech), and general asymmetric-warfare advice:
1 – It is possible to know the intention and the mission of the drone by using the Russian-made “sky grabber” device to infiltrate the drone’s waves and the frequencies. The device is available in the market for $2,595 and the one who operates it should be a computer know-how.
2 – Using devices that broadcast frequencies or pack of frequencies to disconnect the contacts and confuse the frequencies used to control the drone. The Mujahideen have had successful experiments using the Russian-made “Racal.”
3 – Spreading the reflective pieces of glass on a car or on the roof of the building.
4 – Placing a group of skilled snipers to hunt the drone, especially the reconnaissance ones because they fly low, about six kilometers or less.
5 – Jamming of and confusing of electronic communication using the ordinary water-lifting dynamo fitted with a 30-meter copper pole.
6 – Jamming of and confusing of electronic communication using old equipment and keeping them 24-hour running because of their strong frequencies and it is possible using simple ideas of deception of equipment to attract the electronic waves devices similar to that used by the Yugoslav army when they used the microwave (oven) in attracting and confusing the NATO missiles fitted with electromagnetic searching devices.
7 – Using general confusion methods and not to use permanent headquarters.
8 – Discovering the presence of a drone through well-placed reconnaissance networks and to warn all the formations to halt any movement in the area.
9 – To hide from being directly or indirectly spotted, especially at night.
10 – To hide under thick trees because they are the best cover against the planes.
11 – To stay in places unlit by the sun such as the shadows of the buildings or the trees.
12 – Maintain complete silence of all wireless contacts.
13 – Disembark of vehicles and keep away from them especially when being chased or during combat.
14 – To deceive the drone by entering places of multiple entrances and exits.
15 – Using underground shelters because the missiles fired by these planes are usually of the fragmented anti-personnel and not anti-buildings type.
16 – To avoid gathering in open areas and in urgent cases, use building of multiple doors or exits.
17 – Forming anti-spies groups to look for spies and agents.
18 – Formation of fake gatherings such as using dolls and statutes to be placed outside false ditches to mislead the enemy.
19 – When discovering that a drone is after a car, leave the car immediately and everyone should go in different direction because the planes are unable to get after everyone.
20 – Using natural barricades like forests and caves when there is an urgent need for training or gathering.
Slashdot has never been a place to get fresh hot scoops, but rather for (reasoned?) discussion and additional information. For the former purpose, there are dozens other sites like CNN.com. Enjoy the trolling and deaf arguments there.
. I'll rephrase: a device under these rules is expected to have interference around it, and the owners and manufacturer have no recourse *if* it malfunctions due to said interference (not that it *has* to).
And I sincerely doubt that HARMs are specified under Part 15 rules.
The second. It's a "deal with it" rule; otherwise line filters, ferrite chokes, shielding and whatnot would make your device non-compliant.
That's the FCC's Code of Federal Regulations Title 47, Part 15, and "accept" means here that it's up to the manufacturer to "deal with it", exactly because you're operating in an unregulated band. Otherwise line filters, shielded enclosures etc. would be illegal !
*sigh* ... I can hardly defend something that's not under attack. I posted some information that may or may not be useful to someone afraid of Perl, and it's up to said person to consider it, take it at face value, or throw it away with prejudice. Everyone is free to use it even if someone else hates it or trolls against it, and I'm happy using it for what it's good for. Cheers.
That TIMTOWTDI meme is somewhat exaggerated, and not the same as expressiveness (which is what I was talking aboui). Likely, among the 3-4 ways that you may find to do something, some are obsolete or too complicated, some are misleading to anyone else reading the code, and you're left with one that's simple and "natural" for your purpose. Let me explain:
for ($i = 0; $i < $#names; $i++) {
. . .
$names[$i] = transform( $names[$i] );
. . .
}
An atavism from C, unneccessary in Perl.
map {
. . .
$_ = transform($_)
. . .
} @names;
As the name suggests, map() is most useful to do something (hopefully short) to every member of a list and get a second list with the results, at the price of putting your variable at the end, so why?
for (@names) {
. . .
$_ = transform($_);
. . .
}
A-ha! Plus, if you're already using $_ because you're inside a typical while(<>){...} loop, you can always use another variable for iterating through @names.
This "good taste" is acquired after a bit of experience. Maybe it's a bit like cooking - you have so much available and no book could tell you all good combinations or all the bad ones.
No oxymoron here. Perl frees you to create real messes, but that's mostly because it's very expressive, which also helps you code with less temp variables, shorter loops, etc., which can be actually easier to read if you know the language (Perl has a higher "cognitive load" than other languages that may alienate casual participants).
OTOH there are best-practices and style guides to ease things for the next lucky person to read your masterpiece (possibly a future you). So don't blame the language; hell, there's even a module that critiques your code.
So with some discipline and common programmer smarts you can write succint code that may be more readable than "fluffier" implementations. In practice, I've found that in any language, superfluous steps and variables, bad naming, and not-so-logical flow is a bigger penalty to readability than anything else. No language forces good style on you.
New here, you must be.
Obligatory: xkcd: Extrapolating