""overzealous prosecutors" "
Is there any other kind in Trumpistan?
16327 publicly visible posts • joined 10 Jun 2009
Only this presentation is from the "Australian Signals Directorate "
Which (I'm taking a wild stab here) is the Aus miltary version of the US NSA (which people forget is also a military operation, despite all the suits being worn).
So I'm guessing they (and their sub-contractors, and their sub-sub-contractors) have something a little bit more important to guard than last weeks Fosters consumption figures. *
*Which is only important if you're another lager mfg (IMHO lager is mfg'd, not brewed).
Looking over the Wiki entry on this that's can test 2^17 states simultaneously.
If the wiki article is correct then "programming" a quantum m/c is more like the programming of an FPGA than anything else, where you have a quantum gate array" whose connectivity map is the "program"
Interesting side note in the article that the first go at this used "spin" as a parameter and actually dates from 1968 !
<profanity filter off>
Bullshit
</profanity filter off>
Every jurisdiction I know of makes failure to hand over passwords or encryption codes under a search warrant issued in that jurisdiction a crime.
So (maybe) do jail time if you hand over or definitely do jail time if you don't.
If you've got enough evidence to get a warrant you can definitely put someone in jail regardless of their crypto, and if you've got the computers still on you can probably find the keys in memory.
They want warrantless spy-on-demand snooping, regardless of the danger to everyone's privacy and money.
I used to think that.
But no longer.
These people simply don't care if this makes every US computer a massive treasure trove if such a system is mandated.
Their "right to know" trumps everybody else right to privacy.
At least inside their own heads.
It's not a sane policy. It's a personality disorder
Other classics are "regression equations" derived from data sets.
Algorithm chomps on X MB of data and comes up with N term equation. Plug in X value, get Y value within Z %
But WTF does that mean?
What are the real parameters (that could be measured) to give the dependent value?
And does this equation hold outside the test range? No idea. We don't have a data set for that.
Before you think this sounds nuts a common model for turbulence in CFD sims is the "2 factor" model," where you twiddle 2 numeric values.
They have no connection to the actual physical reality of the problem being modeled.
FTFY.
Yes SPARC and Gnat (both Ada derivatives) are more secure but IRL you can write C in any language.
It's a question of how much effort you have to make to circumvent interior checks.
But note.
Sooner or later your HLL will have to talk to the H/W, and what's inside those libraries will probably be written in assembler (unless your process is essentially a compiler back end in hardware, like a Java machine) which won't be subject to the same level of security.
The automotive industry does have C coding standards (MISRA) that are compiler neutral. There are a set of 24 requirements IIRC (and the Toyota auto throttle mishap happened because they didn't follow them)
It comes down to wheather a mfg is willing to follow them, puts in place mechanisms to ensure they are followed, and understands what happens if they are not.
The UK electoral system means the only person who's selection you can control is your direct MP.
So forget "the big picture."
Choose an issue you really care about.
Which party supports that the best?
If <incumbent> vote for them else vote for runner up to get them out.
IRL your choices are a)Keep the incumbent in b)Remove them.
The odds on bet is the runner up last time. Under the "First person to turn up" system the UK has tactical voting is pretty much the only option you have.
Remember, even the 26000 Labour majority in Glasgow can be toppled, with a sufficiently large sense of outrage, as the SNP had over MP's expenses.
Indeed.
Was it not the blessed Maggie who said "The Market will provide."
HMG basically has nothing approaching an actual "industrial strategy" except (more or less) let any company be bought by anyone who's got the money. That includes not prioritizing local companies over price, unlike those rascally furriners like the Fwench or the Jermans.
Which may explain why most of the British water, gas and electricity and steel industries are heavily foreign owned.
Incidentally how many of those foreign aircraft types have an equivalent mfg by BAe?
Handy ability for a CEO of a war tech company to have, isn't it?
Here's the thing.
Arms is always a boom-to-bust business with Cost+ (or Cost++ if it's a BAe product) looking to get some contract off another government for one thing and another.
It's long been know as the most expensive £ for jobs industry in the world.
Mo' Chang, mo' problems.
But seriously. Keep in mind if the line width is 14 atoms then the oxide thickness is usually 1/10 that so 1-2 atoms thick.
Someone must be thinking "Y'know perhaps we should try making these by building things up, rather than chopping stuff away."
Of course, that's when it gets really expensive.
Well it could be they want in house capability due to their very super secret defense work.
No, I'm fu**ing with you.
What you've got to know about BAe is they are a government con-tractor.
IOW their core skills are
a)Talking BS to Ministers. b)Talking BS to civil servants c) Concoting plausible (but probably unworkable) defense concepts that will cost billions to develop d) Having staff who can fabricate (after all they are meant to be a mfg company :-) )the necessary paperwork to prove all work has been done and how much it costs, so they can get paid.
BAe bought "Smith Associates" who were (and probably still are) hand-in-blouse with GCHQ for the boxes to install in ISP's for on demand snooping serious national security investigations.
BAe are famous for walking away from the Blairs National Identity Register Card scheme. In hindsight because it had other bidders. Why compete when you can be a sole source and can fabricate unauditable invoices for stuff (National Security).
Most notably with biobricks
This technology is not confined to a laboratory.
They are not the first bacteria to mfg objects. Sandstone, for example is made by bacteria.
But 30 years after KE Drexlers "Engines of Creation" it's a bit disappointing this is viewed as impressive (which it is).
You know our site is insecure.
You know the link is insecure.
You know your data is personal.
So any loss of it is not our fault.
Frankly I'm astonished some other devious motherf**kers haven't tried this BS before.
But you can bet they won't be the last IoT supplier to do this.
Of course what they do with that location data before they strip it is anyone's guess.
And OSes that leak this data.
Accident?
Google business is knowing your business.
Whenever Google does something (like Android) the only question is "How does this increase the amount of information that Google can collect about most people who use it?"
The answer is "Quite a lot."
And bit map is not protected against "random flipping"
Which (it turns out) is a thing in automotive electronics.
Once you know these 2 facts it doesn't seem too difficult to predict this system could FUBAR quite easily.
Which it did.
Human brains are made of large numbers of cells with interconnections (fan in or fan out) ratios up (but often a lot lower) about 10 000.
As are every other multicelluar organism I'm aware of.
Transistors on chips have fan outs/ins < 10.
We think we're intelligent so we know this architecture works.
There is little evidence other architectures can do things we call intelligent on the scale we do them. Most "AI" projects I've looked into seem to scale up very badly.
BTW Something people forget about language. It evolved (by people) to be spoken to people.
IRL The fact I could spout a 14 word sentence that has 47 parses would be met by the person I was saying it to along the lines of "WTF are you babbling about? Were you on a Texas hill? Did this guy have a telescope? You're talking bo***ks"
I used to work with a PhD candidate in Philosophy.
She hated dealing with non-philosophers on complex moral issues because they would always take a dispute of there PoV (which is kind of what philosophers do) as a personal attack.
Anti abortionists (although of course they would call themselves "right to lifers") were a particular PITA to her.
Nice.
"Origin story" my wrinkly old bottom.
That would be HC Andersen "The Emperor's New Clothes"
My jacket. Isn't it magnificent? The shop said it's the lightest, warmest, coolest coat I would ever wear. I can barely feel it when I put it on.....
I guess it depends at what point the founders realized their plan was a)completely impossible or b)Infeasible in less than a couple of decades (either to mfg or, in the case of that phone charger, to work).
Let me suggest that few people in the world have so little understanding of how any of it works that they believe in "technology" in the way a medieval peasant belied in "magic."
Despite the ability to acquire a crash course in nearly any branch of technology through the internet and access if this sounds like complete BS.
It seems people quite like being ignorant.:-( .
Depends on the heat load.
IIRC normal parachute nylon is about 70g/m^2 but high temperature materials are more around 700g/m^2 (the HIAD demonstrator was "loosely" a parachute type material).
But Mars Sea Level is 1/160 that of Earth Sea Level, so what would be a baking temperature for an Earth entry could be quite survivable with just Nylon, even though you're slamming into it at very high speed.
Supersonic parachutes designed to deploy at pressures 1/160 of Sea Level even more so.
Historically the big ones are
1) Nuclear weapons deployment from supersonic aircraft
2) Entry to planetary or lunar atmospheres (IE Mars, Titan, Venus, Jupiter).
IIRC the last article I read on the subject was penned by someone at Sandia labs, who don't have a keen interest in planetary exploration. Which may explain the coyness on design.
Exciting idea as Mars atmosphere is so thin you need huge sub sonic 'chutes
Actual problem.
Local police forces too slow in providing mug shots.
Options.
1)Improve data flow with better hardware links (National Broadband?) Scripts to extract pix, prep for secure transfer of known felons.
2) Photograph everyone "because we can." Storage is cheap enough to do so.
Do phrases like "Grossly disproportionate" come to mind? This sounds like the UK's ANPR network, with unlimited data retention.
If anyone less than a government can do it now you can bet it's already been done by at least one government for purposes of exploit insertion, because the people most likely to be signing stuff already are those they are likely to be interested in.
Call it the "Price of privacy."
My study of the British suggests among the Upper Classes it's been "forever"?
While "The Lower Orders" have striven to behave like their "betters" and adopted a similar disdain for knowledge in most forms.
Ever noticed how the British tend to pronounce "intellectual" (with or without the air quotes) with a sneer?
I'm not sure who coined the term "The arrogance of ignorance" but it certainly applies to a significant sector of the "ruling" class.