Re: At home
...further to that, I'd suggest that if lightning has a habit of visiting your house, you should invest in a tall metal flagpole and put it >100m away, preferably uphill.
5761 publicly visible posts • joined 20 Jul 2010
Your post may have contained several accurate and insightful points. However, I stopped reading as soon as I saw you were advocating murder (however vile the supposed target).
Going round suggesting someone kill people you don't agree with makes you a fascist, even if the person you want killed is also a fascist. Fascism is bad, mmmkay?
...others give away FREE soft and pimp users' data...
...All scummy - but all legal.
That particular one is no longer legal (at least not on this side of the Atlantic) thanks to GDPR, brought to us by none other than the "evil undemocratic federalist blah blah SOVRINTY etc. etc." EU.
I can be Fedex plumbing and heating, there's zero problem with that at all, and FedEx attempting to bring a trademark dispute or "passing off" action would have a hell off a job doing so
In principle this might be true, in practice, I reckon you'd be in trouble as soon as you put your company name on the side of a van. Especially considering the availability of high-priced lawyers to large companies.
These things will be orbiting around 20 km below Hubble, which typically points away from Earth.
Things above Hubble (and thence getting in its way) are much more likely to be in the (much) higher geostationary orbit, which is going to be equatorial by default. These are the things that are going to bugger up space telescopy.
I'm only talking about space telescopy here, since ground-based optical telescopy is pretty much redundant since Hubble went up, because of that pesky atmosphere being in the way, which is far more of an issue when trying to image things that are far away (or just small, Dougal).
Also worth noting that the 'next gen' James Webb is due to go up into the L1 Lagrange point, so nowhere near anything in Earth orbit...
My understanding is that modern radio telescopy doesn't use single dishes any more, but multiple dishes spread out over a large area (hundreds to thousands of miles). Presumably these satellites will be reasonably well directional in their broadcasts, since the power requirements scale with the square of the angle subtended, and nobody is going to design something to waste energy in an environment where every milliwatt counts.
With this in mind, will they really cause a genuine problem? Presumably telescope arrays already have mechanisms to filter out interference that only affects one or a small number of dishes, and such interference would only be an issue if it occurs at the wavelengths you're trying to pick up. Can anyone enlighten me with the frequencies these things will actually operate on and how it compares to those used in astronomy?
Given that Starlink will eventually consist of thousands satellites, I can imagine you might have to chuck out a significant proportion of images.
Given that space telescopes tend to focus in on a tiny fraction of the sky, I think you'd probably need orders of magnitude more satellites flying around for it to cause a real problem.
I'd also expect a significant portion of satellites to be orbiting in a similar plane (close to equatorial), in the same direction as the Earth's spin (because you get that convenient boost from the Earth's rotation when launching). For that reason, trying to image things that fall in that plane would be expected to suffer more from the odd satellite getting in the way. As the orbital inclination goes up, you'd expect to get fewer issues - relatively few things are put into polar orbit unlsess strictly necessary.
I've tried 4k monitors, etc. but I need the seperation of multiple displays, as a lot of things try and hog as much of a monitor as they can.
Personally, the best compromise I have found at home with the limits of desk space is two 24" borderless UHD monitors, which give around the same number of pixels as a single 4K monitor, but give a more usable workspace for development work, and will play games on one monitor at a reasonable FPS with a 4 year old graphics card.
I leanred long ago that whenever doing anything anywhere near live data, the first thing you do is
SELECT * INTO TABLE_BACKUP_DATE FROM TABLE
(with the caveat of: beware of cascading deletes on foreign keys)
That, on top of a full database backup if you can afford one, and writing any delete/update statements as select statements first, to do a check that they return the expected number of records.
Is your heap large enough to get hot? (oo-er missus, etc.) Does it get turned (to let oxygen in)?
If the answert to both of the above is yes, I'd be genuinely surprised if they didn't degrade at elast enoguh to be in smallish fragements when you use the compost (and those fragments are only going to add structure to your soil while they degrade further, so not a bad thing). Unlike plastics, in a healthy soil, they should eventually get eaten up by various bugs and worms in any case.
These things are all "compostable" as in "compositble in an industrial composter"; they require three things to break down; heat, moisture and oxygen. Your home compost bin is probably missing at least one of those things. You might have a bit more luck with a big compost heap that gets left out in the rain and a regular turning, but they are intended for a big ol' bio-reactor type composter in a recycling centre somewhere downwind of any houses.
I won't disagree with the idea of getting a plurality of viewpoints, but you have to be able to determine which are reliable, fact-based (without too much cherry-picking) ones, and which are distortions, rhetoric, and lies.
As for Huawei [sp], I have read plenty of articles pointing uot the US Gov't's double-standards here, especially with regards to Cisco. It doesn't take a genius to read between the lines and see that the real motive for the US isn't to stop suspect hardware from snooping on people (especially in a targeted way), but to (continue to) control it.
The tl;dr; here is that you shouldn't trust any hardware manufacturer that may have vested interests, either at a state-actor level, or merely for good ol' fashioned criminal purposes.
...and here we go, they're still at it:
This is a fair point. FB could be doing a lot more to tackle fake news and obvious propaganda. For instance, I've lost count of the number of times I've seen the exact same right-wing propaganda posted in forums. A good example of this is the "Lisbon Treaty 2020" nonsense. It would surely be trivial for a moderator to fact-check things like this that are doing the rounds, discover that they are obviously false, and remove all instances of them. A follow-up on the accounts posting them to check if they are bots (for instance new accounts that have posted only that image, or only up-vote such images with no other activity) couldn't harm either.
The obvious conclusion is that, although FB execs make a big noise about cleaning up their site, they don't really care too much about removing the sort of content that is genuinely harmful. After all, if it draws traffic to their adverts, they're quids in.
Repeat after me:
"The cloud" is just Someone else's computer
Now, bear in mind that if your computer has a problem (crashes, hardware failure, network loss, etc. etc.), the power is in your hands to do something about it (even if that something is scrap it, replace it, and restore everything from backup). If "the cloud" has a problem, the number of things you can do about it is zero (unless you count being put on hold by a call centre drone).
So, the logical thing here is that if you need to back stuff up reliably, the only sure-fire way is to do it yourself. If you're particularly paranoid, you ship those backups to another building, in case the building your computer is in burns down. Depending on the frequency you want to do this, and the amount of stuff you need to back up, the actual solutions may vary from copying a file to a pen drive, to live log-shipping and replication over multiply redundant secure network links to multiple secured off-site bunkers.
...the US are socially and culturally more closely aligned with the UK...
In some respects, yes. In others, hell no! I'm not cheerleading for China here by any stretch of the imagination, but whislt they are becoming more socially open, with a growing middle class, the USA seems to be becoming increasingly socially conservative, with growing inequality, and a tendency towards theocracy by the back door (offically they have a separation of church and state, but you try and find more than a handful of senior politicians there who aren't openly Christian and don't invoke their deity in their reasons for policy making). Not to mention the highest per-capita prison population in the world (0.72%), with a heavy dose of racial bias added on top (closer to 10% if you're black and male)
Personally, I'd prefer the middle ground. Some sort of democratic arrangement, with a large healthy economy, where people can practice their religion in the privacy of their own home if they so want, without state interference, without a huge gap between the rich and poor. Maybe somewhere that doesn't try to dominate the rest of the world either militarily or economically.
An exercise for the reader:
You are able to throw a rock hard enough to reach the Moon. Exactly how hot does it get from atmospheric heating?
There's a reason that most meteorites that are found on Earth are of the metallic type; chondritic (rocky) meteorites are typically small and well fractured by the time they arrive, and those don't have to be travelling at escape velocity to get here. Note that these form in space, so can be reasonably large when they start out. You're going to need a pretty big impact to have a chance of dislodging anything bigger than a pebble into orbit, and those sorts of impact tend to sterilise the area they are about to hit before they even arrive due to the radiant heating from atmospheric impact. The last of these arrived some 65 million years ago, and caused a bit of a kerfuffle at the time...
Now, there's an argument that thngs could arrive here inside rocks that have been knocked off other planets, notably ones without a substantial atmosphere, if the inside of that rock doesn't get too hot, and whatever is inside it can survive the force of impact, and is also resistant to the irradiation it will have received whilst in space, possibly for millions of years.
You could easily survive there with a suitable space suit. However, if you were on Earth (already wearing that space suit), and something hit you hard enough to propel you to the Moon, how do you rate your chances?
There's a not-so-subtle distinction between being able to survive in an environment, it being possible to transport you to that environment, being able to survive that transport, and the combination of all three...
My understanding is that 'smart' locks also have a physical lock because you need to be able to open them in the event of a power failure. That means that they are, by definition, less secure than a standard lock, because they have an additional attack surface. (physical lock vs physical lock and smart lock).
As anyone who has spent some time doing it as a hobby will tell you, many physical locks are laughably easy to pick if you know how. I would imagine the 'backup' on a smart lock will, in most cases, be added as an afterthought, so will also be substantially less secure than an equivalent priced decent physical-only lock. I'd not be surpirsed if it could be picked by 'bumping' alone, or with a 'master' key, making the lock essentially useless against any professional burglar.
The only advantage I can think of for a smart lcok is the ability to audit (i.e. track) who is opening it, and when. If it's your lock, that's an advantage; if it's a lock that you have to use that does not belong to you (as in this case), it's a disadvantage, and a potentially significant one from the perspective of privacy.
Security and privacy are normally seen as a trade-off (i.e. you sacrifice some of one to gain some of thd other). In the case of 'smart' locks, it seems you are sacrificing both, to a varying degree, for a perceived gain that in most cases is no such thing.
Yeah, pretty sure that's a picture taken somewhere (else) in Europe. The clue's in the fact that it's not sufficiently yellow to be British fast food, and also it's in more than one language (and one of the isn't Welsh).
I'm also assuming here that you are American, in which case might I bring the following exhibits to the stand: Hormone fed beef, chlorine-washed chicken, and absolutely everything stuffed with high-fructose corn syrup. I'd much rather eat offal to be honest. I'm quite partial to liver and bacon, and last time I was in France I had a very nice salad made from duck gizzards.
I just use a faked email address. Most guest wi-fi sign-ups don't bother to verify it, before logging you in.
The problem with most public wi-fi is that the contention to bandwidth ratio is so appallingly high (i.e. 50 people trying to use the same 1MB backhaul) that you really are better off using 4G if you aren't in a black-spot.
"Good&Co is one of those startups that believe it’s your personality, not your skills, that define success in the workplace"
Meanwhile, in real ife, I have to clean up the mess made by the 'personalities' because they don't have any technical skills.
If ever there's a prima facie example of marketeering bullshit over reality, here it is.