335 karma · joined April 7, 2019
"Too cheap to meter" was a promise in the 50's regarding nuclear power. Since then it turned out to be one of the most expensive ways to produce electricity if not the most expensive.
That's right. We would have been completely lost were it not for... books.
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_der_Konzeptfahrzeuge_von...
Except being exposed without protection to the hostile internet is their very reason to exist. I expect such devices to be developed with the awareness that they are going to be attacked by capable adversaries. Thus secure coding practices are to be followed and state of the art exploit mitigation techniques employed on the OS level. There's no excuse for high severity vulnerabilities to be found in these kinds of products.
If the law ever changes you may have a better chance. Or such games will not be published in the first place.
What is striking me as quite disingenuous though is the loud complaining when the manufacturer does what was made clear right from the start. As if somehow a betrayal or theft was happening here which clearly isn't the case.
If you should ever bother too look into your end user license agreements (EULA), you'd know you never owned anything to begin with. Nothing was ever sold to you. You acquired a license to use the product under the specified terms set forth in the EULA. If the terms of this license agreement don't sit right with you, I suggest you don't take the deal.
curl 'https://google.com/complete/search?client=chrome&hl=en&gl=en...'
The article make it very clear: Without civil nuclear power the maintenance cost of the nuclear powered sub fleet would skyrocket. The civil nuclear power generation masks the costs associated with maintaining the necessary know how and industrial base to fuel military nuclear reactors.
> however keep in mind that nuclear reactors like the EPRs being built in the UK are designed such that producing the necessary fission products to produce weapons is basically impossible.
Really. Last I checked these reactors were fueled with 5% enriched uranium oxide. Plutonium is formed by transmutation of U-238 which is in ample supply in that fuel. What's really stopping the UK to claim that Plutonium is the 2022 shuttering of their only reprocessing plant in Sellafield.
It's not like they need more Plutonium anyway. The UK currently sits on a 140t civilian stockpile of Plutonium in addition to whatever the military has. The pit of a nuclear bomb (fission or fusion) requires approximately 5kg Plutonium.
Where I live, building affordable housing for low and medium income is at the moment financially unattractive, so it isn't undertaken in the numbers required to meet projected demand. Offering luxury housing for the small segment of the population able to afford it, won't make a difference.
https://www.reuters.com/markets/europe/german-housing-shorta...
https://www.reuters.com/markets/europe/german-home-building-...
While the precise mechanism by which the #4 reactor in Chernobyl was destroyed in 1986 was rooted in the flawed design combined with unsafe operation, this does not mean that other reactor designs cannot fail catastrophically with loss of containment and release of radioactive material. Particularly when operated outside of their specification through operator error, accidents or a combination thereof.
How would you know unless you took precautions? Static electricity doesn't necessarily make itself obvious by arcing, yet the voltage can be high enough to damage sensitive components.
Also damage sometimes isn't obvious in the sense that that a component or circuit is killed outright. Instability, reduced lifetime and increased susceptibility to future ESD events are other known consequences of electrostatic discharges.
For more information: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JkECJlA2Fg4
When buying a trinocular it should be a simul-focal one where the stereo microscope and the camera are focused and available all at the same time (no switching of the light path to the camera). Example for such a trinocular microscope: AmScope SM-4NTP. A bincular microscope with matching specs will be slightly cheaper.
Louis Rossmann explaining in more detail: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_eQrbop-J4
Also don't skimp on the meter, buy something decent. There is a lot to be said about the real life and noticeable differences in cheap and quality meters when testing or repairing electronics but in the realm of embedded device hacking I particularly found the following features handy:
- A high speed voltage bar at the bottom of the instrument which tells you if a voltage is indeed stable. You can detect the TX pin of serial lines with that. Cheap meters may have that bar but the update speed is way too slow to be useful
- A high speed and loud continuity tester. Many cheap meters (and some expensive as well) have a large delay between shorting out the leads and the buzzer going off. That's rather annoying when you can't make good contact long enough (also see below for test leads).
After working with a cheap meter for a while (Uni-T) I went for a Brymen BM869s and never looked back.
Also get yourself some high quality pointy, hard gold coated test leads. I personally can wholeheartedly recommend the Probemaster 8000 series.
To cut a very long story short, what should have happened a long time ago in Germany is to treat internet access at a reasonable speed (however that is determined) like access to electricity or the plain old telephone system: It's the law you get connected like everyone else at the price everyone else pays, even when you are in a very rural setting. Leaving that decision to commercial interests, has lead to very slow or unavailable rural internet infrastructure because either the price would be ridiculously high to become connected or the companies would lose money.
It's political failure, plain and simple.
Looking back in time, the original sin was committed in Germany in the early 80s when the SPD run government understood that fiber optic networks were the future for the telephone system and television distribution. They had a 30 year plan to convert West-Germany's telecom infrastructure to fiber. That was way before the internet, but would that plan have been enacted, Germany would have sat on a high speed fiber infrastructure in the 90s when the Internet exploded onto the scene.
Unfortunately the conservative CDU government under Kohl immediately scrapped that plan when they came into power and went for cable as the distribution medium for TV and the telephone system continued to operate on copper at least on the last mile. So here we are in the 2020s with crappy cable modems and crappy DSL connections. (Where available.)
Because of an intended functionality of many of those file formats, which makes them quite dangerous when coming from untrusted sources: Macros.
- Funny. Quite obviously the issue was not the possibilities of tsunamis in Germany. It was the fact, that this particular power plant was not constructed in an area prone to massive tsunamis without sufficient tsunami protection. In Germany you would replace tsunami with different natural disasters. For example earth quakes. Yes, parts of Germany experience earth quakes. Usually they are very light, but every few centuries there's one able to level cities. The same style of organizational failure which left Fukushima unprotected against major tsunamis could have left German nuclear power plants without insufficient earth quake protection.
- The public witnessed that a nuclear power plant cut off from external power supply and without emergency power generation can run out of control just from the decay heat. Very few people knew before that incident that nuclear power plants don't have an off-switch and don't necessarily fail safely in exceptional situations.
- Also everybody got to see (once more) what failure of containment meant and that Japan got a big break because much of the radioactive plume was blown out to sea. Something like that happening in the middle of densely populated Europe would be very ugly and very expensive.
- Nuclear was already quite unpopular in Germany since Chernobyl and its nuclear fallout over Germany and Fukushima was just another big nail in its coffin.
Maybe that was your particular experience but generally that wasn't the case unless we're talking about a server connected via UUCP to the rest of the world, possibly with a dialup link between the servers and transferring news articles every few hours or once a day.
NNTP employs a flooding algorithm whereby every server offers all messages received to every peer except the ones showing up in the Path Header of the message. Peers were first offered the unique Message-Id each message has and could then decline or accept the transfer. Programs like innfeed implemented this conversation as a bidirectional streaming protocol (RFC4644). We're talking seconds for a text posting to be propagated to every half decently connected news server on the planet.
The type and quality of moderation is up to the moderation team. Might be automatic, might involve a review by a human for each post.
As someone else already mentioned, there are groups which were configured to be moderated but have no moderators at all to approve posts. Either they disappeared or there never were any. To participate in these groups you have to set the "Approved:" header in your post yourself. Obviously that would also be the way to circumvent the moderation process for any other moderated group. The countermeasure is that the moderators send out a cancel control message which instructs all the newsservers receiving it or at least those who honor cancel messages, to delete this specific message.
In my opinion Usenets greatest strength was also its downfall. It is a distributed system without central authority over who could connect to the network or firm control over groups and their contents. To connect to it as a peer, you just had to find at least one Usenet site willing to exchange messages (peer) with you. Usually that wasn't a problem. ISPs, universities, organizations of all kinds were running their own servers, offering Usenet client access to their customers and members for no additional charge.
In a distributed system without central authority, innovation is exceedingly hard though. The protocols and features were basically set in stone. Taking the concept of offering discussions among users to a centralized or closed system made it possible to innovate very fast and offer superior features to the users.
As the article pointed out, that wasn't the only protocol which got picked up that way and innovated upon until it displaced its origins.
Since Usenet is still frozen feature wise were it was 30 or more years ago, I don't see a revival coming anytime soon.
In Germany they didn't. The plan to exit from nuclear power was enacted by a conservative coalition of CDU/FDP in 2011.
Funnily enough the year before they had dismantled the original exit plan from the year 2000 that was enacted by a coalition of SPD and the Green Party. But Fukushima happened and the old conservative position of "nuclear power good" suddenly became very, very unpopular in Germany.
> Climate change is not a pressing issue, with the rise of renewable we will clean up our act way before it cause serious issues.
That's not the scientific consensus on the issue and could not be further from the truth. We're already experiencing serious consequences from a changing climate. When we don't change now this will escalate to catastrophic consequences.
> it’s the left voice that doesn’t understand the conservatives and the value they bring.
Oh the left likely understands those values pretty well. They just happen to consider the promise of "everything will remain as it was" not so valuable when there is a high price to pay for refusing to change and adapt to a changing world.
> Changing things imply destruction, and the desire to change everything fast has
We would not have to move fast if the mostly conservative governments running Germany in the past 30 years would have used their time to gradually enact sufficient change.
> consequences, thus a return to traditions has a lot of merits.
There really never was a traditional world view or a way to live where everything was okay for everyone. But I'm not surprised you'd say that. Looking backwards and not forward is the core value of conservatism.
Wait until you see what millions of people displaced by rising sea levels are going to do to political and economical stability worldwide. That's not going to happen in a far distant future, that's within 30 years. Bangladesh for example is expected to lose 17% of its land by 2050, displacing millions. Miami-Dade county will be 60% under water by 2060 when current projections come to pass.
> If climate change were really really as dire as some say it is, we wouldn’t be half-assing our way via renewable energies which don’t have a power grid or power store nearly capable enough to handle a “fully electric future”
The realities of climate change and its dire consequences aren't some doomsayers internet theories. We're completely half-assing our response to it despite the scientific consensus on the brutal consequences of our doing.
> We should “go nuclear”
That ship has sailed at least 20 years ago. Starting now with average construction times of 10 years plus they would come too late to make a difference.
Renewables are cheaper to build and faster to construct so that's were the world is heading.
https://www.iea.org/news/renewable-power-on-course-to-shatte...
DANE was never limited to browsers. Example:
https://ssl-tools.net/mailservers/proton.me
Though support in that space is very patchy as well and maybe going nowhere. In any case, it serves as an example that DNSSEC can be built upon, even if the new ideas don't necessarily make it.
Much of it not interesting security wise.
> That's not a manageable amount for one individual, so I wouldn't expect it to be systemetically reviewed.
I settle for people thinking like attackers and going for the attack surfaces.