That depends entirely on what they are listening with. One sub set of ham radio is called fox hunting which is a gameified form of radio direction finding. Some guys are really good at it. If you annoy one of them and they are persistent they can potentially track you down. The Feds of course have very sophisticated tools far and above what's available to you but if you've drawn that kind of attention you are already in deep trouble and looking at jail time. Powerful software defined radios like the RTL-SDR are inexpensive and with a PC can be used to scan broad swathes of spectrum and even decode and store transmissions. People can setup their own DIY listening posts this way. For someone with the right setup and looking at the right time they would notice you are using an encrypted transmission. To figure out where you are would involve repeated detections from multiple points. An adjacent topic is pirate radio stations. The Youtube channel Ringway Manchester has a series of videos about historical UK pirate stations and their stories. You might find it interesting.
What threeio said is right. Technically, encoding data digitally isn't encryption and is fine, and there are digital modes used by Hams. But if you were to come up with your own scheme I could see some sweaty old timers try to accuse you of encryption just because their $3k Yaesu can't decode it. There's a good reason why a lot of recent innovation in the hacker and maker spaces has been in unlicensed bands. The rules for the Ham bands were written decades ago when just trying to talk to people around the world was considered experimental. Now its trivial to do that with HF with the right equipment and a bit of reading. The FCC tends to neglect the ham space which is both a good and bad thing. Lack of attention means people are probably getting away with doing a lot of harmless things they technically shouldn't be. But it also means we are stuck with rules from the 1930's.
Using encryption on ham bands is illegal yes. You can use it on commercial bands if you buy a license from the FCC and ISM (common 2.4ghz/5Ghz) is mostly fair game as well. The practical reality is people are probably getting away with abusing it because the FCC is not omniscient and has limited resources. For an individual to draw the ire of the FCC they need to make a nuisance of themselves. Occasionally you hear of people getting arrested for using illegal cell jammers and the like. I can't recall hearing of someone getting caught using encryption.
For something like this to really get a crackdown you would need a watershed event like RC aircraft had with cheap drones. The point where very capable hardware became extremely cheap and accessible to people who know nothing about the hobby. The RC aircraft community effectively self policed for decades because the bar for entry was high enough that anyone getting involved had to engage with the community. Drones changed that. And the FAA had to step in and regulate. I think we are getting close with cheap Chinese radios. But even Baofengs still require programming and educating yourself. Devices like the flipper zero are far more damaging. Even though they are limited in their capabilities, they make it trivial for the user to make a nuisance of themselves in ways that are hard to ignore. Its probably a matter of time until a cheap radio hits Amazon that does everything for you and permits non hobbyists to ruin everything. Imagine something as capable as a HackRF but as easy to use as an iPhone. Then we have problems.
It could be a mistranslation and just refer to DTS/CTCSS. The cpu isn't powerful enough to implement real AES encryption and the datasheet doesn't mention a hardware crypto module. It could be an inversion scrambler, that's not difficult to implement in software and even if it doesn't have that stock someone could implement it. But scramblers have limited utility now. They are really only useful to annoy others, they are trivial to defeat. Undocumented encryption capabilities are also not unheard of with Chinese made ham radios either. Seems the FCC really only cares when people make a menace of themselves and draw their attention.
At some point its not about deterrent or social benefit but justice. People can say its not fair or productive for people like him to be locked up forever. Well, what about their victims? How many people's financial futures were destroyed by SBF? Is it fair to all those people that he will get to live a normal life? And likely a comfortable well off one at that. He already had a privileged family and I have no doubt it will be easy for him to profit off his story once he gets out. The hardly seems right.
Its all very messy. The scientific method is about the best system we have. But the scientific method and academia are not the same thing. I've yet to find anyone besides some weird philosophers and contrarians who actually doubt the scientific method. But I find more and more people every day who doubt academia. And yeah. Its and industry made up of fallible people with incentives that are not aligned with the stated goals of said industry. We've had scandals. We've had falsified data. We've had falsified careers. And then there's the replication crisis where its possible an entire discipline is built on a foundation of slop. And then you have people who aren't technical themselves but chant trust the science as some kind of religious mantra. Which helps nothing frankly. And this mess leaves plenty of room for bad actors who take advantage of the situation and push their own warped agendas.
People act like this is the end of the world for regulation but it isn't. Nor is getting rid of chevron deference a bad thing. SCOTUS' intent here is pretty clear. If congress wants to delegate a power to the executive then they must explicitly do so. And courts shouldn't take regulators at their word in cases anymore but actually test to see if what they claim makes sense or is in good faith, you know, like everyone else must do in court.
The actual issue relevant to this article is that America lacks any real overarching privacy law. We need one badly. Congress is unlikely to come up with one on its own. So people need to get active and lobby for one. We've made good progress with right to repair in the last few years so that shows doomerism is just that. Get off your ass and spread the word. Normies have been deaf to us saying this is problem for years. Maybe when you tell them that their insurance will go up every time they have spirited drive they will actually pay attention.
Yes and know. The implication of it being an "unsecured email server" to me sounds like they spun up a VM for some reason instead of using Exchange online.
The system owner is responsible for security of systems they have deployed on Fedramp services. Microsoft is responsible for securing the service but they don't make sure every vm you spun up on Azure meets your own security baselines. Those vary not just between agency but even specific site. Expecting the vendor to do all of that is an impossible task.
Yes dating apps have a fundamental contradiction and enshitification is inevitable. But what struck me the most was how amateurish this article was. Citing tiktok users. Overusing phrases. Poor pacing. Its another example of the enshitification of journalism.
Game mechanics are generally not copyrightable. Nintendo did file patents for some mechanics in the newest Zelda game. I don't know how well those would hold up under court scrutiny, bad patents are approved every day. Pokemon's mechanics were also not fully novel, it was inspired by what was already in 1997 the well established JRPG formula.
Sometimes I wonder if we should go back to the days of regulated airways. Yeah the cheapest ticket will be $500 but these things wouldn't be a problem anymore.
The only way I see this working with out current economics and IP law is if the people training models license the work they are using. And a traditional license wouldn't do, it would have to be one specific to training AI models.
As to the question of worth, obviously OpenAI's models have value without the training data. Just having a collection of images does not make a trained AI. But the total value of the system is a combination of that model and the training data.
I think there likely is little cause for concern. Is it contributing to poor health? Maybe but if it is then its a small contribution. There are much bigger issues like poor diet and lifestyle. HFCS for example was easy to link to poor health and it should probably be outlawed.
No but that's a silly standard. I can't go back in time and blood test my infant self. We have microplastics everywhere because of their widespread use. That's been occurring for a few generations now. There is no rational reason to think that we only accumulated them when we first noticed them. No the rational explanation is its been that way as long as we've been mass exposing ourselves to plastics which is right around the end of the second world war. And if car tires are as big of a contributor as some studies indicate then its been even longer because vulcanized rubber is a prewar invention.
IIRC there is some evidence of hormonal changes related to some volatiles associated with certain types of plastics. That might have something to do with it. But Obesity can also easily be explained by more mundane things like terrible diet and lifestyle and there's a huge body of evidence to show that if you change those, you lose weight.
>So I don't think we know enough to say confidently that people aren't just dropping dead inexplicably.
Well proving a negative is impossible. Further research into the potential health effects is needed. But at this stage I think worrying over every report that we found plastic in more and more places isn't cause for alarm until we actually know its dangerous.
>What upper bounds?
Well we know it isn't acutely toxic because people aren't just dropping dead inexplicably. And we know it isn't drastically raising cancer rates because, again those haven't inexplicably shot up.
Have we been able to link any real harm to microplastics? I know it sounds bad intuitively. But can we draw a link to any diseases? What if this just amounts to fear mongering?
>nother factor that could be at play is that all the non-Tesla EV makers have recently announced they will switch their chargers to NACS, but this will take a couple of years to roll out, so it’s not a great time to buy a non-Tesla since it already has legacy charging hardware.
This is a big factor and one I note to anyone I know who is thinking of buying an EV. You don't want to be stuck with a dead end tech. Buying a non-Tesla that hasn't already adopted the north american charger is a foolish move at this point. I'm sure there will be conversion kits for many models at some point but that's another cost and one you likely want to have a professional do. Best to either buy a Tesla or just wait a year or two.
Except it completely backfires when you have a workstation with multiple users who infrequently use it. Existing patching solutions, like microsoft's own system center have a hard time coping with applications that live in app data. So you end up with 8 instances of teams on a system. 6 of which are months out of date.
That's asking a lot of windows. But as a former sys admin, that sounds like it would make things harder to manage. So its linked. But its not really there. So existing userdata backup automation wouldn't catch it. Sorry your Outlook psts are gone. User data should live with users. The problem isn't with that paradigm. Its that its abused and wide open.