It's worth a giggle and, maybe, a thoughtful moment."
It's worth a giggle and, maybe, a thoughtful moment."
the Nyquist limit of the audio sampling hardware of a cell phone over instruction rate of a modern CPU is a pretty small fraction.
The "audio" in question is most likely all below 24 kHz, that being the Nyquist limit for the 48 kHz sampling hardware, unless it happens that some phones can actually sample faster, and have microphones that can respond to higher frequencies.
The instruction rate of the CPUs in question is many times that frequency.
It doesn't sound likely.
Using multiple cores turns out to help the attack (by shifting down the signal frequencies).
Say what? Through what mechanism would multiple cores shift down the frequency? And what about parallel instruction streams contributing to noise?
TEMPEST was a details-secret government requirement meant to defeat means of eavesdropping on classified computer data from its electromagnetic emissions. I guess they need to include audio too.
My impression is that the noise comes from the power supply, not the CPU. I can certainly hear it with some computers, and it is related to work on the video card in my experience. I'm astonished that you can actually pull data from that, and in fact I'd like to see independent confirmation before I believe it.
Have you got one where it's Paul, Ringo, and dogs filling in for John and George? If it's halfway decent, they could get the band back together.
Like me. I live alone, and so I don't cook very often. Mostly I get home from work, heat something up quickly and that is dinner.
Get yourself a pressure canner and a bunch of 1L jars. Take a weekend to learn how to use it properly. Then, go out and buy yourself a bunch of whole chickens, some potatoes, stewing beef, chicken and beef broth (or just make your own), carrots, celery, and onions. Ensure you have some salt and pepper and some common spices. Roast a few whole chickens, remove the meat, and stick them in jars (one each), top with water and a bit of salt, and put in the pressure canner for 90 mins (you can save the bones for broth). Put some raw beef cubes in the bottom of some other jars, with cubed potatoes, and chopped celery, carrot, and onions, until nearly full, and top with beef broth. Put in the pressure canner for 90 mins. Do the same with raw chicken instead of beef. The raw meat will cook completely within the jar during the pressure canning process, and comes out seriously tender and juicy.
A typical home pressure canner can do 7L of food at once. That can mean seven chickens, seven jars of stew, or seven jars of soup at your disposal, which only need heating, and which only have the ingredients you put in them.
The possibilities are huge, and not only do you get to select the ingredients, but the end result is completely shelf-stable (so long as you follow the directions correctly and verify the seals on your jars are solid). It's usually recommended you eat anything you can this way within a year, but I've heard of people who have ate canned items 5 - 10 years old that tasted just fine (you may lose some of the nutritional factors this way, mind you).
It's really pretty easy, and the US government Dept of Agriculture, as well as some other canning companies and organizations publish tested recipes online. So long as you take care of them the jars themselves last nearly forever, and only need their snap lids replaced, so you can reuse them to your hearts content.
I took up canning roughly a year ago for my family, and we currently have over 40L of food put away, including whole chickens (deboned), crab meat (I live by the ocean, and own some crab traps), vegetables, pasta sauce with meat, jams, jellies, whole fruits, soups, and stews. I'm planning on doing some chilli in the near future. It's so easy for even one of us to have a tasty, nutritious meal -- and considering I can raw pack the stews especially means I can easily make seven meals in about two hours time that are shelf-stable and which take just minutes to heat in the microwave.
I wish I had known what I know now about pressure canning when I was single. You can often buy food cheaper in bulk -- perhaps in quantities more than you'd typically be able to eat in a single week. You can control the sizes (as jars are available in a variety of sizes). Shelf-stability. Quick reheating. Nothing in the jar you don't put in there yourself. And if you plan ahead just a little bit, you can put up a lot of future meals in just a few hours.
Also we don't people who say I will just take the basic and not kill my self pulling the 80+ work week.
Maybe we can employ more people to teach proofreading skills?
It's not at all clear what you're saying here. But I did get that part about how I shouldn't be able to do the extra work I want to do in order to make more money, because you think I shouldn't be allowed to do that as long as some other guy might want to learn how to do my job and do it instead of me.
You do realize how ridiculous that sounds, right? Shut down the people willing to do the extra hustle, even though they're the ones who pay most of the taxes? Yeah, that'll get those new businesses started. Not.
And Iraq had WMDs.
When you have plenty of other things you can pick from ("The IRS didn't pick on certain political groups" or "It wasn't Al Queda, it was random people on the street upset about a YouTube video!" or "You can keep your health insurance, period"), why trot out this one? Iraq did have WMDs, and used them to slaughter thousands and thousands of people. They had, and continued to make long-range missiles, and did everything possible to keep inspectors out of certain areas, even as truckloads of stuff like VX went to Syria. When you're going to grouse about the government lying, at least stick with complaints that hold up under casual scrutiny.
Maybe people should be free to speak their mind without being arrested. I'd rather live in a world where someone can call me a name and not be locked up than any alternative.
I have to agree to that, though that doesn't mean that they shouldn't expect a public backlash. Free speech is not without consequence, but that consequence should not be arrest. The problem with free speech is that there will always be someone who decides they are offended by something said by someone else, but if we are don't exist in a society where we can debate the views of others, then it is very troubling.
I wonder what Orwell would have to say?
No, actually it does not. Biological sex and ancestry are objective, biological constructs. Gender and race are both social constructs, created for political and social purposes.
I can easily agree with 'race' here and probably replace it with 'genetic descent', but gender!? Physical difference in gender do make a difference. The male of the species are not capable of giving birth and the female of the species is not capable of producing a child without the male of the species providing semen (there may be exceptions, but I am having difficulty finding any evidence of the 0.0001%). How we handle the differences in appearance and gender is one thing, but there are still biological factors at play.
In Europe whe had millions of people killed at gunpoint for the content of someone's speech. This is a very tangible problem that has to be dealt with.
No, you had millions of people killed because millions of other people decided to actually kill them. If they had decided not to embrace the idea of killing them and actually do it, the words that someone else spoke would have remained just that: spoken words. What you're saying is that, what
Have we no obligation to take sides?
Sure, if you want to look at it that way. But you should have no power to lock people away for disagreeing with you. Do you really want criminal prosecutors to decide which "facts" are true in every online argument and debate? How would that work, exactly, in your utopia? If I content that Jenny McCarthy is a twit and wrong in her views, but that she didn't "threaten herd immunity" in a significant way
Are you even thinking about what you're saying?