Looking at their web site, I notice a few things. Namely, if you want any specifics, you need to "Inquire" by providing contact information so that their horde of sales representatives can contact you with the information you desire. But for the bit of information you can get without giving them contact information, I quote the following little gem from their web site involving modes of operation.

Key Expansion

When very high rates of data encryption are necessary, key expansion can be used in which the QKD key material is expanded through a deterministic random bit generator (DRBG) algorithm to produce the one time pad key. This mode reduces the amount of QKD key material necessary for encryption, yet still provides exceptionally high data confidentiality.

I find it quite enlightening that they claim that using "Key expansion" that they create a "one time pad". That immediately raises all sorts of red flags since what's created isn't a "one time pad". And the fact that they obviously don't know the actual meaning of that phrase calls into question their competence about cryptography.

Actually, both the Model I, II, III and 4 used the Z80 as the microprocessor. However, there were some fairly major differences between the Model II and the rest of the product line.

Model II - Had a 256 byte boot ROM that was fairly rapidly switched out for RAM during the boot process leaving it with 64K of actual RAM after booting. The other TRS-80 computers had a fairly large amount of RAM that remained accessible and was used during normal processing (for instance, BASIC was in ROM) and for the most part, their RAM was limited to 48K. The lower 16K of their memory space was devoted to the ROM, memory mapped IO, and video RAM.

Video - The models I, II, and 4 used memory mapped video. The Model II used a separate video controller with its own RAM.
Keyboard - Models I, II, and 4 used a memory mapped switch matrix. The Model II used a keyboard controller and IO port.

With that kind of hardware differences, most software on the Model II was most certainly not compatible with the other models. But not because of the processor. But simply because of the I/O to get information to and from the user.

I believe you misspoke. I will believe that you had a TRS-80 with "Level 1" BASIC and you later upgraded it to "Level 2" BASIC, but you most certainly didn't upgrade it to a Model 2 TRS-80. The Model 2 TRS-80 was a "Business Computer" with an 8" Floppy disk drive.

Actually in a design I saw some time ago, the cross section of the ribbon would be more like an arc of a circle. No straight line path of a micrometeorite would be capable of severing the cable.

It seems to me that most of you didn't bother to read the article. In a nutshell, DARPA wants a small electrically isolated chip that acts as a RFID chip and sends an encrypted response to an interrogation. Method of use

1. Specialized probe scans chip. Obtains serial number of chip.
2. Specialized probe sends serial number information to centralized server.
3. Centralized server sends back to probe query string.
4. Probe passes onto chip, the query string.
5. Chip sends back encrypted response to query string.
6. Probe passes back to centralized server, encrypted chip response.
7. Centralized server sends back to probe "good" or "bad" results.

Notice that the encryption key may be unique for each chip. The keys are known by the centralized server, but don't need to be known by anything else.

In order to create a counterfeit, the attacker needs to do one of two things.
1. Duplicate an existing chip to include the serial number and encryption key.
2. Create a new chip with a new serial number and encryption key and implant that serial number and key into the database maintained by the centralized server.

If an attacker is capable of compromising the central server, then it's game over. But the assumption is that is a "hard task". So the security is likely to be aimed at protecting the encryption key for each chip. Perhaps store the key in TLC Nand and arrange for the value to be corrupted if it's exposed to light (and of course, encapsulate the chip in an opaque material).

So when you manufacture a "non-counterfeit" component, you
1. Manufacture component.
2. Glue a chip to the component.
3. Register the chip with the centralized server.

To verify that a component isn't a counterfeit.
1. Scan for chip and do the entire song and dance to verify the chip.

That pig doesn't fly as you stated it. But let's look at the actual situation. Namely, that you don't have 3 stops involved. The number of stops is 5.

A - B - M - C - D

A = Suburb for 1st passenger.
B = Destination for 2nd passenger
M = Metro center/ticket exchange point
C = Destination for 1st passenger.
D = Suburb for 2nd passenger.

Now the first passenger wants to travel from A to C and the second passenger wants to travel from D to B. But by having both passengers meet at M and swap tickets, they actually pay for the trips A to B and D to C which is a lower cost than the A to C plus D to B trips.

I don't see a problem with the police using Google Glass provided that if they do, the use is non discretionary and that the unedited video is provided in full upon demand by the public or accused. After all, we don't want the police turning off their glass if they're about to do something questionable. And we don't want anything that's in the favor of the accused to be discarded because it's "not relevant"

Indeed. In fact, law enforcement seems to be the only profession in the USA where one swears an oath upon entering and immediately afterwards does everything in their power to circumvent the spirit of the oath while staying barely within the letter of the oath.

Lying? Perfectly legal for a police officer to lie to you. After all, it makes them "more effective". But don't you dare attempt to lie to the police officer.

Get pulled over at a traffic stop? One of the first things the officer will do upon interacting with you is to ask "Do you know why I pulled you over?" Can you say "voluntary self incrimination"? Well, you just waived your fifth amendment rights simply by answering a casual sounding question. After all that KNOW why they pulled you over. They just want to make you admit it to them so if you decide to fight, you'll have a harder time.

Well, the article did state that he had prescription lenses. And from my own personal experience with glasses, I have to assume that you either do not wear glasses, or if you do, you have a rather weak prescription. I have a rather strong prescription and if I change glasses, it causes me mild disorientation. In fact, when I change prescription, I will not wear my new glasses until the morning after I get them. Switching in the middle of the day is just too much eye strain. I also at one point in time purchases two identical pair of glasses with on tinted and the other clear (couldn't use autogray lenses since at the time I was working in NDI and the ultraviolet light would have caused autogray lenses to darken which would have been bad for inspections). Even though both glasses used the same prescription and had the same frame style, there was enough difference that switching glasses still caused some mild problems for me. So the comment about a "non-google glass prescription glasses" is rather short sighted of you. Some of use really can't simply swap glasses mid day without problems.

I'm gonna assume you didn't bother to actually read the article. The prototype does not include a camera. I will admit that the possibility of a camera being added in the future exists, but as currently designed, no camera.

A long time ago when I was in the military, I found out about a little tidbit of information. You see, sometimes congressmen go on "official trips" and they are reimbursed in full for all expenses they incur related to that trip. And sometimes, said congressmen are accompanied by members of the military. Well, the military members were not reimbursed for all their expenses and had to pay out of pocket for some items. Well, the congressmen saw the military members spending money above and beyond what they would have if they weren't on the trip and thought that was unfair. So a new law was passed. And now the military members are reimbursed in full ... provided they're on a TDY escorting congressmen.....Mind, the members of the military go on many TDY assignments and escorting congressmen is just one of them. But only TDY assignments for escorting congressmen are reimbursed in full.

And that question seems to have the context of "It's OK to spy on the general public. But it's not OK to spy on congressmen".Somewhat like the many laws we have on the books that specifically exclude congressmen.

Oh, the AC you're responding to knows all about the advertising model. And he or she is completely correct. If you're getting something for free, you're not the customer. In fact, you're most likely the product. And in the case of the advertising model, YOU ARE THE PRODUCT. The advertisers are the customer. The content is merely bait to attract product. Now what's the product? Simple. Ears and eyeballs. Or to be more specific, exposure to ears and eyeballs. Your ears and eyeballs being exposed to the advertisers. So do you now understand what "you're not the customer"?

Interesting, there seems to be plenty of CCTV footage on youtube. Did everyone in this compilation get fired? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGSFQxxJaZk
 

I really hope that Ford over designs that truck since unlike steel, aluminum has no fatigue limit. And for those of you who don't know what a fatigue limit is, with some metals, they bend under stress and when the stress is removed, return to their original shape. And if the amount of bending is under their fatigue limit, then that bending process can happen an infinite number of times and no harm is done. However, if the stress is over the fatigue limit, then eventually, the metal will crack and fail. Steel has a fatigue limit, aluminum does not.

So both materials have their advantages and disadvantages.
Steel. It corrodes fairly easily, but has a good fatigue limit. So if you keep it from rusting, it will pretty much last forever.
Aluminum, doesn't corrode, but doesn't have a fatigue limit. So eventually, it's going to fail. No matter what you do, it will eventually fail. But the length of time until it fails can be extended by minimizing flex by using more material than what is strictly needed to handle the load. Or if you don't use excess material, inspect it frequently for fatigue cracks, and if any are found, repair them. On aircraft, they do have a strict inspection schedule and frankly, a lot of the inspection process involves crack finding via dye penetrant and X-ray. Somehow, I don't think such an inspection process would be done with a Ford F150. And I worry that Ford just might not bother to overbuild that truck since doing so will make it more expensive and heavier. I instead suspect that they would design it to last maybe 5 years or so under "typical use" until the frame starts to crack. A "reasonable" service life and guaranteed obsolescence.
 

Unfortunately, it wouldn't work. In order to get what you want, you'd need to find a phase change material with a melting point of about 35 degrees F. And even then, it's unlikely to work since the beverage you'd be pouring into the mug would be already very close to 35F and as such, there wouldn't be much or any energy transfer between the beverage and the phase change material. But if you did get such a mug, you could store it in the freezer. Then the phase change material would freeze and when you used the mug, it would keep your beverage close to 35F until all of the material melted.