I get that there was probably a panicy passenger, but given 4.5 hours to land if they turn around or 4 hours to land if they continue to their destination and nothing but water under them either way, they may have actually prolonged the situation slightly by turning back.
The Pirate Bay: The Movie coming soon to a torrent site near you.
Thanks for this, I, in proud slashdot tradition, did not read the article, but it was my layperson's understanding that it'd have been a bit more dramatic if it had reversed... like a pole flip or something.
Also, the amount of energy required to reverse it... it's hard to see where that could possibly have come from.
Labeling your item with a generic "BOMB" is such a rookie mistake. Always - always! - use more descriptive bluetooth name so you know exactly which device you are controlling. E.g., "cmdrtaco's BOMB".
The name of the product is "Bomb", and "Bomb" is the default Bluetooth name.
I don't know whether that makes you advice invalid, or all the more salient.
Oops. Did I just make Slashdot do a U-turn?
ROTFL
They were half way there. It made no sense to turn around at that point.
Maybe he thought it was off.
Social engineering redux... except now you only have to convince a sycophantic and overly helpful AI.
Not only did they panic over a poorly chosen Bluetooth device name, they turned around AT or just past the halfway point, apparently to maximize the damage and inconvenience. They could just as well have continued as normal and sorted it out at the destination.
How about perform an exploratory laparotomy just in case you implanted a bomb?
I doubt it rises to that level. The device had a name that happened to be Bomb. Yelling FIRE is a specific communication of a dangerous condition.
The bluetooth name has nothing to do with security. It is more likely that MattsSpeaker is a bomb than the thing named BOMB. Any number of things with no bluetooth or bluetooth turned off are also more likely to be a bomb than the bluetooth thing called BOMB.
That site is blocking VPN clients (sus) but here's another one you can pick up at CVS:
https://www.cvs.com/shop/ijoy-...
Imagine how much jet fuel was wasted on being stupid.
This is an example of "sometimes you can be too careful".
Apple isn't the best option though.
Technically the soc is excellent, can't deny that. Trouble is it's hobbled by the operating system. And ports.
Many people incorrectly think of proxies and VPNs (especially VPNs) as a security and privacy enhancement, but unless you're operating the proxy/VPN server yourself they're just as likely to be a massive security and privacy risk. The problem is that they concentrate all of the traffic you'd most like to keep secret in one server, and depending on exactly how the system works, may require installing software on your local machine with ~root permissions. If the operator is malicious, this is a really dangerous combination.
These are useful tools for location shifting and -- in fairly rare cases, and with VPNs only -- from hiding traffic from malicious. But third-party proxy/VPN services should always be viewed with suspicion. Obviously this is even more true when the provider is Russian... though it's pretty likely that wasn't made clear to the people who used the service.
"If a computer can't directly address all the RAM you can use, it's just a toy." -- anonymous comp.sys.amiga posting, non-sequitir
