Comment Re:Elite Sabotage Agency? (Score 1) 23
Oh. Republicans.
And pretty sure "Elite" means something different after the DOGE purge
Oh. Republicans.
And pretty sure "Elite" means something different after the DOGE purge
Why would they bother?
Why bother using NASA a civilian, largely open space agency when they could use y'know, the actual, specific, designed-for-task military space agencies that were designed, structured, and staffed PRECISELY for secretive military projects? Like DARPA, the Space Force, or the Dept of Defense programs.
I'm not saying the US doesn't have secret space launches, OBVIOUSLY they do.
What I'm mocking is the absolutely ridiculous assertion that the Chinese program is "open" to any degree, except very-calculated revelations...you know, like a military based program. From the bottom to the top. The ENTIRE Chinese program is purely secret, except for the shit they're trying to manipulate you with.
I get it, the concept of a major government program that's not secretive has to be incomprehensible to Chinese.
What I read from the paper is Google acted on its own assuming a certain (wrong) understanding of the law.
And Google possibly didn't care and thought if anyone complained it would be better for them to then ask for forgiveness than first ask and wait for permission, that they might not get. I hope they're fined *and* made to replace all the trees.
Obviously in 2026 most of the posts are going to be about how stupid Trump is just making meaningless goals for his own ego.
To be clear, he absolutely is.
Then again, I would point out that it seems pretty common that every president since the 1970s* has seen fit in the latter stages of their presidency to "talk big" on space commitments
Until I actually SEE $50bn flowing into NASA or space investment, I take ANY presidential assertions about expanding space programs as what they are: publicity bullshit.
*In fact the only one I can think of that didn't was Biden, but he was basically non compos mentis the last 12+ months anyway.
OK, OK we'll let Xi know you're earning your paycheck today.
The chinese space program is a fundamentally MILITARY program and thus its budgets, priorities, and developments are secret UNLESS there is deemed a value to public revelation.
The Chinese routinely withhold basic data that is generally shared across space agencies globally such as expected precise trajectories of vehicles and discarded stages.
Project 921, Shenlong, Or perhaps the 2007 ASAT test that was COMPLETELY unannounced and blew what, 3000+ of orbital debris?
Do you know what those TJS "communication" satellites are doing migrating into specific geostrategic orbits and then suddenly adjusting to park next to US or Euro satellites?
How's Yang Lewei feeling today?
https://undark.org/2019/01/29/...
What's chinese for "shut the fuck up, comrade"? I'm pretty sure you know it.
... But my request to the IT security mavens would be to extend your rigor beyond the employees to the programs that directly contradict your rules themselves.
I am told strictly: NEVER click on a blind link, yet I get constant emails from departments - including IT! - that are LINKS to training videos, educational resources, mandatory bullshit that when if don't click on it, I get stern warnings that I'm not doing mandatory things. (Oh, and all external email urls are replaced with unparseable 200-character strings that supposedly route the link through "URL defense" or some such.)
Or how about all the consultants? I work for an EU multinational and we have at least 3 REGULATORY-required systems that I have to log into to comply with EU bureaucracy that are myCompany.kpmg.com or whatever - and then I'm supposed to give that EXTERNAL pop-up my *corporate* user and password while it authenticates through our corporate cellphones.
I'm reasonably savvy, I believe, but when policy & security rules contradict, which am I supposed to follow? I can tell you that corporate IT doesn't appreciate being shown it's own use of blind links.
Palmer Luckey Reveals Genetically Modified Military Dog Startup
And... The company and/or product will be called "Luckey Dogs".
(A subsidiary of "Greased Palm(ers) Industries.)
NASA is accelerating its Artemis program with an Apollo-era sense of urgency, aiming to return astronauts to the lunar surface in 2028 and establish a permanent base near the moon's south pole.
Sounds like Trump wants to put his name on something on the Moon
will be the response to this. The manufacturers won't stand for it, because they lose the potential revenue.
Likely methods:
1. Proprietary Non-linux os's which have a smaller memory foot print.
2. Signed boot loaders with E-fuses blown in the microcomputer.
3. Potted CPU electronics.
4. TV hardware subscriptions (Now you don't own it) Click wrap contract provisions which prohibit modification of the hardware.
5. Mandatory network connections. TV won't work unless it is connected to the internet. This will allow security patches to stop jailbreaks and exploits.
6. Televisions legally required to always be on - like in the dystopian future of Max Headroom.
I'm curious how the nuclear decay of sodium 22 produces antimatter to begin with. Does something transmute, for lack of a better word, into antimatter when its nuclear bonds are broken?
Bananas create anti matter. From Ten things you might not know about antimatter (also mentioned, but not explained here DOE Explains...Antimatter)
Bananas produce antimatter, releasing one positron—the antimatter equivalent of an electron—about every 75 minutes. This occurs because bananas contain a small amount of potassium-40, a naturally occurring isotope of potassium. As potassium-40 decays, it occasionally spits out a positron in the process.
AI Left Alone With Nothing To Do, AI Agents Started Playing
This will devolve into them fucking around and us finding out, probably faster than their minders can imagine.
Idle hands and all that
Absurd generalizations? Wut?
On what basis? It's unquestionable that the political left in the US has both:
- fought nuclear tooth and nail since the 1970s
- is clearly the most concerned (panty-wetting fear in other words) with climate change.
There is no sane person that can dispute those assertions, gaslighter.
"ignoring the fact that your tech isn't actually the only fossil fuel alternative out there" I said LITERALLY NOTHING about that. Nothing. Are you asserting that expanded nuclear WOULDN'T have reduced hydrocarbon emissions substantially, or... are you just afraid to admit that?
I think wind and solar are great; they weren't meaningfully part of the conversation 45 years ago, which is what I rather specifically referenced.
I feel like you might not be getting enough oxygen. I made a single irrefutable assertion and you go off on irrelevancies as if they matter.
If only the people crying about the imminent doom of climate change weren't exactly the same group that INSISTED we abandon nuclear 45y ago.
Maybe Google can build its data center on [their] campus...
Ya, like they'd really want one of those things in their neighborhood.
agents -- programmed to fulfill requests or complete tasks on a user's behalf -- contact call centers
And with companies replacing call center staff with AI agents
Prof: So the American government went to IBM to come up with a data encryption standard and they came up with ... Student: EBCDIC!"