nxzero

Horrible idea, are you serious?

Right, that's obvious, just like it's obvious you'd call them up and sell them on paying you to use it, not tell them to stop via so legal notice that might not even legally apply to them.

Something feels off about this whole post, but can't put my finger on it.

For example, appears the company makes money selling their code to online newspapers, but when a major media company uses their code the response is to tell them to stop doing it.

I would be curious to see the take down notice that was sent literally said.

There's definitely locations listed online that should not be, though as areas become less populated, best way to find secret location is visual analysis of satellite maps, or call a local social hotspot, claim to be from a major newspaper and asked if they know any; point being, it's possible to find them unless they're very careful.

>> "ask Sebastian what he thinks about simulation"

Thanks, appreciate you addressing the questions.

If you wanted to ping Sebastian and let him know about the AMA, I'm sure there would be a lot of interest beyond just me getting an answer to my questions from him; I truly am curious to hear his take, since as you say, the barrier to rendering the software in hardware would likely be beyond the reach of an individual student or even likely a group of students in closes proximity to each other.

Why do it if "it isn’t the core focus of Udacity’s business" as the founder, Sebastian Thrun, said?

Seems like creating free and open source simulator would be of more value than trying to get students to build hardware based vehicles?

DARPA, YC, and other have taken this approach for various reasons in some projects - and it seems if the intent is to teach, learn, share, etc. - it'd be a better investment.

How can something be "too good for the sport" is beyond me. I get that it makes comparing the past to the present, but it literally based on the description in the story made it seem like the changes were improving the "sport" on the competition.

Only restaurants I've known that did well owned the real estate they were in or were super cheap high margin places that were popular with a good location.

Lots of restaurants are just fronts for money laundering.

Maybe short-term, but long-term, it's a wise move.

Results of the book's sells aren't that shocking if the sells per new book from her past books are accounted for: http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/09/15/us/politics/clinton-boo...

Is shocking she got 14-million, which seems really fishy to me.

It might help kill Intel though, which would make it harder for someone else to enter Apple's core markets.

There are a lot of places like that, just Google something like:

(secret OR sensitive) (facility OR building) INSERT-LOCATION-NAME

Sounds toxic. Imagine this was created by someone that sees art as a collection of objects.

Art is about artist, not art - and no one wants to directly be told they are not producing "quality art" by some system.

There's a big difference between being availability being predictable & unpredictable - it's called consistency.

Picking a pattern, and sticking to it is fundamental to systems flow.

Yes, have "randomness" is important, but trying to cultivate chaos from utter disorder is a something at the very least historically speaking people are not good at collectively.

Chaos functions best when it's on the edge of a system, not embedded in it.

Thanks, really appreciate the effort to provide your take on the problem.

While I could easily see this working with friends, it not really what I'm looking for.

Here's so far here's the best expression of why I don't sign NDAs:

https://spin.atomicobject.com/2014/09/08/nda-stifle-creativi...

Maybe it's just to protect the antennas from weather.

Thanks, aware of the email, but I believe in public exchanges about matters that impact the community.

Yes, same DHS agent, his father is a federal judge in Chicago.

As someone that lives a largely anonymous life, not that I'm engaged in anything that would interest law enforcement, bullet proof operational security is impossible, and at some point mistakes happen. If you think it's easy, it's not.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operations_security

Yes, putting your name in a Whois record is stupid, but just because that's what was publicly disclosed doesn't mean that's how they found him.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction

This is not news, here's a report from 2007 covering the topic in detail: https://fas.org/nuke/guide/israel/nuke/

("Updated 2007" is in the footer of the page.)

Most people would not mind wireless power that's not dangerous, but that is not a pragmatic reasoning behind why it will happen soon, but didn't happen in the past. Right?

Work on wireless power transfer has been going on over 100-years, even Tesla worked on it: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_power_transfer

Hard to imagine this being mainstream anytime soon. Is there any reason to believe this will become mainstream in the near future?

ID fraud already makes a lot of SSN non-unique; one in seven SSN has been used more than once, though the SSA doesn't report this to the owner of the SSN.

Yes, that was an odd DARPA RFP though, since amoung other paradoxical that RFP wanted to be able to delete parts of the blockchain after the fact.

NATO is also looking into blockchain uses: https://www.ncia.nato.int/NewsRoom/Pages/160425_Innovation.a...

Redirected link from bitly link above:

https://media.voog.com/0000/0036/0235/files/Black_Lantern_da...

>> "Assuming the appliance remains secure"

Makes me wonder what mathematics would prove this, or if it's assumed to be out of scope, and if so, what else is out of scope too.

The blockchain is critical current & future technology, it's future is independent of Bitcoin's future.

Bitcoin is the first implementation of a blockchain system, but it's a technology, not Bitcoin.

All major log systems will be based on it; governments, banks, military, voting systems, etc.

Highly suggest reading the Wikipedia entry on Blockchain to learn more and think about how you might use it too: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blockchain_(database)

They could, but to do so, legally they be entering the property without a warrant, even if it was executed wirelessly.

Whole legal arguments about the wireless signals is that they're "public" data.

With something as important as blockchain verification, you would think DARPA would stop investing in private intellectual property.

>> "Particular categories of criminal activities would surge."

Please provide examples and the reasoning used to support these examples.