- 154 Posts
- 3.91K Comments
Joined 1 year ago
Cake day: October 4th, 2023
You are not logged in. If you use a Fediverse account that is able to follow users, you can follow this user.
0·1 day agoI don’t know about that. It seemed to have a pretty rapid impact on the phone in that video, and it’s not like those are exactly open. And they weren’t pressurizing it.
Hydrogen
This says that hydrogen isn’t just a problem, just helium:
It seems that MEMS is very sensitive to helium, but only helium. This Link stated that hydrogen does not affect MEMS, which surprised me.
Hmm.
That seems like it’d open a lot of potential abuses.
I wonder what the failure mode of various electronic locks is when they’re exposed to helium?
Apparently, the guy in question is also named Orbán, and prime minister Orbán has said that prime minister aide Orbán is talking nonsense, so there’s that.
https://apnews.com/article/orban-ukraine-russia-invasion-d788a2e58bdd162a3a30532bf33e8633
BUDAPEST, Hungary (AP) — Hungary always has and always will defend itself against foreign attacks, Prime Minister Viktor Orbán said on Friday after one of his closest aides provoked controversy by suggesting that Hungary wouldn’t have fought against a Russian invasion as Ukraine has done.
Speaking to state radio, Orbán sought to downplay the remarks by his political director, Balázs Orbán, which stirred outrage among many in Hungary and led to calls for his resignation.
Prime Minister Orbán called the comment “an ambiguous statement, which in this context is a mistake.”
He emphasized that Hungary has “always defended itself, it will defend itself today and will continue to defend itself in the future by all possible means.”
Also, the names don’t seem to stop there.
On Thursday, Hungary’s most prominent opposition figure, Péter Magyar, called for Balázs Orbán’s resignation by Oct. 23, the 68th anniversary of the revolution.
Isn’t “Magyar” Hungarian for “Hungarian”?
checks Google Translate
It is.
So we’ve got the Hungarian opposition lead Hungarian criticizing Hungarian prime minister Orbán and calling for Hungarian prime minister Orbán’s aide Orbán to resign.
6·2 days agohttps://firms.modaps.eosdis.nasa.gov/map/#d:24hrs;@28.85,45.33,14.00z
NASA FIRMS shows two detected fires in Izmail.
Assuming that these were the targets – and not all heat signatures that FIRMS pick up are:
-
One is at “Dunaysudnoservis”, which is apparently a Ukrainian shipyard; Google Maps has an image with a ship in drydock there.
-
One is at a small commercial area to the northwest of a solar farm, or possibly in a adjacent residential area; the resolution isn’t good enough to determine. “Barakholka”, a secondhand store, and a carwash are in the commercial area.
-
He’s an American citizen, and Starlink is an American company.
Yup, but in a British newspaper.
The Brits have pretty adverse interests on this matter. I think that American communications security is a debate that doesn’t need to involve the British, can be done perfectly fine among ourselves.
EDIT: I’d also add that Reich isn’t the guy to raise the matter either; it’s not his area of expertise. If, say, the NSA or friends raise it as an issue – we pay a large number of full-time domain experts to secure our communications – then I think that’d be an interesting topic.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merrow
Merrow (from Irish murúch, Middle Irish murdúchann or murdúchu) is a mermaid or merman in Irish folklore. The term is anglicised from the Irish word murúch.
‘Musk’s SpaceX has nearly total control of the world’s satellite internet through its Starlink unit.’
The British, on the other hand, have a competing satellite network, OneWeb, which is the principal competitor of, and doing a rather poor job of competing with Starlink.
I don’t feel a burning need to go look to a British newspaper for advice as to whether-or-not to use an American satellite network versus a British satellite network.
If you guys across the pond want to use OneWeb instead, knock yourselves out.
EDIT: And speaking of national security, the last time we were relying on a British global network for intercontinental communications, we wound up with British intelligence spying on our diplomatic communications channels. Thanks, but I’m pretty comfortable using an American network.
6·2 days agoI’d kind of like to see a Balatro HD DLC option.
I don’t have a problem with low-resolution artwork; I think that it’s often an effective way to reduce asset costs. But when a game makes it big, as Balatro has, I’d generally like to have the option to get a higher-resolution version of it. For some games, say, Noita, that’s hard, as the resolution is tightly tied to the gameplay. But for Balatro, the art consists in significant part of about 150 jokers. That’s not all that much material to upscale.
EDIT: And specifically for Balatro, I think that it’s worth pointing out that there’s a whole industry of artists who make (very high resolution) playing cards for print.
kagis
Okay, here’s my first hit:
https://playingcarddecks.com/blogs/all-in/10-top-playing-card-designers
These guys don’t hyperlink to the designers, but going down the list and digging up a link for each playing card design company or artist:
That’s a large variety of competently-done, high-resolution artwork.
Now, granted – Balatro doesn’t use a standard deck; it’s not a drop-in approach using existing decks, the way it might be with a typical solitaire game.
But it seems kinda nutty to me that there are artists out creating decks, but only selling them in small volume, and also video games that sell in large volume but don’t have much by way of card artwork options.
1112·4 days agoIsn’t it easier to just play a different game? I mean, there’s a ludicrously large library of games out there. If Sony is determined to only offer some game on terms that people don’t like, I mean, fine. Send money to a different publisher.
It doesn’t really seem worth the time and effort to make that game palatable. Give it a negative review indicating why you’re unhappy with it and move on.
considers
I found absolutely bizarre the claims from the Kremlin back when that Russia wasn’t shelling Ukraine across the border back when. Like, you’re lying. But it’s not just that you know that you’re lying, but that I know you’re lying and that you know that I know that you’re lying. If it’s not fooling anyone, and you know that you aren’t, then why are you persisting in doing it? Like, when I point out that this is nonsense, why continue to expend credibility on this?
It was absolutely mystifying to me. It’s not something that one does.
Then read something from someone talking about how this is a Russian cultural thing. Like, the idea, if I understand correctly, is that in a scenario like this, Russia wants other countries to ignore the fact that they’re shelling Ukraine. But…it would be awkward for other countries to say “that’s okay with me”. So the idea here is that they are trying to make it as convenient as possible for others to ignore the fact as well. Like, the idea is that one is sort of trying to lubricate the social interaction with bullshit; there’s no deception as such intended, but that the idea is that socially-awkward truths can be more-readily ignored if everyone collectively agrees to disregard them.
It sounds completely bonkers to me, but apparently it is, indeed, a thing.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/vranyo
vranyo (uncountable)
- White lies or half-lies in Russian culture, told without the intention of (maliciously) deceiving, but as a fantasy, suppressing unpleasant parts of the truth.
2007, David Shulman, From Hire to Liar: The Role of Deception in the Workplace, →ISBN, page 79:
The term vranyo in Russian describes the subtle collective participation people can have in deception. Vranyo occurs when one person lies to another, the second person recognizes that the first person is lying, and neither of them acknowledges that any lie was spoken. For example, someone states (knowing otherwise) that he will meet monthly production goals. An audience hears this claim and knows it to be false. No one acknowledges the lie publicly. […] When a co-worker claims to work incredibly hard but is lying and an observer knows that colleague is lying but does not expose the lie—that is vranyo. In subsequent chapters, workers demonstrate a strong inclination to vranyo. Vranyo occurs routinely in meetings […]
So, I dunno. Maybe this is Russia doing this vranyo business; the government and the public both know perfectly well that the air defense didn’t intercept the Ukrainian strike, but it’s easier to pretend that it did than to say that it didn’t? It doesn’t seem to me that dicking up air defense here would be something difficult-enough to grapple with to where it’d make sense, but then I don’t think that this whole vranyo thing makes a lot of sense in the first place, so…shrugs
details
Why The Kremlin Lies: Understanding Its Loose Relationship With the Truth
Russian leaders have used deception for strategic ends in ways that shed light on their geopolitical goals
One of the stickiest challenges for Western governments has been how to deal with, or even understand, a Russian leadership that lies insistently and incessantly, even when it doesn’t need to.
Amid the current crisis over Ukraine, the Kremlin has made the situation both simpler and more confounding. On the one hand, the Russian leadership is stating its most important security concerns and demands more clearly and publicly than ever before. President Vladimir Putin has demanded formal guarantees that there will be no enlargement of NATO to the states of the former Soviet Union and no threatening military presence in Ukraine or elsewhere in eastern Europe.
On the other hand, the Kremlin continues to mask its intentions in a torrent of falsehoods. Senior Russian officials claim that Russian military forces pose no threat to Ukraine while inventing apparent pretexts for a potential invasion—such as accusing Ukrainians of “genocide” and claiming that U.S. military contractors are deploying chemical weapons to the Donbas. The thuggish nature of the Kremlin’s demands and threats undercuts the hand of any Western officials who might want to engage with Moscow. What is the point of talking with a counterpart who has such blatant disregard for the truth?
The Kremlin, for its part, appears to expect that its messages and motivations are clear enough. It doesn’t seem terribly bothered that its reliance on brazen lies leads interlocutors to doubt that anything it says can be trusted. Still, knowing what Moscow is trying to communicate with its various uses and abuses of the truth is important as the West contends with the very real threat of a large-scale Russian military operation in Ukraine. Like it or not, Western policymakers simply do not have the luxury of throwing up their hands and tuning out everything the Kremlin is saying.
Remembering That The Kremlin Expects Others To See Through Its Lies
The Russian leadership’s frequent resorting to transparent lies, known in Russian as vranyo, has been widely analyzed. The Kremlin lies even though it either expects or doesn’t care that others see through such deception. It lies to deflect blame for outrages in which its role has been exposed, such as the shootdown of Malaysian Airlines Flight MH17 over Ukraine in July 2014, the poisoning of former Russian military intelligence officer Sergei Skripal and his daughter in the city of Salisbury in the UK in March 2018, or the assassination attempt on opposition leader Alexei Navalny in Russia in August 2020. Russian officials lie to deflect blame from their allies and proxies too, like when they insisted that evidence of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s use of chemical weapons was utter nonsense and blamed Assad’s opponents instead.
Deciphering the Kremlin’s Half-Lies, Half-Truths
The Kremlin also expects foreign governments to be able to see through its lies when they are used in pursuit of underlying strategic goals. On those occasions, half of what the Russian leadership says is a lie, and the other half is the “truth” in a sense—that is, it indicates the goal that Moscow is seeking. Knowing which is which is not always as easy as the regime thinks.
The Kremlin has used the half-lie, half-truth formulation most prominently in the context of Russia’s involvement in eastern Ukraine. It uses the same approach on the subject of Russia’s interference in U.S. elections and Russia’s testing and deployment of a ground-launched cruise missile in violation of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty. Each of its falsehoods is connected to a goal that references to all three were included in its December 2021 proposed draft treaty containing its key demands of the United States (see text box 1).
I still have a hard time seeing why the Russian foreign ministry would try to use it in an international relations context where the other party clearly has no intention of playing along, but I guess that the claims about this depot were probably aimed at a Russian domestic audience; RIA is state-run domestic news, rather than outward-facing. So maybe the idea is that the target audience gets that this is bullshit, but accepts that it is bullshit and is okay with it, and that there’s an unspoken social convention to mutually maintain a collective illusion, because it’s easier to live with than the truth. I guess? I mean, it sounds nuts to me, but it’s clearly a thing in at least some cases, so maybe that’s what’s driving this.
The full phrase is usually “the dildo of consequences rarely arrives lubed”. I don’t know who coined it, but it’s been around for some years.
EDIT: Using Google search by date, one of the earlier hits that Google indexed is this one, from 2017:
https://daily-devops.tumblr.com/post/161621189597/best-quote-about-the-elections-ever-the-dildo
That was June 9, 2017, and apparently talking about the British general election of 2017, so it goes back at least as far as that.
It looks like Google may try to infer date of post in some cases from websites, so date search finds some earlier ones, but nothing that appears to be reliably prior to that. They’re apparently quoting someone, so I doubt that that’s the first time it was used.
35·4 days agoThe green entrepreneur, who has donated more than £5m to Labour, says vegan meals are healthier and better for the environment.
He is campaigning for an end to all farming of animals, which he says is now the biggest driver of the climate crisis.
He told a fringe meeting at Labour’s conference that his company, Devil’s Kitchen, already supplies vegan food to “one in four” primary schools.
He denied he was against farmers, insisting that he did not want to kill the industry but allow it to be “reborn”.
“[Farmers] have to be part of the move to net zero, they have to move away from animal agriculture, we know that the science tells us that - and they already grow grass to feed to animals.”
One regrettable side effect of the fact that children cannot vote is stuff like this.
Imagine how British adults would react if someone proposed a law banning their meat consumption.
But kids can’t do anything about it – other people choose what food is available to them in cafeterias, so…
EDIT: Maybe the real answer is to convert school cafeterias into food courts and have different caterers compete for lunch tickets or something, so that kids have a say.
The only kind of remote analog I can think of that adults tolerate is during wartime, when soldiers are drafted, so that their presence at an institution is required and someone else determines what food they will have available at that institution, if they’re deployed and being issued rations.
2024: Ukraine using Soviet air defense systems to fire American naval missiles to shoot down Iranian-designed drones after Iran provided airpower technology to Russia.
I’m pretty sure that this wasn’t on anyone’s bingo card as of, say, 2000.
So, I was thinking more about the fact that the air defenses should be destroying an incoming weapon before it’s over the target, but yeah, on penetrative power, for this particular attack, it’s even harder for Russia to make the case.
Dmitry Bulgakov, then a deputy defence minister, told RIA in 2018 that the facility could defend weapons from missiles and even a small nuclear attack. Bulgakov was arrested earlier this year on corruption charges, which he denies.
“It (the concrete facilities) ensures their reliable and safe storage, protects them from air and missile strikes and even from the damaging factors of a nuclear explosion,” RIA quoted Bulgakov as saying at the time.
Like, if the Ministry of Defense is moving from “it can stand up to a nuke” to “falling Ukrainian drone debris blew the thing up”, that’s one heck of a shift.
In a bizarre repeat of previous denials, the Russian Ministry of Defense again claimed that no direct hits occurred, attributing all damage to fallen Ukrainian drone debris.
All the other issues here aside, I think that you guys are long overdue to find a fresh cover-up strategy. I mean, the “our soldiers were smoking and it exploded” thing was better than this. At least with smoking, there’s the potential to stop the problem in the future, but if air defenses are having the “debris” destroy the targets that they’re aiming at, then the air defenses intrinsically can’t be very effective even when they work.
using an admin portal’s default credentials on an IBM AIX server.
I think that there are two ways to solve that.
The first is to have the admins actually complete setups.
But, humans being humans, maybe the second is a better approach:
When creating a computer system, don’t let a system be used, at all, until all default credentials have been replaced with real ones. If you do, someone is invariably gonna screw it up.
Your directions may say “Before pulling lever 2, pull lever 1 so that machine does not explode”. And maybe you feel that as the manufacturer, that’s covered your hind end; you can say that the user ignored your setup instructions if they get into trouble. But instead of doing that, maybe it’s better to not permit for a situation where the machine explodes in the first place; have pulling lever 2 also trigger lever 1.
8·6 days agoThe night of September 17, Ukraine blew up a very large Russian ammunition depot at Toropets, up in Moscow’s general direction.
https://www.kyivpost.com/post/39247
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4OeKEHCuic
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toropets_depot_explosions
While there wasn’t a single detonation, the numbers I’ve seen quoted are that ~30 kt of total explosives went off, which is in atomic-weapon-class, larger than Hiroshima (15kt) or Nagasaki (21kt), hence the reference to Oppenheimer’s quote at the successful test of Trinity (25kt), the first atomic bomb.
At that point, OP posted an image about it:
https://lemmy.today/post/16521510
The night of September 20, Ukraine blew up another ammunition depot, one at Kamenny, Tikhoretsky, Krasnodar Krai, Russia, and the other at Oktyabrsky in Tver Oblast, Russia. The image that OP used here is from Tikhoretsky.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pO1CS8UeUDY
EDIT: The Toropets large explosion in the video is, from what I can tell from other sources, only about 0.2-0.24kt, so significantly-smaller than Hiroshima/Nagasaki atomic detonations. I read that Ukraine hit the depot with ~100 UAVs, so probably various explosives were stored far enough from each other not to have the whole depot be touched off by one explosion. I was listening to Michael Kofman discuss it, and he mentioned that the Toropets depot is spread out over ~5km, many different storage structures.
I don’t know whether Altman or the board is better from a leadership standpoint, but I don’t think that it makes sense to rely on boards to avoid existential dangers for humanity. A board runs one company. If that board takes action that is a good move in terms of an existential risk for humanity but disadvantageous to the company, they’ll tend to be outcompeted by and replaced by those who do not. Anyone doing that has to be in a position to span multiple companies. I doubt that market regulators in a single market could do it, even – that’s getting into international treaty territory.
The only way in which a board is going to be able to effectively do that is if one company, theirs, effectively has a monopoly on all AI development that could pose a risk.