…special operations forces have honed their ability to conduct manhunts, adopting a new targeting system known as “find, fix, finish, exploit, analyze, and disseminate.” They have adopted a flatter organizational structure and collaborated more closely with intelligence agencies, allowing special operations to move at “the speed of war”…
The hunt model was lauded as a form of authorization, streamlining towards smaller secretive teams trusted with quick and lethal capabilities “over the fence” as Harvard lawyers infamously had envisioned decades ago.
As ominous as the militant “kill” steps sound to unleash upon an upstate New York school, in computer software terms they remain basically incident response activities. Probably they could have fit easily under a public-private Computer Emergency Readiness Team (CERT) expansion without invoking “hunt” authorization.
It does seem possible “E” leaves the door open for much broader remit including active defense and hack back for hunt teams to go after attackers, though, at “the speed of” cyberwar.
Another Echo company (Army 160th) already has kind of established that reputation.
So maybe I’m underestimating what is going to be done by DHS here, and hunt will become an operative word for kill chains even inside schools where kids are meant to be learning and experimenting.
One of the lesser known stories in the American mobile technology space is Sailfish OS by Jolla. For whatever reason it never seems to get any press, unless you count this sideways glance in ZDnet
I have seen all too many failed attempts to compete with Android and iOS. But I’m impressed by Duval’s privacy-first approach, which builds on the existing successful Android platform. Instead of trying to replace it, he’s making the best of it. I think with privacy being more of a concern for users and hardware vendors looking for Google-free operating systems, /e/ may be successful where so many others have failed.
Ok, first of all to be fair, I am assuming these non-specific phrases include Sailfish OS. It is a Linux-based OS (i.e. Meego derivation, following N9 Linux-based phones from 2011) that successfully replaced Android in 2013 and ran an emulation engine for Android. Does the author believe it failed?
Despite being in America I’ve used it since basically v1.0.1 (called an “Android love fest” by TheReg) on dedicated Jolla hardware as well as Sony phones and it’s great! One of the amazing things about the Android emulation was how it allowed app stores to be multi-master.
It wasn’t as slick as the Nokia firmware-based regional packages that came before it, but Jolla allowed users to choose apps from stores completely disconnected from Google, never touching American soil for that matter.
Second, there’s some kind of weird thing going on at Google where in 2017 their HTC-based phone was codename Sailfish. This new /e/ OS lists Sailfish as one of the phones it will run on already. Perhaps you could call this some kind of coincidence but it’s hard to believe it is random since…
Trumpin tullimullistus: Androidista tuli pelinappula… ”Kohta mennään kuilun reunan jälkeen lujaa alas” (Trump customs shock: Android became a pawn… “Soon we’ll go down the edge of the abyss”)
And fourth, if success is based on users making privacy a concern, then surely Sailfish (the non-Google one) should already have registered as a win. And that’s not even to mention that it was Linux from the start.
In other words, I appreciate that there’s another Android Appstore non-Android phone with privacy in mind, being developed by the Mandrake founder. More options sounds great to me! Although his sense of history does worry me.
“The 80s have been the most exciting period in computing so far, in my opinion,” he said. “Well, I can’t talk about the 60s and 70s period.”
However, at this point I’d like to see a simple comparison table with Sailfish: Ideas stolen by Google? Endorsed by Russian government? Runs on OEM hardware that Google resells?
Finally, the article on /e/ also mentioned how it would run on Samsung devices. If that’s a goal, I figured I should pull out this history chart showing the development of Samsung’s non-Android OS that their mobile devices can run already:
Russian Geographical Society used one of its modern landing crafts in a way a mother walrus didn’t appreciate, so most news outlets are describing how she attacked their boat, sinking it and sending the Russian military running for their lives.
Naturally the Russian military made a statement that reported the opposite:
“Serious troubles were avoided thanks to the clear and well co-ordinated actions of the Northern Fleet servicemen, who were able to take the boat away from the animals without harming them.”
Definitely avoided any serious troubles there. “Able to take the boat away” from threats is double-speak for sinking. Aha, you can’t attack Russian boat, because there is no boat. Troubles avoided! Swim faster comrades, it is very cold.
Maybe something was lost in translation when Russians said they thought they were up to the tusk (pun intended).
“The walrus was not injured. We just shoved her off. Our boat was damaged – sections three and five. Barely made it to shore” said Leonid. (Морж не пострадал. Мы его просто отпихнули. А лодка пробита — три секции и пяти. Еле доплыли до берега, сообщает Леонид.)
Speaking of being lost…
The area in question supposedly is on Wilczek Island, (Остров Вильчека) in the southeastern end of Franz Josef Land, Arkhangelsk Oblast, Russia. Maybe it’s somewhere else?
I have yet to find a western map anywhere listing a “Cape Geller” (мысе Геллера). Who was Geller?
GPS has been known unreliable for a very long time. Ten years ago I wrote about it here, and more recently participated in tests that successfully fooled Tesla navigation systems such that it made a car drive erratically and abruptly exit a highway.
Trouble in navigation probably is why the USAF is announcing new technology on bombs that optimistically gets described as the kind of cutting-edge millimeter waves and lasers you might find on driver-less-cars.
While the GBU-39 used Global Positioning System (GPS) satellites as the guidance method, the StormBreaker when operational will use GPS plus a millimeter wave radar and a semi-active laser as a seeker package.
I’ll wager the backstory here is that GPS bombs were being not-so-smart after all (mass civilian casualties). Terms like “smart” and “seeker” only go so far when the things dropped from a plane, or flying themselves, blow up the wrong people.
“They told us it was a mistake by the coalition, and after the war we will talk about it,” Hasan said of Iraqi officials whom he contacted for help. “Why would they make a mistake like this? They have all the technology. This is not a small mistake.”
Another east Mosul resident, Jasim Mohammed Ali, said his son and six grandsons were killed by what he believes was a coalition airstrike that destroyed his home on Nov. 17.
The coalition is still investigating the strike based on a complaint by Human Rights Watch, which — along with other experts The Times consulted — identified munition parts in the wreckage of Ali’s house as a GBU-39 small-diameter bomb, a guided munition used by coalition forces.
So the good news might be that bombs are going to be far more accurate and kill the right targets.
“An increase of 82 percent in child casualties compared with the previous four years” has been linked in Afghanistan to aerial attacks and remnant explosives.
I haven’t found yet that kind of reference in the USAF press release on why they felt the need to improve “smart” bomb targeting systems. It just seems like a logical jump from the HRW criticisms.
The pilots said their bombs lit Baghdad like a Christmas tree
It was the Christian thing to do you see
they didn’t mention any casualties
no distinction between the real and the proxy
only football analogies
San Francisco tops the ranking of large metros in the index, followed by Boston and New York. What’s interesting is that the New York metro leads on three of the four variables of the index. It has far and away the largest share of households who report no access to a vehicle, 22 percent. (That’s more than three times the share in both San Francisco and Boston.) New York is also the clear leader in the share of commuters who use transit to get to work, with more than 30 percent, almost double San Francisco’s share. And it has the edge on the share of commuters who walk to work, roughly 6 percent.
But New York has a far smaller share of commuters who bike to work. It even fails to crack the top 10 on this metric, coming 101st out of 382 metros, or 22nd out of 53 large metros.
Full disclosure: I have commuted by bicycle in cities around the world all year through wind, rain, snow, sleet…up hills and down.
56% of Copenhageners ride a bicycle for transport daily. 75% cycle all winter.
The core reason, I believe, is the politics of NYC and how they perceive personal power accumulation measured by dollar bills in their bank accounts to be inversely related to the health of the environment they commute in/through.
The city has a pollution-loving history with a huge “we’re busy trying to get rich/famous, leave us alone” lobby that claims doing the right thing for “others” is economically unfeasible in their list of priorities.
The term “economic feasibility” has been subject to debate in the past. When the city banned styrofoam, it said that recycling the stuff was not economically or environmentally feasible. Restaurants and other industry sued in disagreement — and it took several more years and some back-and-forth in the courtroom before the ban was finalized.
The typical NYC powerful resident would go to the gym and spin to look “better than others” in work or personal life, but has little interest in getting on a bike for the same workout when told it results in making the city a better place to live for others.
Third, this should not be seen as a unique experience. It needs to be a monthly event if not weekly. A single day for cycling to be made safe is pathetic in a city that claims it wants always to be “on” and alive.
I’ve written before about the benefits of cycling in cities and the bottom line is the economics are clear and simple. What’s unclear is who in NYC has the political power and sense to do the right thing?
The real story presented by Citylab data is bicyclists must find a LaGuardia-like talent to overcome NYC power culture now rooted in the self-gain mindset of cars that brings willful disregard for others’ safety and health.
…what is really tedious is that we are not allowed to drive, but you expect money from motorists…
That’s crazy talk (absolutism and a fallacy), given how redirection from one street in an entire city doesn’t mean cars are being banned from all streets.
Think about what the motorist association is claiming: a single person who pays any amount of money demands that they are entitled to blockade hundreds or even thousands of others on the street just because they like to sit in public inside a private inconvenience box.
Drivers were being told they would have to avoid a street (small inconvenience) where a dedicated bus lane was being created for greater good… and that car association said no way would they allow smarter traffic planning if it takes away one inch of asphalt for them to generate harms, because they’re wealthy.
Psychologists Dacher Keltner and Paul Piff monitored intersections with four-way stop signs and found that people in expensive cars were four times more likely to cut in front of other drivers, compared to folks in more modest vehicles. …expensive cars drove right on by 46.2 percent of the time, even when they’d made eye contact with the pedestrians waiting to cross. Other studies by the same team showed that wealthier subjects were more likely to cheat…
American Infrastructure is crumbling. The ASCE has given American infrastructure a “D+”. It could cost almost $5 trillion to fully fix and upgrade American infrastructure. Congestion charging systems could potentially raise billions of dollars per year.
Here, let me frame (pun not intended) this another way: if a car is on the street then that street in NYC should be declared shut down.
I mean if we use that first point of the Five Borough Bike Tour properly, when cars use the streets the streets are effectively shut down and highly polluted (from brake dust to exhaust it’s a huge mess with slow cleanup).
People forget how influential and successful LaGuardia was dealing with the predatory and selfish mindset in NYC, and that his rural experiences and humanitarian values arguably are what made his vision of the city so great.
On average, more than 4,000 Special Operations forces — Navy SEALs, Army Green Berets, and Marine Corps Raiders among them — are deployed to the region each week, more than anywhere else in the world.
The logic of burying the data on protracted military engagements is not a very well held secret.
“Already we’re not getting answers to basic questions, like who the U.S. has killed and why it hasn’t better protected civilians, and the more the U.S. role is turned over to Special Operations Forces, the CIA, or contractors, the less information the government is going to provide,” Eviatar told The Intercept. “One has to wonder if that isn’t the reason they’re apparently shifting these roles to secret agents whose actions and their consequences the government isn’t required to disclose.”
The breakneck pace at which the United States deploys its special operations forces to conflict zones is taking a toll, their top commander told Congress on Thursday.
Army Gen. Raymond Thomas, commander of U.S. Special Operations Command, called the rate at which special operations forces are being deployed “unsustainable” and said the growing reliance of the U.S. military on its elite troops could produce a dangerous strain.
“We are not a panacea,” he told the Senate Armed Services Committee. “We are not the ultimate solution to every problem, and you will not hear that coming from us.”
This poses a special risk to healthy civil-military relations because it allows policymakers to avoid justifying or explaining operations publicly. Reliance on special operations also decreases the likelihood of mission success because special operations forces are not designed to win complex campaigns on their own. As Gen. Mark Milley notes, “The one thing [Special Forces] are not designed to do is win a war.”
“This cyber environment involves people,” Neal said. “It involves their habits. The way that they operate; the way that they name their accounts. When they come in during the day, when they leave, what types of apps they have on their phone. Do they click everything that comes into their inbox? Or are they very tight and restrictive in what they use? All those pieces are what we look at, not just the code.” […] ISIS was using just 10 core accounts and servers to manage the distribution of its content across the world.
Very few Americans probably realize how Green Berets were compromising communications networks, including tapping into Internet service providers, to predict movements of suspected political (terror group) leaders and assassinate them.
The CDC has dispatched more than 100 doctors and investigators to identify the specific cause of the deadly illness, which resembles a rare form of pneumonia.
Dr. Nora Volkow, Director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) at the National Institutes of Health, made a statement yesterday that the illness is a public health crisis and 25% of teenagers report they vape.
People often ask me about legacy tobacco products, where cancer/disease typically takes decades to develop. Doctors say vaping is different because far more acute damage that can lead to seizures with lungs “burnt” leading to death in under a year.
One issue seems to be that vaping was heavily marketed and sold without warnings about harms so users reported using the products far more often during a day, and without any self-regulation or sense of dangers (puffing on low-cost unlabeled/unknown liquids constantly indoors instead of just a high-cost labeled cigarette or two per day that regulators required to be inhaled outside).
Way back in July 2012 I wrote “Vaping Harmful to Health” because, after running into some kids in SF, I felt the need to warn about dangers that sadly weren’t obvious enough to them.
At the recent Structure conference, a young woman who had just moved from the east coast to San Francisco boasted of her boyfriends’ addiction to “Vaping”. She showed photos of all the accessories he has been obsessing about, from batteries to different colors and patterns. A young man visiting from New York echoed her story and said he was happy to be spending money on hip new e-cigarettes.
That post attracted a lot of random traffic (search engine success?) from people interested in vaping because it generated a huge amount of hate-filled and angry responses.
Literally hundreds of “die in a fire” variety harassment messages flowed into my queue for years afterwards. Many accused my blog of being a front for “big tobacco”. Here’s a typical example, from a St. Louis, Missouri reader:
Some also posted very lengthy counter-arguments to the comment section, which I then replied to as best I could.
Fast forward seven years and “all broadcast, print and digital product advertising in the U.S” is being halted by a big tobacco-owned vaping company under federal criminal investigation as their CEO steps down, and related death toll reaches double digits with confirmed illness approaching 550 people.
Lately I’ve also been sad to discover Juul plastic cartridges laying all over the sidewalks and roads, as if toxicity of cigarette smokers tossing 4 trillion pieces of toxic trash into the environment (98% of cigarette filters are plastic fiber) was some kind of positive inspiration to vaping designers.
Shame on these engineers, their management and investors. Could I have done more over these past years to help wind up regulators by giving them some sticker suggestions?
In fact the American diesel companies effectively ran similar cheats as VW yet, politically speaking, they seem to be facing little or no reaction unless you count some legal wranglings starting in 2018.
…class-action lawsuit filed today accuses Ford and Bosch of knowingly installing emissions-cheating software devices in 2011-2017 Ford 250 and 350 Super Duty diesel pickup trucks, akin to the devices at the center of Volkswagen’s Dieselgate scandal, allowing the affected pickups to pollute at levels up to 50 times legal limits, according to Hagens Berman
In a completely unreported event earlier this year, Ford tried to tell the court their executives are immune to charges of cheating and fraud because “no true defeat device” can be defined.
The Court agrees that Plaintiffs’ claims are not contingent on their ability to prove that Ford used defeat devices in its vehicles. […] Ford fails to point out that even if Plaintiffs were no longer able to refer to Ford’s alleged use of defeat devices, Plaintiffs could still succeed with their fraud claims. The true issue with regard to Plaintiffs’ fraud claims is whether or not Ford materially deceived (under the various state laws) its consumers. The Court finds that Plaintiffs have sufficiently stated a claim for fraud, under state laws, without relying on Ford’s alleged use of defeat devices. […] Plaintiffs’ overpayment theory is sufficient to provide standing to sue Bosch LLC because of its role in the use and concealment of a cheat device that allegedly constrained the emissions control system of the vehicles purchased by Plaintiffs.
That’s still a very long way from Ford executives being accountable for anything, let alone facing criminal charges for deceptive practices.
With the widely promoted news about VW cheating America basically lit a fire under German regulators, while seemingly doing little domestically about the same. Have you heard of any real diesel emission cheating impacts to Ford or GM? And those aren’t the only three. Many car companies were cheating…
The impact to VW has had the perversely competitive effect of passively warning American manufacturers about emissions cheating by making an example of a foreign company that is held back now under real accountability to its regulators.
I’d suggest we consider at this point whether German behavior is some kind of time-capsule from Allied 1940s ethical thinking about doing the right thing, instilled during the Eisenhower occupation of Germany; a mindset sadly that has faded away in modern America.
Imagine today seeing posters like this one that told Americans to read and appreciate black history in order to defeat fascism:
Industries of Nazi Germany infamously went along willingly with obviously toxic policies of Hitler such as using slaves to build vehicles. Only when bombs were raining down on Nazi car executives’ own heads did change begin, and even then reparations have been slow.
“The ghost of the Third Reich will hang over every Volkswagen car unless the company takes action and provides justice to the thousands of its former slave labourers around the world,” Mr Weiss said.
…her remarks that the firm did nothing wrong when it employed 200 forced labourers during World War II were thoughtless. […] Former forced labourers have failed to obtain compensation from Bahlsen in individual lawsuits, with German courts citing statute of limitations laws. […] Verena Bahlsen has also been criticised for boasting about her wealth and love of conspicuous consumption. “I own a fourth of Bahlsen and I am very happy about that. I want to earn money and buy a … yacht,” she said at a business event in Hamburg earlier this month.”
The difference today in Germany, after Allied bombing campaigns cleared the way, seems to be that government prosecutors are in position and willing to go after abusers early, with real authority to hold executives accountable and force their course-corrections.
Google has successfully defended a plan to keep links in countries other than where people live, as a court has just ruled a citizen’s national right to delete information does not automatically extend to data stored in another country.
“The balance between right to privacy and protection of personal data, on the one hand, and the freedom of information of internet users, on the other, is likely to vary significantly around the world,” the court said in its decision.
The court said the right to be forgotten “is not an absolute right.”
While the EU has successfully upheld privacy as a human right (“UDHR Article 12. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy…”), which is showing signs of being adopted by US states, Google is litigating for ways to delay or deny link deletion as part of that right.
And while I’m not a lawyer, I’m told the Court technically has statedthere still can be a global application if ordered by the supervisory authority, but it is no longer considered an “automatism”.
The positive spin for the loophole is that Google doesn’t have to abide by a citizen’s request to be forgotten, even if that citizen has an entire nation backing their request as a legal one. Surveillance capitalism having a lack of responsibility to human rights means more money in Google’s pocket, just like if they avoid paying taxes or walk away from any other social-good contract that local markets require of them. In its most charitable light, a mechanism for preserving information against someone’s wishes could be justified if data loss would cause harms.
This, however, is not that case as the “loss” would be revenues Google wants to realize without getting authorization by owners of assets/data. Google litigates this as a “responsible actor” for preservation of data against censorship to appear interested in freedom of speech, yet there are far better ways to avoid censorship than litigating loopholes and havens for advertising revenue databases.
The negative spin for the loophole is that Google is using its ad-revenue warchest to fund its role as a freeloader, using infrastructure and collecting data in order to create high-walled hiding places where they can charge access. This is not unlike the colonial model designed to embed local “business networks” for exploitation and expropriation (theft) of local assets to remote locations to be held against the wishes of creators and owners.
Was the driver asleep? Failure of the car’s “intelligence” seems the most likely explanation, although we can’t yet rule out a human deciding to drive into oncoming traffic across a bridge at 230am. The driver looks alert and standing freely, surrounded by CHP:
Here’s the map view of the Freemont entrance to the Bay Bridge, with yellow lines to demarcate I-80 and its various tentacles gripping the city. It’s been going through renovations and at least confusing enough that Google felt a need to place directional arrows on their map:
Again, it’s tempting to say Tesla has nothing to do with this. Perhaps some will say a human would have had a reason (from being confused to willful disregard) to enter the wrong deck (upper, westbound) while headed east over bridge. They may even argue the computer could have done a better job.
However it’s even more likely and tempting to discuss whether a SF driver asleep like so many other cases put too much trust in their car (typical tech worker living in East Bay taking Tesla into city because awesome supercar autopilot is awesome, duh why don’t you believe in the ubergenius of Musk?).
CHP could not confirm that the vehicle was on Autopilot, but “considering the vehicle’s ability to slow to a stop when Samek was asleep, it appears the ‘driver assist’ feature may have been active at the time.”
the Tesla driver appeared slumped over with something tied around the steering wheel.
“If his little thing tied around that steering wheel fell off, and he was still sleeping, he would have slammed into somebody going 65 miles per hour,” Miladinovich said.
When the system doesn’t sense adequate torque on the steering wheel, Tesla says…[it does something about it]
It may turn out Tesla engineers didn’t think about common safety issues for upper and lower deck bridges. That’s what we’re waiting now to have CHP confirm, based on the story so far and that screen grab of the driver.
In birds-eye view you can see the reports of Tesla going the wrong-way at Freemont Street and I-80 puts the car right at the start of the upper/lower deck split:
Entering upper deck means a primitive navigation tool still would register right path on map and be unable to react until it was far too late (separated past Treasure Island) and restricted by barriers…continuing about 10 miles into the 880 northbound on the wrong side.
All that above begs the question whether a 2019 computer would allow such navigation variances that it wouldn’t prevent a car from driving directly into oncoming traffic on the wrong deck of one of the longest bridges in America, close to Tesla HQ.
Tesla engineering has been known to misread road lines, misread road-signs, slam into barriers and even spontaneously explode into fireball…at this point I’ll wager a stacked double-decker bridge entrance was all it took for Tesla AI to willingly start driving wrong way.