Juha Saarinen at Wired (http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/author/juha-saarinen) reports that “[…] The ongoing rape-and-sexual-molestation investigation of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is taking another in a series of odd turns. A file containing 100 pages of interview transcripts, investigatory notes and other material in the case has appeared online, where it’s being eagerly dissected by Swedish WikiLeaks-watchers. […]” (full article at http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/02/wikileaks-sweden).
The leaker hit by his own doom… 😉
This post as a comment also at http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/02/wikileaks-sweden
David Kraveds at Wired (http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/author/davidkravets) reports that “[…] The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation is shooting down a key legislative talking point: that the internet “kill-switch” legislation is needed to prevent cyberterrorists from opening the Hoover Dam’s floodgates. […] At a panel in Washington last week, a GOP staffer working on the bill was even more terrifying. […] “I’d like to point out that this is not a factual example, because Hoover Dam and important facilities like it are not connected to the internet,” Peter Soeth, a spokesman for the bureau, said in an e-mail. “These types of facilities are protected by multiple layers of security, including physical separation from the internet, that are in place because of multiple security mandates and good business practices.” […] (full article at http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/02/hoover/)
Only one point: also the Iranian uranium sites were protected, but a worm spread through USB devices…
Ok is an unlikely event, but happened once. So i don’t question on US Law, but I think Mr Soeth could be a little more careful or precise when speaking…
This post as a comment also at http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/02/hoover/
Brian X. Chen at Wired (http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/author/brian-x-chen-2/) reports a security flaw that allows bypassing iPhone code lock: simply “[…] tap the “Emergency call” button, then enter three pound signs, hit the green call button and immediately press the lock button. That simple procedure gives a snoop full access to the Phone app on the iPhone, which contains the address book, voicemail and call history […] (Full article http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/10/iphone-snoop/).
🙂 also Apple has some funny things to do without jailbreaking…
Dan Nosowitz at Fast Company, Arcamax, NPR, Kit Eaton from Fast Company, Michael Calore at Wired (http://www.wired.com/epicenter/author/howto_admin/) and Rosa Golijan at Gizmodo report a CNET source on “[…] an as yet unconfirmed rumor that Google is testing a voice calling service, to be embedded inside Gmail and thus a web-based VoIP product. The service will, according to the rumor, be launched from the Google Chat window where contacts reside, and will be a sort of combination of Google Talk and Google Voice. Google Talk, launched a few years ago, is a combination of instant messaging and VoIP, while Google Voice consolidates various phone numbers into a single one, along with other services like voicemail transcription. But what CNET is reporting is a bit different: true web-based phone calls, for free (or very cheap). Users won’t even be required to have a Google Voice number to use the upcoming service. […]” (full article at http://www.fastcompany.com/1684840/google-reportedly-taking-aim-at-skype-with-voice-calling-in-gmail and original at CNET at http://news.cnet.com/8301-30684_3-20014617-265.html at http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=129440019&ft=1&f=1001 ,at http://www.fastcompany.com/1684961/googles-next-assault-on-the-phone-biz-call-phones-from-gmail and at http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2010/08/gmail-gets-dialed-up-a-notch-with-new-calling-feature/comment-page-1/#comment-55101).
I think Google will be a great competitor for Skype and MSN, because of some important factors:
a) Broadness of services offered
b) Potential integration of services
d) Capability of service visioning
The hope is that they don’t go too far in imagination just like they did with Wave and do something simple and effective like they did with other service (Docs, Mail,…)
This post as a comment also at http://www.fastcompany.com/1684840/google-reportedly-taking-aim-at-skype-with-voice-calling-in-gmail , at http://gizmodo.com/5621146/soon-youll-be-able-to-make-phone-calls-from-your-gmail-inbox, at http://www.arcamax.com/businessnews/s-770638-840175#posts ,at http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?verified=true&storyId=129440019&ft=1&f=1001#commentBlock and at http://www.fastcompany.com/1684961/googles-next-assault-on-the-phone-biz-call-phones-from-gmail
Brian X. Chen at Wired (http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/author/bxchen/) reports that ” […] study led by AnandTech saw a major drop in signal strength when the iPhone 4 was “cupped tightly,” covering a sensitive area in the lower left corner. The iPhone 4’s external band is actually two antennas — one for Wi-Fi, Bluetooth and GPS, and the other for voice and data — and according to Anandtech, touching the point in the lower left, where the two antennas meet, causes attenuation. […]” (full article at http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2010/07/iphone-4-anandtech/).
Apple gave the information that an upcoming update is going to solve the problem (Letter at http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2010/07/02appleletter.html).
The saga continues
I just came through this article from Alexis Madriga (http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/author/alexis-madrigal/), talking on civilian uses of nuclear bombs. “[…] The U.S. government sponsored Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory to come up with and research ideas for what was known as Project Plowshare (see video). While Livermore scientists tested new ideas through about a dozen explosions, Soviet scientists had a much larger program known as “Program No. 7 — Nuclear Explosions for the National Economy” which detonated more than 120 nukes to aid civilian aims […]” (full article at http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/04/yourfriendatom/).
Though is over a year old, it reminds me that we (as human gender, not only as US), evaluated the use of an atomic bomb to stop the oil spill in Gulf of Mexico.
Seems that we made no steps ahead in this direction: oil spill is still there, and people thinking of nuclear explosions as fireworks are still there.
While I’m for the use of nuclear energy, I cannot think of a world filled with explosions to make “big holes”.
Come’on we as humans can come up with some smarter uses of our knowledge.
This post as a comment also at http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/04/yourfriendatom/comment-page-2/#comment-112097
Noah Shachtman (http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/author/noah_shachtman/ ) at Wired reports that “[…] The U.S. mission in Afghanistan centers around swaying locals to its side. And there’s no better persuasion tool than an invisible pain ray that makes people feel like they’re on fire. […] OK, OK. Maybe that isn’t precisely the logic being employed by those segments of the American military who would like to deploy the Active Denial System to Afghanistan. I’m sure they’re telling themselves that the generally non-lethal microwave weapon is a better, safer crowd control alternative than an M-16. But those ray-gun advocates better think long and hard about the Taliban’s propaganda bonanza when news leaks of the Americans zapping Afghans until they feel roasted alive […]” (full article at http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/06/u-s-testing-pain-ray-in-afghanistan/) .
Honestly I think that is just a matter of POV: on my side is better to have people running away with the feeling of being burned than having a bullet between your eyes. I can understand that if you’re on the other this new NLW (Non Lethal Weapon) could be quite disturbing.
But if can avoid some (unfortunately not all) human losses, for me is welcome.
This post as a comment also at http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/06/u-s-testing-pain-ray-in-afghanistan/comment-page-2/#comment-89204
Noah Scachtman at Wired, reported by Gizmodo (http://www.wired.com/) informs us that “[…]
The jet that’s supposed to make up more than 90 percent of America’s combat aviation fleet may have become a lot easier to shoot down.
Lockheed Martin, makers of the Joint Strike Fighter, has been under huge pressure to stabilize the jet’s skyrocketing costs. Production prices have nearly doubled on what was supposed to be an “affordable” fighter. R&D money is up another 40 percent. Some analysts predict the program could run as much as $388 billion for 2,400 jets.
So Lockheed decided “to trim 11 pounds and $1.4 million from each aircraft by removing shutoff valves for engine coolant and hydraulic lines and five of six dry bay fire-suppression systems,” according to InsideDefense.com.[…]”
This on the other hand brings to a minor resistance towards a direct AA attack.
I think that numbers count also on this, but IMHO is not a 1.4 million per aircraft (which BTW costs more than 100 million bucks each) saving thta changes the big numbers over F35.
This post as a comment also at http://gizmodo.com/5561408/gajillion+dollar-stealth-fighter-now-easier-to-shoot-down
Apple presented last monday its last creation (the Iphone 4g) and is just time of a comparison with the supposed enemy: the HTC EVO 4G based on Android.
Priya Ganapati at Wired (http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/author/pganapati/), makes a well detailed comparison between the two contenders (full article at http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2010/06/iphone-4-vs-htc-evo-4g).
The article features also a handy table reported below:
They are very close in performance, but some points are meaningfull:
- IPhone is lighter of about 1/3
- HTC is 4G enabled, while IPhone is not (just a question: why IPhone 4G if not 4G? 🙂 )
- IPhone has native video conferencing, HTC doesn’t (was so costly to have it no board instead of delegating to an application?)
- IPhone has more sensors
This post as a comment also at http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2010/06/iphone-4-vs-htc-evo-4g
As reported by many sources, and among them Nell GreenfieldBoyce at NPR (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4494969), Noah Robischon at Fast Company (http://www.fastcompany.com/user/142631) and Jason Paur at Wired (http://www.wired.com/autopia/author/jasonpaur/), privately financed rocket Falcon 9 owned by Space X entered orbit at first launch (full articles at http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=127487766&ft=1&f=1001, http://www.fastcompany.com/1656560/spacex-falcon-9-successfully-launched-into-orbit-video, http://www.wired.com/autopia/2010/06/space-x-goes-into-earth-orbit/).
I think that is a great breakthrough in space activities, that, if continued, will bring an overall efficiency in space travel.
Is not (only) the fact of succeding at first try, but is a matter of economy, because in a medium timeframe, I suppose the owner of Space X will try to reach the breakeven, demostrating that is possible to have space transportation at a reasonable rate.
I don’t think that this as a first outcome will lead to more tourists in space, but will surely bring more commercial payload up ther in the sky, enabling also medium sized countries to have access to near space.
This post as a comment also at http://www.wired.com/autopia/2010/06/space-x-goes-into-earth-orbit/comment-page-1/#comment-78258, and at http://www.fastcompany.com/1656560/spacex-falcon-9-successfully-launched-into-orbit-video