161–170 of 264 posts
Russian trawlers going back and forth in that area… https://x.com/PerErikSchulze/status/1794828268480438514
That's what trawling is . . . it is completely normally for a trawler to go back and forth like that.
Submarine cables are clearly marked on nautical charts, and even recreational boaters know not to anchor in those areas.
A professional trawler captain is not going to accidentally trawl over such an area.
Russian trawlers going back and forth in that area… https://x.com/PerErikSchulze/status/1794828268480438514
>After an inital investigation, the police dropped the case due to lack of evidence, and inadequate legislation.
Just in case why people are wondering why cutting of internet for an arctic island is a big deal. What many might not know is that Svalbard is home to the northernmost satellite station in the world. It is just one of two stations that can communicate with polar orbiting satellites each day. ESA and NASA as well as other civilian organisations are present there, and the station communicates with well over a hundred s…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This article details how certain russian trawlers criss-crossed a lot over another cable in Norway that broke some time before... ...and then the same trawlers were in the vicinity of this cable in Svalbard when another trawler criss-crossed over it until it broke (In Norwegian but hopefully Google Translate will do an OK job and mainly graphics) https://www.nrk.no/nordland/xl/russiske-tralere-krysset-kabl...
Criss crossing is quite normal behavior btw. I see it all the time here at the North Sea near England.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, but that also makes it an ideal cover story too.
Why would the russians care to have a cover story? They're in an open hot war with the west.
russia wont openly invade Baltics/NATO, they will send little green men under the cover of some self manufactured crisis. A big forest fire, chemical spill, maybe an aircraft crash or terrorist attack. Then it will be "touch our guys and we Nuke you" like they keep saying in Ukraine, with West trembling to cross magical imaginary red lines.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I wonder how much data per unit of time this is capable of transporting. The max throughput of fiber optic cables isn't exactly constant. As fiber optic modem and DSP technology improves you can get much higher speeds on 15+ year-old cables than were ever possible when they were laid. Recently I saw an article about researchers getting 300,000 Gbit/s over existing fiber optic cables (though I'm sure that's a long w…
The Shannon limit is constant if you assume reasonable but idealized SNR values for the medium, and gives you a real "law of physics" upper limit ... typically still many orders of magnitude beyond what we can transmit today. But it's amazing how effective DSP can be; trellis coding managed to get modems to squeeze right up to the Shannon limit of POTS telephone connections.
The Shannon limit is changed by changing technology over the medium, not the other way around.
If you signal with light on/off pulses, you get one limit. If you add polarization tricks (using different physical properties and tech), you get another limit. As you add QAM and a zillion other tricks, you get another channel limit. If you add quantum superdense coding, you get another channel limit. Each of those, until we learned there is yet another layer of physics and tech, would be "the Shannon Limit." All of these can be done on the same medium.
The Shannon limit is a mathematical *model* of a channel. It's not a physical/technological limit.
Here [1], for example, is a paper pointing this out for transoceanic undersea optical cables. "As pointed out in Section 9.3, the Shannon limit is only limiting if we assume there is no technical way to further improve the QoT..."
Technology changes routinely change the "Shannon Limit," since that limit has almost nothing to do with physics. Physics and the signaling technology define a Shannon Limit for that particular channel combination, nothing more.
[1] https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/shannon-lim...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think what had a big impact on me is they show both a healthy lung and a smoker's lung
This was the big one for me too. The juxtaposed healthy versus unhealthy lungs resemble an uncooked chicken versus a roast chicken which was left in the oven for 30 minutes more than necessary. https://www.scotsman.com/webimg/legacy_elm_28724349.jpg?crop...
And through the grandfather, who fades to translucency.
It wasn't just me; that PSA made enough of a splash that it was called out on Friends.
I've tried to find that PSA in the past, but with no success. Once I asked a friend if they could find it, and the response was "Oh, I know exactly the one you're talking about. I won't help you look for it. I hate that commercial and I don't want to see it again."
Looks like it's made it onto youtube by now in glorious 240p: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6pb6XxrbmE
I note that the second comment is "This commercial was what made my father stop smoking." It's interesting to think about the balance between disturbing the smoking audience so strongly that they stop, and disturbing the non-smoking audience so strongly that they complain about being exposed to your traumatic imagery and imperil your funding.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
TL;DR of the court cases: the fisherman was guilty of damages to the tune of $1.2M, and his insurance cover was voided because his act was so reckless. Funnily enough, the cable owners (Telus) tried to thread the needle of making the owner liable, but not so badly that insurance wouldn't pay for it. The judge didn't buy this, and obviously a sole operator crab boat can't pay over a million in damages (although he did…
Not even a down payment on the fine?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is it possible to tap fiber-optic cables without the owner getting wise? Even if you could tap modern cables, I assume everything is now encrypted and carries so much bandwidth that it becomes possible to sample the interesting intelligence.
Private companies provide equipment and software to analyse all raw data going through an ISP. All the big names, from US and EU to some countries in Asia, bought this equipment and software. So, my guess is that a government's budget can enable sampling anything from "so much bandwidth". Regarding encryption, if you run the numbers, to brute force common encryption algorithms it would take Google's compute 1 second.…
That's not true at all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
While this looks alarming and makes an engaging tweet, I have no idea how regular trawling patterns look like. They might circle around fishing spot.
Dave Barry made a similar observation about antismoking PSAs, objecting to one that had someone throw a diseased lung on a table. He pointed out that you could present any random internal organ and it would look just as bad: " This is what will happen to you if you keep smoking. Look! A perfectly healthy goat kidney!"
I did rewind and listen again then look up what he was saying and indeed, my assumed knowledge of smoking was altered.
Apologies for my vagueness with 'issues', I don't want to under or over state what he said and right now I can't locate the exact sentence within the days of testimony.
This man... https://archive.is/x5MRY