41–50 of 82 posts
Worth the read just for the horrible B-17 bit used as opener. Good hook.
It reminds me of the accidental Hawaii nuclear missile alert a few years back. AIUI, the button to test the system was in close proximity to the button to send the real thing.
https://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/infrastructure/a...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He also could have used Chernobyl as an example.
Chernobyl was very different, due to the negligence factor. "Hold my vodka and watch THIS" is no way to run a nuclear power plant.
Worth the read just for the horrible B-17 bit used as opener. Good hook.
It reminds me of the accidental Hawaii nuclear missile alert a few years back. AIUI, the button to test the system was in close proximity to the button to send the real thing.
Can you guess which music video that’s from?
> thanks for all the bits Am I missing something here? What's the headline supposed to mean? Is it a tongue-in-cheek gesture, since GCHQ routinely hoover up personal data and spy on both their citizenry and foreign countries?
Its Ian ingratiating himself to the geek readership so they think he's one of them and not, well, a fucking ex government spook ;)
The comments about Heartbleed and OpenSSL suggest (to me) his behind the scenes thinking: Airplanes don't fall out of the sky because transport safety boards do the analysis and the manufacturers follow their advice - the idea is only one planet crashes per type of mistake. Well it's hard to get a group of open source developers to follow cleanroom techniques for free. I am guessing that the thinking is to fund the i…
Ian Levy, UK National Cyber Security Centre’s departing Technical Director, discusses life, the universe, and everything.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It reminds me of the accidental Hawaii nuclear missile alert a few years back. AIUI, the button to test the system was in close proximity to the button to send the real thing.
Or much lower stakes but the terrible UI that caused Citibank to accidentally give away $500M[1] (though they got it back on appeal [2]). I am always amazed to see the awful, awful software people put up with to do their jobs. [1] https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2021/02/citibank-just-go... [2] https://www.reuters.com/markets/us/citigroup-wins-appeal-ove...
And THREE PEOPLE all signed off on it!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It reminds me of the accidental Hawaii nuclear missile alert a few years back. AIUI, the button to test the system was in close proximity to the button to send the real thing.
There were some choices gif/memes to come out of that, though like the top one here: https://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/infrastructure/a...
I CANNOT STAND UI's that are interactable before they have completed their layout rendering! Or things like notifications that suddenly push everything down, right when you were about to tap on one of those elements! Why is this still a thing? Any UI element that shifts or appears should have like a user-adjustable half-second delay before it becomes interactable again
Worth the read just for the horrible B-17 bit used as opener. Good hook.
As a pilot, loved the B17 bit. I am intrigued by the memory safety section. It’s a hot topic these days, right? So here’s an interesting thought experiment. What if all these areas where we use memory-unsafe technologies were replaced by memory managed technologies like C#, Python, Go, etc. Sure, lots of things would run slower (raw TLS in Python, yay), BUT would there suddenly just be less exploits? Or is this area…
I was confused by the B17 fact; if you’re at the stage of lowering the gear (flying slowly), pulling the wrong lever and going full flap would do not much? Now if you were taking off and went to raise the gear and lifted the flaps instead, then that's a problem.
A bit of searching seems to have revealed that the actual problem was inadvertent gear retraction. Pilots were retracting the gear, either while adjusting flaps on final approach or after landing when they tried to raise the flaps again.