well code which U2f token generate with the help of Google authenticator has ONLY 6 digits. 6 digits that's not extremely hard to brute force is that right ?
If you are using additional backup u2f token (2 tokens in total) hacker has chance 1:500 000 to find out correct PIN is my assumption right ?
You seem confused. I think you're describing TOTP, but this whole thread is about FIDO.
WebAuthn, U2F and similar FIDO based schemes are sending some public key signed blobs over the network. A PIN is purely a local protection, it's not sent over the wire. So a hacker can't just try guessing the PIN. First they need to steal your physical token, only then could they start guessing PINs for the stolen token.
or CO2 concentration under 1000 ... in our building they somehow trying to save money on air conditioning so we don't consider air in the office to be 'fresh' as there's usually ~1500ppm - 2000ppm CO2 concentration.
For others who may be curious, outdoor mean CO2 concentration is currently 410 ppm.
CO2 concentrations under 1000 ppm are described as having 'good air exchange'. CO2 between 1500-2000 is unpleasant, causes drowsiness and feels stale and gross. 5000 ppm is the typical workplace health limit.
Some guidelines are based on 1950s air quality, which had 250-350 ppm CO2. Today, you need more circulation to maintain acceptable CO2 levels than you did 50 years ago because the outdoor air has a higher concentration.
Long term costs of things, health care implication of issues like Pollution, and garbage littering(hygiene) are neglected. In fact this carelessness can be seen in other places like nutrition too.
Also general lack of respect for the law. Things like everyday corruption. And then lack of basic public hygiene, come to mind.
India had to do a lot of work to eradicate polio. It took quite literally decades.The next set of diseases which will be more like Diabetes, Thyroid related diseases, Malnutrition etc will be far harder to deal with.
It's everywhere the same story. In Czech Republic IBM has implemented quite a lot IT projects for government. Just for example : There's software for tax management of whole country which is running on mainframes from 1992, it was written in Informix 4GL language there's only GUI is MS-DOS based terminal. all officials need to work with that system.
Of course it was fine 15 years ago but from that time we had quite a lot changes in tax system, many new conditions has been addad and in the result we have unstable deprecated software where maintainability is nowadays near to ZERO.
There are currently no people who knows how it works and who knows Informix 4GL language in 2018... After few years it will be probably replaced but cost of new project will astronomical (...of course).
I am not blaming purely IBM, quite often government officials are incompetent when it comes to software project planning.
there's no reason to consume bottled mayonnaise at all.
Don't be extremely strict, food with reasonable % of sugar will not harm you if you will be below daily limit with sugar...
I don't really use mayo, I prefer vinaigrette dressings. I was just using mayo as an example though, if you make mayonnaise yourself, it's just oil, egg yolk, and vinegar. There shouldn't be sugar in mayo.
On the second count, you're right that you don't need to be extremely strict. I went sugar-free for a month because I made a bet with a friend, rather than for any actual health reason. A small amount of sugar is fine for you.
The problem is that practically every shelf stable packaged food contains added sugar. If you have a diet that consists of a lot of packaged food, the sugar starts to add up quickly, especially if you're in a habit of using ketchup, which is astoundingly high in sugar. Granola bars (and granola in general) are also a food that people seem to forget contain a boatload of sugar too.
Consider replacing anything that has sugar in it, with an organic sugar alternative. Trader Joes, Whole Food, Costco, local organic store/coop have many alternatives, and many of them taste better than the popular brands.
Organic sugar isn't a panacea, it's still almost completely sucrose and organic sucrose is absolutely chemically identical to non-organic. It often tastes way better, but it's a stretch to assign significant health benefits to it.
By all means, steer clear of HFCS (operative word: fructose, not sucrose). It's probably less bad than it's reputation suggests, but its also probably worse than sucrose. More pertinently, it's indicative of cheap, low-quality food that has way too much sweetener because it otherwise has no flavour.
But more on point for this thread: Don't replace a food that shouldn't have sugar in it at all (mayonnaise) with a variant that just has a different kind of sugar. Find a variant that is better quality and doesn't have sugar at all. Good mayonnaise requires really good eggs and those are expensive.
The problem is sometimes these "variants" are very difficult to find.
Pasta sauce for instance IMHO should not have any sugar at all (tomatoes, spices, and a little bit of olive oil). If sugar is added, it should be very modest. But try finding a typical pasta sauce in the store with no sugar or even only a modest amount of sugar. This is more difficult than it sounds.
Options definitely exist and Googling, it seems with keto being more of a thing, there are a few more options compared to when I searched a few years ago -- haven't honestly made pasta in a while. But it's still relatively few, your typical Ragu type bottles will have sugar or HFCS as one of the top 3 ingredients. The options that do exist tend to cluster around more expensive "organic" offerings. And you have to keep checking ingredients lists continuously for changes. One report for instance said Aldi's used to have a pasta sauce without sugar. This is not the case now... http://ggfgourmet.com/en/index.php/aldipastasauce/
Pasta sauce is one of those things that takes time to make. If you don't have the time to make it, and can't find a quality variety without the unnecessary sugar... you're out of luck.
It's pretty easy to buy a couple 28oz cans of tomatoes, a jar of minced garlic, and some olive oil and simmer for a half hour. That's like, what, 15 minutes more than it takes to make pasta to begin with. Generally I agree with you, though.
I'd like to be able to buy ground sausage, but a lot of packaged ground sausage has added sugar, as do a lot of packaged broths and bouillon cubes. Broth and sausage are great ways to add some flavor to staples like beans and lentils and it's really unfortunate that it's so hard to find packaged versions without sugar.
The "assumption" is that when you ask someone what the difference between sucrose and sucrose is, that you don't mean a second hidden question about something else entirely.
You definitely free to argue that, but is there some scientific basis or any study you can point to?
The issue with sugar is how the body processes fructose and glucose. Unless there is indication that substances present in non-organic vs organic sugar modify digestion of sucrose and fructose there isn't much to the theory organic makes sugar less harmful.
I am not a scientist that can argue how the body processes fructose/glucose. But I can argue the difference between raw unprocessed sugar cane plant vs processed white sugar.
Processed white sugar has a detrimental effect on the body, and unprocessed sugar does not. Or if it does, it's so minimal as to be unnoticeable in my own tests.
This includes ability to concentrate, lethargy, dental health, sleep, hyperactivity and general health like colds and the flu.
This is from my own experimentation with multiple people, first hand, not just reading what others have said.
Sorry, but i do not see how the warning is useful, as it first of all distract your attention from driving, and secondly happens too short a time before the would be accident for you to react in my experience. So as a stand alone warning feature without automated breaking, i dont see the use case that you're praising?
This is all too easy. On Friday, I was taking the off-ramp to join a different highway, on cruise control (because I knew the road layout ahead), at the speed limit (70MPH). I glanced down to adjust the heater and when I looked up, a BMW had been sitting on the ghost islands separating the highway and the off-ramp (apparently missed the turn), and the driver had just decided to join the lane I was currently steaming down. Fortunately, the excellent brakes (as well as the loud horn...) in my Supra made up for my lapse in concentration.
I'm in two minds about vehicle automation. Most of it is to compensate for human idiocy (such as the above example). The same gains could be made by humans not doing illegal maneuverers like that. Yes, there are occasions where the electronics can react appropriately to a rapidly developing situation much faster than a human could (e.g. child/animal running into the road), but I agree with the article's caution on complacency. All it needs is for a driver used to auto-braking to get into a car without it and cause an accident, and the technology will suddenly become mandatory.
At the other end of the spectrum, as I've often said, it's technology developed by humans, based on our own understandings, so there will be flaws. Having experienced poor ABS systems that would activate at low speed to the point that I feared the car would not stop at the junction I was approaching, I am not confident auto-brakes will react appropriately in every situation they're called upon.
A lot of vehicular automation is compared to aircraft systems (especially fully autonomous technology) but there is a critical distinction - you never get tailgaters in the air (or if you do, something has gone terribly wrong). Aircraft can rely on huge amounts of automation because in normal use, there are huge amounts of open air in every direction to allow the pilot time to take back control should the systems fail, and still have space and time to correct the immediate problem. Vehicles on the ground are tightly grouped together. Not only does this leave precious little time for humans to react to a bad situation, it also means that any automation systems are similarly constrained. They have to work correctly in a span of seconds or milliseconds. There is no time to 'nope' out and pass control back to the human when they exceed their programming, as is frequently the case with Tesla. Failure is thus very difficult to analyse and account for.
Automation is generally a good thing, but I can't help thinking we might end up automating ourselves into a hole on this one.
Yikes, early ABS brakes were terrifying, especially on snowy or icy roads. I had a couple vehicles that you'd have to start braking a hundred yards earlier than if you were using normal brakes, or else you'd go sailing past where you planned on stopping. Fucking dangerous, if you weren't expecting that behavior.
Another problem with early ABS is that it was widely misunderstood. Many drivers thought it would allow them to stop in a shorter distance under very slippery conditions, when in fact the opposite was often true (but you could steer more effectively). Thus they didn't slow down as much as they should for the conditions and didn't have enough time left to stop.
Also a thick A-pillar will block vision for a few degrees slightly to the sides. Enough to give me a couple of "crap, did not see that (car/pedestrian)" close calls in full daylight.
I feel you there. My partner (who doesn't drive) just bought a second hand Corolla. She'd had it just a few days when I nearly t-boned a flatbed Toyota Hilux because it was hidden completely behind the pillar and just happened to have the correct speed relative to me to allow it to match my turn and remain completely hidden. Luckily, I'm quite cautious at intersections.
I've since learned to move around whenever I'm looking for other vehicles.
Yep, that's a classic case of an engineering trade-off. The thick A-pillars in modern cars are a real detriment to visibility in a place where we need it most, and can not only cause more crashes due to low visibility, but also more impacts with pedestrians since they're frequently hidden in that spot. However, they're also a real boon for crashworthiness: thicker pillars are structurally essential for surviving a rollover accident, and they're also good for holding airbags which can prevent deaths or maimings that the front airbags are insufficient for.
It's a pretty common mistake to rear-end the person in front of you if they stop unexpectedly while you're shoulder-checking for a merge. A warning would probably prevent some of those collisions.
I think you're misunderstanding. Consider a merge like the one below. Each line is a lane, and the direction of travel is upwards. This is sometimes how an on-ramp ends, for instance.
||
||
||\A
C|| \B
|| \
Cars A and B are in the \ lane, and Car C is in the leftmost | lane. The \ lane has a yield sign.
The driver in Car A is a new driver, and is uncomfortable merging. The lane they would be entering is clear, but they're spooked by the car in the far lane and stop unnecessarily at the merge point.
The driver in Car B behind them is following closely and is preparing to merge by doing a shoulder check. They are not looking forward when the car in front of them stops. If the way had been blocked they would have been expecting the car ahead to stop, but they had seen it was clear.
The driver of Car B is at-fault in that collision. They were depending on the driver ahead of them to behave predictably, and they were not driving defensively enough. A warning noise would probably have triggered them to slam on the breaks and might have prevented the collision. Automatic emergency breaking would do the same, perhaps more reliably.
(This was a real accident. I was a passenger in the lead car.)
Absolutely disagreed, the car starts beeping if you're approaching a slower car in front of you but don't start slowing down - it has captured my attention more than once on long motorway drives - it does it long enough in advance that you can go "shit I didn't realise we were slowing down".
One Sunday early risers gazing at Czech Television’s CT2 channel saw picturesque panoramas of the Czech countryside, broadcast to the wordless accompaniment of elevator music. It was the usual narcoleptic morning weather show. Then came the nuclear blast. Across the Krkonose Mountains, or so it appeared, a white flash was followed by the spectacle of a rising mushroom cloud
