@ACuriousMind hey! actually, i was reading about the Internet war happening around the world where emerging economy like China is competing to develop their own Internet is it really possible? i feel no , because most of the undersea optical fiber cable is being developed by the west and its allies? in cyber warfare domain what u feel is the most critical thing
and one more thing how data theft is possible using these cables i read somewhere that western countries are concerned about fiber cables
Why would the big C develop their own internet when their great firewall is already so powerful at controlling the internet for their own use? It is not like the old internet infrastructure would be causing trouble any time soon?
it is a big deal that the confluence of a language barrier and the great firewall, together, gives them quite the powerful control over their own political stability
@आर्यभट्ट that's not about China making its own internet, it's about the concern that whoever controls the cables through which internet traffic passes can of course a) intercept that traffic and b) just cut off other people's access to the cables
not sure what's unclear about this - if I control the cable through which some data is passed, I can just cut the cable open, put some listening device in there and record ("spy") on everything that's passing through it. I wouldn't even call that "spying", it's just how it works - if you give me some data and tell me to pass it to someone else, you have to give me the data
it's the same thing as with the cable: If I build your computer and install the firmware on it, I can also install something that allows me to e.g. control your computer from afar, or record everything you type or whatever
so you have to trust me that I won't do that
and plenty of people don't trust China not to do that
(of course, this isn't a one-way street: China has an interest to produce all that hardware themselves because they don't necessarily trust US-produced technology to be safe!)
all those news reports about intelligence threats "from China" or "from Russia" usually describe threats that are symmetric, but the West likes to pretend they're not
I really don't trust regulation to fix this, although I largely approve of the EU attempts at regulating data collection by companies
Both companies and intelligence agencies have no interest in actually protecting anyone's data, and as soon as the perceived benefits outweigh the potential fine, they'll just break regulations
do u feel the Ai makes personnel data more vulnerable i mean not about government even corporates have been misusing the personnel data by spamming customers
for that we need internationally recognized personnel data regulation
which includes all the countries like various convention of the united nations
if you're talking about LLMs like ChatGPT, no, those aren't really privacy risks as such. The only problem could be that people train them on sensitive data and don't realize that they can't control how the models regurgitate that data
@naturallyInconsistent and even those are regularly broken by the big players (e.g. Facebook/Meta and Cambridge Analytica), although they have to pay fines
A real vision for privacy would involve only using software that doesn't collect all that data at all unless really necessary, but this requires individual action
the problem isn't that their code is closed-source and if we only could see the code that collects the data suddenly everything would improve; the problem is that everyone knows they collect that data and uses them anyway
don't get me wrong: I'm all for community-driven, free, open-source software, but the "open source" part isn't really at the core of the privacy problem
@RyderRude I think you heavily misunderstand how open-source works
open source doesn't mean anyone can make any changes they want to the code
and the thing with replacing the large social media players isn't that there is no open source software that could also do that
there are open source alternatives, see e.g. the software that powers Mastodon as a Twitter alternative
but just because it exists doesn't mean people use it
the market is dominated by the big players and the network effect is real: Everyone uses Twitter because everyone else uses Twitter; almost no one is going to use the open-source alternative as long as everyone else is still on Twitter
@ACuriousMind let me say clearly commercial interest and backroom collaboration between tech companies and government makes the open source a failure in front of them
@RyderRude ...and what I've been explaining to you is that "open source" is not the solution. Yes, an open-source software is easy to audit regarding what data it stores or not. But, again: Our current issues with privacy are not about us not knowing that the companies store a truckload of data
They even tell you in their terms of service, usually!
all the scandals aren't that the companies secretly stored data you didn't know they stored, it's just that they used that data in nefarious ways after they pinky-swore they wouldn't do it
@RyderRude OpenAI also makes a lot of money from enterprises that mostly use fine-tuned GPT3 models as they achieve high levels of performance at a fraction of the cost
In 2019, the non-profit AI research startup OpenAI turned a page that would alter its bedrock. Unusual though it may be for a non-profit organisation to make millions of dollars, OpenAI announced the OpenAI LP as an entirely separate entity, calling it a ‘capped-profit’ corporation. While the company would continue to research and develop new technologies, it also wanted to make more money in the process.
The details of the deal were this – investors of the startup could now earn up to 100 times their investment and not more than that value. The remaining money made would go right back into their nonprofit work done by another entity called OpenAI Nonprofit. OpenAI counts a bunch of big names among its VC firms like Andreessen Horowitz, Sequoia, Tiger Global and Founders Fund, all of which have the option to exit the agreement whenever they wan
You just don't understand how open source works at all; almost all open source projects are not somehow egalitarian paradises where everyone can do everything - most of them are owned by specific people or organizations, and those people or organizations control what happens to the software
@RyderRude Admittedly, it's pretty mundane. But if the timestamps of your observations are sloppy it's difficult to verify your theory against those observations.
And with astronomical stuff, it's a bit circular, since before the atomic clock we set our mechanical clocks from astronomical references. And we still keep UTC coordinated with time based on the Sun, since we want to maintain the traditional link between the length of the day and the length of the year. That gets tricky at high precision because the Earth's rotation period is gradually & irregularly increasing.
> He sought to develop a pendulum whose period was precisely one second – such a pendulum would complete 86,400 swings in a 24-hour period. This he directly tested, twice, by using stars to mark time and recruiting a team of nine fellow Jesuits to count swings and maintain the amplitude of swing for 24 hours.
this means that today we must be keeping track of two types of time : one that is based on atomic clocks and the other that must remain aligned with the solar year
Part of the motivation for the length of the metre was for it to be the length of a seconds pendulum. But they soon realised that that was a bit sloppy, due to the variation in g.
one more problem that comes up here is that we can only compare two "clocks" and we dont know which one is the real clock. we can only know that both are irregular relative to each other
Well, we have an atomic clock network, where all the clocks on the network contribute to TAI. But you can't just make an observation and know the TAI time of that observation. It takes the BIPM time to collate the data from all the clocks on the network. So you make a preliminary record of what time your clock says, and then a couple of weeks later when the next edition of Circular T comes out (which is published monthly), you can convert your preliminary timestamp to TAI.
the reason these problems arise is that clocks themselves are complex objects subject to the laws of mechanics, and yet, the fundamentals of Newtonian mechanics is based on treating clocks as a primitive object
I investigate current density functions. the currents are induced into an electron cloud, the underlying mechanisms are QM, but the quantituies I obtain can be treated classically. So I have an external homogeneous time independent mag field B^ext that induces currents J^B into the electron cloud, lets say. These currents correspond to some induced magnetic field B^ind from which they can be obtained for example ma the Ampere law from the curl.
@PM2Ring there was a fun anecdote about the Eotvos experiment where, to make sure the experiment was as undisturbed as possible, the experimenters ran to the setup, did their thing and then ran back away
Via some considerations I have obtained a method for computing a "vector potential" for the currents that is obviously in general different from B^ind but from which J^B also can be obtained by taking the curl (and dividing by \mu_0).
Obviously the two vector potentials B^ind and the other one lets call it W are related via a gradient of a scalar function f. Like W + grad(f) = B^ind. What I would like to know now is if B^ind is special among all W+grad(g) potentials of this form for all possible g. And if B^ind for example fullfills some variational property ?
in Quantum mechanics it induces non zero but "static" currents.
Amateur "time hacker" Tom van Baak made a pendulum that's sensitive to tides. He also measured gravitational time dilation by taking one of his atomic clocks up a mountain, with his kids. leapsecond.com
@RaphaelJ.F.Berger isn't the definition of the magnetic field - as opposed to any other field $W$ that has $\nabla\times W = J$ - just that it also fulfills the rest of Maxwell's equations?
@RaphaelJ.F.Berger Yes - I'm saying the $B^\text{ind}$ is special in that it is the only one among those that also fulfills the other three Maxwell equations for your current $J$
@RaphaelJ.F.Berger If you also give me some boundary conditions for $E$ and $B$ then I'd say so - I'd just compute $J$ from it - as $\nabla \times W$ - and then use that $J$ and the boundary conditions to get a unique solution for $E$ and $B$ from Maxwell's equations
Also from Tom"s site: http://leapsecond.com/pages/atomic-bill/ Below is my brother-in-law, Bill, a professional construction contractor, proving that a HP 5071A Cesium Beam Primary Frequency Reference can in fact be used as a wrist watch.
