"this hard drive from 1986 won't spin up. We tried freezing it, tapping it with a rubber hammer, and opening the case to lower the friction... there's only one option left: GET OUT THE C4 EXPLOSIVES!"
"what if you crush the case?" (probably still resuable if you don't bend the platters, since you could swap the case+PCB in a cleanroom
if you have magnetic material which is in some range of 0-100% magnetized, it starts at 50%
You write at 0, it goes down to 10%
if you instead wrote a 1, it would go up to 90%
but the 1 will only be pushed down to like 20%, as it doesn't fully overcome the previous magnetization

like "if we had magnetoscopes that were 10x more sensitive and could cool down the drive to within a couple degrees of absolute zero, maybe?"
With some clever hacking of the firmware/hardware, you could possible have a hard drive which has been been programmed to avoid the tracks affected by the hole
but it's theoretically possible.
it might vibrate itself to death.
1. they don't want to be surprised by the secret technological abilities of enemies
They also thought the much more complicated & secure Lorenz machines were were not decipherable... they were wrong.
If you are like "We erase all our drives by writing them with zeros" and then one day are like "UPDATE: MAKE SURE YOU WRITE ZEROS THEN ONES THEN RANDOM CHARACTERS..."
By going overboard about your security methods, you keep them guessing about your capabilities.
It's a 56-bit cipher, and was an important advance in publicly-available cryptography.
But they published an early version in 1975, then later updated it after talking with the NSA.
They don't want to reveal this technique (because then the enemy will harden their systems against it) but at the same time, they don't want their domestic systems to be vulnerable to it
Let's say the NSA figures out how to hack into every linux machine...
The work the UK did to so completely hack the Engima machine was kept secret for decades

Like, if every time the Nazis sent out a submarine, a British destroyer sailed directly to it and sank it, they'd start to get suspicious about the security of their codes
But man, this spy is great. Let's give them a medal, and tell them to try to be a bit faster with the radio messages next time..."
They told him to go to the UK and recruit more local British agents to spy for the Germans
He reported having recruited Brits to help him spy, and send along reports of their discoveries, including blaming them for all any incorrect information that came through.
He'd just made the German Navy waste a ton of resources trying to find and sink an allied convoy... which didn't exit.
Like, when his "Liverpool agent" didn't tell the Germans about the big fleet movement leaving that port, he said that the agent had suddenly fallen ill, and a fake obituary was put in the newspapers
So he "hired" a radio operator, and the Nazis sent over information on the encryption system he would use.
This wasn't Enigma (it was a manual system), but was actually really helpful for further Enigma codebreaking
Which the allies could intercept
1. the encrypted Enigma transmission
2. the original plain-text version, because THEY WROTE IT
They specifically set it up to cause delays for accurate messages and to have inaccurate but-vaguely-close information.
"no. Patton is about to send 75 divisions to invade Pas de Calais! Our best agent is certain of this."
So he had both, making him one of the very few people to get decorated by both sides of WW2.
In reality he retires to Venezuela, running a bookstore under a new name.
I don't think that was even legal in 1940s Britain.



I need to go get some coffee and maybe turn down my ADHD from a 9 to maybe a 6 or 7.
https://t.co/fxSZjxyBm0
I've got a list of a bunch of 'em on my wiki:
https://t.co/zF7vci6gcy
More from foone
More from Internet
Are you a web developer or a designer?
These websites will help you create professional mockups for your applications:
🧵👇🏻
1. Shot Snap:
Create beautiful device mockup images for your app or website
2. Smart Mockups:
Create stunning product mockups (free & premium)
https://t.co/1RmIQhAreS
3. Screely:
Instantly turn your screenshot into a mockup
https://t.co/riAzf7CioH
4. Screenshot .rocks:
Create beautiful browser & mobile mockups in seconds.
https://t.co/EpxLukHg8T
These websites will help you create professional mockups for your applications:
🧵👇🏻
1. Shot Snap:
Create beautiful device mockup images for your app or website
2. Smart Mockups:
Create stunning product mockups (free & premium)
https://t.co/1RmIQhAreS

3. Screely:
Instantly turn your screenshot into a mockup
https://t.co/riAzf7CioH

4. Screenshot .rocks:
Create beautiful browser & mobile mockups in seconds.
https://t.co/EpxLukHg8T

You May Also Like
This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?
Imagine for a moment the most obscurantist, jargon-filled, po-mo article the politically correct academy might produce. Pure SJW nonsense. Got it? Chances are you're imagining something like the infamous "Feminist Glaciology" article from a few years back.https://t.co/NRaWNREBvR pic.twitter.com/qtSFBYY80S
— Jeffrey Sachs (@JeffreyASachs) October 13, 2018
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.

Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)

There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.

At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?