Most AIs are trained on older poster art like this - they're well labelled, have consistent style, and because they're older there are likely to be a bunch of duplicates in the training set.
steventhedev
joined 2 years ago
None built in from what I recall. That was from back in 2011, so it's possible things changed since.
Reading through, it looks like retries do exist, but remember that duplicate packets are treated as a window reset, so it's possible that transmission succeeded but the ack was lost.
I remember the project demos from the course though - one team implemented some form of fast retry on two laptops and had one guy walk out and away. With regular wifi he didn't even make it to the end of the hall before the video dropped out. With their custom stack he made it out of the building before it went.
I'll need to dig through to find the name of what they did.
Small strikes against any IRGC personnel stationed outside Iran - they're fair game and on the table. We're already seeing this with the strikes on Damascus and throughout Lebanon.
Also - based on the saber rattling and talking heads, it sounds like there are likely to be three potential targets: the dams, which would cause massive domestic economic damage to Iran; the oil facilities, which would cause massive economic damage to the Iranian regime; finally, known nuclear sites, which are in line with Israeli rhetoric about preventing Iranian nuclear ambitions.
I think cooler heads will prevail and the dams won't be targeted, and without a regional coalition committed to a ground invasion with a goal of regime change, attacking the nuclear facilities won't have the strategic impact that's desired. Which leaves the oil refineries - there's a natural bottleneck for Iranian oil production/export so there's a short list of physical areas that need to be attacked for it to be effective.
Thinking on it further, IRGC headquarters should also be on the table. I don't think it's likely, but if it succeeds (and it's likely to succeed - especially with direct US support) then it's a huge win. But even if it does succeed I don't see it leading to real regime change in Iran, so without that strategic impact it's far less likely.
To be fair, because of window size management it only takes 1% packet loss to cause a catastrophic drop in speed.
Packet loss in TCP is only ever handled as a signal of extreme network congestion. It was never intended to go over a lossy link like wifi.
Anything using Blind as a "verified industry source" is going to be skewed to the type of person who uses Blind. Beyond that, it's low sample size, and there are suspiciously round fractions for some of the larger companies. Worse, because Blind is blind - this doesn't represent current employees, but merely people who worked at some point in the past at those companies.
Not saying it's not good - just saying not to get overly excited over a badly done survey
Are you ok?
Typical intercept opinion piece - one sided with self-contradictory citations. For example - claiming that the only complaint was based on an Instagram story that way posted after the professor was informed of the complaint. It's like they started from the headline and just wrote whatever supported that conclusion.
I honestly wish I hadn't wasted my time reading this
From what I understood, the radar systems were incompatible and that's why despite it being on the table it wasn't sold to the Ukrainians. That and the requirement to gather accurate surveys of the areas to be protected.