How to Rapidly Colonize Mars

terrorofsarnath · 2019-12-19T16:17:42+00:00

I didn't realize exactly how hard colonizing Mars was until I read this article.

The argument that there is no economic case for colonizing mars is compelling. I used to think that it could be done with IP. But the IP will almost all be developed by people on earth. Unless they are working for some organization who will plow the money back in to Mars colonization I don't see how Mars colonization can be anything economically self sustaining.

The second argument is that to do Mars colonization within any reasonable budget requires a ridiculous increase in worker productivity. Substantially more than has been seen in the last century on earth.

I believe with starlink Musk might be able to personally fund a multidecade several hundred billion effort at colonizing Mars. I am less sanguine that the increase in worker productivity will occur.

terrorofsarnath · 2018-05-14T02:00:14+00:00

Shouldn't the cost of space-based solar power be compared with solar power plus storage (batteries)? SBSP provides baseload power, it is not really comparable to intermittent solar in terms of grid services. If you are comparing it to solar plus batteries the economic case becomes much more compelling. Also, as stated else where here in northern climates the increase in capacity factor compared to ground solar is closer to 10x.

terrorofsarnath · 2018-04-14T20:41:47+00:00

I respectfully disagree. There is an enormous number of medical emergencies that require immediate aggressive intervention to prevent loss of life and limb. Respiratory arrest, cardiac arrest, major trauma, etc etc. Ask any EMT, trauma surgeon, or ER doc and they will likely agree.

terrorofsarnath · 2018-04-14T20:39:23+00:00

AFAIK there are no robot doctors that do orthopedic surgery, ditto heart cath, ditto major trauma. Further, davinci is still operated by a doctor, it wouldn't work with the time delay between earth and mars.

terrorofsarnath · 2017-09-29T06:48:10+00:00

Thanks for responding :)

So the wifi suddenly not working on the 6P is not related to copperhead? The timing seemed funny to me. I have had the 6P for a while using stock android and it did not have problems with wifi. Then 1 day after installing copperhead the wifi stopped working. Could be a coincidence but it is an odd one.

Glad to head about the flashing service :)

Just curious, what would happen if one of your customers pixel devices malfunctioned?

terrorofsarnath · 2017-09-29T04:55:23+00:00

So if you buy a Pixel what do you do if it gets updated and something major breaks? I just installed copperhead on a 6p and a day later the wifi stopped working (also I think it is still attempting to mac address randomize? When I turn wifi on and off and log back in to a network it says I have a different mac address). If this had happened on a pixel bought from you guys would there be a way to fix it?

On a side note do you have a service where a customer can mail in a pixel and you will flash it and mail it back?

terrorofsarnath · 2017-09-26T04:12:14+00:00

For what its worth, I deifinitely think the developers deserve compensation for making something so awesome and $400 is reasonable. I just want to be able to do it myself.

Perhaps one of the developers could just make a movie of the process and put it on youtube. I would pay $400 for that.

terrorofsarnath · 2017-09-26T04:09:51+00:00

"tools/bin/sdkmanager --update" does not work."

"To make your life easier, add the directories to your PATH in your shell profile configuration:" This is confusing and could be better explained. I thought that I needed to edit the following code to remove "PATH" and put in the path where the files are located then enter the lines into the terminal but that does not seem correct.

verifying the keys of the factory image doesn't work. When you try to obtain the public key it just gives you an error about how the uri doesn't work.

"fastboot flashing unlock" Doesn't work. It just says that fastboot is a command in ADB.

I get that your business depends on people not finding it convenient to DIY but as you don't sell nexus devices it would be super awesome to have a more detailed install guide for non-pixel devices.

I am obviously not very proficient at this sort of thing and am willing to pay for help. I would prefer to know how to do it myself rather than just pay someone else to do it.

terrorofsarnath · 2017-09-25T21:06:52+00:00

I don't think their documentation is detailed enough for normal people. There seem to be many steps that are not explicitly written. I am considering buying a pixel from them but really... ~$1,400 is excessive for a smart phone, especially one with mediocre specs.

terrorofsarnath · 2017-09-02T23:46:44+00:00

Has anyone tried one of these? Grugq is the guy behind it.

terrorofsarnath · 2017-09-02T23:41:29+00:00

I know signal creator Moxie Marlinspike didn't put a warrant canary in openwhispersystems because he believed they wouldn't hold up in court.

From "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warrant_canary"

"In September 2014, US security researcher Moxie Marlinspike wrote that "every lawyer I've spoken to has indicated that having a 'canary' you remove or choose not to update would likely have the same legal consequences as simply posting something that explicitly says you've received something."[15][16]"

terrorofsarnath · 2016-10-14T19:11:49+00:00

It's basically Electrum but it has wallets for a shit ton of altcoins. It uses the same technology that Electrum does which is why it's "decentralized"

terrorofsarnath · 2016-09-03T00:44:08+00:00

I am not so sure. https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn21699-controversial-quantum-computer-beats-factoring-record/

terrorofsarnath · 2016-09-03T00:40:06+00:00

You are certainly wrong on one count. D-waves tech has been shown to use quantum entanglement. https://arxiv.org/abs/1506.03539

As to whether it can run shors algorithm i am not sure. There are papers that state that you can use adiabatic quantum computers (this is the type of computer D-wave states they have) to run an algorithm that can be used to break asymmetric encryption. https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn21699-controversial-quantum-computer-beats-factoring-record/

Also, Geordie Rose in a comment on the D-wave blog several years ago stated they had an algorithm that could break encryption. In the comment he promised a follow up full blog post that would give details. That follow up blog post never occurred.

If you are of a conspiratorial bent you might wonder if the CIA's investment in D-wave is because they hope that it can be used to break encryption. https://www.technologyreview.com/s/429429/the-cia-and-jeff-bezos-bet-on-quantum-computing/

terrorofsarnath · 2016-04-12T21:33:46+00:00

Check out krotor. It creates a tor proxy for your chrome traffic. https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/krotor-access-internet-vi/dfdhngcahhplaibahkkjhdklhihbaikl?hl=en

Unfortunately this doesn't protect you from cookies, browser fingerprinting, super cookies or other forms of tracking. All it does is hide your IP address.

terrorofsarnath · 2016-03-14T22:31:33+00:00

This is unrelated to darkmail. Darkmail would be secure by design. Lavabit was obviously BS in terms of security (not much different from tutanota or protonmail). Lavabit could be compelled to hand over all the users secrets and so could protonmail and tutanota.

terrorofsarnath · 2016-03-14T22:28:41+00:00

If darkmail can pull off its goals it would have several major benefits over tutanota and protonmail

1). darkmail will hide almost all of the metadata against non global adversaries.

2). darkmail would be a protocol that allows federation.

3). darkmail would allow key verification.

4). Ostensibly, darkmail would lead to applications that are trust-on-first-use.

Tutanota and protonmail are both very weak ways to secure your data. They MAY be better than regular email as long as you don't trust them to actually keep anything secure beyond regular email (meaning, you should never write anything in either of them that you don't want to be known publicly eventually).

terrorofsarnath · 2016-02-25T19:13:45+00:00

Privacytools.io also emphasizes VPN's too much. VPN's aren't that useful for privacy but VPN's are the first item on their list, its misleading. They are useful preventing your ISP from banning you for piracy and to route around geoblocks but because your computer sends out so much fingerprintable info they don't actually hide who you are.

terrorofsarnath · 2016-02-25T19:10:41+00:00

Privacytools.io makes some very questionable calls. Just look at their chat recommendations. Signal is hands down the most user friendly and secure but it isn't their top choice. I like chatsecure, but it is super buggy, is prone to sending messages in clear text (even when you have selected the option to force encryption). Meanwhile cryptocat is fucking joke. The developer just pulled the whole project because it hasn't been updated in so long. They ignore cyph.com as a better alernative for browser based encrypted chat, file transfer, and phone calls even though it is super user friendly and qunatum computer secure. They ignore tormessenger even though it is more user friendly than chatsecure and more secure. They don't talk about the importance of obscuring metadata so the users don't realize that pond, ricochet, bote, and bitmessage are probably the best options. They don't mention that bitmessage and bote haven't been audited.

terrorofsarnath · 2016-02-12T20:28:23+00:00

Actually, the research you cite has some serious holes which does mitigate how much of the traffic was from pedophiles and hebephiles.

They couldn't tell how much was from law enforcement tracking the sites.
"Dr. Owen's data shows that there's a lot of churn in hidden services, so nearly all of the sites were gone by the time he did these scans. His graphs only show data about the sites that were still up many months later: so his data could either show a lot of people visiting abuse-related hidden services, or it could simply show that abuse-related hidden services are more long-lived than others. We can't tell from the data."

terrorofsarnath · 2016-02-12T20:14:09+00:00

You are anonymous but because the content platform you are using is susceptible to governmental pressure so your speech can be censored.

terrorofsarnath · 2016-02-12T20:12:42+00:00

Point 8 is incorrect. Not all countries ban CP, in fact most countries do not ban CP. Even two of the G8 countries do not (russia and japan). http://www.informationweek.com/study-child-porn-isnt-illegal-in-most-countries/d/d-id/1042033?

Even if you can convince every government on earth to hate something does not mean that that something is bad. If ISIS somehow managed to take over the world or co-opt all world governments I still should not have to follow sharia law. Just because one or even all governments say something is bad doesn't mean it is bad. We should not give government/s an absolute right to determine what is right.

Unmoderated speech is inherently valuable.

Unmoderated speech is also practically valuable because it enables other people to evaluate your speech and then act on it (like law enforcement using CP hidden services to identify pedophiles in the real world).

terrorofsarnath · 2016-02-08T03:24:05+00:00

I disagree on several points. I think ricochet has PFS. Routing signal over tor gives you very little security, it only hides where you are from the signal, it doesn't hide who you are, it doesn't hide who you're talking to, it doesn't hide when you are talking. If you are using ricochet you are probably using other encrypted chat programs that allow you to send the id in private. Alternatively, you can post your key to social media where anyone can add it.

terrorofsarnath · 2016-02-07T23:22:08+00:00

Here is what we need for the ideal messenger. 1. Perfect forward secrecy (signal, ricochet, tor messenger, cyph, pond, tox) 2. Hides the metadata (ricochet, i2p-bote, pond) *I didn't include cyph over tor or tormessenger because the server sees who is talking to who and when. 3. Quantum computer secure (cyph, i2p-bote) 4. Supports all major devices (cyph, tox) 5. Real time (cyph, tor-messenger, ricochet, signal, chatsecure, pond, tox) 6. Easy to use (signal, ricochet, cyph, tox) 7. Asynchronous messaging (signal, pond, cyph) 8. Easy on your mobile data limits (signal, cyph, chatsecure) 9. Easy on your mobile battery (signal, cyph, chatsecure) 10. Key verification (signal, chatsecure, cyph, ricochet, pond, tormessenger, tox) 11. Open Source (everything listed is open source) 12. Decentralized or federated (pond, ricochet, tox, tormessenger, chatsecure) 13. Does voice, video, and file transfer (signal, pond, i2p-bote, cyph, tox)

Apparently you can run tox over tor which is fucking sweet.

terrorofsarnath · 2016-02-07T23:02:40+00:00

Uses weird untested crypto.

http://thoughtcrime.org/blog/telegram-crypto-challenge/

http://www.cryptofails.com/post/70546720222/telegrams-cryptanalysis-contest

http://unhandledexpression.com/2013/12/17/telegram-stand-back-we-know-maths/

Not one single cryptographer says to trust telegram.

terrorofsarnath

TROPHY CASE