A common system task is backing up files – that is, copying files with the ability to go back in time and restore them. For example, if someone erases or overwrites a file but needs the original version, then a backup allows you to go back to a previous version of the file and restore it. In a similar case, if someone is editing code and discovers they need to go back to a version of the program from four days earlier, a backup allows you to do so. The important thing to remember is that backups are all about copies of the data at a certain point in time.
In contrast to backing up is “replication.” A replica is simply a copy of the data when the replication took place. Replication by itself does not allow you to go back in time to retrieve an earlier version of a file. However, if you have a number of replicas of your data created over time, you can sort of go back and retrieve an earlier version of a file, but you need to know when the replica was made, then you can copy the file from that replica.
convert currency value
The HX-63 cipher machine is an electromechanical, rotor-based system designed and built by Crypto AG. The machine uses nine rotors [center right] to encrypt messages. A dual paper-tape printer is at the upper left. //
Growing up in New York City, I always wanted to be a spy. But when I graduated from college in January 1968, the Cold War and Vietnam War were raging, and spying seemed like a risky career choice. So I became an electrical engineer, working on real-time spectrum analyzers for a U.S. defense contractor.
In 1976, during a visit to the Polish Army Museum in Warsaw, I saw an Enigma, the famous German World War II cipher machine. I was fascinated. Some years later, I had the good fortune of visiting the huge headquarters of the cipher machine company Crypto AG (CAG), in Steinhausen, Switzerland, and befriending a high-level cryptographer there. My friend gave me an internal history of the company written by its founder, Boris Hagelin. It mentioned a 1963 cipher machine, the HX-63.
Leo Major
Leo Major’s story is so preposterous that Hollywood still hasn’t made a movie about it. A French-Canadian who saw action in the Normandy landings, Leo began his military career by full of communications equipment, providing the Allies with invaluable intelligence. He then single-handedly took out a group of elite Nazi SS troops, but lost his left eye after a dying enemy managed to ignite a phosphorus grenade. When a doctor tried to send him home, Leo reportedly replied that he to aim. He later broke several bones in his back, but again refused to be evacuated, returning to the battlefield to participate in the liberation of Holland.
During an early-morning reconnaissance mission at the Battle of the Scheldt, he spotted a German contingent in a village, most of them asleep. A typical soldier would have returned to report to a superior, but for a guy like Leo this was an opportunity. He captured the German commander, and after killing a few soldiers, the entire company of 93 men . He then escorted them back to the Allied lines. Seriously, you can’t make this stuff up.
But Leo’s greatest feat was still to come. In April 1945, the Canadians were tasked with liberating the Dutch city of Zwolle. Their plan was to bombard the German positions with artillery until they surrendered. Leo was once again sent on a reconnaissance mission, this time with a friend. His superiors really should’ve known better. Realizing that an artillery barrage would also kill innocent civilians, Leo and his buddy Willie decided to liberate the city all by themselves. Unfortunately, around midnight, Willie was shot and killed. Enraged, Leo grabbed his friend’s weapon and gunned down two Germans, with the others fleeing in terror. He then proceeded to capture a different German vehicle and forced the driver to bring him to an enemy officer at a nearby tavern. Leo then informed the surprised officer that the town was surrounded by an overwhelming Canadian force and that an attack was imminent, before strolling out of the tavern and disappearing into the night.
The next step was to convince the Germans that what he had told the officer was true. Leo spent the rest of the night racing around the town, gunning down Nazis and throwing grenades like a one-man army. After seeing their comrades gunned down by a mad Canadian in an eyepatch, most enemy soldiers made the smart choice and surrendered. As the night wore on, Leo kept appearing at the Allied lines with groups of confused German prisoners—before returning to the city. His final feat was to clear out the local SS headquarters. By 4:00 AM, the Germans had abandoned the town. The artillery attack was canceled, the city saved by a single man.
Leo received numerous medals for his deeds in World War II, and earned even more in Korea. Leo Major died in 2008, but his memory lives on in Zwolle, where he is regarded as a hero.
This man lost nearly $87,000 for the crime of having cash on him.
Chances are, you probably take things like stop signs and traffic circles for granted. At least, I know I’ve never sat at a stop sign and wondered, “Who on Earth decided to make us stop in situations where there may be oncoming traffic or pedestrians?” But someone had to have done it. That someone is William Phelps Eno.
Eno was born in New York City in early June of 1858 and died in December of 1945, so he was around to witness the evolution of the automobile from simply not existing to becoming an incredibly commonplace form of travel. And that also meant he witnessed those lawless early days of the road. //
So, in 1900, Eno worked to set down his thoughts on traffic safety, which he titled Reform in Our Street Traffic Urgently Needed. Three years later, he wrote a city traffic code for New York, the very first of its kind.
Among his many inventions were the stop sign, the traffic circle, one-way streets, taxi stands, and medians. He set down clear rules on passing, turning, right of way, parking, following, and backing up. Eno designed the Arc de Triomphe, Piccadilly Circus, and Rond Point on the Champs-Élysées — some of the busiest and most iconic pieces of road in the world. Basically, the whole goal was to keep traffic flowing as smoothly as possible and prevent accidents and deaths.
Last week, Qantas operated the world’s first commercial flight between New York and Sydney, a 19-hour and 16-minute epic journey. It was part of the airline’s “Project Sunrise,” a study into the feasibility of super-long-haul flights for both machine and human.
While the 787 Dreamliner is a great aircraft to operate such ultra-long-range (ULR) flights, humans aren’t designed particularly well to be cooped up in a pressurized tube for such sustained periods. It’s made a bit better if you have a flatbed to spend the entirety of the flight in. Even in the back of the aircraft, having films to watch and being able to doze off whenever you chose helps eat up the time.
However, what about the crew who call that pressurized tube their office? Those people are working a 20-plus-hour day and have to perform at their peak, right until the end of that long slog. ULR flights pose their own challenges to those who keep you safe on board, so this is how we do it.
Last month, JetBlue launched its inaugural flight between New York-JFK and London Heathrow (LHR) on an A321LR aircraft. Narrowbody aircraft are nothing new to transatlantic travel, but JetBlue’s entry into the highly competitive New York to London route caused quite a stir.
For travelers sitting in the cabin, the experience is comparable with other transatlantic carriers, with lie-flat seats in business class and mood lighting and amenity kits for passengers in the back. But how does transatlantic flying in an A321 differ from a 787 Dreamliner for the people sitting farthest forward — the pilots?
In my career, I’ve spent just over 3,000 hours flying the A321 (7,000 hours total with the A320 family) and nearly 4,000 hours flying the 787 Dreamliner. As a result, I feel I’m in a good position to compare and contrast how it feels to fly the two aircraft, particularly on routes with longer flight times. ///
:: Boeing
A Russian research expedition has rediscovered the location of the container with two damaged reactors from the Soviet navy submarine K-19, dumped in Ambrosimova Bay in 1965. //
17,000 radioactive objects
The two reactors from the K-19 submarine are not the only objects posing a risk to marine environment. In fact, no other places in the world’s oceans have more radioactive and nuclear waste than the Kara Sea.
Reactors from K-11 and K-140, plus the entire submarine K-27 and spent uranium fuel from one of the old reactors of the “Lenin” icebreaker are also dumped in the same sea. //
17,000 radioactive objects
The two reactors from the K-19 submarine are not the only objects posing a risk to marine environment. In fact, no other places in the world’s oceans have more radioactive and nuclear waste than the Kara Sea.
Reactors from K-11 and K-140, plus the entire submarine K-27 and spent uranium fuel from one of the old reactors of the “Lenin” icebreaker are also dumped in the same sea. //
While mentality in Soviet times was «out of sight, out of mind», the Kara Sea seemed logical. Ice-covered most of the year, and no commercial activities. That is changing now with rapidly retreating sea ice, drilling for oil-, and gas, and increased shipping. //
Additional to the reactors, about 17,000 objects were dumped in the Kara Sea in the period from the late 1960s to the early 1990s.
The US Air Force's first ever chief software officer has quit the job after branding it "probably the most challenging and infuriating of my entire career" in a remarkably candid blog post.
Nicolas Chaillan's impressively blunt leaving note, which he posted to his LinkedIn profile, castigated USAF senior hierarchy for failing to prioritise basic IT issues, saying: "A lack of response and alignment is certainly a contributor to my accelerated exit."
Chaillan took on his chief software officer role in May 2019, having previously worked at the US Department of Defense rolling out DevSecOps practices to the American military. Before that he founded two companies.
In his missive, Chaillan also singled out a part of military culture that features in both the US and the UK: the practice of appointing mid-ranking generalist officers to run specialist projects.
"Please," he implored, "stop putting a Major or Lt Col (despite their devotion, exceptional attitude, and culture) in charge of ICAM, Zero Trust or Cloud for 1 to 4 million users when they have no previous experience in that field – we are setting up critical infrastructure to fail."
(CNN)US officials processing Afghan refugees abroad recently alerted the State Department to instances in which women and girls were forced into marriage or arrived with male partners posing as their husbands to be eligible for evacuation and escape the Taliban, according to two sources familiar with the matter.
The incidents described by sources to CNN were revealed while Afghans were at a transit hub abroad. They underscore the desperation among Afghans to flee the country after the Taliban takeover -- and the fear of what their rule might mean for women and girls.
It's unclear how widespread the issue is, but it prompted enough concern for US diplomats in the United Arab Emirates to send a cable.
‘Whether it is true or not,’ this president and his enablers ‘need to project a different picture’: that the Afghanistan retreat was a great success. //
In a bombshell report on Aug. 31, Reuters reported on an audio recording of a July 23 call between Biden and then-Afghan President Ashraf Ghani. It released a transcript. In the call, Biden stated, “I need not tell you the perception around the world and in parts of Afghanistan, I believe, is that things aren’t going well in terms of the fight against the Taliban.”
Biden then gave Ghani his marching orders: “And there is a need, whether it is true or not, there is a need to project a different picture.” His own words condemn the president: “Whether it is true or not…” As the indispensable Mollie Hemingway noted on Fox News on Sept. 2, “What this phone call shows is that the withdrawal was, like so many other parts of the war, communicated to the American public with lies.” Indeed it was.
But this was even worse. Again, Hemingway: “While the previous president was impeached over a phone call and accused of a quid pro quo, here you actually have a president asking someone to lie on his behalf and conditioning military aid on part of those lies.” //
The abandonment of Americans and allies who fought with us, coupled with the lies about the strategy, is a disaster. It is contrary to the military’s fundamental ethos and everything that this country stands for. It compromises both our national honor and security.
But, “whether it is true or not,” this president and his enablers “need to project a different picture”: that the evacuation and retreat was a great success, that it all went according to plan, and that this administration will continue protect our fellow citizens both in Afghanistan and at home. For shame, Mr. President, for shame.
Propaganda from the corrupt corporate media, Hemingway said, is just one way that political agendas such as swaying a court decision can be pushed.
“I don’t think the credibility of the media can go down much more than it already has. People are not trusting them and I actually think that’s a good thing,” Hemingway said. “I think people thought for a long time that the media were just biased, that they just needed encouragement to do a better job of journalism. What’s different about the moment we’re in now is that I think people realize they’re doing their job. Their job is not journalism, their job is propaganda.”
“That’s good that people have woken up to the reality that the media are that hostile to conservative ideas, founding principles, and so they’re not expecting them to be improved by complaining about bias or pointing out hypocrisy,” she continued. “They actually understand that they are in many ways the primary political opponent of lovers of freedom and the founding principles upon which this country has had so much success.”
AT&T Unlimited Elite® includes 40GB of mobile hotspot/tethering data per eligible line per month. AT&T Unlimited ExtraSM includes 15GB of mobile hotspot/tethering data per eligible line per month. After 40GB for AT&T Unlimited Elite and 15GB for AT&T Unlimited Extra, all tethering data usage for that line, will be slowed to a max of 128Kbps for the rest of the bill cycle. The AT&T Unlimited StarterSM plan does not include mobile hotspot/tethering except for eligible Connected Cars (in car Wi-Fi/vehicle wi-fi hotspots).
AT&T PREPAID data plans
Tablet / Mobile hotspot
- 15GB: $35 per month (add 5GB for $10)
- 20GB: $25 per month - when you pay $300 in advance for 12 months (add 5GB for $10)
- 100GB: $55 per month (add 5GB for $10)
Favorable outcome on viral load and culture viability using Ivermectin in early treatment of non-hospitalized patients with mild COVID-19 – A double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled trial
Background Ivermectin, an anti-parasitic agent, also has anti-viral properties. Our aim was to assess whether ivermectin can shorten the viral shedding in patients at an early-stage of COVID-19 infection.
Methods The double-blinded trial compared patients receiving ivermectin 0·2 mg/kg for 3 days vs. placebo in non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients. RT-PCR from a nasopharyngeal swab was obtained at recruitment and then every two days. Primary endpoint was reduction of viral-load on the 6th day (third day after termination of treatment) as reflected by Ct level>30 (non-infectious level). The primary outcome was supported by determination of viral culture viability.
Results Eighty-nine patients were eligible (47 in ivermectin and 42 in placebo arm). Their median age was 35 years. Females accounted for 21·6%, and 16·8% were asymptomatic at recruitment. Median time from symptom onset was 4 days. There were no statistical differences in these parameters between the two groups.
On day 6, 34 out of 47 (72%) patients in the ivermectin arm reached the endpoint, compared to 21/ 42 (50%) in the placebo arm (OR 2·62; 95% CI: 1·09-6·31). In a multivariable logistic-regression model, the odds of a negative test at day 6 was 2.62 time higher in the ivermectin group (95% CI: 1·06–6·45). Cultures at days 2 to 6 were positive in 3/23 (13·0%) of ivermectin samples vs. 14/29 (48·2%) in the placebo group (p=0·008).
Conclusions There were significantly lower viral loads and viable cultures in the ivermectin group, which could lead to shortening isolation time in these patients.
The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov NCT 044297411.
Double-blind study shows ivermectin reduces disease’s duration and infectiousness • FDA and WHO caution against its use //
Ivermectin, a drug used to fight parasites in third-world countries, could help reduce the length of infection for people who contract coronavirus for less than a $1 a day, according to recent research by Sheba Medical Center in Tel Hashomer.
Prof. Eli Schwartz, founder of the Center for Travel Medicine and Tropical Disease at Sheba, conducted a randomized, controlled, double-blinded trial from May 15, 2020, through the end of January 2021 to evaluate the effectiveness of ivermectin in reducing viral shedding among nonhospitalized patients with mild to moderate COVID-19.
Ivermectin has been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration since 1987. The drug’s discoverers were awarded the 2015 Nobel Prize in medicine for its treatment of onchocerciasis, a disease caused by infection with a parasitic roundworm.
Over the years, it has been used for other indications, including scabies and head lice. Moreover, in the last decade, several clinical studies have started to show its antiviral activity against viruses ranging from HIV and the flu to Zika and West Nile. //
In Schwartz’s study, some 89 eligible volunteers over the age of 18 who were diagnosed with coronavirus and staying in state-run COVID-19 hotels were divided into two groups: 50% received ivermectin, and 50% received a placebo, according to their weight. They were given the pills for three days in a row, an hour before a meal.
The volunteers were tested using a standard nasopharyngeal swab PCR test with the goal of evaluating whether there was a reduction in viral load by the sixth day – the third day after termination of the treatment. They were swabbed every two days.
Nearly 72% of volunteers treated with ivermectin tested negative for the virus by day six. In contrast, only 50% of those who received the placebo tested negative.
IN ADDITION, the study looked at culture viability, meaning how infectious the patients were, and found that only 13% of ivermectin patients were infectious after six days, compared with 50% of the placebo group – almost four times as many.
“Our study shows first and foremost that ivermectin has antiviral activity,” Schwartz said. “It also shows that there is almost a 100% chance that a person will be noninfectious in four to six days, which could lead to shortening isolation time for these people. This could have a huge economic and social impact.”
The study appeared on the MedRxiv health-research sharing site. It has not yet been peer reviewed.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.31.21258081v1
Schwartz said other similar studies – though not all of them conducted to the same double-blind and placebo standards as his – also showed a favorable impact of ivermectin treatment.
His study did not prove ivermectin was effective as a prophylactic, meaning that it could prevent disease, he cautioned, nor did it show that it reduces the chances of hospitalization. However, other studies have shown such evidence, he added.
For example, the study published earlier this year in the American Journal of Therapeutics highlighted that “a review by the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance summarized findings from 27 studies on the effects of ivermectin for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19 infection, concluding that ivermectin ‘demonstrates a strong signal of therapeutic efficacy’ against COVID-19.”
Schwartz said he became interested in exploring ivermectin about a year ago, “when everyone was looking for a new drug” to treat COVID-19, and a lot of effort was being put into evaluating hydroxychloroquine, so he decided to join the effort.
“Since ivermectin was on my shelf, since we are using it for tropical diseases, and there were hints it might work, I decided to go for it,” he said.
Researchers in other places worldwide began looking into the drug at around the same time. But when they started to see positive results, no one wanted to publish them, Schwartz said.
“There is a lot of opposition,” he said. “We tried to publish it, and it was kicked away by three journals. No one even wanted to hear about it. You have to ask how come when the world is suffering.”
“This drug will not bring any big economic profits,” and so Big Pharma doesn’t want to deal with it, he said. //
“You would think Merck would be happy to hear that ivermectin might be helpful to corona patients and try to study it, but they are most loudly declaring the drug should not be used,” Schwartz said. “A billion people took it. They gave it to them. It’s a real shame.”
a new report from CNN of all places has revealed that the evacuation devolved into a sex slavery market as women entered into forced marriages in exchange for the promise of rescue.
Omri Ceren
@omriceren
Thinly sourced but CNN says there's cable on it. If true should be mass resignations.
Biden admin didn't have criteria & didn't vet 10s of 1000s of Afghans they evac'd. What resulted was market for forced child marriage & sex slavery across evac process.
The sources said that some Afghan women and girls housed at one of the evacuation centers in the UAE reported that their families had forced them into marriage outside of the airport in Kabul so they could escape the country as the Taliban seized power. In some reported instances, families paid men eligible for evacuation thousands of dollars to marry or pose as husbands for women to flee. //
Ceren points out, this is also evidence that the vetting process was an absolute joke. Men were literally able to take payment for women being forced into sex slavery within hours of being evacuated and no one checking the paperwork seemed to care. That means they either turned a blind eye or that they weren’t even actually checking the backgrounds of these people to even notice what was going on.
None of this is surprising, though. We saw the country of Libya descend into a literal modern-day slave state after the Obama administration orchestrated the overthrow of Muammar Ghaddafi. Unintended consequences are a constant when it comes to Washington’s foreign policy smart-set, though, that’s not an excuse for what occurred.
The slogans they yell the loudest are the ones they believe the least. We’ve noticed that recently. Volume is inversely proportional to sincerity. You scream it because you don’t really believe it. How do we think this? Here’s why. //
The very same people who’ve told us for decades that it’s “my body, my choice,” and seemed to mean it— those people — immediately abandoned their own argument when COVID arrived. Suddenly they were demanding that we wear the mask and get the shot.
These weren’t optional suggestions. They weren’t deeply personal decisions to be made according to the dictates of individual conscience, after consulting with family, physicians, and clergy. Not at all. These were mandates. All of a sudden Democrats were arguing that actually, politicians do get to decide what we do with your bodies — it’s their choice, not yours:
“Inject these powerful drugs whether you want to or not because we own you.”
Whatever else that is, that is not a pro-choice position, to put it mildly. So as we watched this happen we wondered: what are these people going to say the next time so-called abortion rights are challenged in court? Now we know the answer. //
Reporter: The law signed by Gregg Abbott bans abortion after a so-called fetal heartbeat is detected – usually around six weeks.
“So-called fetal heartbeat.” Democrat hypocrisy at its finest: embrace “the science” when it fits the narrative; ignore the science when it destroys the narrative.
“They didn’t tell you why it’s so important to stop fetal hearts from beating,” said Carlson. “They just asserted that it is.” //
Intentionally stopping a person’s heart from beating is the definition of killing. Government has a right to regulate that. Deciding when it’s OK to kill a person is, on the most basic level, the whole reason we have laws in the first place. So whether it’s right or wrong or whether you like it or not, it’s not a crazy statute. It did however drive the media crazy.
Liberal Talking Point About Joe Rogan and Ivermectin Gets Blown up From Unexpected Source – RedState
the discussion of ivermectin infuriated some folks on the left. They were beside themselves that Rogan mentioned it, attacking it as a “horse dewormer.” //
Because ivermectin isn’t just a “horse dewormer.” While it’s not approved by the FDA for use for COVID, it’s an anti-parasitic drug, approved for humans for other purposes.
Indeed the guy who came up with it, William Campbell, won the Nobel Prize for it in 2015, because of its significant contribution toward helping combat parasites that caused problems for about 100 million people around the world. “Treatment is so successful that these diseases are on the verge of eradication, which would be a major feat in the medical history of humankind,” the Nobel committee said.
So anyone calling it a horse dewormer is revealing they don’t understand how it’s been used. And one thing that’s really hilarious, given this “fake news” about it just being a “horse dewormer” is who is recommending the usage of ivermectin for refugees coming into the country to fight issues of parasites: the CDC.
https://www.cdc.gov/immigrantrefugeehealth/guidelines/overseas-guidelines.html //
sickoftalking
an hour ago
The Twitter "trust the experts" crowd need to do their own reading instead of just passing on what other "trust the experts" people say as fact.
https://www.jpost.com/healt...
"Prof. Eli Schwartz, founder of the Center for Travel Medicine and Tropical Disease at Sheba, conducted a randomized, controlled, double-blinded trial from May 15, 2020, through the end of January 2021 to evaluate the effectiveness of ivermectin in reducing viral shedding among nonhospitalized patients with mild to moderate COVID-19.
...
Nearly 72% of volunteers treated with ivermectin tested negative for the virus by day six. In contrast, only 50% of those who received the placebo tested negative.
IN ADDITION, the study looked at culture viability, meaning how infectious the patients were, and found that only 13% of ivermectin patients were infectious after six days, compared with 50% of the placebo group – almost four times as many.
“Our study shows first and foremost that ivermectin has antiviral activity,” Schwartz said. “It also shows that there is almost a 100% chance that a person will be noninfectious in four to six days, which could lead to shortening isolation time for these people. This could have a huge economic and social impact.”"