Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | dimdimdim's commentslogin

At the very same time it is trivial to update the drones of today to use a secure mutual authentication mechanism which the "drone defender" cannot break into. So, even if there is a spectrum DoS (which might be illegal to do for anyone apart from law enforcement) its not that the defender will take over the drone.

This is a cat n mouse game where the drone creator always has an advantage.


Yeah, but GPS isn't a handshake, and most commodity drones rely on it. You can't take it over, but you can probably blind it.


It's been spoofable (and jamable) for some time...but serious PIA to do and a huge FCC no-no as it's tough to focus.

http://news.utexas.edu/2013/07/29/ut-austin-researchers-succ...


Do you really need GPS to tell the drone, "Remember your flight control inputs and reverse them on loss of signal?"

I'm sure it's not trivial, but drone defence based completely on signal interception seems straightforward to defeat.


Iran claims to have captured drones by spoofing the GPS.


Here is a free video course on GDB - covers most of things discussed in this video and more:

http://www.pentesteracademy.com/course?id=4


haha! :D so funny!


http://pentesteracademy.com/topics - used it for 3 years. happy customer!


The one I've used for 3 years counting:

http://pentesteracademy.com/topics

Its the Pluralsight / Lynda.com but for Computer Security.


Looks cool. Wish you didn't have to pay $100 each time you restarted and the PayPal and email cancelation is not anything I would trust sadly. Just seems to risky for a "well we didn't get your cancelation, sorry" situation.


Something seems awfully wrong with HNs rating system - somehow this story is plummeting way soon down the list :)

Seems like a Google - Hilary thing :)


Shows how most CEOs of even large companies are human like everyone else, not the "super mature", "super calculated", "super intelligent" begins they are made out to be. It's also important to note the arrogance - invented the 90 day trial :D


> Shows how most CEOs of even large companies are human like everyone else

Um, it doesn't really say anything about most CEOs, does it?

Actually, I think it shows how this guy is different from others, because he seems more nutty than most people.


How did someone like this become CEO? Or is it just his response to breaking under the pressure for the first time?


Because he founded the company.


In that case, the board is incompetent it seems.


Boards are optional, there simply may not be one.


Dont need basic grammer to fund a company.


It helps to know how to spell "grammar" when you post to HN, though.


Oh the irony


Poe's law[0] applied to grammar?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe%27s_law


Muphry's Law.


>Dont

>grammer

>fund

This is intentional right?


You'd hope.



On a more humorous note - I'd like to see you volunteer as a Beta Tester for Theranos' next release :) :)


I would happily do so. I do not have any health conditions that require testing, however, so I would not be exposing myself to risk by doing so.


Except your test results could come back falsely positive causing you to get sick from treatment to cure a disease you don't have.

See the problem?


I'd expect my physician to interpret them with the proper expectation. All tests have some probability of a false negative or false positive, and medicine is not so simple as reading a test result and ordering treatment.


It shouldn't be, but it is.


Not when your bug can kill a person or damage his organs due to wrong medication give because of a wrong test result.

http://www.wsj.com/article_email/theranos-voids-two-years-of...

There is a reason Healthcare is regulated and required multiple degrees of testing before it can be released to the general public -- imagine every new "health startup" pushing new drugs and then saying they'll "fix a bug" when a couple of folks die. The comparison is immature.


> The comparison is immature

Quite the opposite. Health regulations suffer from a number of perverse incentives that economists have studied extensively:

Drugs are needlessly delayed in getting to market. Doctors and patients are perfectly capable of assessing the risk/reward of an unproven treatment by looking at scientific studies. The FDA adds a layer of false-security... in spite of its sluggish process, the FDA is often quite wrong and drugs that were approved get taken off the market. For other drugs, they are delayed for several years and much harm is caused. Economists have studied this and found that regulators cause much needless suffering and death by being excessively risk-averse.

Consider too illegal drugs. Our regulators criminalize many substances, resulting in black market behavior and significant crime and other negative effects. Here too, backward regulations cause much unnecessary suffering, death (and crime too).

For people who do not understand healthcare, the world appears quite black and white. In reality no treatment works all of the time, and no test is without its share of inaccurate results. Doctors are equipped with enough Bayesian reasoning ability to use the available information wisely.

Also, a physician should not base any decisions on a single blood test result. That is not the proper way to use such tests. If it were, doctors and medical training would not be necessary. Most tests have a significant probability of false positive and false negative results, so docs are trained to consider the results only in the context of other diagnostic clues.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: