Why We Wear Seat Belts On Airplanes
This post is inspired by Matt Simmons‘ fantastic post on why we still have ashtrays on airplanes, despite smoking being banned over a decade ago. This time, I’m going to cover seat belts on airplanes. I’ve often heard people balking at the practice for being somewhat arbitrary and useless, much like balking at turning off electronic devices before takeoff. But while some rules in commercial aviation are a bit arbitrary, there is a very good reason for seat belts.
In addition to being a very, very frequent flier (I just hit 1 million miles on United), I’m also a licensed fixed wing pilot and skydiving instructor. Part of the training of any new skydiver is what we call the “pilot briefing”. And as part of that briefing we talk about the FAA rules for seat belts: They should be on for taxi, take-off, and landing. That’s true for commercial flights as well.
Some people balk at the idea of seat belts on commercial airliners. After all, if you fly into the side of a mountain, a seat belt isn’t going to help much. But they’re still important.
Your Seat Belt Is For Me, My Seat Belt Is For You
Let’s Encrypt with DANE
For many years we’ve seen Domain Name certificates priced as a luxury add-on, costing many times more than the original name registration fees. Let’s Encrypt has broken that model and now basic security is now freely available to anyone. But the CA model itself is not all that robust, and there are still some critical vulnerabilities that can be exploited by a well-resourced attacker. Adding DANE TSLA records to the DNS signed zone, and equipping user applications, such as browsers, with an additional DNS lookup to fetch and validate the TLSA record is a small step, but a significant improvement to the overall security picture.Nvidia & Audi Set a 2020 Timeframe for Level 4 Autonomous Cars
Level 4 is one step below a fully driverless car.
Woth Reading: Domain name proxies for privacy
Privacy/proxy services carry no per se stigma of nefarious purpose, although when first introduced circa 2006 there was some skepticism they could enable cybersquatting and panelists expressed different views in weighing the legitimacy for their use. Some Panels found high volume registrants responsible for registering domain-name-incorporating trademarks. Others rejected the distinction between high and low volume as a determining factor. WWF-World Wide Fund for Nature aka WWF International v. Moniker Online Services LLC and Gregory Ricks, D2006-0975 (WIPO November 1, 2006) expresses the consensus, namely that use of these services “does not of itself indicate bad faith; there are many legitimate reasons for proxy registration services”). —Circle ID
The post Woth Reading: Domain name proxies for privacy appeared first on 'net work.