Microwave based ground penetrating radar is actually different from WiFi. Also the technology referenced in the link is a motion based body locator, not an identity recognition device.
This is different technology doing different things than what the original article was talking about.
VPNs will help. The article is only talking about VPN servers based in a location with a geo ban, which, duh. But if you actually use your VPN to be in a different country and not just a different city it’ll work fine.
Why do you need to identify specific cats over merely the presence of movement or cats in general?
If all you need is presence detection then a motion sensor would be vastly more efficient.
If you actually need identity detection, then maybe, but you’ll still have to have a camera or detailed access logs to associate the interference signature with a known entity and at that point you may as well just put an RFID reader under the bowl you throw your keys into or use facial or gait detection.
Probably not.
This kind of thing relies on the fact that the emitter and environments are static, impacting the propagation of the signals in a predictable way and that each person, having a unique physique, consistently interferes with that propagation in the same way. It’s a tool that reports “the interference in this room looks like the same interference observed in these past cases.”
Search and rescue is a very dynamic environment, with no opportunity to establish a local baseline, and with a high likelihood that the physiological signal you are looking for has been altered (such as by broken or severed limbs).
There are some other WiFi sniffing technologies that might be more useful for S&R such as movement detection, but I’m not sure if that will work as well when the broadcaster is outside the environment (as the more rubble between the emitter and the target the weaker your signal from reflections against the rubble).
Don’t think of this as being able to see through walls like with a futuristic camera, think of this as AI assisted anomaly detection in signal processing (which is exactly what the researchers are doing).
I’m generally pro research, but occasionally I come across a body of research and wish I could just shut down what they’re doing and rewind the clock to before that started.
There is no benefit of this for the common person. There is no end user need or product for being able to identify individuals based on their interactions with WiFi signals. The only people that benefit from this are large corporations and governments and that’s from them turning it on you.
Continued research will ease widespread surveillance and mass tracking. That’s not a good thing.
None of those is a substitute for any other.
I work on process automation software that includes a very large multidirectional scrollable canvas with the map of nodes. My experience mirrors yours, though I switched to a magic trackpad a few years back for the bigger gesture area.
I still wouldn’t recommend the magic mouse to anyone though.
Working as intended
Security concerns and a wash of crap people think will be the next big thing.
[Citation Required]
You could read it, it’s pretty short.
Here’s what the AUP says about porn:
You may not use any of Mozilla’s services to:
- …
- Upload, download, transmit, display, or grant access to content that includes graphic depictions of sexuality or violence,
- …
So yeah, in that sense it “says what it says about porn.” It’s just that “what it says about porn” is in a list of things you can’t use their services for and before the only mention of how to use their “product.”
Through their various agreements and terms Mozilla makes a clear distinction between products and services and has clear guidelines on how you can use them. When the TOS says “obey the AUP” and the AUP says “don’t use our services for porn and don’t sell our products or services” then viewing porn with their product is not a violation of their AUP and thus not a violation of their TOS.
Ultimately, however, the final decision would have to be resolved in court.
The Acceptable Use Policy contains guidelines for services and guidelines for products. The Firefox TOS says “Your use of Firefox must follow Mozilla’s Acceptable Use Policy, and you agree that you will not use Firefox to infringe anyone’s rights or violate any applicable laws or regulations.” The only part of the Acceptable Use Policy that pertains to products is “You also may not sell, resell, or duplicate any Mozilla product or service without written permission from Mozilla.” Mozilla has a separate TOS for their services.
Therefore, you can look at porn in FF as long as you don’t bundle FF in a Linux repo without their written permission, but you can’t look at porn when using their VPN.
Liberal politicians have tried to make it more difficult to weed out ineligible voters, including with some laws that make it unnecessary or even illegal to verify voter ID. The SAVE Act was proposed in response to these efforts. Liberals say that the measure would make it harder for some groups of eligible citizens, including Black people who have suffered a history of voter suppression, to cast their ballots.
You have to pay to get an id. You have to go somewhere that is not your place of work during normal work hours to get an id.
Voter id laws are literally a poll tax.
The camera module is thicker than the phone and Samsung doesn’t think we want a marginally larger device with a fuck ton more battery and better cameras.
This isn’t one of those instances where freedom of speech is allowed.
I love how you just reiterated your erroneous point verbatim without clarification.
Be respectful of others.
Not sure what that has to do with this discussion or my comment.
Gonna ignore you now since you don’t have an answer to my question.
It seems you don’t actually know what freedom of speech is.
Freedom of speech means the government can’t get you in trouble for what you say.
Freedom of speech does not mean what you have to say is valuable, relevant, or required to be protected, platformed, or promoted by private capital or individuals. Lemmy instances by and large are not products of governments used to curtail your right to say what you want–they’re private entities who’s own freedom of speech and association allow them to make a determination about whether you’re an acceptable entity to keep around.
If you think you’re an acceptable entity to keep around when no one else does, feel free to start your own instance.
Sure it is.
And even if it weren’t that doesn’t make your comment about you getting butt hurt from someone telling you to be better for seeking out where you can be a bigot any less ironic.
Perhaps you should rephrase your post then to indicate you’re actually interested in bigotry affirming instances instead of instances that refrain from being a government entity that controls expression.
They are different.
Pretty much any Lemmy instances I suspect supports freedom of speech. There’s not really any evidence that admins are colluding with the feds to control what you say.
What may be happening is admins deciding of their own volition to not platform certain types of comments. Notably that doesn’t stop you or anyone else from saying whatever; it just means you gotta do it somewhere else, like your own instance.
WiFi uses a subset of the significantly wider microwave band. Ground Penetrating Radar also uses a subset of the microwave band. While there can be some overlap, the frequencies desired for GPR will very broadly based on what you are looking for, what you are looking in, and how deep you are looking for that thing. The wattage supplied can also differ.
WiFi and Microwaves in general are most definitely not the same thing and I will absolutely encourage you to not set up a 1kW 3GHz jamming antenna for your WiFi needs.
Could you use WiFi for search and rescue? Maybe for a narrow set of circumstances, but in almost all situations a dedicated GPR option will be better.
This also won’t identify a victim, only revealing that one exists.