It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Firearms resolution to soon be passed.

page: 9
12
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 15 2017 @ 05:07 PM
link   
a reply to: TerryDon79

a flash drive is protable Solid state storage device. Forgive me for not clarifying that is was portable or as he told me you plug it into your computer. He called it a finger drive, funny they now call them thumb drives.

The last time I made a change to a post after posting it, I got blamed for saying something I did not say and then changed it. He had no proof I ever said it or changed it other than his own self but said I did anyway.

Just like you two cannot even a definitive measurement to eternity.


edit on 15-10-2017 by ChesterJohn because: clarification for TerryDon79




posted on Oct, 15 2017 @ 05:08 PM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn

A thumb drive, or flash drive, is different to a SSD drive or flash drive.

The 2 aren’t the same.
edit on 15102017 by TerryDon79 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 15 2017 @ 05:10 PM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn

Neighbour

Flash drives are not ssd tech. Why is this so hard for you to grok?



posted on Oct, 15 2017 @ 05:11 PM
link   
a reply to: TerryDon79

thumbs/flash drives are made with solid state integrated circuit parts hence no moving parts to record of erase data. I know now the are made with cercuit on chip technology but basically it is solid state.
edit on 15-10-2017 by ChesterJohn because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 15 2017 @ 05:13 PM
link   
a reply to: TerryDon79

www.pcmag.com...

Just in case he reads it..... Different tech



posted on Oct, 15 2017 @ 05:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: Noinden

You are correct, I am not talking smart guns, from what was explained it is a chip would control the hardware that will not allow certain parts to function.

Not to negate smart guns or smart products. But this device can fit in the handle, stock or butt of a gun to control the firing of the guns shell or cripple the guns recoiling mechanism not allowing a gun to load or reload itself. It is something that came out of their smart gun technology that they think can be implemented easier than marketing smart guns to the public. Which we all know is very expensive.


LOL. you do realize this would not work. it would be hacked within weeks or less. Like DENUVO was. Not only that you could replace parts or machine parts yourself if need be to also get around this crap.

This was in a think tank? you do know those are most of th e time a waste of time. This would abridge the 2nd amendment by making a gun harder to own and more exspensive. SO much so its out of touch for alot of americans.



posted on Oct, 15 2017 @ 05:17 PM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn
If you think thumb drives can't have "erased data" found. You are in for a shock. Best way to erase it? Burn it to ash


www.howtogeek.com...



posted on Oct, 15 2017 @ 05:19 PM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn

Basically, yes, but not the same. Far from it.

The first thumb drive was patented in April 1999 and commercially released in December 2000. A year and a half, ish, not “years”.



posted on Oct, 15 2017 @ 05:23 PM
link   
Sorry i should have used integrated circuits, when I said solid state I referring to the fact that it had no moving parts my bad for wrong terminology but I am known for that as you all well know.



posted on Oct, 15 2017 @ 05:25 PM
link   
sorry PC mag wont let me read the article without a subscription and I stopped having one when they went online early in 2008.

Do you all need a link for that?


edit on 15-10-2017 by ChesterJohn because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 15 2017 @ 05:28 PM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn


Do you all need a link for that?


No, but any evidence of any GPS device capable of doing what you say, would be nice. Even a patent number would do (they would have a patent if it was real and they didn’t want it stolen).



posted on Oct, 15 2017 @ 05:59 PM
link   
This idea would be ridiculously easy to subvert. Place the weapon in a faraday shielded enclosure, take it to a shielded location and bypass + disable + remove the GPS device. I'm also thinking of the likely scenario where you're depending on the weapon being usable but the battery has died or you're in a metal shed with very poor to zero GPS reception. So many ways this can fail you at the wrong time and I'm not even exactly a 'pro-gun' campaigner.



posted on Oct, 15 2017 @ 06:04 PM
link   

REMINDER



We certainly do not want to discourage the involvement of helpful critical analysis and skeptical thought, this will always be a very important part of collaboration on ATS. However, we will be strict in managing the tone and style of such exchanges. Please keep your critical involvement to helpful focus on issues, facts, and analysis of possibilities, and do not engage in disruptive character attacks, snipes, and insults in any way. Any such activity will result in a warning and removal of your post.


FORUM GUIDELINES

Do not reply to this post!
edit on Sun Oct 15 2017 by DontTreadOnMe because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 15 2017 @ 06:38 PM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn


Chester, you are certainly correct in your assertion that very tiny GPS tracking devices exist. I totally believe that, and I think our alphabet soup agencies have had them for quite awhile! By the way, I vaguely remember flash drives around that time, how exciting. Although nowadays we look back and laugh at them, but 16MB was a big deal compared to a floppy disk! My first thumb drive was 16MB (I think by Memorex, but not 100%) and I paid almost $200.00 for it. Eeek!

As far as 802.11 goes, as you know it is a standard that allows wireless devices to communicate with one another using a common "language" in order to facilitate interoperability. So to say there are systems communicating outside of the standard is also certainly true. You and I could create our own protocol, perhaps that modulates certain waveforms or even something more exotic if we desired. So in that regard, I say its also very probable you are correct.

However, I believe this begins to break down when we look at similar closed systems and esoteric protocols that do not have the benefit of public scrutiny by the security community (researchers and hackers) at large. Much like proprietary cryptographic algorithms (barring those developed by agencies with near infinite resources) are often vulnerable to some type of attack, these private protocols could contain serious security flaws that could be exploited by attackers.

With 802.11, we can of course secure the connection with a PSK or using TFA w/ a RADIUS backbone. This solves the "authorization" problem, but still leaves "authentication" wide open. For instance, if I were able to obtain someone's access code, how could the system prevent me (a non-legit user) from using this code (which is valid)?

It is important to remember that many people protect their lives with firearms, and such technology could have very real and terrifying consequences for these when a hacker finds an unknown exploit. If they could disable the firearms, the defender would be left near defenseless.

The darknet consists of servers using those same proprietary protocols (onion routing, I2P, freenets, SIPRNET, NSANET etc - that just so happen to be shared for the benefit of the public). There are also some other resources that could be considered darknets simply because they are not accessible to the public as a whole. The Really Above Top Secret forum, for instance, is technically a darknet in the fact that it can only be accessed by ATS members. The benefits of using such a system is anonymity, but does nothing to prevent hackers from running the same types of local and remote exploits against the end user.

JB

edit on 10/15/2017 by JBurns because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 15 2017 @ 06:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Pilgrum

yes this is true. But if you are inside the Faraday cage you could still disable it. i.e. using your computer interface that is wired into the same cage could use your bluetooth or other wifi in the cage to still disarm or arm it.

A Farday cage will not protect you from what is inside. You would have to sweep it daily to be sure no one has bugged you or placed a wired or other type of device inside your cage they could access from remote location.



posted on Oct, 15 2017 @ 06:52 PM
link   
a reply to: TerryDon79

If you think every invention is patented or located in the patent office you are not just wrong but ignorant to government inventions that are not patented.



posted on Oct, 15 2017 @ 06:56 PM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn

So this company you know, has this ground-breaking, super advanced, never seen before GPS tech, yet there’s no patent to protect from it from being copied?

Seems legit.



posted on Oct, 15 2017 @ 06:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
No I am talking about a GPD Global positioning device it is different than a GPS I apologize if I used GPS but it does operate on the global positioning satellite system.


Again your making things up, any thing 'global' is only global because it operates in conjunction with satellite constellations.



posted on Oct, 15 2017 @ 06:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
I'm not actually being serious.


Ah, you had me worried there for a minute.



posted on Oct, 15 2017 @ 07:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: TerryDon79
Are you getting GPD and DGPS mixed up?


Even if he were you still need satellites to operate these as well.




top topics



 
12
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join