• 0 Posts
  • 68 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: February 17th, 2024

help-circle





  • This instance shows that it is, in fact, how that works, at least in part:

    Shang wasn’t an official federal employee yet, meaning he couldn’t access the pump.

    No credentials, no access. Most infrastructure like this has physical security like fencing, padlocks, steel doors, and so on. I don’t know if there’s a break-in alarm, but even if not, they’d still have to figure out how to access the pumps and turn them on. They’re probably computer-controlled, so you’d have to get access to the computer system. I’m sure you could override it on the PLC, or just plain hotwire it, but that takes a whole new set of skills.






  • The physiological response could be driven by literally anything and there’s no way to isolated it to “lying” - what if I’m nervous just because I’m being interrogated by people who are known to be dirty and untrustworthy?

    This is why they’re unreliable. Too many false positives. But the stress of lying can produce a physiological response, which is the basis for the polygraph in the first place.

    But people can also control their responses, so there’s also a high possibly of false negatives.

    The true positive and true negative rate is too low to be considered reliable, but it’s not like there’s zero basis in fact, like those bomb scanners that were literally empty shells.




  • catloaf@lemm.eetoSelfhosted@lemmy.worldRetailers who pack & ship HDDs right?!
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    16 hours ago

    Call me blind if you will, but I don’t see anywhere you’ve said exactly how they’re packed. One place you said “only air bubbles”, but another place you mentioned boxes. All I’m asking is that you bring all the complete relevant information to the table in the first place.

    Edit: okay that’s not all I’m asking. I’m also asking for test data on the received drives, so that we can determine whether the packaging was fit for purpose.


  • catloaf@lemm.eetoSelfhosted@lemmy.worldRetailers who pack & ship HDDs right?!
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    17 hours ago

    If you rejected the drives out of hand, then it’s impossible to say the packaging was obviously faulty.

    You also did not answer my question about how exactly they were packaged. The plastic clamshell is generally fit for purpose and I doubt WD, Seagate, etc. would continue using packaging that resulted in high rates of failure. If you wish to contest that assumption, prove it with data.


  • catloaf@lemm.eetoSelfhosted@lemmy.worldRetailers who pack & ship HDDs right?!
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    17 hours ago

    I’m sure they can and do. I have never received a defective drive purchased new, through I don’t even know how many desktops, servers, and storage systems. Even drives preinstalled in desktops with no extra packaging have run perfectly well for years. I can count on one finger the number of hard drive failures in those desktops I’ve seen in the last decade.


  • Yes, I read and understood what you said. If the packaging was obviously faulty, that means the drives were rendered unfit. If the drives were determined to be fit for purpose, that means that packaging was sufficient and not faulty. Hard drives are not eggshells, they are designed to survive FedEx punting them onto your porch.

    If you want to play the combative game and accuse each other of disregarding each others’ comments, I will ask again the question you did not answer: do the drives not function, or do they fail any SMART test? If you are accusing your suppliers of being inadequate, please, support that with data.