Most malware tries to compromise your systems by using a known vulnerability that the maker of the operating system has already patched. To help prevent malware from affecting your systems, two security best practices are to apply all operating system patches to your systems and actively monitor your systems for missing patches. In case you do need to recover from a malware attack, you should make regular backups of your data. Microsoft’s Big Win in Quantum Computing Was an ‘Error’ After All Productivity Hub In a 2018 paper, researchers said they found evidence of an elusive theorized particle. In today’s blog post (Part 1 of a two-part post), I show how to keep your Amazon EC2 instances that run Microsoft Windows up to date with the latest security patches by using Amazon EC2 Systems Manager. ![]() Tomorrow in Part 2, I show how to take regular snapshots of your data by using Amazon EBS Snapshot Scheduler and how to use Amazon Inspector to check if your EC2 instances running Microsoft Windows contain any common vulnerabilities and exposures (CVEs). To follow along with the solution in this post, you need one or more EC2 instances. You may use existing instances or create new instances. For the blog post, I assume this is an EC2 for Microsoft Windows Server 2012 R2 instance installed from the Amazon Machine Images (AMIs). If you are not familiar with how to launch an EC2 instance, see Launching an Instance. I also assume you launched or will launch your instance in a private subnet. A private subnet is not directly accessible via the internet, and access to it requires either a VPN connection to your on-premises network or a jump host in a public subnet (a subnet with access to the internet). You must make sure that the EC2 instance can connect to the internet using a network address translation (NAT) instance or NAT gateway to communicate with Systems Manager and Amazon Inspector. The following diagram shows how you should structure your Amazon Virtual Private Cloud (VPC). Well, I guess this shows why it's so important to publish the raw data as supplementary material along with the article.You should also be familiar with Restoring an Amazon EBS Volume from a Snapshot and Attaching an Amazon EBS Volume to an Instance. So from an outside perspective this doesn't look good at all for the authors. I'm sure if they had marked the missing curves with a placeholder the reviewers would've noticed immediately and this article would probably not have been published. Just cropping your graph (which also makes most labels on the X axis invalid) is just insane, they hammer that into your head during the first undergrad lab classes already. If you do a series of IV curves at equidistant points you cannot simply cut out the data you don't like, and if you do remove irrelevant data points (again, you probably shouldn't) you need to replace them with a placeholder value such as a black background to make it immediately clear that you left out some data. I did my PhD in a similar field (superconducting quantum computing) and if I had cut data from a graph like that I would've gotten a really strong reprimand from my supervisors. It's at least hard to imagine how Kouwenhoven or anyone in his group could not have found this highly problematic. Oh wow, looking at their graph and the portion they cut out for "aesthetic reasons" this looks almost like fraud to me. ![]() Apart from the 1976 budget, the rest just seem to be made up, and the end dates seem arbitrary. Very unclear where these predictions and budget numbers come from. If everything goes to plan, ITER will pave the way for another reactor, called DEMO, which will expand the technologies perfected by ITER to an industrial scale, and hopefully prove that nuclear fusion is a viable source of energy. Those figures quickly changed to €15 billion and 2019, but confidence in those numbers has eroded over the years.Īnd yet the timeline just for ITER to do an experimental run is still 10 years, and then: The project was officially begun in 2006 with an estimated cost of €5 billion and date for the beginning of operations-or first plasma-in 2016. ITER was initially budgeted €5 billion which was provided, then jumped to €15 billion, which was also provided: > People's expectations about a faster fusion timeline were always based on funding that never manifested. Issues with component construction and design disagreements have been blamed for the delays. When ITER first received formal approval in 2006, it was slated to first achieve fusion in 2016, a date which has since been pushed back at least 10 years. ITER was supposed to achieve fusion in 2016, but that has now been delayed until 2026:
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |