I am glad to see that whoever released this blurred out almost everything in the OSD, even if it makes my identification harder, as it helps keep sensitive information private private, but I’ll reiterate some concerns that I’ve posted earlier that maybe there should be some sort of standard unit in the military that does the censorship before release.

• First point. Some of the numbers “leaked” around the edge of the blurred area. Probably nothing critical, but I’m sure that it’s not intentional.

• Second, I don’t know how hard it is to reverse a blurring operation. I am pretty sure that the censoring software isn’t deleting the area in question and then regenerating it fully using pixels at the edge, because that flashing bit that I assume is a “low battery” warning shows up even with no pixels on either side of the blurred area visible, and doesn’t “snap” from one side to another when the blurred area shifts from exposing a few pixels on one side to exposing a few on another. And if that’s the case, it may be possible to reverse some of the operation.

  If Ukraine is using a method that isn’t adequately-hardened to censor these, and is using the same approach on many videos, then Russian intelligence can potentially restore that information.

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiener_deconvolution

  

  From left: Original image, blurred image, image deblurred using Wiener deconvolution.

• Third, this, like a number of videos I’ve seen, look like they’re from a cellphone camera of a drone display. That’s not the end of the world, and I don’t know if all those drones have some way to export video. However, I’d think that if they don’t, Ukrainian intelligence may want a way to archive the footage that they’re taking, because all of this footage near the front is probably interesting for all sorts of analysis. And if it can be exported directly from the drone feed to be released, I’d think that that’d be preferable, because it also means that there’s no risk of information being leaked from other sources, like background sound from inside an FPV base (“nest”?), which is something that I’ve seen sometimes, thought not in this video, or video including background shots of the FPV base, or reflections.

Kind of curious what they used to hit the thing.

https://www.bellingcat.com/resources/2024/01/19/identifying-small-drones-from-screenshots-and-displays/

The crosshair in the posted video looks similar to the Aeorozvidka’s R-18 screenshot. That “S” symbol looks like the “throttle percent” symbol in the Betaflight OSD software, and the number (~70) would be about right.

I’m not sure that it’s either of them, though.

They link to this archive of drone OSD screenshots.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Z0m2rqD_EgjtdA8T4YhSvfUbqY3nOjs2KyLhR2oiktc/edit

But nothing in there looks quite like this either.

Be kind of nice if there was some corpus of images that someone could train an AI model on to auto-identify drone type from screenshots via image classification. I mean, there probably is, but for public use, rather than intelligence agencies.

Context:

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/russia-shot-down-its-own-stealth-drone/

A prototype of Russia’s Hunter S-70 combat drone was shot down over the occupied Donetsk region, in what experts are calling a significant embarrassment for Moscow’s air force.

Footage circulating online shows the unmanned aircraft being hit by a missile mid-air before crashing to the ground.

Another missile can be seen fired from a separate aircraft, which military analysts believe was responsible for downing the drone.

The incident, which occurred near the front lines in the Donetsk Oblast, has raised questions about the drone’s deployment in such a volatile area.

Military specialists, after examining images of the wreckage, concluded that the destroyed aircraft was likely a Russian Hunter S-70, a next-generation combat drone that was being tested. According to reports, the drone was shot down either due to a loss of control or deliberately after it malfunctioned during the test flight.

Justin Bronk, senior research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute, called the incident a “stunningly embarrassing failure” for Russia. He pointed out that the fact the test flight occurred so close to the frontlines reveals poor decision-making.

goes looking to see how hard it is for Russia to replace losses

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_Su-25

In early August 2008, Russian Su-25s attacked the Tbilisi Aircraft Manufacturing plant, where the Su-25 is produced, dropping bombs on the factory’s airfield.[49]

Well, that sounds like it’s probably not going to be very conducive to receiving further aircraft for multiple reasons.

https://www.scramble.nl/military-news/georgia-announced-the-restart-of-production-of-the-su-25

24 February 2021

Georgia announced the restart of production of the Su-25

The candidate for the post of Georgian Defence Minister, Juansher Burchuladze, has stated that Georgia is about to restart the production of military aircraft.

https://www.blogbeforeflight.net/2021/03/georgia-first-restored-su-25-takes-flight.html

On March 6, 2021, Georgia’s first restored Su-25 (or Je-31 Bora) ground attack aircraft performed its maiden flight, according to the Georgian Military Department.

The restoration and modernization of the aircraft was carried out by the local firm Tbilisi Aircraft Manufacturing (TAM). The aircraft will be used for combat and training missions.

The project does not envisage the complete production of fighters, but the restoration of the platforms built at the time of the USSR. It is currently unknown where Georgia gets the components for the aircraft, as deliveries from Russia are completely excluded. Previously the nation had said it was looking to get engines from France and the United States. Rumors also say that Israel has offered its support for the project. Israeli firm Elbit already produced a prototype of a modernized Su-25, called Su-25 Scorpion or Su-25KM, in 2001.

TAM began manufacturing Su-25s in 1978 until Moscow imposed a total ban on exports of Russian military components to Georgia following the 2008 conflict between the two nations. TAM is currently the only manufacturer to have all the technical documentation for the type and has a stock of 50 aircraft.

So Georgia is basically doing refurbishment, and it doesn’t sound like they’re going to be exporting to Russia any time soon.

Apparently Belarus announced early last year that they were wanting to produce it:

https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2023/02/21/belarus-to-make-su-25-attack-aircraft-as-russia-eyes-industry-takeover/

WARSAW, Poland — In another sign of tightening defense ties between Belarus and Russia, Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko has announced his country’s defense industry is ready to kick off the manufacturing of Sukhoi Su-25 ground-attack aircraft.

Some analysts suggest the move could be related to Moscow’s plan to streamline Minsk’s defense industry capacities toward its war against Ukraine.

The authoritarian leader made the announcement during a Feb. 17 meeting with his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, in Moscow’s Novo-Ogaryovo suburb.

“As I was informed by the [Belarusian] government, they are ready to start producing the Su-25 aircraft which has proven itself well in Ukraine as an attack aircraft, a workhorse,” Lukashenko said, as quoted in a statement released by his office. “They are ready to produce it even in Belarus with a small amount of appropriate technological support from the Russian Federation.”

But I don’t see any news subsequent to that.

I’d also add:

• All three BTRs are converging on what appears to be a gas station. Not sure if that’s where I’d want to be heading if I were in the middle of a firefight.

• The two BTRs that smacked into each other both appear to have been heading for – and wrecked – several feet away from what looks to me to be a large propane tank. Short of actually hitting the propane tank, that seems like probably the worst place to be heading for at said gas station.

“Don’t trust Google! It shows you the bad stuff! Only trust Truth Social for your information!”

I don’t know whether Altman or the board is better from a leadership standpoint, but I don’t think that it makes sense to rely on boards to avoid existential dangers for humanity. A board runs one company. If that board takes action that is a good move in terms of an existential risk for humanity but disadvantageous to the company, they’ll tend to be outcompeted by and replaced by those who do not. Anyone doing that has to be in a position to span multiple companies. I doubt that market regulators in a single market could do it, even – that’s getting into international treaty territory.

The only way in which a board is going to be able to effectively do that is if one company, theirs, effectively has a monopoly on all AI development that could pose a risk.

I don’t know about that. It seemed to have a pretty rapid impact on the phone in that video, and it’s not like those are exactly open. And they weren’t pressurizing it.

Hydrogen

This says that hydrogen isn’t just a problem, just helium:

https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/669763/why-is-a-mems-device-affected-by-helium-but-not-hydrogen

It seems that MEMS is very sensitive to helium, but only helium. This Link stated that hydrogen does not affect MEMS, which surprised me.

Hmm.

That seems like it’d open a lot of potential abuses.

I wonder what the failure mode of various electronic locks is when they’re exposed to helium?

https://firms.modaps.eosdis.nasa.gov/map/#d:24hrs;@28.85,45.33,14.00z

NASA FIRMS shows two detected fires in Izmail.

Assuming that these were the targets – and not all heat signatures that FIRMS pick up are:

• One is at “Dunaysudnoservis”, which is apparently a Ukrainian shipyard; Google Maps has an image with a ship in drydock there.

• One is at a small commercial area to the northwest of a solar farm, or possibly in a adjacent residential area; the resolution isn’t good enough to determine. “Barakholka”, a secondhand store, and a carwash are in the commercial area.

He’s an American citizen, and Starlink is an American company.

Yup, but in a British newspaper.

The Brits have pretty adverse interests on this matter. I think that American communications security is a debate that doesn’t need to involve the British, can be done perfectly fine among ourselves.

EDIT: I’d also add that Reich isn’t the guy to raise the matter either; it’s not his area of expertise. If, say, the NSA or friends raise it as an issue – we pay a large number of full-time domain experts to secure our communications – then I think that’d be an interesting topic.

‘Musk’s SpaceX has nearly total control of the world’s satellite internet through its Starlink unit.’

The British, on the other hand, have a competing satellite network, OneWeb, which is the principal competitor of, and doing a rather poor job of competing with Starlink.

I don’t feel a burning need to go look to a British newspaper for advice as to whether-or-not to use an American satellite network versus a British satellite network.

If you guys across the pond want to use OneWeb instead, knock yourselves out.

EDIT: And speaking of national security, the last time we were relying on a British global network for intercontinental communications, we wound up with British intelligence spying on our diplomatic communications channels. Thanks, but I’m pretty comfortable using an American network.

Though then you have the specter of competitors clicking that.

Nah, I just used to write “googles” and when I switched search engines to Kagi, switched to “kagis”.

In this particular case, Kagi runs a Threadiverse – what they term “Fediverse Forums” – search lens. AFAIK, haven’t checked recently, Google doesn’t yet offer that, so that search depended upon a Kagi feature. Kinda the analog to site:reddit.com with Google, but spanning the Threadiverse instances.

some sort of plastic or rubber is degrading, maybe my phone case?

There’s this type of coating – I commented on it a while back, will link to my comment in a sec – that was put on a lot of consumer electronics that over time, breaks down to become sticky.

kagis

https://lemmy.world/comment/12199022

TPE, thermoplastic elastomers. They (some?) break down over time into really sticky goo.

I haven’t seen it in some years – was a real problem maybe, I dunno, ten years ago? If your thing is only six years old, I dunno if it’s that.

But isopropyl alcohol and enough elbow grease will get it off, if it’s just a coating on plastic.

I don’t see anything when searching for “sticky otterbox”, though, so I don’t know if that’s the factor, even if that’s what’s going on here. My experience that the source is pretty obvious, since it’s a “grippy” rubberized thing that becomes increasingly-sticky over time.

considers

I found absolutely bizarre the claims from the Kremlin back when that Russia wasn’t shelling Ukraine across the border back when. Like, you’re lying. But it’s not just that you know that you’re lying, but that I know you’re lying and that you know that I know that you’re lying. If it’s not fooling anyone, and you know that you aren’t, then why are you persisting in doing it? Like, when I point out that this is nonsense, why continue to expend credibility on this?

It was absolutely mystifying to me. It’s not something that one does.

Then read something from someone talking about how this is a Russian cultural thing. Like, the idea, if I understand correctly, is that in a scenario like this, Russia wants other countries to ignore the fact that they’re shelling Ukraine. But…it would be awkward for other countries to say “that’s okay with me”. So the idea here is that they are trying to make it as convenient as possible for others to ignore the fact as well. Like, the idea is that one is sort of trying to lubricate the social interaction with bullshit; there’s no deception as such intended, but that the idea is that socially-awkward truths can be more-readily ignored if everyone collectively agrees to disregard them.

It sounds completely bonkers to me, but apparently it is, indeed, a thing.

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/vranyo

vranyo (uncountable)

1. White lies or half-lies in Russian culture, told without the intention of (maliciously) deceiving, but as a fantasy, suppressing unpleasant parts of the truth.

2007, David Shulman, From Hire to Liar: The Role of Deception in the Workplace, →ISBN, page 79:

The term vranyo in Russian describes the subtle collective participation people can have in deception. Vranyo occurs when one person lies to another, the second person recognizes that the first person is lying, and neither of them acknowledges that any lie was spoken. For example, someone states (knowing otherwise) that he will meet monthly production goals. An audience hears this claim and knows it to be false. No one acknowledges the lie publicly. […] When a co-worker claims to work incredibly hard but is lying and an observer knows that colleague is lying but does not expose the lie—that is vranyo. In subsequent chapters, workers demonstrate a strong inclination to vranyo. Vranyo occurs routinely in meetings […]

So, I dunno. Maybe this is Russia doing this vranyo business; the government and the public both know perfectly well that the air defense didn’t intercept the Ukrainian strike, but it’s easier to pretend that it did than to say that it didn’t? It doesn’t seem to me that dicking up air defense here would be something difficult-enough to grapple with to where it’d make sense, but then I don’t think that this whole vranyo thing makes a lot of sense in the first place, so…shrugs

https://carnegieendowment.org/research/2022/01/why-the-kremlin-lies-understanding-its-loose-relationship-with-the-truth?lang=en

I still have a hard time seeing why the Russian foreign ministry would try to use it in an international relations context where the other party clearly has no intention of playing along, but I guess that the claims about this depot were probably aimed at a Russian domestic audience; RIA is state-run domestic news, rather than outward-facing. So maybe the idea is that the target audience gets that this is bullshit, but accepts that it is bullshit and is okay with it, and that there’s an unspoken social convention to mutually maintain a collective illusion, because it’s easier to live with than the truth. I guess? I mean, it sounds nuts to me, but it’s clearly a thing in at least some cases, so maybe that’s what’s driving this.

The full phrase is usually “the dildo of consequences rarely arrives lubed”. I don’t know who coined it, but it’s been around for some years.

EDIT: Using Google search by date, one of the earlier hits that Google indexed is this one, from 2017:

https://daily-devops.tumblr.com/post/161621189597/best-quote-about-the-elections-ever-the-dildo

That was June 9, 2017, and apparently talking about the British general election of 2017, so it goes back at least as far as that.

It looks like Google may try to infer date of post in some cases from websites, so date search finds some earlier ones, but nothing that appears to be reliably prior to that. They’re apparently quoting someone, so I doubt that that’s the first time it was used.

2024: Ukraine using Soviet air defense systems to fire American naval missiles to shoot down Iranian-designed drones after Iran provided airpower technology to Russia.

I’m pretty sure that this wasn’t on anyone’s bingo card as of, say, 2000.