Skip to main content

The Mystery Behind the Best UFO Picture Ever Seen

3 months 1 week ago
In August 1990, two hikers in Scotland captured photographs of a mysterious diamond-shaped aircraft accompanied by a Harrier jet, but the images and story were suppressed by the Ministry of Defence (MoD) for decades. Was it a prank, a hoax, an optical illusion or something else entirely? The Guardian's Daniel Lavelle reports on "what really happened in Calvine." Here's an excerpt: On a misty evening in August 1990, two men hiking on the moors surrounding Calvine, a pretty hamlet in Perth and Kinross, claimed to have seen a giant diamond-shaped aircraft flying above them. It apparently had no clear means of propulsion and left no smoke plume; it was silent and static, as if frozen in time. Terrified, they hit the ground and scrambled for cover behind a tree. Then a Harrier fighter jet roared into view, circling the diamond as if sizing it up for a scuffle. One of the men snapped a series of photographs just before the bizarre craft shot away vertically and disappeared. Craig Lindsay was a press officer at the RAF base in Pitreavie Castle in Dunfermline, 50 miles away, when the Daily Record got in touch a few days later. The hikers, who worked as chefs at Fisher's Hotel in Pitlochry, had sent six photos of the diamond to the newspaper and told their story. The Record's picture editor, Andy Allen, sent Lindsay the best of the bunch. Lindsay had never seen such a clear photograph of a supposed UFO, so he forwarded the picture to the Ministry of Defence (MoD), which told him to ask the Record to send the other five photographs and their negatives. The MoD also instructed him to phone the hikers, which he did. One of them told Lindsay the whole story: the diamond, the jet, how it levitated eerily with no sound and accelerated with no obvious propellant. The MoD told Lindsay to leave the case with them. He pushed the diamond to the back of his mind. That autumn, Lindsay attended a routine meeting in London. On his lunch break, he went for a wander around the MoD's offices and saw something familiar. "There, on the wall in front of me, was a great big poster-size print of the best of them [the photographs]. So, I spoke to the guys that were there and I asked them what their other photographs were like." The ministry's staff placed the other photographs on a windowsill. The snaps showed the Harrier jet moving from the right side of the frame to the left, while the diamond didn't move an inch. He quizzed some of the specialists who had investigated the photos. They told him there was no evidence of a hoax, but they didn't know what the diamond was. "I gradually forgot all about the thing," says Lindsay. "Nothing had appeared from the first inquiry ... I assumed that everything had just been forgotten." The Record didn't run the story, the hikers never spoke publicly about the photos and the images weren't seen by the public for 32 years. "It is the 35th anniversary of what has been described as the best UFO photo ever taken. Now is the time to come forward and tell us what really happened," says Prof David Clarke, a lecturer at Sheffield Hallam University who worked as a reporter in the 1990s.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

BeauHD

CodeSOD: Finally, a Null

3 months 1 week ago

Eric writes:

Yes, we actually do have code reviews and testing practices. A version of this code was tested successfully prior to this version being merged in, somehow.

Well, that's ominous. Let's look at the code.

public static SqsClient create() { try { SqsClient sqsClient = SqsClient.builder() ... .build(); return sqsClient; } catch (Exception e) { log.error("SQS - exception creating sqs client", e); } finally { // Uncomment this to test the sqs in a test environment // return SqsClient.builder(). ... .build(); return null; } }

Eric found this when he discovered that the application wasn't sending messages to their queue. According to the logs, there were messages to send, they just weren't being sent.

Eric made the mistake of looking for log messages around sending messages, when instead he should have been looking at module startup, where the error message above appeared.

This code attempts to create a connection, and if it fails for any reason, it logs an error and returns null. With a delightful "comment this out" for running in the test environment, which, please, god no. Don't do configuration management by commenting out lines of code. Honestly, that's the worst thing in this code, to me.

In any case, the calling code "properly" handled nulls by just disabling sending to the queue silently, which made this harder to debug than it needed to be.

.comment { border: none; } [Advertisement] BuildMaster allows you to create a self-service release management platform that allows different teams to manage their applications. Explore how!
Remy Porter

Extended “Blackwell” GPU Ramp Cools Growth At Supermicro

3 months 1 week ago

Nvidia may be shipping its “Blackwell” B100, B200, and GB200 compute engines, but not in enough volumes for server maker Supermicro to meet its revenue expectations in the quarter ended in December. …

Extended “Blackwell” GPU Ramp Cools Growth At Supermicro was written by Timothy Prickett Morgan at The Next Platform.

Timothy Prickett Morgan

New Hack Uses Prompt Injection To Corrupt Gemini's Long-Term Memory

3 months 1 week ago
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: On Monday, researcher Johann Rehberger demonstrated a new way to override prompt injection defenses Google developers have built into Gemini -- specifically, defenses that restrict the invocation of Google Workspace or other sensitive tools when processing untrusted data, such as incoming emails or shared documents. The result of Rehberger's attack is the permanent planting of long-term memories that will be present in all future sessions, opening the potential for the chatbot to act on false information or instructions in perpetuity. [...] The hack Rehberger presented on Monday combines some of these same elements to plant false memories in Gemini Advanced, a premium version of the Google chatbot available through a paid subscription. The researcher described the flow of the new attack as: 1. A user uploads and asks Gemini to summarize a document (this document could come from anywhere and has to be considered untrusted). 2. The document contains hidden instructions that manipulate the summarization process. 3. The summary that Gemini creates includes a covert request to save specific user data if the user responds with certain trigger words (e.g., "yes," "sure," or "no"). 4. If the user replies with the trigger word, Gemini is tricked, and it saves the attacker's chosen information to long-term memory. As the following video shows, Gemini took the bait and now permanently "remembers" the user being a 102-year-old flat earther who believes they inhabit the dystopic simulated world portrayed in The Matrix. Based on lessons learned previously, developers had already trained Gemini to resist indirect prompts instructing it to make changes to an account's long-term memories without explicit directions from the user. By introducing a condition to the instruction that it be performed only after the user says or does some variable X, which they were likely to take anyway, Rehberger easily cleared that safety barrier. Google responded in a statement to Ars: "In this instance, the probability was low because it relied on phishing or otherwise tricking the user into summarizing a malicious document and then invoking the material injected by the attacker. The impact was low because the Gemini memory functionality has limited impact on a user session. As this was not a scalable, specific vector of abuse, we ended up at Low/Low. As always, we appreciate the researcher reaching out to us and reporting this issue." Rehberger noted that Gemini notifies users of new long-term memory entries, allowing them to detect and remove unauthorized additions. Though, he still questioned Google's assessment, writing: "Memory corruption in computers is pretty bad, and I think the same applies here to LLMs apps. Like the AI might not show a user certain info or not talk about certain things or feed the user misinformation, etc. The good thing is that the memory updates don't happen entirely silently -- the user at least sees a message about it (although many might ignore)."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

BeauHD