Is it 1944 Again? Police Capture Anti-American Militia Stranded on Road

In November of 1944, two Nazi German soldiers were detected while… standing on the side of a road in Maine.

The two men, German Erich Gimpel and American defector William Colepaugh, had slipped ashore from a German U-boat that had entered Maine waters. “They just weren’t like normal Mainers in November,” Forni said in 2001. “You just never saw anybody walking without boots when it was snowy like that. It’s a wonder I didn’t stop and offer them a ride.”

That’s the story that comes to mind when I read the news today of anti-American soldiers standing conspicuously on the side of a road in Massachusetts.

The standoff began around 2 a.m. when police noticed two cars pulled over on I-95 with hazard lights on after they had apparently run out of fuel, authorities said at a Saturday press briefing. A group of men were clad in military-style gear with long guns and pistols, Mass State Police Col. Christopher Mason said. He added that they were headed to Maine from Rhode Island for “training.” The men refused to put down their weapons or comply with authorities’ orders, claiming to be from a group “that does not recognize our laws” before taking off into a wooded area, police said. Police said they used negotiators to interact with the other suspects. Mason said the “self-professed leader” of the group wanted it to be known that they are not antigovernment.

Ok, first. How stupid is someone to stand on the side of the Interstate with their long guns out?

I mean obviously stupider than running out of fuel, but how can they not know that will draw attention like walking without boots in the Maine snow?

These men whine that they don’t “recognize our laws”, which reads to me like an “American defector” in November 1944 saying he doesn’t recognize frostbite.

And then they go on to say while they reject American laws (passed by the government), they are not “anti” the American government? All that’s missing from this new story is a U-Boat.

No wonder they ran out of gas.

It’s Time to Stop Saying Zero Trust

This new article is spot on in the analysis of why Zero Trust has gone too far and needs to be stopped.

Digital trust and human trust are two separate things. Zero trust only applies to digital systems. People are not necessarily untrustworthy, but at the same time they are not packets. Zero trust only applies to the zeros and ones that traverse our various digital systems.

I would go even further and say Zero Trust also needs to apply in limited fashion to zeros and ones because they are being used for “intelligent” systems now that approximate human behavior. Trust me, you don’t want to live in a world of all Zero Trust machines.

Zero trust was a fair thought exercise to challenge overly trusted perimeter thinking (e.g. Maginot’s reaction after WWI that led to his “build a wall” campaign).

However, it has succumbed to the hyper-political extremist notion of rugged individualism. These people talking about Zero Trust being in all aspects of life sound like a kind of Ayn Rand parrot — being unrealistic, selfish and cruel while squawking out “zero trust” at every interaction.

Reality is that we gain efficiencies from building containment and perimeters. It’s the very definition of depth, which has great value, and has been proven viable for many thousands of years. security is nothing if it can’t achieve efficiency, although vendors obviously make less money the more efficient the controls become.

It’s a lot like saying the bazaar model of security is better than the castle. while true to a very large extent (pun not intended) because the castle wall is so slow and expensive to build, nobody at the bazaar really wants to go to sleep in the middle of one.

Killer Drone Swarms Are Here

Two important stories in the news:

First, Israel has confirmed using drone swarms in combat.

…in mid-May, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) used a swarm of small drones to locate, identify and attack Hamas militants. This is thought to be the first time a drone swarm has been used in combat.

Second, a June 14th drone swarm in Shanghai suddenly fell apart and dozens crashed, causing injury and damage.


Source: “Dozens of drones on the Bund in Shanghai accidentally fall and hurt people?”, Kanzhaji.com

And speaking of loitering munitions, a third news story confirms the US Marines are adopting Israeli technology.

Manufactured by the Israeli company UVision Air, the system has been selected after the completion of several successful demonstrations, tests, and evaluation processes. The system will provide the Marines Corps with ISR, highly accurate and precision indirect fire strike capabilities.

Why Driverless Cars Can’t Understand Sand

Sand is a fluid such that driving on it can be hard (pun not intended) even for humans.

It’s like driving on snow or mud, yet it seems to be far less well studied by car manufacturers because of how infrequent it may be for their customer base.

Source: Simulator Game Mods “Summer Forest”. Snow and mud computer driving virtual environments can easily be found, yet sand simulations are notably absent.

Traction control, for example, is a product designed for “slippery” conditions. That usually means winter conditions, or rain on pavement, where brakes are applied by an “intelligent” algorithm detecting wheel spin.

In sand there is always going to be some manner of wheel spin, causing a computer to go crazy and do the opposite of help. Applying brakes, let alone repeatedly, is about the worst thing you can do in sand.

On top of that the computer regulation of tire pressure sensors has no concept of “float” profile required for sand. When the usual algorithm equates around 40psi to safe driving, deflating to a necessary 18psi can turn a dashboard into a disco ball.

The problem is product manufacturers treat core safety competencies as nice to have features, instead of required. And by the time they get around to developing core competencies for safety, they over-specialize and market them into expensive festishized “Rubicon” and “Racing Design” options (let alone “WordPress“).

In other words core complex or dangerous scenarios must be learned for any primary path to be safe, yet they often get put onto a backlog for driverless. Such a low bar of competency means driverless technology is far, far below even basic human skill.

Imagine it like exception handling cases or negative testing being seen as unnecessary because driverless cars are expected only to operate in the most perfect world. In other words why even install brakes or suspension if traveling parallel to all other traffic at same rate of speed, like a giant herd? Or an even better example, why design brakes for a car if the vast majority of time people don’t have to deal with a stop sign?

Recently I put a new car with the latest driverless technology to the test with dry sand. I was not surprised when it became very easily confused and stuck, and it reminded me of the poem “Dans l’interminable” by Paul Verlaine (1844 – 1896).

Dans l’interminable
Ennui de la plaine,
La neige incertaine
Luit comme du sable.

Le ciel est de cuivre
Sans lueur aucune.
On croirait voir vivre
Et mourir la lune.

Comme des nuées
Flottent gris les chênes
Des forêts prochaines
Parmi les buées.

Le ciel est de cuivre
Sans lueur aucune.
On croirait vivre
Et mourir la lune.

Corneilles poussives,
Et vous, les loups maigres,
Par ces bises aigres
Quoi donc vous arrive?

Dans l’interminable
Ennui de la plaine
La neige incertaine
Luit comme du sable…

“The uncertain snow gleams like sand.”