That has not been a CERTling. "some angel"s behaviour I cant't explain or justify. Maybe you want to talk to PL / Orga.
-
-
Replying to @c3cert @datenwolf
Seems the person who requested the takedown was HonkHase.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
If HonkHase says it's a problem, it's probably a problem. The guys it usually pretty chill and only takes out the ban-hammer if it could really create some trouble (which includes legal). But: You don't mess with HonkHase.
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @datenwolf @c3cert
It wasn't a problem every year prior, then suddenly all lasers disappeared on day 1 of 33c3. Whatever the problem was, it had nothing to do with individual lasers and everything to do with some kind of general decision, legal or otherwise.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Huh, actually on the 33c3 in the upper levels of the CCH there were a few high powered lasers, with a static beam configuration, also leaving the premises, which made me kind of nervous. If you can see a red laser beam without fog it's certainly beyond class-3a
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @datenwolf @c3cert
Laser classes are useless. The danger posed by a laser is way more complicated than what class it is. Any useful scanner is going to be Class 4 (mine is), but there's a huge difference between a laser pointer (static beam) and a scanner at a minimum distance.
5 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Class-3: Will cause eye damage. Class-4: Will set shit on fire. There are also subclasses. Most important for laser projectors: 3a vs 3b vs 3c. 3a is: Eye damage on direct exposure. 3b: Scattering off polished surfaces cause damage. 3c: Scattering off dull surfaces cause damage.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @datenwolf @c3cert
Class 3 and 4 and their subclasses are all but useless. The actual result depends way too much on the specific circumstances. Obviously my class 4 laser projector neither sets shit on fire nor is harmful when scattered off a dull surface.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
And it's also below eye damage levels when scanned at appropriate speeds and distances (though you wouldn't want to *deliberately* aim it at people, i.e. audience scanning, without more thorough analysis as the safety margins are larger for that)
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
I reiterate: Nobody knows for sure if scanning actually makes it eye safe. So far this is just an assumption that's based on a purely thermal model, assumes the eye to consist largely of water and the retina being a beer-lambertian absorber.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
It's not just scanning. Beams expand wider than the human pupil at sufficient distance (and are deliberately expanded for audience scanning setups) in order to also reduce peak power.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.