Monthly Archives: August 2021

Parkour: The Ultimate Guide For Beginners

Posted on by

[…]

Parkour is rooted in French military history, and more specifically escape and evasion tactics using only the human body, trained using “parcours du combattant”; an obstacle course based training method.

Whilst sharing common features, it should not be confused with freerunning, which places less of an emphasis on efficiency, allowing for more acrobatic movements.

[…]

Experienced traceurs do not seek the adrenaline rush which can often be part and parcel of engaging in the riskier aspects of the activity. Instead they seek to challenge themselves to overcome the shackles of their inhibitions. Their training allows practitioners to learn to manage risk rather than seek it.

[…]

# The basics:

1. Balancing

The ability to balance is a vital aspect of parkour. Practitioners spend a decent amount of time jumping onto and walking along narrow railings and walls.

2. Running

Parkour involves both explosive sprinting and endurance running so be sure to add in some middle distance as well as short sharp sprint sessions into your training regime to ensure you are parkour fit.

3. Jumping and Dropping

Whether it’s to bridge gaps or scale heights, jumping plays a significant role in parkour movement patterns. Dropping involves moving from areas of high ground to low, and requires a proper understanding of how to land safely, which will be discussed below.

4. Landing

Landing properly after jumping or dropping is an essential skill which will enable you not only to engage in parkour safely but also allows for efficient transition between movements and obstacles. The way in which you choose depends on a number of factors:

  • The height from which you are landing;
  • The landing area;
  • The distance of the jump

Landing on two feet should always be your preference as this will limit the amount of stress you place on your joints. The objective should be land as softly as possible, which means bending at the knees on contact with the surface. If your dropping from a particularly high level or landing with significant forward momentum then you may want to sink at the hips too and use your hands and arms to absorb some of the force.

Rolling on landing is a really useful way of dissipating the force you experience on making contact with the ground across more of your body. This is definitely something to add to your repertoire when you start to drop from levels higher than head height or when jumping with a lot of forward momentum. It’s a vital skill to help you remain safe and injury free whilst partaking in parkour.

5. Vaulting

A maneuver to help you negotiate those obstacles which are to high to jump over but don’t require climbing, the vault is probably one of the most iconic aspects of parkour. It normally involves you using your hands to propel yourself over an obstacle a little bit like a monkey. There are numerous ways in which you can achieve this basic principle. The below video takes you through a step by step guide to 10 different ways suitable for beginners.

6. Climbing

When taking the most direct (efficient route), a cornerstone of the parkour philosophy, it is inevitable that you’re going to be required to climb in order to scale obstacles which are too high to jump or vault over. This is where climbing comes to the fore. There are a number of different ways in which to climb, largely depending on the height you are required to scale.

Undoubtedly one of the most useful techniques in parkour generally has to be the ‘wall run’. This skill will enable you to climb over walls which would ordinarily be way out of reach. Check out the video below for a quick tutorial.

A slight variation on the wall run, known as the ‘tic tac’ can be a great way of using adjacent surfaces to help you generate the required momentum to climb your target wall.

The ‘cat leap’ is a combination of jumping and climbing. Particularly useful when you are attempting to traverse a gap which is too wide for you be able to land on the target area on your feet. Instead you must aim to land with your feet on the front face of the wall fractionally before gripping the top of the wall with your hands.

7. Swinging (Lache)

Just like when you were a kid swinging from tree branches. This can be a particularly useful method of passing through an obstacle or even dropping from a height which would ordinarily be too high. Traceurs will also use this technique to traverse gaps between bars, where gripping the bar and hanging rather than landing on your feet is more preferable.

The below tutorial takes you through a step by step guide in how to introduce yourself to the skill of lache.

Top Training Exercises To Get You On Your Way

There are some great ways in which you can prepare yourself for parkour before you even turn up for your first meet or join one of the new age parkour specific gyms.

Here are 10 of the best to get you started:

1. Forward walking lunge:

The strength and stability built from lunges is directly transferable to many of the movements which make up parkour. Jumping or landing from one foot, wall runs and tic tacs all require unilateral strength. The best way of developing such strength is by completing single leg weight bearing exercises, of which the forward lunge is a particularly good example. The intensity of the exercise can easily be increased by adding dumbbells or a barbell.

2. Wall handstand:

Parkour has numerous similarities to gymnastics, and it doesn’t get much more acrobatic (for beginners that is) than handstands. Mastering this type of exercise is a great way of developing upper body strength (a key component of climbing and swinging), as well as spatial awareness and balance. By practising against a wall you can negate some of the potential danger associated with the traditional handstand.

3. Overhead barbell press:

A fundamental exercise for developing upper body strength,the overhead press translates perfectly into actions such as vaulting. If you just starting out use an unloaded barbell to ascertain how much load is appropriate for your relative strength. Standing with your feet around hip width apart, hold the bar with an overhand grip just in front of your collar bones with your elbows pointing towards the ground. Push the bar upwards in front of your face, finishing above your head with your arms straight, locked out at the shoulders and elbows. Once you have reached the top of the range, pause momentarily before returning the bar slowly to the start position and repeating.

4. Broad jump:

This is probably one of the most important exercises to include in your parkour preparation training. The most fundamental of movements, involved in every jump you make from obstacle to obstacle. This is a great way of developing the power you will be sure to need in order to get the most out of your foundation parkour movements.

There will be plenty of occasions when parkour requires you to jump and land on just one of your legs so why not add in single leg jumps too. Mix up taking off and landing on the same foot and taking off and landing on opposite feet.

5. Back Squat:

There’s no getting away from the back squat. It is such a fundamental movement pattern which can be applied to so many different every day as well as athletic pursuits. Consequently, it is a must do exercise if you’re looking to get into parkour. There are few gym movements which are better at building general lower limb strength and will help pretty much with every aspect of parkour, including jumping, landing, and wall running.

6. Wall dip:

A slight variation on the traditional dip exercise you will see regularly in the gym, this is a perfect upper body exercise which has excellent cross-over with a common feature in movement such as the vault and the second phase of a climb.

Find a wall or equivalent surface which is between hip and shoulder height. Place your palms flat on top of the surface fingers pointing forwards. In the start position, your arms should be straight, completely holding your body weight off the ground. Lower your legs towards the ground by bending at the elbow in the same way as if you were performing a standard push up, lowering your chest towards the top of the wall. Once your elbows are bent to around 90 degrees, push against the surface through your palms and lift your body weight, extending your arms until straight. Repeat the movement.

7. The monkey plant:

These are a great exercise for building upper body strength in a more parkour specific training environment. Stand in front of a wall which is approximately hip height with one foot slightly in front of the other and both hands in contact with the top of the wall. Using both your legs and your upper body, propel yourself forwards and upwards so that you finish on top of the wall on both feet.

The monkey plant is also a great stepping stone to more advanced parkour exercises like vaulting.

8. Pull ups:

One of the most fundamental upper body strength exercises going, the pull up will help you generate the necessary strength to haul your body weight up walls with your upper body alone. Pretty useful then. Once you’ve mastered the bodyweight pull up for a decent number of sets and reps (3 x10 for instance) why not increase the intensity by adding extra weight using dumbbells or discs.

9. Bear crawl:

This exercise is a great full body workout generating stress on both the lower and upper body. It is a particularly appropriate form of training for parkour as there will often be times when you are required to move on all fours, whether it be to squeeze under low obstacles, or to provide a little extra stability when traversing obstacles at significant heights.

10. Vertical jump:

Along with the broad jump, this is also one of the most fundamentally applicable exercises to parkour. A great way of converting the strength you build in your legs using exercises such as the back squat and forward lunge into power, one of the most important assets to have if you are going to traverse those gaps or run those walls.

To make the exercise even more parkour specific, be sure to land softly each repetitions, bending at the knees and folding at the hips (making contact with the ground with your hands) in order to practice dissipating the force you will experience when you drop from considerable heights.

Source: Parkour: The Ultimate Guide For Beginners – Sport Fitness Advisor

Australian Court Rules That AI Can Be an Inventor, as does South Africa

Posted on by

In what can only be considered a triumph for all robot-kind, this week, a federal court has ruled that an artificially intelligent machine can, in fact, be an inventor—a decision that came after a year’s worth of legal battles across the globe.

The ruling came on the heels of a years-long quest by University of Surrey law professor Ryan Abbot, who started putting out patent applications in 17 different countries across the globe earlier this year. Abbot—whose work focuses on the intersection between AI and the law—first launched two international patent filings as part of The Artificial Inventor Project at the end of 2019. Both patents (one for an adjustable food container, and one for an emergency beacon) listed a creative neural system dubbed “DABUS” as the inventor.

The artificially intelligent inventor listed here, DABUS, was created by Dr. Stephen Thaler, who describes it as a “creativity engine” that’s capable of generating novel ideas (and inventions) based on communications between the trillions of computational neurons that it’s been outfitted with. Despite being an impressive piece of machinery, last year, the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) ruled that an AI cannot be listed as the inventor in a patent application—specifically stating that under the country’s current patent laws, only “natural persons,” are allowed to be recognized. Not long after, Thaler sued the USPTO, and Abbott represented him in the suit.

More recently, the case has been caught in a case of legal limbo—with the overseeing judge suggesting that the case might be better handled by congress instead.

DABUS had issues being recognized in other countries, too. One spokesperson for the European patent office told the BBC in a 2019 interview that systems like DABUS are merely “a tool used by a human inventor,” under the country’s current laws. Australian courts initially declined to recognize AI inventors as well, noting earlier this year that much like in the US, patents can only be granted to people.

Or at least, that was Australia’s stance until Friday, when justice Jonathan Beach overturned the decision in Australia’s federal court. Per Beach’s new ruling, DABUS can neither be the applicant nor grantee for a patent—but it can be listed as the inventor. In this case, those other two roles would be filled by Thaler, DABUS’s designer.

“In my view, an inventor as recognised under the act can be an artificial intelligence system or device,” Beach wrote. “I need to grapple with the underlying idea, recognising the evolving nature of patentable inventions and their creators. We are both created and create. Why cannot our own creations also create?”

It’s not clear what made the Australian courts change their tune, but it’s possible South Africa had something to do with it. The day before Beach walked back the country’s official ruling, South Africa’s Companies and Intellectual Property Commission became the first patent office to officially recognize DABUS as an inventor of the aforementioned food container.

It’s worth pointing out here that every country has a different set of standards as part of the patent rights process; some critics have noted that it’s “not shocking” for South Africa to give the idea of an AI inventor a pass, and that “everyone should be ready,” for future patent allowances to come. So while the US and UK might have given Thalen the thumbs down on the idea, we’re still waiting to see how the patents filed in any of the other countries—including Japan, India, and Israel—will shake out. But at the very least, we know that DABUS will finally be recognized as an inventor somewhere.

Source: Australian Court Rules That AI Can Be an Inventor

Amazon hit with $887 million fine by European privacy watchdog

Posted on by

Amazon has been issued with a fine of 746 million euros ($887 million) by a European privacy watchdog for breaching the bloc’s data protection laws.

The fine, disclosed by Amazon on Friday in a securities filing, was issued two weeks ago by Luxembourg’s privacy regulator.

The Luxembourg National Commission for Data Protection said Amazon’s processing of personal data did not comply with the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation.

[…]

Source: Amazon hit with $887 million fine by European privacy watchdog

Pretty massively strange that they don’t tell us what exactly they are fining Amazon for…

Bungie & Ubisoft Sue Destiny 2 Cheatmakers Ring-1 For Copyright Infringement

Posted on by

Bungie and Ubisoft have filed a lawsuit against five individuals said to be behind Ring-1, the claimed creator and distributor of cheat software targeting Destiny and Rainbox Six Seige. Among other offenses the gaming companies allege copyright infringement and trafficking in circumvention devices, estimating damages in the millions of dollars.

[…]

Filed in a California district court, the lawsuit targets Andrew Thorpe (aka ‘Krypto’), Jonathan Aguedo (aka ‘Overpowered’), Wesam Mohammed (aka ‘Grizzly’), Ahmad Mohammed, plus John Does 1-50. According to the plaintiffs, these people operate, oversee or participate in Ring-1, an operation that develops, distributes and markets a range of cheats for Destiny 2 and Rainbow Six Seige, among others.

Ring-1 is said to largely operate from Ring-1.io but is also active on hundreds of forums, websites and social media accounts selling cheats that enable Ubisoft and Bungie customers to automatically aim their weapons, reveal the locations of opponents, and see information that would otherwise be obscured.

“Defendants’ conduct has caused, and is continuing to cause, massive and irreparable harm to Plaintiffs and their business interests. The success of Plaintiffs’ games depends on their being enjoyable and fair for all players,” the lawsuit reads.

[…]

According to the lawsuit, the cheats developed and distributed by Ring-1 are not cheap. Access to Destiny 2 cheats via the Ring-1 website costs 30 euros per week or 60 euros per month while those for Rainbox Six Seige cost 25 euros and 50 euros respectively, netting the defendants up to hundreds of thousands of dollars in revenue.

The plaintiffs believe that Ring-1 or those acting in concert with them fraudulently obtained access to the games’ software clients before disassembling, decompiling and/or creating derivative works from them. These tools were then tested on Destiny 2 and Rainbow Six Seige servers under false pretenses by using “throwaway accounts” and false identities.

Copyright Infringement Offenses

Since the cheating software developed and distributed by Ring-1 is primarily designed for the purpose of circumventing technological measures that control access to their games, the plaintiffs state that the defendants are trafficking in circumvention devices in violation of the DMCA (17 U.S.C. § 1201(a)(2)).

[…]

In addition, it’s alleged that the defendants unlawfully reproduced and displayed the plaintiffs’ artwork on the Ring-1 website, adapted the performance of the games, and reproduced game client files without a license during reverse engineering and similar processes.

In the alternative, Ubisoft and Bungie suggest that the defendants can be held liable for inducing and contributing to the copyright-infringing acts of their customers when they deploy cheats that effectively create unauthorized derivative works.

[…]

In addition to the alleged copyright infringement offenses, Bungie and Ubisoft say the defendants are liable for trademark infringement due to the use of various marks on the Ring-1 website and elsewhere. They are also accused of ‘false designation of origin’ due to false or misleading descriptions that suggest a connection with the companies, and intentional interference with contractual relations by encouraging Destiny 2 and Rainbow Six Seige players to breach their licensing conditions.

[…]

Source: Bungie & Ubisoft Sue Destiny 2 Cheatmakers Ring-1 For Copyright Infringement * TorrentFreak

Wow, this seems to me to be a stretch. Nobody likes playing online against a cheat but calling it copyright infringement and creating derivative works seems like a stretch, as does saying people might think the cheat creators (which to me seems like original work) might be mistaken as being affiliated with the companies. Even Trump and QAnon followers aren’t that stupid. Then as for the licenses  imposed: yes, people click yes on the usage licenses but I’m pretty sure almost no-one has any idea what they are clicking yes to.

Justice Department says Russians hacked federal prosecutors during SolarWinds

Posted on by

The Russian hackers behind the massive SolarWinds cyberespionage campaign broke into the email accounts of some of the most prominent federal prosecutors’ offices around the country last year, the Justice Department said Friday.

The department said 80% of Microsoft email accounts used by employees in the four U.S. attorney offices in New York were breached. All told, the Justice Department said 27 U.S. Attorney offices had at least one employee’s email account compromised during the hacking campaign.

The Justice Department said in a statement that it believes the accounts were compromised from May 7 to Dec. 27, 2020. Such a timeframe is notable because the SolarWinds campaign, which infiltrated dozens of private-sector companies and think tanks as well as at least nine U.S. government agencies, was first discovered and publicized in mid-December.

The Biden administration in April announced sanctions, including the expulsion of Russian diplomats, in response to the SolarWinds hack and Russian interference in the 2020 U.S. presidential election. Russia has denied wrongdoing.

[…]

Source: Justice Department says Russians hacked federal prosecutors

This is another escalation in the finger pointing between the US, Russia and China

100s of (war)ships are having their positions falsely reported in AIS

Posted on by

Analysis of tracking data from Automatic Identification System broadcasts reveals vessel locations have been simulated for a number of ships, including military vessels. This false information could compromise vessel safety, decrease confidence in a crucial collision avoidance system and potentially spark international conflict.

Over the years, data analysts working with Global Fishing Watch and SkyTruth have noticed a number of ship tracks coming up in impossible locations—in transit over Antarctica, circling in the Utah desert and elsewhere—and we have questioned whether these false positions resulted from faulty Automatic Identification System (AIS) transmitters, deliberate misuse of those transmitters, or from intentional third party interference. AIS is the international system of vessel radio broadcasts used to identify vessel locations and help prevent collisions at sea. We have learned how to interpret anomalies in AIS data and, even when the ship coordinates were wrong, we never had reason to doubt that these vessels were on the water broadcasting AIS. In most cases, we are also able to identify the true position of the vessel.

[…]

I first noticed these false AIS tracks in groups of sailboats which appeared hundreds of miles out in the Atlantic Ocean even though shore-based AIS antennas appeared to receive their positions. Since a typical range for a terrestrial antenna is at most about 60 miles, I knew something was wrong with these positions. When I searched for more information on the identities of these vessels I found that they were featured on a website running simulated sailing races. Whoever was setting up the races not only simulated realistic AIS positions for each of the participants, but then fed these made up positions into a public AIS site — sites like AISHub receive ship positions from contributors — so that the sailboat positions appeared on these sites alongside real vessel traffic.

[…]

Our recent investigation into a second group of false AIS tracks has shown that these concerns were very much warranted. I was alerted to this case when an article in Dagens Nyheter, a Swedish news outlet, was shared with me. Nine Swedish Navy vessels appeared on AIS as if out on maneuvers. In the news story, the Swedish Navy confirmed that these positions were false and mentioned additional false positions in the Baltic Sea, specifically near the Russian enclave of Kaliningrad.

[…]

I was able to take advantage of the full complexity of AIS communication to identify a pattern specific to the false simulated AIS positions. From there, I wrote an automated computer query of our global AIS database to identify other vessels with this same pattern of AIS broadcast.

The results were alarming. Nearly a hundred U.S. and European naval vessels had track segments with the same AIS pattern as the false tracks of the Swedish navy ships near Karlskrona. Over the past few months I dug into this data using all available sources to confirm vessel locations and identities. I confirmed false AIS positions for 15 navy vessels from seven countries, with many more vessels suspected of having fabricated positions.

[…]

Naval vessels are frequently photographed, and it’s possible to get a sequence of port visits based on photos uploaded to sites like warshipcam.com. This documented series of port visits can then be compared to the AIS track to confirm that an MMSI corresponds to a particular vessel.

[…]

Two sources of open satellite imagery work very well for matching to AIS, Sentinel-1 (S1) synthetic aperture radar (SAR) and Sentinel-2 (S2) optical imagery from the European Space Agency (ESA). S1 SAR is acquired with very high frequency over Europe — any given location is imaged approximately every other day and has the advantage of penetrating clouds

[…]

I matched S1 and S2 imagery to tracks of 15 naval vessels with AIS patterns sharing characteristics identified in the false positions of the Swedish vessels near Karlskrona. These 15 examples, which I was able to confirm with comparison to imagery, represent just a fraction of the nearly 100 naval vessels with suspected false AIS tracks identified by my algorithm between August 27, 2020 and July 15, 2021.

[…]

I describe two examples below.

U.S. survey vessel USNS Bruce C. Heezen transiting into Baltic Sea, September 2020

AIS data shows this vessel transiting through the North Sea and entering the Baltic Sea between September 17 through 23, 2020. However, the positions broadcast on those dates match the false AIS pattern, and I have additional evidence that this AIS track did not show the actual location of the vessel.

[…]

British Aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth on the Irish coast with accompanying flotilla of British, Dutch, and Belgian warships, September 2020

AIS from September 17, 2020, shows a surprising international naval flotilla accompanying the British aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth about 20 miles out from the coast of Ireland. In addition to the 283-meter Queen Elizabeth, AIS shows the British HMS Duncan (152 meters) and HMS Albion (176 meters) as well as the Dutch HNLMS Rotterdam (163 meters), the HNLMS Johan de Witt (176 meters) and the Belgian BNS Leopold I (122 meters). This flotilla of massive warships should have made quite a striking picture on Sentinel-2 satellite imagery. However, the image coinciding with the AIS transit dates, seen below, shows none of the six naval vessels. Furthermore, several publicly posted photos and news articles show that these vessels were in port elsewhere at the time.

[…]

It’s unclear how the false positions get combined with real data from terrestrial AIS antennas, though one can hypothesize that they could be produced by an AIS simulator program similar to that used to produce the tracks in the simulated sailing races. While I initially thought the false data might be entering the data feed from a single terrestrial AIS station, it appears that false AIS positions were reported at a number of different terrestrial stations.

Some of these terrestrial stations appear to be picking up AIS positions when vessels are too far away. For example, a suspected false position near Kiel, Germany was picked up by a receiver in Gdynia, Poland more than 300 miles away and outside of normal terrestrial antenna range. However in other cases, false positions were picked up by nearby receivers. Further information linking individual AIS positions to particular receiving antennas could allow us to understand more about where the positions are coming from.

Possible motives for data falsification

It’s clear that considerable care was taken to produce plausible tracks. For example, false AIS segments mostly appear only in those locations where naval vessels would be expected to broadcast AIS (near port and in other congested areas). Confirmed and suspected false AIS segments show incursions by 11 North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and NATO allied warships into Russian territorial waters near Kaliningrad and Murmansk as well as within the disputed territorial waters around Crimea in the Black Sea. Suspected false tracks from June 2021 also show two Russian warships entering the territorial waters of Ukraine and Poland. Other false AIS tracks are more subtle

[…]

A recent incident in the Black Sea shows how uncomfortably close we are to a scenario where a false AIS track is used to show an aggressive action by a naval vessel that did not really occur. From June 18 to 19, 2021, the British destroyer HMS Defender and Dutch frigate HNLMS Evertsen could be seen at dock in Odessa, Ukraine. However, on those same dates, AIS showed the vessels leaving port and going to a naval base in Sevastopol in Russian-occupied Crimea.

[…]

Although this attempt at disinformation was easily refuted by witnesses and a live webcam in Odessa, a far more delicate situation unfolded a few days later when the HMS Defender really did leave Odessa and transit through Russian claimed waters. The HMS Defender broadcast AIS during the transit past Crimea that showed the vessel entering disputed territorial waters that extend 12 nautical miles from shore. The vessel entered only about 1.8 nautical miles inside territorial waters and maintained a normal transit course under “innocent passage.” Russian forces claim to have responded with warning shots and dropping live bombs in the path of the vessel. The HMS Defender proceeded normally, exiting the waters around Crimea and continuing to Georgia.

[…]

Fortunately, these false tracks could be readily identified with the same systematic data analysis tools which have made it possible to pull increasingly detailed information from the global AIS dataset to inform researchers about activity at sea.

The openness and accessibility of AIS has made possible innovative uses of the data. But this accessibility also makes the system vulnerable to manipulation which, if not detected, could support false narratives about vessel movements that cause confusion and potentially could even spark an international incident.

Ultimately, AIS is a critical collision-avoidance system relied upon by thousands of mariners, and while these manipulations don’t directly compromise on-the-water collision avoidance, they may compromise trust in the AIS system

[….]

Source: Systematic data analysis reveals false vessel tracks – SkyTruth

Increase in Earth’s energy imbalance is proof that climate change is man made

Posted on by

The observed trend in Earth’s energy imbalance (TEEI), a measure of the acceleration of heat uptake by the planet, is a fundamental indicator of perturbations to climate. Satellite observations (2001–2020) reveal a significant positive globally-averaged TEEI of 0.38 ± 0.24 Wm−2decade−1, but the contributing drivers have yet to be understood. Using climate model simulations, we show that it is exceptionally unlikely (<1% probability) that this trend can be explained by internal variability. Instead, TEEI is achieved only upon accounting for the increase in anthropogenic radiative forcing and the associated climate response. TEEI is driven by a large decrease in reflected solar radiation and a small increase in emitted infrared radiation. This is because recent changes in forcing and feedbacks are additive in the solar spectrum, while being nearly offset by each other in the infrared. We conclude that the satellite record provides clear evidence of a human-influenced climate system.

[…]

Source: Anthropogenic forcing and response yield observed positive trend in Earth’s energy imbalance | Nature Communications