Posts by Lord Elpuss 2298 publicly visible posts • joined 17 Aug 2009
"Does are me wonder if it wpuld be used by thieves to locate and "deactivate" trackers on stuff they've nicked."
Yes it would, and it is. AirTag is intended to help you find your lost stuff and isn't intended as an anti-theft device. In fact it's pretty crap at doing that precisely BECAUSE any thief will get a message, along with detailed instructions on how to locate and deactivate it.
"It’s a tool, but it’s clearly one without protections against misuse."
Have you been living under a rock?
"Apple did remedy the problem later once customers raised safety concerns, but I cannot believe that this use-case didn’t come up during product development"
Anti-stalking protections were built in from the very beginning. They were refined and strengthened later (e.g. reducing the 'Time to Warn' from +/-24h to <2h), following customer feedback.
"It’s amazing that Apple could get all the way to release on a product without including a feature to inform people that they were being tracked."
It would have been amazing. And unbelievable. But it's not true.
https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2021/04/apple-introduces-airtag/
"Additional murders linked to AirTags since last December include the Chicago murder of a woman by her boyfriend after he figured out that she had removed an AirTag he hid in her car"
Linking this murder to the AirTag is about as accurate as linking it to the glasses she was wearing when she discovered the AirTag and removed it. The AirTag was working as designed, and alerted the woman she was being tracked. The fact that her pondscum of a boyfriend couldn't handle being outsmarted and murdered her is in no way linked to Apple; in fact you could argue that if Apple's anti-tracking safeguards had been less effective, she wouldn't have known she was being tracked and said pondscum of a boyfriend would have had to look for another reason to murder her.
Yes it's a marketing gimmick - in the same way that thinner bezels are a marketing gimmick. My issue is with the terms in bold;
"...purely a marketing gimmick? ... it offers no advantage over aluminium but adds several problems.""
It's not purely a marketing gimmick, and it does bring some, admittedly small, advantages over aluminium. It's harder so scratches less easily, it's lighter which is always a good thing on a big phone, and the moment of inertia thing has merit as a consideration. I have an iPhone 14 Pro Max and it's a big beast; anything that makes it less unwieldy is welcome. Will it change the planet? No. Is it the single most important reason to buy this phone? No. It's an incremental improvement, like practically every other headline feature of the iPhone 15.
"Teardown reveals iPhone 15 to be series of questionable design decisions"
Utter shite. The iFixit article mentions what they call a number of GOOD design decisions that they are happy with. In fact, the article literally states it’s a GREAT design.
Oh and Tetraprism doesn’t mean 4 lenses. It means 4 prisms. Prism != Lens.
Same on Mac. The current OS (Ventura) supports systems back to 2017, and the previous (still fully patched) OS goes back to 2015.
One suspects the author bought himself a Chromebook at some point, deeply hates it and is looking for any - ANY reason to convince himself his purchase actually made sense.
Didn't BOFH use varying levels of 'zzzt' to indicate voltage? Bzzt = warning shot, kzzt = temporary incapacitation and KZZZZT when you really mean it? Accordingly I would respectfully submit the following as Reg SI units for mains voltage;
zT = US 110v
bzT = Euro/World 230V
kzT = 3-phase
KzT = anything above 430v usually resulting in extreme crispiness.
"It could never make sense, the hardware is already fitted and ready to use."
It makes sense to the fleet manager, who gets to save a few quid a month on leasing and pass these costs on to John Q Salesman, who activates the feature at their own expense for the 3 years they own the car.
What happens after the 3 years, nobody cares. The car will be sold on the second hand market, and subsequent buyers will then have the choice to purchase subscriptions again.
BMW win all the way of course, as they essentially get to sell the same feature twice.
I saw a pitch a few years ago - I think it was a TED talk. The speaker was envisioning a world where we don't actually 'own' anything in perpetuity - the idea of "property" would be obsolete. Everything on subscription; you get everything you need for as long as you need it, but it's never actually yours. This would presumably go hand in hand with no need to actually possess money; as long as you were a good citizen and did what was asked of you, your subscriptions would be taken care of.
I remember thinking at the time: this is being pitched as 'new', but there's nothing new about it. And it even has a name. Nine letters. Begins with C.
"BMW wanted to take your money, and keep taking it in perpetuity, while delivering nothing."
It's exactly this in a nutshell. There needs to be a valid reason for a subscription; be it continuing upgrades and development, a 'loss-leader' sales approach (effectively, payment in arrears), or a connection to a service that the supplier also has to pay for on an ongoing basis. Heated seats are none of these, therefore no articulable reason for a subscription. And unusually for BMW, they didn't even really try.
PS even though this idea should have been binned at conception, it's worth noting that BMW are a little bit maligned here in that they did also offer a pay-at-purchase option. A one-off lifetime subscription, if you will; at more or less the same price as heated seats in previous models. So really they were offering customers more choice, not less - you could buy once as you always used to, OR you could subscribe. One place where this would make sense is fleet owners - they could buy the 'basic' cars at company expense, and individual drivers could stump up for the 'extras' for their period of ownership; whatever that may be. In this context, I get why they thought it might work.
There absolutely is a difference.
32bit was killed off because the address spacing wasn't able to keep up with modern technology and therefore to keep it viable, required additional development, security and provisioning costs when deployed along with x64 which weren't justifiable. Not exactly 'wilful trashing of tech'.
3rd party pri... you know what? I can't even be bothered. You know the answer as well as I do.
Be well.
My company gave me an Ocean Signal PLB1 when I was stationed in Africa; very small and light. Luckily never needed to put it to the test, but have no reason to suspect it wouldn't work as described.
Note that you MUST register it with your country's maritime rescue services (it works on land as well but all signals are routed through maritime channels), and the costs vary wildly from country to country. The UK allows you to register them indefinitely and for free, whereas a number of European countries charge anywhere from €17 to €87 per year to register. Some countries also make it difficult for you to cancel your registration; you get lots of threatening letters describing the dire consequences that will befall you if you transmit using the device after de-registration, as well as requiring you to request de-registration within a narrow time window in the last month before your registration expires. Failure to do this means you're automatically reregistered for the subsequent year, with costs, and zero option to cancel.
Speaking from personal experience. I'm not bitter. Well, not very bitter, anyway.
"The iPhone version (as I understand it) only allows texts to the emergency services and requires a subscription after two (three?) years while the Samsung version allows texts to any number but only a certain amount each month and requires a subscription much earlier (from day one?)."
iPhone Satellite Emergency SOS also allows communication out to your emergency contacts listed in the Health app, including your location data and transcript of any information you exchange with the emergency services. It's read-only though; they can't communicate back.
And yes it's free for 2 years; they're mooting a subscription after that but details haven't yet been released.
If he's executive-banded, then he's an executive. The job title doesn't say everything.
Besides. That big arrow flying over your head at 31,000 feet? That's the main point of this article which was that he was murdered in a horrible way, they've collared the alleged perps and one turned out to be his ex-wife.
If they were insanely overpriced sneakers with another logo, they wouldn't be tat?
It's not up to you, me or the article author to determine what 'tat' is and what not. 99% of the items sold at most major auctions wouldn't interest me, including these sneakers, but that doesn't mean I would call it 'tat'. I would simply move on. Somebody clearly finds it valuable, and that is their right.
Who can understand the mind of any fanboi, no matter the subject? That is why the pejorative form is used.
I'm aware of why the pejorative form is used. The implication is that only a fanboi would have bought these sneakers, and that fanboi's minds are un-understandable. Neither statement is substantiated, and both are arguably insulting in nature.
You believe a letter from Einstein isn't better news than any advertising giveaways?
Define 'better'. Einstein's letter is fascinating to be sure, but ultimately it's a curio, a snippet of history, a peek into a great mind. There's no new physics in it, and It doesn't 'contribute' to the advancement of Humanity any more or less than the Apple sneakers do. It's arguably equivalent.
If the author was any more bitter, they’d be pissing lemon juice.
Unlike your calm and entirely rational demeanour.
I'm very calm and rational. And this is an unnecessary ad hominem. Be better.
” You *do* remember your original point, don't you? In case not, it was: "because hiding inside every anti-fanboi of company A is a fanboi of company B." “
Actually my original point was “The negativity, bitterness and anti-Apple sentiment in this article absolutely ruins what could have been an interesting piece.”
Does selective reading run in your family, or are you just special?
” you were clearly struggling with the idea of anything like a spectrum.“
*I* was clear. You, on the other hand… well. Do you know the expression ‘when in a hole stop digging’? Or ‘Better to stay silent and be thought a fool, than speak and remove all doubt’?
Back to the drawing board old chap.
” You must know a very weird subset of humanity.“
Name, show or point me to one single human who doesn’t like or dislike ANYTHING.
”And "liking something" does not mean you are a "fan" of it (the other way around, yes); and being a "fan" does not meany you are a "fanbois" (the other way around, yes).“
Fan noun to admire, be enthusiastic or think positively.
Again. Point me to ANY human being who has EVER lived, who has never admired, been enthusiastic or thought positively about something.
” The world and "defining aspects of Humanity" (whatever the heck those are) are not all just binary, black and white; there are shades of grey in between and, gosh, also colours.“
Well done. You just defined the spectrum of ‘like’ and ‘dislike’.
” Got a bible verse to back that up, if you are going to start invoking God in this absurdity?“
Do you believe the bible is the correct or absolute reference here? Dear oh dear. This is a scientific site; do better.
” * note: you can also just be a superfan, you don't have to take the obnoxious path and be a fanbois once you have gone beyond the level of just a normal fan.“
Correct, and well done again. Now go and tell the author of the article; he seems to disagree with you.
"> because hiding inside every anti-fanboi of company A is a fanboi of company B.
> First of all it's an assumption
"
Everybody is a fan of something. Everybody. Literally every single human being on the planet. It's not an assumption, it's an absolute literal God-given fact. Because dividing the world up into things we like and things we don't like is a defining aspect of Humanity.
Don't be a dick. It doesn't suit you.
Why aim anything at fanbois? First of all it's an assumption, second of all it's none of anybody else's business what people choose to like or not like.
Besides, anti-fanbois are also pretty annoying. And usually hypocritical, because hiding inside every anti-fanboi of company A is a fanboi of company B.
"Disagree - care to share any double blind A/B testing that shows this?"
Sure - here's one on speaker cable. Definite difference between cheap (crap) and 'proper', and basically no difference once you get into the 'proper' territory. Which is what I said.
The difference is in the shielding. It comes down to:
No shielding vs some shielding, noticeable.
Some shielding but not properly wound vs 'proper' shielding, noticeable by a trained ear, but not by normal mortals
'Decent' proper shielding vs 'Unbelievably expensive' proper shielding, no difference at all.
For analogue, there is a noticeable difference between a $10 interconnect and a $100 interconnect (or SCART). There is a tiny bit of difference (to audiophile/videophile ears and eyes; 99% of us couldn't tell them apart) between a $100 interconnect and a $1000 interconnect. There's no difference at all between a $1000 interconnect and a $10,000 (or higher) interconnect, apart from bragging rights.
For digital, as long as the cable is mechanically sound there is no difference at all between a $10 HDMI, a $100 HDMI and a $10,000 HDMI. Same goes for optical. The 0s and 1s get from one end to the other just fine. The problem with (very) cheap cables is that they tend to BE less mechanically sound; but you don't need to spend much more money to avoid this.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
