625 posts • joined 6 May 2011
Re: I was around 50 years ago, just barely
I have a feeling some billionaire will cause a ruckus a century from now by recovering one of them, bringing it back to Earth, and putting it on display in his house.
If it makes you feel better it would take a LOT of effort to do so.
Using chemical rockets would probably be too expensive to even just catch up to either Voyager probe, let alone return to Earth with them.
They're both currently traveling at more than 15km/s so you'd have to accelerate to a speed faster than that to catch up to one of them, then capture it and change direction to head back to earth. That's a *very* large amount of delta-V which means a tremendous amount of fuel would be needed.
Re: What are the 3 rules again?
1. A human employee may not reduce the profits of the Amazon corporation, or through inaction allow profits to be reduced.
2. A human employee must obey the orders give to it by Amazon except where such orders would conflict with the first law.
3. A human employee must protect their own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Laws.
It's unethical because they don't tell you that they are a go-between or escrow service - they imply that they can somehow decrypt your files themselves. From the article:
Dr Shifro, a Russian-language organisation presenting itself online as a ransomware decryption agency, claims that it's "the only company that specializes in decrypting files", urging users: "Call – we will help!"
So if you want your files back but don't wish to fund evildoers this would appear to be an alternative solution. Except, of course, that it isn't that at all.
Re: Mixed emotions....
This may not be the problem you have but make sure you remove the clear plastic wrap from the thunderbolt cable. There's a chip in the connector that can overheat and cause this problem (randomly blank screens). I witnessed this problem on several dozen trashcan Mac Pros and removing the film fixed it right up.
Facebook's CEO on his latest almighty Zuck-up: OK, we did try to smear critics, but I was too out-of-the-loop to know
And by machine-learning, Facebook may well mean a small army of poorly paid human content-moderators.
The PBS series Independent Lens recently aired a documentary film on these content moderators called "The Cleaners." Available to watch online here: https://www.pbs.org/independentlens/films/the-cleaners/. I highly recommend it.
On a related note, Frontline (another PBS program) recently did a two-part series on Face Book called "The Face Book Dilemma". It's an excellent primer to share with your friends who don't understand what all the fuss is about. Also available to watch online, here: https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/film/facebook-dilemma/
AI's next battlefield is literally the battlefield: In 20 years, bots will fight our wars – Army boffin
"The wars of the future will not be fought on the battlefield or at sea. They will be fought in space, or possibly on top of a very tall mountain. In either case, most of the actual fighting will be done by small robots. And as you go forth today remember always your duty is clear: To build and maintain those robots. Thank you." -- Military school Commandant's graduation address, "The Secret War of Lisa Simpson" [4F21]
New Zealand border cops warn travelers that without handing over electronic passwords 'You shall not pass!'
Re: What are the patents?
Don't know the specific patents in this case but with them being "eCommerce" patents I'm willing to bet they all boil down to:
"An economic thing people have done for centuries but, like, now there's a computer and/or the Internet in there? So it's different somehow. Whatever, who cares - just give us the patent already."
Some people just have to ruin everything...
"For all the good we've achieved, the web has evolved into an engine of inequity and division; swayed by powerful forces who use it for their own agendas"
Name a single technology from any time in human history that did not follow exactly the same path.
I'm sure the first were fire and flint knives and I don't think it ever stopped.
Your Plastic Pal Who's Fun to Be With!
"Dealing with chatbots and virtual assistants can be so frustrating that it’s normal for humans to start getting snarky. Such run-ins would be a little more entertaining if the machines could give some of that sass back" said the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation representative.
No wonder they were first against the wall...
As for guns... yeesh, 3D printing isn't the only way. They're gonna ban machine tools next?
The difference being that making a gun out of metal (and other materials) using machine tools requires actual skill.
In theory, any idiot can plug in a 3D printer, load some plastic into the hopper (or whatever) and click "Print" to start churning out shitty
finger removers plastic guns.
Not Secure -vs- Not Encrypted
I object to it being labeled as "Not Secure" when "Not Encrypted" would be far more accurate and far less nasty sounding. But that's the whole point of this, to scare users and drive site operators to use HTTPS. If a user sees "Not Encrypted" they'll either not understand or not care what that means. But calling it "Not Secure" implies that Bad Things™ will happen! Because everyone is always telling them to "Be Secure" and that this is important! And now their browser is telling them their favorite website is not secure? Well, I guess I'd better steer clear of that site until they fix it; thanks Chrome for warning me!
But why does Google care about some random WWW server being encrypted or not? Because with plain HTTP, nearly anyone can see your data and thus access that sweet sweet nectar of your browsing history. But with HTTPS, only the browser and the site you're going to get that info. It's all about trying to stop other advertising companies from getting the same info that Google will get from Chrome users. It's aimed squarely at their competitors and has nothing to do with making anything more secure. I mean FFS, the data is only encrypted during transit - once it hits the browser or the server daemon it's right back to plain text and just as (in)secure as it was before they started using HTTPS.
Samsung introduced the Dex with 2017’s Galaxy S8 and then updated it this year with a smaller dock that puts the phone in a horizontal position and turns it into a touchpad. That’s an important trick because as a portable device, the DeX Pad is a wash: you need a USB charger, a keyboard and an HDMI cable to get it working. Samsung recommends that you use only its supplied HDMI cable too, so that needs to go into your bag too, making a rat’s nest of cables even before you add a mouse to the mix.
Obviously the solution is a laptop-style "shell" with a keyboard, a built-in display and some useful ports on the back (USB, HDMI, Ethernet, etc). Put a big ass battery in it to recharge your phone and power the display then leave a slot in the front for the phone to dock where the trackpad would normally be. Then you can plug the phone in when you need a proper keyboard or a bigger screen, then pop it out when you don't.
Only problem I can see is that smartphones vary wildly in size and shape so you'd have to come up with a standard or make some kind of sabot for each model...
Whitelist by default.
Yes to this - a thousand times yes to this.
I already do this manually - If a number appears and it's not in my on-device phone book then straight to voicemail it goes - but it would be nice if the phone just did that for me automatically.
99% of the calls I get on my phone now are voice spam - mostly it's someone trying to sell me health insurance (because, you know, that's the sort of thing you buy from some random weirdo that cold-calls you) and vaguely threatening messages in Mandarin.
Re: Economically Feasible?
This is supposedly compensation and the cost of processing that should be part of the costs paid by Google. If someone has suffered $x damages then $x should be what they're entitled to receive, not $x minus some administration fee.
That is exactly my point - if Google has agreed to pay an amount that breaks down to 4¢ per class member then those individuals in the class are entitled to the entire 4¢ and not 4¢ "minus some administration fee." Ergo, Google has to pay whatever direct and indirect fees or costs incurred while processing those 129 million 4¢ payments.
Why does the court (any court) care to make things easier or cheaper for the giant corporation with many billions of dollars?
Personally, I would consider the amount paid to track down addresses for the class members and then print and mail all the checks as part of the punishment.
To be honest, why should the rest of the world comply with ICANN's wish -not even a law- to have our private information and publish it globally? And then charge you to hide it....that's like volunteering for blackmail.
Was Whois data ever intended to be private in the first place? The identity of what entity owns which domain names never seemed to me like data that needed to be protected or kept secret. (Please note that I am NOT defending ICANN just arguing that Whois data is of public interest.)
Then again when I was but a lad they published the name, address, and phone number of everyone in town with a phone in a big book that everyone got a copy of every year. (And if you didn't want your information listed in this book you had to pay a separate fee for the privilege of being unlisted.)
What I don't like is the fact that despite a complete lack of a Facebook profile, Facebook still has got my biometric data because I have several friends that use the service and I am often in photographs that get uploaded. Zuckerberg et al might not specifically know who I am beyond whatever primary key they assigned my facial data in their database, but they'll be able to identify me as such in any other photographs or videos and I have no idea if any of the existing privacy laws or regulations would even cover the use of such non-subscriber data.
Maybe I'm paranoid but for some reason I just don't trust multi-billion dollar corporations to act in my best interests.
Re: And naturally, the IRS will fine those who coudn't file on time
Sorry, but if you wait until the last day to file then you kinda deserve it.
Most people get all their W-2's and similar required paperwork by the end of January so they had at least 8 weeks to get their shit together.
Or if they couldn't manage that, then they could file IRS Form 4868 which will automatically give them a 6 month extension.
Backpage.com swoop: Seven bods hit with 93 charges as AG Sessions blasts alleged child sex trafficking cyber-haven
Re: Companies & Microsoft
You are thinking of "Stacker" by Stac Electronics. In 1993/94 after negotiating with Stac to license their code for inclusion in DOS, Microsoft basically just ripped them off instead with their "DoubleSpace" program. This resulted in several lawsuits with around US$200 million in damages and payments awarded to Stac in the end.
In my college job I appropriate the boss's untouched Palm III for my own use until I graduated and got a HandSpring Visor Deluxe. To this day when I am filling out paper forms that require you to put letters into individual boxes I find myself writing in Graffiti.
A friend of mine got a Palm VII when those came out - I remember being impressed that he could look up movie showtimes on it. This would have been in the summer of 1999 so instant access to data from basically anywhere was still a pretty big deal.
NOT a flying car...
Audi and Airbus are pondering a self-driving car that can also fly
"The ultra-light, two-seater passenger cabin can be attached either to a car module or to a flight module.
So NOT a flying car but instead a box that you sit inside that is then either put into a car or put into an airplane. By that logic it is also a boat, a train, a horse-drawn carriage, a semi-truck, and a helicopter - just put the box inside any of those things.
A flying car is one that will drive along the road and then start flying without swapping out parts.
IMHO, it's less 1984 and more Hitchhiker's Guide.
They don't want to expunge the information from the record to pretend it never existed in the first place as much as they just want to make it so that the only place you can find it is in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying "beware of the leopard."
Oh FFS - fixing this is EASY
Step 1 - Setup a news white-list. If you aren't on the list then your "news" won't be allowed.
Step 2 - Create a process whereby *any* news site can apply to be added to the white-list. This would be human reviewed by qualified people and the sites would be required to meet very basic journalism standards such as only publishing actual, factual news and having a clear demarcation between what's news and what's commentary or editorial content. (This is neither difficult nor burdensome.)
Step 3 - Review these sites on a regular basis to make sure that they are still in compliance.
Re: No chance
The biggest problem with the bill is size of the potential fines. They are big enough to bankrupt a company in short order (50% of annual revenues). In many cases that would be as bad as the security breach as the company sinks taking other innocent businesses with it.
Well then they had better be pretty fucking careful with our data in order to keep that from happening.
Well, there's this bunch of people going here, talking there, and occasionally seeing/doing something exciting. I suppose if you've followed the story lines you actually care what's going on, although the need to see the minutiae of riding north escapes me.
I'm sorry but that's just silly - you can't start reading a book at the 6th chapter and then stop at the 7th chapter and then not like the book because you didn't know who any of the characters were and didn't understand what they were talking about. The same goes for a TV serial drama.
You can say it's boring or not a genre you typically like or that the characters are uninspired or you can just not like it for non-specific reasons but this "without context" critique is just the weirdest thing I've ever heard.
> Why is this [a kernel driver for the SPI flash] even a thing?
Actually, I meant "why is SPI flash a thing."
At a minimum, SPI should be an option that is disabled by default. But preferably (IMHO) it shouldn't even exist. The BIOS' flash storage should be read-only outside of the BIOS' own configuration screens.
Otherwise some random software cock-up could brick your shiny new laptop (Q.E.D.)