Slashdot Mirror

https://www.theverge.com/2015/... https://techcrunch.com/2016/02... https://www.dailydot.com/layer...

You must be retarded to think disabling the phone only after doing an ios update is in any way a security measure.

Only thief who was even more stupid than you (quite the feat) would go to the trouble of swapping the sensor, and then instead of accessing all the juicy details, update and brick the phone.

Well, I do stand corrected (but not by you).

Apparently, this was a mistake, and has been fixed by Apple since February, 2016.

https://techcrunch.com/2016/02...

He started with $680 million. We now know why bitcoin price has spiked. He's hiding it.

The payment was in Uber stock shares evaluated at the buying time, I believe. I am not so sure that he has already converted into other forms (unless he did when the law suit was initiated)...

Actually that could happen, but it won't because banks lobby the hell out of the governments to protect them against every and any competition (see the brazilian Nubank https://techcrunch.com/2016/12... )

Hopefully governments also fall to AI.

I see a lot of people confidently asserting opinions here without actually giving arguments refuting much of anything in the source article. So let's do some basic cost calculations. Let's say that your electric car has a capacity of 85kWh. That capacity with the very heavy Tesla Model S will give you an approximate EPA range of 426km (265 miles). If your electricity cost was $0.15/kWh, that means the cost to charge your car fully from empty would be $0.15/kWh x 85kWh = $12.75. Since you would seldom fully empty your car battery fully, you would typically charge less than this, and it is likely the EPA range does not bring the battery to full empty. Even so, I will assume the price of driving the range of 426km would still be $12.75 (charged from the charger in your garage...fully charged when you get up). This gives an electric cost of $12.75/426km = $0.0299/km.

Now let us consider a gasoline car. I'll assume an optimistic 10L/100km. That would mean that driving 426km would use 426/100 x 10 = 42.6L of gasoline. Gasoline costs $1.32/L where I live, but let's give it a cheaper price of $1.11/L. This would give a cost for driving 426km of 42.6L x $1.11/L = $47.29. The cost per km would be $47.29/426km = $0.111/km. In other words gasoline costs $0.111/$0.0299 = 3.7 x more or 370% more than electric per km! Electric cars are simpler. The battery technology is constantly improving. There are Tesla electric cars that have driven 200000 miles with no battery replacement (the car linked to here did have its battery replaced at 200000 miles, but it actually had most of its range, and it is likely Tesla wanted to examine the battery). Recent improvements in battery technology promise batteries that will last the life of the car. The announcement referred to here was in reference to an increased voltage battery chemistry that showed 92% capacity remaining after 1200 charge cycles. If your car has a range of 230 miles per charge cycle, than that would allow the car 230 miles x 1200 = 276000 miles and still have 92% battery capacity! For most of us, that would be longer than the lifetime of a fossil fuel car.

The cost of the cells is already dropping precipitously. The trend shown over the last few years is going to continue. There is no such trend in gasoline cars. Costs are for fossil fuel cars are going up. Electric cars will appear at lower and lower points in the market, first in the used market, and later in the new car market. In the end, electric cars will be the only economical choice. It is simple physics and economics. You can deny it all you want, but in the end, physics will win. Steam won over horse transportation because it was cheaper and better. Gasoline won over steam power because it was cheaper and better. Electric will win over gasoline because it is cheaper and better.

Actually that could happen, but it won't because banks lobby the hell out of the governments to protect them against every and any competition (see the brazilian Nubank https://techcrunch.com/2016/12... )

The other projects don't even cover the basics of the vision, only MaidSafe is developing the full scope of a decentralized internet. Completely autonomous, fully distributed, shared resources, anonymous, and secured by design. The security landscape will change forever because they remove the servers from the internet. No servers, only pure peer to peer distributed internet, anonymous with broadband like speed. All files stored in the cloud forever, without any recurrent cost, all communication encrypted by default. Currency-wise: no centralization, instantaneous transactions, no fees (forever, their security model doesn't require it), and anonymous, paid by resource served. And this is possible because it is NOT blockchain based, their consensus system is based on xor based close group consensus. Pied Piper's description on the show is word by word the description of the SafeNetwork. For more information read: Article in TechCrunch: https://techcrunch.com/2014/07... MaidSafe and the safe network explained using bitcoin terminology: https://safe-network-explained... MaidSafe's on Google TechTalks in 2006: https://youtu.be/fLA77zxk-vA About MaidSafe's XOR distance routing: https://youtu.be/Lr9FJRDcNzk?l... Projects like IPFS are not anonymous.

But I would be very afraid of a projected $2 billion loss in 2017

Fully agree! Now, if it was a $3 billion loss, like Uber last year, then everything would be awesome and they'd be worth $60+ billion. This just tells me Evan doesn't know how to spend money fast enough!

Just how big does anyone believe the market for a new MacPro actually is ?

Apple believes it's big enough to focus on.

https://techcrunch.com/2017/04...

Drivers. Basically Uber is spending $1.55 for every $1 people pay for their ride.

https://techcrunch.com/2016/12...

You apparently haven't been paying attention: Apple is most certainly NOT neglecting its "PC/laptop" customers.

Well you you just state that without a follow up then it must be true..trump?

How about straight from the horse's mouth?

https://techcrunch.com/2017/04...

And they have already done significant updates in the past few months to Logic Pro X, Final Cut Pro X, and MainStage 3 (plus GarageBand and iMovie for Macs). They have also done a HUGE Bundle of pretty much ALL their Pro Apps for $199 for students and educators.

So, I think they "get it".

Do you?

"Security researchers are still going through the files, but many of the exploits appear to be used for attacking older or little-used system."

-- TechCrunch

Like Solaris and "Linux 2.4"

It makes sense that you would keep a library of tools for hacking older systems and software. There's so much more there to hack.

"Security researchers are still going through the files, but many of the exploits appear to be used for attacking older or little-used system."

-- TechCrunch

I will pick up a refurbished Note 7 for cheap.

I assume you're referring to all the anti-terrorism Snowden shit, that started under W. but continued under Obama (and six years of GOP-controlled Congress). And damn-well ain't gonna let up any under Trump.

But let's put it in context. The GOP, after years of screaming and gnashing of teeth, when the chips were finally down could NOT get enough of their own shit together to repeal Obamacare, that thing they say they hate more than anything in the whole world. But, just a few days later, these same guys managed to put their differences aside to crush a tiny consumer-protection rule for Internet users.

... and the punch line? They didn't even need to! The GOP-installed FCC chairman can and said he would do away with the rule all by himself. But no. All the GOP, from Congress to the White House, must, must take a courageous stand against opt-out Internet Privacy in the name of those good shareholders of the nation's ISP's. That's right, it turns out the GOP really can live with Obamacare, but a world where ISP's can't sell your data? Heavens-to-Betsy!

That's who we're dealing with here, people. Still insist that Dems are the worst? Ancient history, get over it. Out of the frying pan, into the fire, and shit it's only been 12 weeks!

but on the other hand, doesn't Ivanka's clothing line just look spanky!

Have had an impure thought? Your ISP will know!

True, but much more likely people will be flagged on suspicion of copyright violations. They could perhaps sell impure thoughts to extortionists, if they can find some who will pay, but ISP's can make more money selling out your efforts to download that unlicensed copy of that Disney movie. Some nice arrangement between the MPAA, the RIAA, and a consortium of ISP's willingly providing their data about you for the noble cause of fighting piracy (the evil-looking eagle says "Piracy is not a Victimless Crime").

Search torrent sites much? There'll be a red flag for that.

Could have left it well enough alone, they could have, but nope they just had to take bold action for the likes of Comcast and Verizon.

if you are going to replace your roof, then have a look at this. https://techcrunch.com/2016/10... be cheaper than a new roof plus solar, its allegedly almost the same as just a new roof (depending on what you use)

but who would own this fiber, and will it remain "dark"? There's always rumors and urban legends of tons of installed but unused for one reason or another. Laying more won't help, particularly if its owned by some investor putz intending to charge the Earth to any comm company who'd put it to use.

Anyway, the biggest problem is the last mile, particularly in rural neighborhoods, older neighborhoods, and cities where the roads are already built and too busy and expensive to tear up. That's the excuse Verizon's using for failing to light up New York City.

They don't sell 40kW model you fucking stupid dumbass.

Your right, this is a good question. Most of the studies I am referring to were those that were brought up when I was studying math education year ago and I no longer have access to an actual research databases. The studies subjects covered how testing and actual math proficiency are ambiguous, how GPA and SAT scores don't strongly correlate with success etc. It is very hard to find actual information specific to IT proving one way or the other. There have been interviews with google HR about https://techcrunch.com/2013/06... , but this is not a study but just semi anecdotal head scratching.

However, with a cursory understanding of pedagogy, the dangerous assumptions that are made in many tech interviews are blatantly obvious. Creating meaningful test is a very hard thing to do, maybe even impossible; It just rubs me the wrong way how people in IT are so sure of something they know so little about. It really should not be up to unqualified employers to vet the education or life experiences of a professional, we really need a sort of accrediting body to develop a more meaningful baseline.

These technical interviews always give me the silly image of some manager throwing a engineer a bunch of toothpicks and tape and then with a serious face, asking them to build a bridge; It would be considered ridiculous in any other field.

I am also not being obnoxious, but are there any studies that help clear up what does work? There has to be formal work on this somewhere.

So Trump is going to be handing out the highest paying jobs first. What will the H-1B jobs will pay?

Facebook pays an average of $135k to their H-1B employees.

https://techcrunch.com/2015/03...

If it turns out the the highest jobs turn out to be the cheaper paying jobs to the H-1B people,

Well, fortunately, after decades of experience, we know what the top paying jobs in the H-1B program are, so your fears are unfounded.

then the American workers just lost the best jobs in America. Is this what is meant by creating jobs for Americans??

If you limit highly skilled workers and immigrants from coming into the country, companies like Google and Facebook are simply going to increase the size of their R&D labs in China, India, and the EU. That is, those jobs won't go to (current) Americans, they will go to the same people who would have immigrated here, but they will now be paying taxes and contributing to foreign communities.

Americans need to realize that the most valuable resource a country can have is smart people; they bring the wealth and the growth. If you attract them, make life good for them, and offer them low taxes and wealth, they'll come, stay, and make you rich. If you keep them out, marginalize them, and impose high taxes on them, they'll stop being productive and eventually leave.

The problem is that our industry, unlike every other single industry except acting and modeling (and note neither are known for "intelligence") worship at the altar of youth. I don't know the number of people I've encountered who tell me that by being older, my experience is worthless since all the stuff I've learned has become obsolete.

This, despite the fact that the dominant operating systems used in most systems is based on an operating system that is nearly 50 years old, the "new" features being added to many "modern" languages are really concepts from languages that are between 50 and 60 years old or older, and most of the concepts we bandy about as cutting edge were developed from 20 to 50 years ago.

It also doesn't help that the youth whose accomplishments we worship usually get concepts wrong. I don't know the number of times I've seen someone claim code was refactored along some new-fangled "improvement" over an "outdated" design pattern who wrote objects that bare no resemblance to the pattern they claim to be following. (In the case above, the classes they used included "modules" and "models", neither which are part of the VIPER backronym.) And when I indicate that the "massive view controller" problem often represents a misunderstanding as to what constitutes a model and what constitutes a view, I'm told that I have no idea what I'm talking about--despite having more experience than the critic has been alive, and despite graduating from Caltech--meaning I'm probably not a complete idiot.)

Our industry is rife with arrogance, and often the arrogance of the young and inexperienced. Our industry seems to value "cowboys" despite doing everything it can (with the management technique "flavor of the month") to stop "cowboys." Our industry is agist, sexist, one where the blind leads the blind, and seminal works attempting to understand the problem of development go ignored.

How many of you have seen code which seems developed using "design pattern" roulette? Don't know what you're doing? Spin the wheel!

Ours is also one of the fewest industries based on scientific research which blatantly ignores the research, unless it is popularized in shallow books which rarely explore anything in depth. We have a constant churn of technologies which are often pointless, introducing new languages using extreme hype which is often unwarranted as those languages seldom expand beyond a basic domain representing a subset of LISP. I can't think of a single developer I've met professionally who belong to the ACM or to IEEE, and when they run into an interesting problem tend to search Github or Stack Overflow, even when it is a basic algorithm problem. (I've met programmers with years of experience who couldn't write code to maintain a linked list.)

So what do we do?

Beats the hell out of me. You cannot teach if your audience revels in its ignorance and doesn't

Back before Facebook bought out MySpace...

[citation needed]

...plus the attempt to monopolize a thing (Uber for driving, Facebook for sharing, OKCupid for dating, etc) that is killing the ability to actually socialize...

OKCupid was never an attempt to monopolize any industry. It was a free alternative to paid dating sites. That ended pretty much when Match.com bought them.

Apparently you missed the memo:

https://techcrunch.com/2010/04...

ICQ was sold back in 2010.

I guess you didn't know iMessage uses end-to-end encryption so Apple cannot be compelled to let anyone monitor it.

BlackBerry even goes so far as to host message servers in other countries - while that makes sense from a technical performance standpoint it makes it super easy for foreign governments to monitor communications.

Linus really has no sense of security. He'll use whatever is expedient over what's wise. It's a shame really.

How about describing the attack vector?

Well, the "practical" attack, described here required:

This attack required over 9,223,372,036,854,775,808 SHA1 computations. This took the equivalent processing power as 6,500 years of single-CPU computations and 110 years of single-GPU computations.

So, Step 1: Get a super-computer ... or rent a fuck-tonne of capacity at Amazon EC2 ...

See also this slashdot article from 2015 about the exact same technology:
https://science.slashdot.org/s...

Apparently the reason it's in the news is that LiquiGlide (a company Prof. Varanasi co-founded, though it's not mentioned in the newer article) just went through (or is in the middle of?) a new round of venture funding.

So they had working technology for sale two years ago but now they want it to be news again, because marketing.

Yes - that thing the human drivers of Uber don't have when they are working as Uber taxi drivers.

That's not strictly true, since Uber insures them while they have a fare. The only time they aren't covered is while they are on their way to pick up a fare.

Which is part of the problem. Away from Planet Uber, if your journey is undertaken for work purposes (which going to meet a customer clearly is) you are "at work", and should be covered by work-related insurance. That's why regular taxi drivers have to have commercial insurance; private car insurance doesn't cover operating as a driver-for-hire.

The fun part is that, despite the all the penny-pinching (and the hype), Uber is hemorrhaging money.

The letter wasn't threatening at all, actually. It was mostly the NHTSA asking questions about their design and testing in order to ensure it was safe on the roads. Hotz decided to fold rather than even try to answer the questions.

What's being discussed here are platforms that need features SWIFT simply doesn't have, like inline assembler to manipulate hardware specific features

That's not so; the assembly language of Swift is bitcode - which you can embed in Swift code for customized performance.

manual allocation schemes for shared memory (EG reserved blocks that are processed by hardware interrupts)

Although the link is not exactly that case you can use UnsafeMutablePointers for that purpose. Swift is not a garbage collected language, it uses ARC which is already deterministic as to when memory is allocated and released - but you can disable that for code and manually manage memory used.

To use SWIFT you'd need to develop entirely different custom libraries for each platform

Ask Apple how they support various ARM architectures...

No not everything is quite there, but Swift is moving rapidly and the underpinnings were built with the explicit goal that Swift COULD replace C as a language for any purpose, not just another higher level language that really can't apply for low level development. At this point the language is basically locked in but more features will be added over time, including stronger device programming support. That's why taking the time to learn it now means that by the time you understood it well you could probably start doing some hardware development with it... pretty sure LLVM at least and possibly Swift will be involved in some way at Tesla for example. When you are writing code that MUST be stable, like code that controls a car, C is just not going to cut it long term.

Try n9y25ah7.

The audience is not just the people on the ground, but also the people watching at home. And Trump’s inauguration broke live video streaming records.

Streaming users on their couch at home do not count as people on the national mall.

The audience is not just the people on the ground, but also the people watching at home. And Trump’s inauguration broke live video streaming records.

High value products do no use container ships. Companies like Apple buy shipping capacity and go UPS/FedEx Air. Container ships are for big stuff, heavy stuff, or mass made in China junk.

And they just added Tor support, with their own .onion address.

https://protonirockerxow.onion/

For when you absolutely, positively want your e-mail to be slower than traditional post service.

after all Uber is already making lots of money from the cities where they are allowed to operate

Uber is losing money. Lots of it.

Depends on how you measure it. One way is the way you cited, another is number of active users -- and they're roughly equal as of last year (GMail has become much more popular). Yahoo currently had 1 billion as of February last year whereas GMail had the same at the same time (Feb 2016).

BTW- Your sig is from Good Omens correct? Haven't read that in a decade -- I'm thinking I should reread it.

Yes, it is.

Uber deemed to be operating at a
loss.

Enjoy.

Yours In Peace,
K. Trout

Why Are Some Great Movies Panned and Some Inferior Movies Praised?
Why Are Some Great Books Panned and Some Inferior Books Praised?

Because people have different tastes?
Because there are times when critics are completely out of touch with the intended audience?
Because they are shilling for the big publishers to get free playstations?

Take your pick.

Yes because the answer to preventing rockets from blowing up on the pad is for a CEO who has no idea about rocket science to sit in the room and demand the problems away?

Do you realise that innovators, investors, and entrepreneurs don't exactly sit around getting in the nitty gritty of the companies right?

But hey let's also ignore that so far only one SpaceX mission hasn't been a success, even if many of them have gone bang AFTER a successful mission. Let's ignore that Solarcity has already not only delivered batteries but actually did larger scale mini-grid work for 600 residents of an island nation. We need more CEO micromanagement.

Here's what HBO has to do with Amazon.

And nothing is exactly what my involvement with Netflix/HBO/Amazon or any other TV channel is. And I pay them nothing every month, and have been doing that for years.

Here's what HBO has to do with Amazon.

Look people, this sort of tech has been around for decades now.

I don't think most people know, but for some of these automated restaurant ideas and industrial food machines, you read "it has been around for years"... you'll think something like early 2000s, but it's actually more like back in the 60s or 70s. You know that conveyor belt sushi thing? It was invented in 1958. It had a huge boom, then it fell out of fashion, then it started becoming popular once again in early 2000s. But here's the deal: restaurants with regular non automated parts are still the majority and the most popular.

Wanna see something older? Try restaurants that serves food using vending machines only. One of those existed back in 1902, and it was in the US:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

A prototype restaurant is far from replacing jobs in a large scale, and if this is about robots replacing fast food workers in a smaller scale, this isn't news. China and some countries in Europe already used adapted industrial automation systems, robots and robotic arms. The fact that one restaurant is opening does not mean that it's economically feasible as a regular thing, doesn't mean that all restaurants will copy the concept, and it doesn't mean it'll work at all.
http://www.theverge.com/2016/4...

Remember this Nuremberg restaurant from 2007?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

How about this japanese restaurant from 2009?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Eatsa opened last year, but it's basically the same idea as the previously mentioned Automat that had an initial boom only to disappear years later:
https://techcrunch.com/2015/08...

Right now, these automated systems are on average extremely expensive, single purpose, hard to maintain, and mostly seen as novelty both by clients and from a marketing perspective. We're still probably over a century away from a multipurpose humanoid robot that can do everything human staff do, in an ideal condition where the price, maintenance costs and usefulness counterbalances paying minimum wage or so. By the time miraculous robots like those appear, we'll be more prepared for the switch, and it'll happen gradually. And even then, it's hard to imagine robots completely replacing fast-food and restaurant staff unless we're talking about a future where robots are replacing humans. Because there will always be people willing to pay for a restaurant that has humans preparing your food and serving it.

The base logic why things like that don't suddently happen out of nowhere is easy to understand: even if by some miraculous circunstance we managed to produce perfect robots that would work flawlessly and require no maintenance in all restaurants in a city, this would automatically put so many people out of a job that these restaurants would end up having no costumers to serve, closing down before all the investment put into it had any return. But of course, we can't magically create thousands of robots out of thin air overnight, most robots and automation systems nowadays have limited functionality that's not usually adequate for fast food kitchen environments, and culturally people are not used to and will take a long time to get used to automated restaurants.

Perhaps far into the future we'll pay more to go to restaurants with an all human staff that will only be there simply because they enjoy working with that... but here I'm entering utopia territory. If we ever reach an age where robots can do most things for use at reasonable costs, we'll either have already implemented the universal basic income, or governments will be responsible for most of the upkeep of basic population needs. I mean, you have a damn army of multipurpose robots,

From reading the comments, it seems a lot of people are misunderstanding the situation here. I think even the summary is missing the point! This is about passengers hooking up with other passengers, not with drivers.

Uber Pool and Lyft Line are services that let you carpool/fare split with other people. You request a ride, and it tries to match you up with people who have requested a similar pickup/dropoff point.

It's common to make small talk with the other passengers (just like you would with a taxi driver, or a regular UberX/Lyft driver) and people have realized that this provides a social pretense to meet other people and chat them up. FTFA:

Although passengers have no control over whom they’re partnered with, there’s a high-enough density of young, single people in a city like San Francisco that occasional romantic interludes happen. As people share the ride to their respective destinations, they have a bit of downtime to get to know one another...It’s speed-dating on demand, and the people doing it say it’s better than Tinder.

Lyft has even experimented with features to facilitate this: https://techcrunch.com/2015/05...

I don't understand how they managed to raise $73.5 million fucking dollars for this

Are you kidding? The app that did nothing but say "Yo" conned some VC morons into giving them a million bucks: “We are fascinated by these uses of simple yes/no, on/off communications tools,” Betaworks co-founder John Borthwick wrote on the Betaworks blog. “As the notification layer becomes the primary interface of alert-based information on your phone — as the OS’s allow navigation and controls in those alerts — there will emerge a new class of applications that mediate this layer for web sites, other app’s and connected hardware.”

With mindless bullshit like that, how can you not get rich?

It distracted kids in schools and got used for bullying etc. It also got picked up by people who wanted to talk to kids in schools, which is not good either. Yik Yak blocked the app at schools in the U.S....

https://techcrunch.com/2014/03/13/amid-vicious-bullying-threats-of-violence-anonymous-social-app-yik-yak-shuts-off-access-to-u-s-middle-high-school-students/

"As for how the blocks will affect Yik Yak’s user growth, the company isn’t concerned, saying that the app is still doing “very well” at colleges and the publicly cited user numbers have been grossly under-reported."

I would guess the kids who used it and were blocked, graduated as kids who forgot it existed.

Ditto. Really disappointing. I'm really fond of my Pebble Steel. I was thinking about moving to the Pebble Time Round, but I guess that won't happen now.

I think this comes down to a case of a company being run by engineers; one that produces a great product, but can't run a business effectively. They have to sell to FitBit for $35 million, when they were reportedly offered $740 million from Citizen last year.
https://techcrunch.com/2016/11...

Most of the putative 50000 jobs are going to be construction work building the factories.

That's still a net positive. That's 50,000 construction jobs that wouldn't exist in the U.S. if FoxConn stays put in China.

If you have even 100 employees constantly doing a very similar job, you can easily afford to spend 5 million developing a custom robotic solution)

$5,000,000 to develop a custom solution?!?! You're seriously underestimating the cost involved with that. Just a off-the-shelf robot alone can cost $100,000, without programming or other peripherals.
https://techcrunch.com/2016/03...

TFA goes into some detail about how it was discovered that every claim made was false.

Which article? Provide a link, please, because the article for this story doesn't talk about Pizzagate.

I want to see the article that shows every claim made was false. Though I'm sure the mainstream would never spin a story, ignore facts, or otherwise, right? It's only those fake news sites like Breitbart that we have to worry about, right?

A little something for you to ponder while you're digging up that article.