The batteries aren't sealed in. Two screws, a suction cup to get the tight-tolerance screen up, and you're in. Pentalobe drivers are available at Walmart.
The batteries do have a removable adhesive tape, similar to 3M Command Adhesive. There are couple more screws inside that secure connectors, including the battery connector. That's really all there is to it.
It takes a couple of tools to replace the battery; I have to use a screwdriver to replace the batteries on my toddler's toys too.
It's one straw in particular that broke the camel's back and it's that those licensing HEVC saw the rise of video streaming services and got a bit too greedy
That's an understatement if there ever was one. Many of HEVC's patent holders refused to put their patents into the MPEG-LA pool - so instead of one organization and FRAND licensing, we get three pools (and Technicolor off on its own, dumping the FRAND idea entirely -- each licencor is individually negotiated).
The authors of x.265 pleaded for sanity, knowing HEVC won't go far without a major change. Many groups can't get the licenses required for HEVC at any price.
AOM is a collective middle finger to the greedy guys in (and especially the HEVC licencors that broke off from the MPEG-LA): they forged their own patent pool, and licenses it with terms that work well for free software.
Steve Jobs was apparently worried about that, and made use of a loophole in California Law specifically to fly under the radar: it wasn't required to install plates for the first 60 days of getting a new car.
A man of his resources had no problem getting a new car every couple months, so all of his cars had no plates.
Mass transit? The quasi-government agency with cameras that record everybody boarding the train/bus?
Biking isn't much better, with the city putting cameras at every intersection. It's only a matter of time until they ID every face they see in real time.
That's a pretty big clue, all by itself. From there, it's just a matter of combining footage from omnipresent security cameras -- which is really just a matter of effort.
Combining all security camera footage was pretty effective in getting pictures of the suspects and timeline of the Boston Marathon bombing. London's panopticion is a regular feature on/.
First it was "terrorists", then "immigrants". We already have prosecutors subpoenaing Alexa and Google Home for murder trials, and people are willingly putting surveillance devices in their homes.
It won't be much longer before it's worthwhile to develop and install automated readers to flag & track every car with a suspicious plate, and then direct the police to them.
Given the number of Police dashcams, it could even be a selling point should a new camera hit the market with the ability.
Much like a new driver's license, or even a new car, it still identifies you, and it's not hard to query every license plate of every vehicle you've used (including rentals) since tracking began.
Unless you're a billionaire and decide to take Steve Jobs's example and buy a new car every few weeks so you never have to get a license plate. (Granted, California recently closed that loophole)
Cardinal Richelieu would be proud:
If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him.
In this case, they just have to wait for a crime that happens conveniently close to you.
I’m just bitching about/., and sharing the most useful workaround I’ve found.
I’m a typography geek and never liked ambidextrous quotes. Professional typesetting doesn’t use ambidextrous quotes, and the tech has existed for years for regular computer users.
Haven't Amazon Echo and Google home already done this pretty effectively already? Even with Apple's HomePod entering the fray in a few weeks, Siri doesn't exactly threaten the keyboard.
Alll bets are off during rush hour in a city thatâ(TM)s consistently in the top three contenders in the race for the worst drivers in the US.
Iâ(TM)ve lost count of the number of times somebody uses the âcurteouslyâ(TM)-unoccupied lane as a âoefast laneâ, zooming past everybody else well above the speed limit. Then they make an emergency lane change when they run out of room...
I've simply come to accept that even driving defensively, eliminating distraction, and keeping my eyes glued to the road, I may react to crazy shit #1 and totally miss crazy shit #2.
Thatâ(TM)s where I see a real benefit from an autonomous system that reacts faster than I can...
Terrible analogies are all we have, because every language has idioms or words which have meaning quite different than logic or their base words would recognize.
Tell an English kid to "knock up" his sister, and he'll wake up his sleeping sister.
Tell an American the same thing, and he'll refuse, because there's no way he's having sex with his sister and making her pregnant.
Tell a Chinese guy to knock up his sister, and he'll know what "knock" and "up" means, and will probably think you want him to hit her with something going upwards.
The only solution is to realize that we shouldnâ(TM)t always assume that words and phrases mean what we think they do.
The only question, I think, is whether these autonomous systems compensate for human inability to pay attention *more* than they encourage inattention.
Used properly, it can be very useful. As it stands, I think of the current technology as being like a horse saying "Even I am not *that* dumb'.
If nothing else, the big problem is this: marketing requires a very short term to describe a feature. That's how 'net neutrality' became the term for a subject that takes several paragraphs to explain adequately.
Like so many other idioms in the English language, using logic to derive meaning is a recipe for failure.
As an example 'Go knock up your sister' has a VERY different meaning depending on if you are English or American, and will leave a non-native person wondering what either means.
Well, if you can work out how a computer vision system can easily tell the difference between a car in a different lane on a bending road, versus a car stopped in the lane in front of you, you're a better developer than I.
Google's best can't tell the difference between primates and humans with a similar skin color, so I do not feel too bad.
I'm willing to bet they have the limitation to avoid unnecessary slamming on the brakes for no reason.
(My car has a much simpler system, and doesn't claim otherwise. It's an alternative to nothing.)
Thatâ(TM)s kind of my point (and Teslaâ(TM)s too): the driver is responsible.
On an aircraft, the pilot is still responsible for flying the aircraft. If the autopilot flies the plane into a mountain, itâ(TM)s still labeled pilot error. Thereâ(TM)s no absolving the guy at the controls.
Its benefit is if the driver's treats it like an extra set of eyes, and is able to take corrective action when the driver fraks up. If the driver thinks it'll drive for him, you're right, it's a bad idea. (If you know anything about an aircraft's autopilot, you know it does not mean the flight crew is playing "I spy" while the plane does all the work).
* Blind Spots. You wanna change lanes or merge into traffic. So you check your blind spot, and glance away from the road in front for a fraction of a second. Problem is, somebody else just cut you off and stomped on the brakes. (Or somebody cut off the guy in front of you, and he stomped on the brakes.) In either case, the car starts braking before you know there's a problem.
* Blind Spots part II: We aren't paying as much attention as we think we are. The reality is humans suck at paying attention, we have mountains of data to prove it, and that's why we pay big bucks to watch "Magicians" and "Illusionists" perform.
* Blind Spots, part III: We're effectively blind for the fraction of a second while our eyes move from one focus point to another. That matters more than you'd think. The "I didn't see it coming" excuse doesn't even require a distraction... just glance at the road sign for a second.
* Distractions: A Pennsylvania insurance company found that 62% of accidents were caused by somebody being "lost in thought". Humans suck at paying attention.
* Another one I didn't appreciate until I got a car with a similar system: The car handles the gas pedal, and I cover the brake pedal with my foot. Wild animals (deer, moose), pets, children, and even adults jump in front of cars all the time. My car (not a Tesla) won't react until something is in my lane, so there's a chance I'll react first.
If no defects were found in the autopilot system, then why did the car crash?
The "no defects were found" is from the fatal crash a couple of years ago, and there were several contributing factors, outside of the autopilot.
That said: I don't drive a Tesla, but my car has a similar adaptive cruise control and auto-braking system. On my (non-tesla), I can easily see how somebody not familiar with it would think "Oh, I have the system engaged, the car will stop."
The reality is that it'll only stop if the difference in speed between my car and the object in front of me is less than 30 MPH. Drivers must go to the effort of learning the car's systems in order to know that. (And the learning comes from the Manufacturer's YouTube videos, The Fine Manual, The Dealership's guy whose only job is to teach customers about it, and said it at least a dozen times...)
I've been in more than a few situations where I can see traffic is stopped ahead, but my car continues accelerating towards them -- I'm accelerating past 50 MPH, while they're at a dead stop, 50 meters ahead.
Honestly, it feels like my brain is breaking every time: "Why isn't the car slowing down? Oh yeah, dummy! I gotta do it this time!"
So with my experience in a similar system on an entirely different make/model, I'm willing to bet the guy could have had autopilot engaged, but he didn't learn (for whatever reason) its limitations.
I don't own a Tesla, but I know my own car's auto brake system doesn't gracefully slow to a stop unless the speed difference between my car and whatever is in front of me is less than 30 MPH.
If the delta-v is more than 30 MPH, my car will do a "panic stop" thing to slow the car down, but it'll be too late to avoid a collision.
So... who uses HEVC? Certainly none of the big players: YouTube, Netflix, Hulu, Vimeo, etc, etc, etc... none use HEVC. H.264 is "good enough" with a few that offer content in VP9.
You buy a UHD bluray with Dolby Vision encoded movie, or stream an online video in 12bit HEVC.
We still can't get color management right with the newest UHD HDR displays. I'd have to pay a few hundred bucks to get a technician to come out with a colorimeter and calibrate the display properly to get the benefit of 12 bit HEVC or Dolby Vision.
Hell, Wayland is supposed to be the new shiny to replace X11, and it can't do color managementat all.
Why would you be happy visiting a website and seeing an image encoded in something from the 90s that results in banding and poor dynamic range when attempting to convey the full spectrum of what your equipment is capable of
Have you seen a billboard recently? Or a magazine, newspaper, or any other printed media? Just because the image is better, doesn't necessarily mean people will notice and/or care.
There is more than enough variance from one production run to the next within the same make/model that specialized equipment and training is needed to actually achieve that quality on an individual display.
Slashdot Mirror
The batteries aren't sealed in. Two screws, a suction cup to get the tight-tolerance screen up, and you're in. Pentalobe drivers are available at Walmart.
The batteries do have a removable adhesive tape, similar to 3M Command Adhesive. There are couple more screws inside that secure connectors, including the battery connector. That's really all there is to it.
It takes a couple of tools to replace the battery; I have to use a screwdriver to replace the batteries on my toddler's toys too.
It's one straw in particular that broke the camel's back and it's that those licensing HEVC saw the rise of video streaming services and got a bit too greedy
That's an understatement if there ever was one. Many of HEVC's patent holders refused to put their patents into the MPEG-LA pool - so instead of one organization and FRAND licensing, we get three pools (and Technicolor off on its own, dumping the FRAND idea entirely -- each licencor is individually negotiated).
The authors of x.265 pleaded for sanity, knowing HEVC won't go far without a major change. Many groups can't get the licenses required for HEVC at any price.
AOM is a collective middle finger to the greedy guys in (and especially the HEVC licencors that broke off from the MPEG-LA): they forged their own patent pool, and licenses it with terms that work well for free software.
Steve Jobs was apparently worried about that, and made use of a loophole in California Law specifically to fly under the radar: it wasn't required to install plates for the first 60 days of getting a new car.
A man of his resources had no problem getting a new car every couple months, so all of his cars had no plates.
Mass transit? The quasi-government agency with cameras that record everybody boarding the train/bus?
Biking isn't much better, with the city putting cameras at every intersection. It's only a matter of time until they ID every face they see in real time.
You do leave your home with your face, right?
That's a pretty big clue, all by itself. From there, it's just a matter of combining footage from omnipresent security cameras -- which is really just a matter of effort.
Combining all security camera footage was pretty effective in getting pictures of the suspects and timeline of the Boston Marathon bombing. London's panopticion is a regular feature on /.
First it was "terrorists", then "immigrants". We already have prosecutors subpoenaing Alexa and Google Home for murder trials, and people are willingly putting surveillance devices in their homes.
Hey, Siri, how screwed are we?
Interesting question, sl3xd
It won't be much longer before it's worthwhile to develop and install automated readers to flag & track every car with a suspicious plate, and then direct the police to them.
Given the number of Police dashcams, it could even be a selling point should a new camera hit the market with the ability.
What good would a new plate do you?
Much like a new driver's license, or even a new car, it still identifies you, and it's not hard to query every license plate of every vehicle you've used (including rentals) since tracking began.
Unless you're a billionaire and decide to take Steve Jobs's example and buy a new car every few weeks so you never have to get a license plate. (Granted, California recently closed that loophole)
Cardinal Richelieu would be proud:
If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him.
In this case, they just have to wait for a crime that happens conveniently close to you.
I’m just bitching about /., and sharing the most useful workaround I’ve found.
I’m a typography geek and never liked ambidextrous quotes. Professional typesetting doesn’t use ambidextrous quotes, and the tech has existed for years for regular computer users.
I’m enough of a typography geek to prefer the correct punctuation.
Ambidextrous quotation marks are just awful.
I know it's an extra step, but please tap the "send to" and select "request desktop site" before posting to Slashdot.
m.slashdot.org doesn't handle Unicode.
The desktop site is still pretty crippled, but it's able to handle U+2018 (‘), U+2019 (’), U+201C (“), and U+201D (”) correctly.
The keyboard may be the next victim.
Haven't Amazon Echo and Google home already done this pretty effectively already? Even with Apple's HomePod entering the fray in a few weeks, Siri doesn't exactly threaten the keyboard.
How non-standard is Unicode U+2018 LEFT SINGLE QUOTATION MARK?
Slashdot (or at least m.slashdot.org) doesn't handle it properly, do say nothing of things like Greek Capital Delta (Î")
Alll bets are off during rush hour in a city thatâ(TM)s consistently in the top three contenders in the race for the worst drivers in the US.
Iâ(TM)ve lost count of the number of times somebody uses the âcurteouslyâ(TM)-unoccupied lane as a âoefast laneâ, zooming past everybody else well above the speed limit. Then they make an emergency lane change when they run out of room...
I've simply come to accept that even driving defensively, eliminating distraction, and keeping my eyes glued to the road, I may react to crazy shit #1 and totally miss crazy shit #2.
Thatâ(TM)s where I see a real benefit from an autonomous system that reacts faster than I can...
Thanks. I knew it wasn't quite right, but itâ(TM)s been a couple decades since I've needed to worry about somebody grading my kinematics.
Terrible analogies are all we have, because every language has idioms or words which have meaning quite different than logic or their base words would recognize.
Tell an English kid to "knock up" his sister, and he'll wake up his sleeping sister.
Tell an American the same thing, and he'll refuse, because there's no way he's having sex with his sister and making her pregnant.
Tell a Chinese guy to knock up his sister, and he'll know what "knock" and "up" means, and will probably think you want him to hit her with something going upwards.
The only solution is to realize that we shouldnâ(TM)t always assume that words and phrases mean what we think they do.
The only question, I think, is whether these autonomous systems compensate for human inability to pay attention *more* than they encourage inattention.
Used properly, it can be very useful. As it stands, I think of the current technology as being like a horse saying "Even I am not *that* dumb'.
If nothing else, the big problem is this: marketing requires a very short term to describe a feature. That's how 'net neutrality' became the term for a subject that takes several paragraphs to explain adequately.
Like so many other idioms in the English language, using logic to derive meaning is a recipe for failure.
As an example 'Go knock up your sister' has a VERY different meaning depending on if you are English or American, and will leave a non-native person wondering what either means.
Forget what Tesla does. Think of used car salesmen.
Well, if you can work out how a computer vision system can easily tell the difference between a car in a different lane on a bending road, versus a car stopped in the lane in front of you, you're a better developer than I.
Google's best can't tell the difference between primates and humans with a similar skin color, so I do not feel too bad.
I'm willing to bet they have the limitation to avoid unnecessary slamming on the brakes for no reason.
(My car has a much simpler system, and doesn't claim otherwise. It's an alternative to nothing.)
Apologies for forgetting about slashdot and UTF-8.
Thatâ(TM)s kind of my point (and Teslaâ(TM)s too): the driver is responsible.
On an aircraft, the pilot is still responsible for flying the aircraft. If the autopilot flies the plane into a mountain, itâ(TM)s still labeled pilot error. Thereâ(TM)s no absolving the guy at the controls.
That's as stupid as saying that because a toddler doesn't know what "dead" means, the only reasonable course of action is to call it sleep.
We all have to grow up sometime.
What benefit does it add?
Its benefit is if the driver's treats it like an extra set of eyes, and is able to take corrective action when the driver fraks up. If the driver thinks it'll drive for him, you're right, it's a bad idea. (If you know anything about an aircraft's autopilot, you know it does not mean the flight crew is playing "I spy" while the plane does all the work).
* Blind Spots. You wanna change lanes or merge into traffic. So you check your blind spot, and glance away from the road in front for a fraction of a second. Problem is, somebody else just cut you off and stomped on the brakes. (Or somebody cut off the guy in front of you, and he stomped on the brakes.) In either case, the car starts braking before you know there's a problem.
* Blind Spots part II: We aren't paying as much attention as we think we are. The reality is humans suck at paying attention, we have mountains of data to prove it, and that's why we pay big bucks to watch "Magicians" and "Illusionists" perform.
* Blind Spots, part III: We're effectively blind for the fraction of a second while our eyes move from one focus point to another. That matters more than you'd think. The "I didn't see it coming" excuse doesn't even require a distraction... just glance at the road sign for a second.
* Distractions: A Pennsylvania insurance company found that 62% of accidents were caused by somebody being "lost in thought". Humans suck at paying attention.
* Another one I didn't appreciate until I got a car with a similar system: The car handles the gas pedal, and I cover the brake pedal with my foot. Wild animals (deer, moose), pets, children, and even adults jump in front of cars all the time. My car (not a Tesla) won't react until something is in my lane, so there's a chance I'll react first.
If no defects were found in the autopilot system, then why did the car crash?
The "no defects were found" is from the fatal crash a couple of years ago, and there were several contributing factors, outside of the autopilot.
That said: I don't drive a Tesla, but my car has a similar adaptive cruise control and auto-braking system. On my (non-tesla), I can easily see how somebody not familiar with it would think "Oh, I have the system engaged, the car will stop."
The reality is that it'll only stop if the difference in speed between my car and the object in front of me is less than 30 MPH. Drivers must go to the effort of learning the car's systems in order to know that. (And the learning comes from the Manufacturer's YouTube videos, The Fine Manual, The Dealership's guy whose only job is to teach customers about it, and said it at least a dozen times...)
I've been in more than a few situations where I can see traffic is stopped ahead, but my car continues accelerating towards them -- I'm accelerating past 50 MPH, while they're at a dead stop, 50 meters ahead.
Honestly, it feels like my brain is breaking every time: "Why isn't the car slowing down? Oh yeah, dummy! I gotta do it this time!"
So with my experience in a similar system on an entirely different make/model, I'm willing to bet the guy could have had autopilot engaged, but he didn't learn (for whatever reason) its limitations.
I don't own a Tesla, but I know my own car's auto brake system doesn't gracefully slow to a stop unless the speed difference between my car and whatever is in front of me is less than 30 MPH.
If the delta-v is more than 30 MPH, my car will do a "panic stop" thing to slow the car down, but it'll be too late to avoid a collision.
stream an online video in 12bit HEVC.
So... who uses HEVC? Certainly none of the big players: YouTube, Netflix, Hulu, Vimeo, etc, etc, etc... none use HEVC. H.264 is "good enough" with a few that offer content in VP9.
You buy a UHD bluray with Dolby Vision encoded movie, or stream an online video in 12bit HEVC.
We still can't get color management right with the newest UHD HDR displays. I'd have to pay a few hundred bucks to get a technician to come out with a colorimeter and calibrate the display properly to get the benefit of 12 bit HEVC or Dolby Vision.
Hell, Wayland is supposed to be the new shiny to replace X11, and it can't do color managementat all.
Why would you be happy visiting a website and seeing an image encoded in something from the 90s that results in banding and poor dynamic range when attempting to convey the full spectrum of what your equipment is capable of
Have you seen a billboard recently? Or a magazine, newspaper, or any other printed media? Just because the image is better, doesn't necessarily mean people will notice and/or care.
There is more than enough variance from one production run to the next within the same make/model that specialized equipment and training is needed to actually achieve that quality on an individual display.