Elon plans on leaving the burocrats behind when he gets to mars.
If musk was smart he would round them all up and send them on the first of 2 escape ships - free of charge. I really would worship him if he can pull that one off.
99% of the time when I'm using my phone, I'm the only one to look at it locked so this feature would work for me. It can't be people from across the room, you need to be roughly 6" to 2' away, face the phone and roughly center yourself - something you would do naturally just holding it and looking at it. I'm not sure id want too use it for other reasons, I do prefer pass codes. Also, having done tech demos myself in front of a large audience, I have some sympathy for things going wrong even if you rehearsed them many times. That being said I don't doubt they said something plausible, if in fact it did have a problem.
It's all bullshit. Whatshisfuck stood on stage and claimed that it was orders of magnitude more secure and reliable than TouchID. What happened?
What happened is 1 or more people looked at the phone in its locked state backstage and it rolled over to passcode only, it was actually a good demo of how secure it is.
Nope. If a "perfect" mask is made, the defensive system won't notice. And neither will a human. And if a "good" mask is made, the defensive system won't notice, but a human will.
while getting a perfect 3-d scan of the persons face and making a 3-d printed model may work - on the other hand, pun intended, lifting a fingerprint from anywhere and using it to unlock an iphone touch sensor is trivially easy, children have defeated it by touching it against their sleeping parents hand. Cops can force you to touch unlock your phone too. But the facial recognition wont work with your eyes closed or your face scrunched up or if someone else looks at your phone. So in reality it is a far more secure system, even if it goes over to passcode more often than the finger sensor.
Actually the voting public didn't pick Hillary and further Bruce Spiva, a lawyer for the DNC, argued in its motion to dismiss that the party holds the right to select its candidate any way it chooses and is not bound by pledges of fairness. Further still the super delegates voted in many states for Hillary despite 10 and 20 point leads by Sanders. If super delegates weren't part of the formula, Sanders would have won hands down. The DNC chair resigned in disgrace over this, and small donor donations to democrats have hit historic lows, but there are no rule changes in sight and the DNC will just pick who they like, fairness or public voting be damned.
no one was investigating Trump's bankruptcies too hard, nor scrutinizing any possible deals with money laundering through real estate either. Now he has probably 100 dedicated people working overtime with the highest levels of prosecutorial power and security clearance. While I tentatively agree his goal was to become president (I believe he never expected to become president but wanted a brand/name boost as plan A), he is now seriously more FKD for any possible wrong doings than he ever was as a no talent real estate hack.
Those ads will have done far more harm to trump in the long run if they really did help him get elected. So in a twisted way Trump is right on this one.
Maybe if politics wasn't so terribly corrupted by a handful of large donors, and instead represented the people, discontent wouldn't be so damn easy to sow.
So as this is an actual headline, and not some random question, you are not only arguing that slashdot editors throughly researched the article, but that there are no facts we can really know about how mergers in general or this one specifically will harm consumers beforehand?
After all, what's more important - helping cut the costs to increase adoption and cut CO2 emissions, or getting the third vacation home for some local solar company CEO?
So the real takeaway is it has uncovered a ring of terrorist training camps being run out of high school chemistry labs? Or am I supposed to fall into the giant vat of irony of this being a clickbait slashdot article? I'm so confused...
If the facial scanner was on the back of the phone, and used as a miniature lidar sensor, I would seriously be impressed. Being able to scan items into a virtual environment easily and quickly would have a very large range of awesome applications. As it is now it could probably be repurposed for some pretty neat stuff.
So you are saying if they rough up your children in front of you, then blow off one of thier hands with a shotgun, you would gladly offer your face to unlock the phone but wouldn't dream of entering the passcode? I dare you to make less sense.
Going off our president and many others I'm starting to think being smart is a hinderance. Having an ounce of decency or a single moral fiber almost assuredly is.
So I shouldn't have a extremely wealthy family, who is well connected, and further take vast sums of money to start a business - and if it fails just take even more money to try again? I'm pretty sure that is possibly the single most consistent detail of the success stories of the super wealthy.
The default is two tries and it goes to a mandatory passcode. It fails even if people look at the locked phone, this caused the failure at the demo launch as people looked at it backstage and it no longer worked during the demo live on TV.
Obviously not. From the descriptions the person would need to be looking straight ahead, without a surface pressed to the side of thier face, with thier eyes open. Maybe you could glue thier eyes/lids in the right direction or something. But it's far better than just a touch sensor a seven year old can defeat
Punching you in the face won't make it work and using thier hands to force your face into compliance
Won't work either. If two people look at the phone in a locked stage it rolls over to passcode, its the reason why the demo failed at launch. Please tell me how someone could force you to unlock it because it sounds nonsensical. Even legally compelling a person is iffy because you could blame the roll over to passcode on the phone saying it never works right.
If the cops want to beat the everloving shit out of you, or abuse thier authority to search and take things they don't have a right to they don't need an excuse. Beating the crap out of you only ensures the phone won't visually unlock.
That's going to be a far bigger pain in the ass than a touch sensor where they can compel you to unlock it. Also after two tries it rolls over to passcode permanently so the method you suggest isn't likely to even work with a perfect mask. That's why it failed at the launch demo, too many people looked at the phone in a locked state.
They can't force you to look at it, keep both eyes open, not contort your face, etc. after two tries it goes to passcode. IANAL but my understanding is there is no legal precedent yet.
It dosent work if you scrunch up your face, or close an eye, or not look at it. After two tries it rolls over to passcode, that's why the demo failed at launch (people messing with it in back).
Slashdot Mirror
Elon plans on leaving the burocrats behind when he gets to mars.
If musk was smart he would round them all up and send them on the first of 2 escape ships - free of charge. I really would worship him if he can pull that one off.
99% of the time when I'm using my phone, I'm the only one to look at it locked so this feature would work for me. It can't be people from across the room, you need to be roughly 6" to 2' away, face the phone and roughly center yourself - something you would do naturally just holding it and looking at it. I'm not sure id want too use it for other reasons, I do prefer pass codes. Also, having done tech demos myself in front of a large audience, I have some sympathy for things going wrong even if you rehearsed them many times. That being said I don't doubt they said something plausible, if in fact it did have a problem.
It's all bullshit. Whatshisfuck stood on stage and claimed that it was orders of magnitude more secure and reliable than TouchID. What happened?
What happened is 1 or more people looked at the phone in its locked state backstage and it rolled over to passcode only, it was actually a good demo of how secure it is.
Nope. If a "perfect" mask is made, the defensive system won't notice. And neither will a human. And if a "good" mask is made, the defensive system won't notice, but a human will.
while getting a perfect 3-d scan of the persons face and making a 3-d printed model may work - on the other hand, pun intended, lifting a fingerprint from anywhere and using it to unlock an iphone touch sensor is trivially easy, children have defeated it by touching it against their sleeping parents hand. Cops can force you to touch unlock your phone too. But the facial recognition wont work with your eyes closed or your face scrunched up or if someone else looks at your phone. So in reality it is a far more secure system, even if it goes over to passcode more often than the finger sensor.
Actually the voting public didn't pick Hillary and further Bruce Spiva, a lawyer for the DNC, argued in its motion to dismiss that the party holds the right to select its candidate any way it chooses and is not bound by pledges of fairness. Further still the super delegates voted in many states for Hillary despite 10 and 20 point leads by Sanders. If super delegates weren't part of the formula, Sanders would have won hands down. The DNC chair resigned in disgrace over this, and small donor donations to democrats have hit historic lows, but there are no rule changes in sight and the DNC will just pick who they like, fairness or public voting be damned.
no one was investigating Trump's bankruptcies too hard, nor scrutinizing any possible deals with money laundering through real estate either. Now he has probably 100 dedicated people working overtime with the highest levels of prosecutorial power and security clearance. While I tentatively agree his goal was to become president (I believe he never expected to become president but wanted a brand/name boost as plan A), he is now seriously more FKD for any possible wrong doings than he ever was as a no talent real estate hack.
Those ads will have done far more harm to trump in the long run if they really did help him get elected. So in a twisted way Trump is right on this one.
Maybe if politics wasn't so terribly corrupted by a handful of large donors, and instead represented the people, discontent wouldn't be so damn easy to sow.
So as this is an actual headline, and not some random question, you are not only arguing that slashdot editors throughly researched the article, but that there are no facts we can really know about how mergers in general or this one specifically will harm consumers beforehand?
I guess it's time to retire Betteridge's law.
So that's how my email and bank account was drained at the same time as my luggage was broken into.
After all, what's more important - helping cut the costs to increase adoption and cut CO2 emissions, or getting the third vacation home for some local solar company CEO?
So the real takeaway is it has uncovered a ring of terrorist training camps being run out of high school chemistry labs? Or am I supposed to fall into the giant vat of irony of this being a clickbait slashdot article? I'm so confused...
What if causing human suffering and making everyone grovel before you as they sing your praise is what truly makes you happy? Then you can have both.
If the facial scanner was on the back of the phone, and used as a miniature lidar sensor, I would seriously be impressed. Being able to scan items into a virtual environment easily and quickly would have a very large range of awesome applications. As it is now it could probably be repurposed for some pretty neat stuff.
So you are saying if they rough up your children in front of you, then blow off one of thier hands with a shotgun, you would gladly offer your face to unlock the phone but wouldn't dream of entering the passcode? I dare you to make less sense.
Going off our president and many others I'm starting to think being smart is a hinderance. Having an ounce of decency or a single moral fiber almost assuredly is.
So I shouldn't have a extremely wealthy family, who is well connected, and further take vast sums of money to start a business - and if it fails just take even more money to try again? I'm pretty sure that is possibly the single most consistent detail of the success stories of the super wealthy.
The default is two tries and it goes to a mandatory passcode. It fails even if people look at the locked phone, this caused the failure at the demo launch as people looked at it backstage and it no longer worked during the demo live on TV.
Obviously not. From the descriptions the person would need to be looking straight ahead, without a surface pressed to the side of thier face, with thier eyes open. Maybe you could glue thier eyes/lids in the right direction or something. But it's far better than just a touch sensor a seven year old can defeat
Punching you in the face won't make it work and using thier hands to force your face into compliance Won't work either. If two people look at the phone in a locked stage it rolls over to passcode, its the reason why the demo failed at launch. Please tell me how someone could force you to unlock it because it sounds nonsensical. Even legally compelling a person is iffy because you could blame the roll over to passcode on the phone saying it never works right.
If the cops want to beat the everloving shit out of you, or abuse thier authority to search and take things they don't have a right to they don't need an excuse. Beating the crap out of you only ensures the phone won't visually unlock.
That's going to be a far bigger pain in the ass than a touch sensor where they can compel you to unlock it. Also after two tries it rolls over to passcode permanently so the method you suggest isn't likely to even work with a perfect mask. That's why it failed at the launch demo, too many people looked at the phone in a locked state.
I ran out of fingers myself from the touch sensor. Thank the gods I didn't use my manhood on the sensor, that would have been a serious mistake.
Also just like people have manual covers for a laptop camera, I expect cases to have them as well. If not I'll make some myself and sell them.
They can't force you to look at it, keep both eyes open, not contort your face, etc. after two tries it goes to passcode. IANAL but my understanding is there is no legal precedent yet.
It dosent work if you scrunch up your face, or close an eye, or not look at it. After two tries it rolls over to passcode, that's why the demo failed at launch (people messing with it in back).