I already use a separate browser for anything "dodgy". I wonder if I should get a third browser, and use that only for Google-related things. Then I can block all cookies from anything related to Google in my main browser.
I've been thinking the same thing. Too bad Firefox can't have a separate and concurrent Private Browsing window like Chrome's Incognito windows.
The only thing I didn't like about Gmail's new look is that they got rid of the mini RSS reader, web clips. I needed another web-based RSS reader and ended up using Google Reader. So much for cutting down my Google footprint:-\
No you're still wrong. Yes you can put it in the template, and you can do the same with the Facebook button. The Analytics code doesn't use mind control waves to force the web dev to put it in the template. It isn't unusual to see a Facebook button in a site's "static areas" that appear on every page that lets you Like the company. Technically you are 100% wrong and practically you are grasping at straws.
Facebook is pretty close to GA in popularity now. Look, even Slashdot, the home of the privacy-aware geek, has fucking facebook buttons now, what does that tell you.
Lemme guess, you have your browser locked down like Fort Knox? It seems like these days Google has to recognize you as a geek before it shows you anything technical.
Duckduckgo uses Bing's results, I found that out the other day. Which surprised me because from the quality of the results, I figured DuckDuckGo was a tiny struggling project that was still working on their search code and hadn't done any major indexing.
Bzzt, wrong, both track only the pages on which the tracking code is placed (typically ALL of them). I know this because I've set up these systems as part of my job.
I've noticed the result quality going down over the last year or so. That and a big difference in the search results I see at home vs. work for the same tools. At home my setup is heavily anonymized so I get pretty neutral results, at work I don't use cookie blocking or request blocking and it's much easier to find technical stuff. That might sound like a good thing, but at home it's really hard to find those technical articles even when using the same search terms!
In terms of buying vs. building it's well-night impossible today, only the expensive Linux shops sell significant numbers of computers without Windows. Even if you build a PC, some shops that have contracts with MS won't sell you a CPU/mobo/RAM combo unless you buy Windows with it. Not kidding.
This. If Facebook worked more like individual Diaspora instances and kept the data private and fully under control of the user, I wouldn't be upset about it at all.
I hear that you need to provide ID to open a Gmail account now. Lucky I signed up looong before that in the early days when gmail invites were selling for $50 on eBay, although there's plenty of personal info in the emails themselves.
AFAIK that's correct but that doesn't mean it isn't technically possible. Take me for example, I don't touch social media with a 30-foot pole but people take pics of me and upload them to Facebook, and tag my face with my real name. From a technical standpoint what here is preventing pics of me from being auto-tagged with my name, once a few different people have tagged my face to form a match between my face and name by consensus?
I wouldn't be surprised one bit if that was already happening in the background but simply isn't shown to users, yet. At some point I expect they'll form visible "shadow profiles" for people who are known to Facebook but don't have an account, and all you have to do to take some control over the information flow about you is sign up...
3rd party? Apart from the fact that you can post things there yourself, 3rd party info may still be relevant. Geotagged and instant-uploaded photos can be fairly solid evidence.
500Mbits I could believe, I agree 50Mbit is on the low side but it's not unreasonable. An HD video camera should be able to fit in there, and with good optical zoom (which the drones certainly have) 1080p would be plenty good enough. One video stream is good enough even for ground recon or attack, considering they could switch to a downward-facing camera to look at the ground while flying on instruments, and if they need beyond-HD resolution they can always take some snapshots and spend the next few minutes downloading them.
What sensors could they have that could require more bandwidth than a video camera? Most would require much less - for one thing radar and IR aren't in color, and that's assuming the most asinine possible way of transferring the data.
No that's still completely batshit crazy. People in this thread who have done the research are saying it's actually 50mbit which is sensible and believable.
Slashdot Mirror
This is the new age of social media and curated computing, what does this "utility" word mean?
I already use a separate browser for anything "dodgy". I wonder if I should get a third browser, and use that only for Google-related things. Then I can block all cookies from anything related to Google in my main browser.
I've been thinking the same thing. Too bad Firefox can't have a separate and concurrent Private Browsing window like Chrome's Incognito windows.
The only thing I didn't like about Gmail's new look is that they got rid of the mini RSS reader, web clips. I needed another web-based RSS reader and ended up using Google Reader. So much for cutting down my Google footprint :-\
Both return results that are "lacking" to put it gently IMO.
No you're still wrong. Yes you can put it in the template, and you can do the same with the Facebook button. The Analytics code doesn't use mind control waves to force the web dev to put it in the template. It isn't unusual to see a Facebook button in a site's "static areas" that appear on every page that lets you Like the company. Technically you are 100% wrong and practically you are grasping at straws.
Facebook is pretty close to GA in popularity now. Look, even Slashdot, the home of the privacy-aware geek, has fucking facebook buttons now, what does that tell you.
Google APIs isn't necessarily ad-related, you might want to allow that one.
Lemme guess, you have your browser locked down like Fort Knox? It seems like these days Google has to recognize you as a geek before it shows you anything technical.
Duckduckgo uses Bing's results, I found that out the other day. Which surprised me because from the quality of the results, I figured DuckDuckGo was a tiny struggling project that was still working on their search code and hadn't done any major indexing.
Bzzt, wrong, both track only the pages on which the tracking code is placed (typically ALL of them). I know this because I've set up these systems as part of my job.
I've noticed the result quality going down over the last year or so. That and a big difference in the search results I see at home vs. work for the same tools. At home my setup is heavily anonymized so I get pretty neutral results, at work I don't use cookie blocking or request blocking and it's much easier to find technical stuff. That might sound like a good thing, but at home it's really hard to find those technical articles even when using the same search terms!
In terms of buying vs. building it's well-night impossible today, only the expensive Linux shops sell significant numbers of computers without Windows. Even if you build a PC, some shops that have contracts with MS won't sell you a CPU/mobo/RAM combo unless you buy Windows with it. Not kidding.
It's exactly the same privacy issue as the Facebook buttons, except that Google is much less likely to have your real name.
With the iPad's shape, if any lift is generated at all it would be on the back side - in this case it could be called downforce.
I agree though that it wouldn't have survived if it landed any other way.
The remains of the balloon are enough of a parachute, and the placement of the camera and mount can help it fall level as well.
If you make your Freedombox site public, nothing. If only some friends are granted access to it, then a 403 error should do the trick.
This. If Facebook worked more like individual Diaspora instances and kept the data private and fully under control of the user, I wouldn't be upset about it at all.
I hear that you need to provide ID to open a Gmail account now. Lucky I signed up looong before that in the early days when gmail invites were selling for $50 on eBay, although there's plenty of personal info in the emails themselves.
AFAIK that's correct but that doesn't mean it isn't technically possible. Take me for example, I don't touch social media with a 30-foot pole but people take pics of me and upload them to Facebook, and tag my face with my real name. From a technical standpoint what here is preventing pics of me from being auto-tagged with my name, once a few different people have tagged my face to form a match between my face and name by consensus?
I wouldn't be surprised one bit if that was already happening in the background but simply isn't shown to users, yet. At some point I expect they'll form visible "shadow profiles" for people who are known to Facebook but don't have an account, and all you have to do to take some control over the information flow about you is sign up...
3rd party? Apart from the fact that you can post things there yourself, 3rd party info may still be relevant. Geotagged and instant-uploaded photos can be fairly solid evidence.
Wanted to state that I agree 100% because being modded to +5 doesn't say enough.
500Mbits I could believe, I agree 50Mbit is on the low side but it's not unreasonable. An HD video camera should be able to fit in there, and with good optical zoom (which the drones certainly have) 1080p would be plenty good enough. One video stream is good enough even for ground recon or attack, considering they could switch to a downward-facing camera to look at the ground while flying on instruments, and if they need beyond-HD resolution they can always take some snapshots and spend the next few minutes downloading them.
Let's say it has 5 video feeds. That's 250mbit/sec. Then let's double that for sensors and control signals.
That's exactly 1/8th of the bandwidth accounted for.
What sensors could they have that could require more bandwidth than a video camera? Most would require much less - for one thing radar and IR aren't in color, and that's assuming the most asinine possible way of transferring the data.
"He, uh, downloads songs from the web"
"Yeah, how many?"
"All of them."
"Well you're in a pack of trouble with the record companies there, son!"
No that's still completely batshit crazy. People in this thread who have done the research are saying it's actually 50mbit which is sensible and believable.