You mean all the android app stores combined will beat the singular Apple AppStore. Does that include amazon?
Yup. If you dig into it, they indicate that Google Play accounts for 51% of Android's app revenue. The rest is other Android stores, predominantly in China where Google Play doesn't exist. Presumably Amazon would be included as well.
Then wouldn't you say that the fact that his information appears on this list at all should be sufficient to alienate you? After all, they're talking about doing it to those who voted in favor of it.
While we're at it, let's run their connections through a "family safe" filter and flag any "inappropriate" content in a colorful, bold way. I'd imagine with information like that we could successfully alienate every constituent group in no time at all for the vast majority of folks in Congress, and nothing will get them to kill this legislation faster than recognizing that it's career suicide.
Yeah, about the closest I've seen (and even then, it's still exceedingly rare) is a compiler optimization that results in unexpected behavior.
For instance, when I was in grad school I was looking through the assignments for a class of intro-level students. They were using functions for the first time, so the prof had them take some inputs, do a simple summation in a function, return the result, and output it to the screen. Nothing fancy. Everything ran as expected when I tested this one student's program, but when I looked at the code, I saw that his addition function had no return statement. I figured he had cheated and put all of the logic in main() so as to circumvent using a function, but that wasn't the case. His code called the function and then output the result it was somehow getting back.
Eventually I dragged some other grad students in and we realized it had to be a compiler optimization that had taken his single-line function and optimized it as an inline function, effectively allowing it to return a value, despite the lack of a return statement. After we had the compiler output the assembly so we could look it over, we were able to confirm the theory.
Fair enough. I was taking "You guys can cry fake news all you want" as an indication that I was being lumped in with those who thought Samsung simply got a bad rap with the Note 7 (i.e. with the people who thought there wasn't an issue at all), but if that wasn't your intent, then I think we're on the same page about everything.
I never suggested that the problem with the Note 7 was random fires (note that I was discussing their problems going forward, not their previous problems). It ABSOLUTELY had a major design flaw, exactly as you described. I was suggesting that random fires will be a problem with the 8 for Samsung. And if they have yet another engineering design flaw, then the problem will be compounded further.
Not quite true. Your gain is still his loss as, without per-show advertising revenue, whatever money is budgeted to make a show you like, isn't being budgeted to make a show he likes.
Of course, they have the numbers on what shows each subscriber is watching, so the amortized subscription fees tied to those views are effectively acting as per-show revenue. Inasmuch as my viewing a particular show dilutes my attention so that I don't watch others (i.e. as my subscription fees gets spread across more shows), I suppose it may be his loss, but it's a negligible one at best. So long as there are enough people watching his shows, there's no reason to believe that they would cease being profitable, and so long as they're profitable, there's little justification for ceasing their development, which stands in stark contrast to the networks, where shows are in direct competition.
We had a third-party try to pull this one just this week with the client we both serve. Strange thing is, it actually seems like it was true this time!
And the head of the FCC, who incidentally happens to be an Obama appointee
The FCC is specifically disallowed from having more than three commissioners from the same political party, so the President is forced to appoint at least two out of the five commissioners from parties other than their own. As such, no matter what the reason, it's a bit misguided to trot out the fact that Obama appointed Pai, given that Obama was required to appoint two people he'd almost certainly disagree with, and Pai was one of them.
Virtually every lithium ion battery has a small chance to combust seemingly at random. A few iPhones make the news for doing it every year. A few Andriod phones too. The problem for Samsung is that when that inevitably happens to one of their phones, it won't be treated as the uncommon, unlikely occurrence it likely actually is, but will instead be used for clickbait headlines, fear-mongering, and generally unscrupulous "journalism".
Mind you, I say this as someone who is no fan of Samsung (I've been boycotting them ever since the previous slush fund scandal), but even I have to acknowledge that they have a Herculean task ahead of them.
They don't work for airports because these sorts of traps would damage the landing gear
Then I suppose you should get in touch with airports worldwide to let them know that the arresting systems they're currently using (see link above) "don't work" according to you.
As for the rest, you're ignoring obvious answers. Why use "a fleet of heavy machines" to extract a plane when you could simply loop the tarmac after the ramp so the plane could taxi itself back to the terminal as a routine matter of course? Why bring gravel into the situation instead of just letting gravity and brakes do the job like I described? Why close the entire runway if a single ramp is in use, when you'd have planes coming into different parts of the runway anyway, each of which would be serviced by a different set of ramps?
maximum braking occurs IN A STRAIGHT LINE
Exactly, and an inclined straight line is superior to a flat straight line, hence ramps for cases where maximum braking is needed. And for cases where maximum braking isn't needed, a curved line may well suffice.
maximum acceleration occurs IN A STRAIGHT LINE
Agreed, but why is that relevant? It's a runway of infinite length. As long as you can stay on the runway, you can keep accelerating. Poor traction may be a major problem, but poor acceleration? Not so much.
As for dipping wings and whatnot, allow me to quote what I already said:
I do want to be clear that I'm not necessarily suggesting circular runways make sense. I'm just pointing out that they may not be quite so problematic for the reason you pointed out.
Every other filesystem designed since ZFS has taken this lesson to heart.
So, I take it you're unaware of ext4? It's arguably the most wide-used filesystem designed since ZFS, but it doesn't support the end-to-end checksums you're talking about.
I'd argue that they actually don't handle it well, given that straight runways preclude using cheaper, better techniques that are already employed elsewhere.
We routinely deal with runaway vehicles in other contexts, such as on mountain roads, where runaway trucks are a relatively common occurrence. That problem was elegantly solved by using runaway truck ramps to let gravity dissipate the excess energy. The ramps are cheap, non-destructive, low-maintenance, and work without impeding the flow of traffic. With a circular runway, we could spin ramps off at regular intervals with enough distance between them and the main runway to ensure they don't impede other aircraft, and because they're non-destructive, we wouldn't be limited to using them just for emergency stops. We could use them for the more common situation where a plane merely needs a little more runway to come to a safe stop.
Unfortunately, we haven't been able to use them with straight runways because they would impede takeoffs and landings. Instead, we've been forced to rely on inelegant, destructive techniques for quickly dissipating the excess energy, such as arrestor systems, berms, or other techniques of that sort that need to be replaced or repaired before they can be used again, not to mention the damage they cause to the plane itself.
Straight runways have tied our hands in many regards. A circular runway means we can pull lessons and techniques from all sorts of other industries for dealing with vehicles moving at high speeds along curved paths. Though, I do want to be clear that I'm not necessarily suggesting circular runways make sense. I'm just pointing out that they may not be quite so problematic for the reason you pointed out.
Wait. I thought you said a 'modern file system'. You know....like ZFS.
You need to recalibrate your sense of time. APFS was announced last year and launched today. ZFS has been around for a decade or so at this point. I'd wager you couldn't name a production-ready filesystem intended for widespread use that's newer than APFS without doing a search for one.
To be clear, I have no problem with ZFS. It has its shortcomings and strengths, just like anything else. I'm considering using it with a NAS I'm looking at putting together (via UnRAID). But this suggestion that APFS isn't "modern" is preposterous, given that it's a ground-up filesystem written in the last few years, taking into account the strengths and drawbacks of most other recent filesystems.
PLEASE Netflix, don't go down the route of fscking "reality tv"....please....
They already did, but it seems you didn't even notice.
My wife and I watched through their original series Ultimate Beastmaster a few weeks back, which is a reality TV show that knocks off American Ninja Warrior (and the shows it knocked off before it). The fact that you seem to have not been aware of its addition just goes to show why it's not a concern if they get into reality TV. Netflix can add content intended for me without displacing content intended for you. It's not a zero-sum game. My gain is not your loss, unlike with network TV, where my gain naturally comes at the loss of whatever show used to occupy that time slot.
All of which is to say, I'm fine with Netflix adding more content of more varieties for more people. That I don't enjoy all of it is fine, so long as they keep adding the stuff I enjoy too.
Strangely, this comes after Samsung denied plans to sell refurbished Note 7 devices. Maybe they weren't planning to do it at the time, hence the denial, but the reports in the news got them thinking that selling the old ones off might not be such a bad idea after all?
I re use passwords too. There ain't no one who doesn't.
Sure there are. You're talking to a site full of nerds who use password managers that generate unique passwords. Hell, I've got my parents and wife doing it too.
Unlike copyrights, which have the DMCA to help them force companies like eBay to take down materials that allegedly violate copyright, there's no such protection for patents. Instead, patent owners need to directly take the issue up with the actual person violating their patent....which is how it should be....which is how copyrights should be too, but that's another topic.
Even if we took it to mean that, it doesn't change ZDNet's inability to use the info to narrow the range of dates.
The password was clearly still associated with an account, even if that account was no longer is active use. Likewise, the password may have been reused with inactive accounts elsewhere, any one of which may have been compromised at any time. Just because the person only used the account in question between 2011 and 2015 doesn't mean that that's the only time the credentials could have been stolen.
More or less. Here's some information not mentioned in the summary...
Most of the people admitted to reusing the password on other major sites, though a few claimed they hadn't.
None of the people ZDNet reached had changed their iCloud password since first opening it.
All of the people ZDNet was able to reach were located in the UK. The hackers refused to turn over any US-based account credentials.
ZDNet seems to think the compromise(s) must've happened somewhere between 2011 and 2015, based on info from the users, but I'm not sure I trust that assessment (they indicated none of the passwords had changed, but also said at least one of the passwords was no longer in use which allowed them to specify a date range, but I don't see how both can be true).
By all appearances, Apple's assertion that this is a collection of information obtained from other sources, rather than an actual iCloud leak, appears to be true, so it's not likely a dictionary attack against iCloud, so much as it is data obtained from other hacks. Even so, that doesn't negate the risk these users face; it merely shifts the blame to third-parties. Of course, the fact that a lot of this data appears to be outdated or else linked to accounts no longer in use may end up saving quite a few people from the hassle of dealing with the fallout of a hacked account.
Also, sounds like this hacking group is a farce, given that they "fired" one of their members and have been sending conflicting messages to the media while asking whether or not CBS will cover them.
If you can't see that Apple has a superior update model [...]
You must've stopped reading my post, because I said they were ahead in this area. The reason I said neither was necessarily right was because they both comes with tradeoffs. There's no doubt that Apple's updates are far better, but what about their prices? Variety of hardware? Features that cater to niches? By maintaining such tight control, they sacrifice benefits in those other areas.
And, just so you know, if I've drunk any Kool-Aid, it's Apple's. I own zero Android devices. I own dozens of Apple devices, simply because they have been better for me and my uses. That doesn't make them right. Just better in the areas I care about.
Slashdot Mirror
You mean all the android app stores combined will beat the singular Apple AppStore. Does that include amazon?
Yup. If you dig into it, they indicate that Google Play accounts for 51% of Android's app revenue. The rest is other Android stores, predominantly in China where Google Play doesn't exist. Presumably Amazon would be included as well.
Then wouldn't you say that the fact that his information appears on this list at all should be sufficient to alienate you? After all, they're talking about doing it to those who voted in favor of it.
While we're at it, let's run their connections through a "family safe" filter and flag any "inappropriate" content in a colorful, bold way. I'd imagine with information like that we could successfully alienate every constituent group in no time at all for the vast majority of folks in Congress, and nothing will get them to kill this legislation faster than recognizing that it's career suicide.
Yeah, about the closest I've seen (and even then, it's still exceedingly rare) is a compiler optimization that results in unexpected behavior.
For instance, when I was in grad school I was looking through the assignments for a class of intro-level students. They were using functions for the first time, so the prof had them take some inputs, do a simple summation in a function, return the result, and output it to the screen. Nothing fancy. Everything ran as expected when I tested this one student's program, but when I looked at the code, I saw that his addition function had no return statement. I figured he had cheated and put all of the logic in main() so as to circumvent using a function, but that wasn't the case. His code called the function and then output the result it was somehow getting back.
Eventually I dragged some other grad students in and we realized it had to be a compiler optimization that had taken his single-line function and optimized it as an inline function, effectively allowing it to return a value, despite the lack of a return statement. After we had the compiler output the assembly so we could look it over, we were able to confirm the theory.
Fair enough. I was taking "You guys can cry fake news all you want" as an indication that I was being lumped in with those who thought Samsung simply got a bad rap with the Note 7 (i.e. with the people who thought there wasn't an issue at all), but if that wasn't your intent, then I think we're on the same page about everything.
I never suggested that the problem with the Note 7 was random fires (note that I was discussing their problems going forward, not their previous problems). It ABSOLUTELY had a major design flaw, exactly as you described. I was suggesting that random fires will be a problem with the 8 for Samsung. And if they have yet another engineering design flaw, then the problem will be compounded further.
Not quite true. Your gain is still his loss as, without per-show advertising revenue, whatever money is budgeted to make a show you like, isn't being budgeted to make a show he likes.
Of course, they have the numbers on what shows each subscriber is watching, so the amortized subscription fees tied to those views are effectively acting as per-show revenue. Inasmuch as my viewing a particular show dilutes my attention so that I don't watch others (i.e. as my subscription fees gets spread across more shows), I suppose it may be his loss, but it's a negligible one at best. So long as there are enough people watching his shows, there's no reason to believe that they would cease being profitable, and so long as they're profitable, there's little justification for ceasing their development, which stands in stark contrast to the networks, where shows are in direct competition.
Me: Who is that indistinguishable person in the distance?
You: I don't recognize ____.
I enjoy using "one" as much as the next person, but it doesn't fit into all of the places that a singular "they" can fit.
We had a third-party try to pull this one just this week with the client we both serve. Strange thing is, it actually seems like it was true this time!
And the head of the FCC, who incidentally happens to be an Obama appointee
The FCC is specifically disallowed from having more than three commissioners from the same political party, so the President is forced to appoint at least two out of the five commissioners from parties other than their own. As such, no matter what the reason, it's a bit misguided to trot out the fact that Obama appointed Pai, given that Obama was required to appoint two people he'd almost certainly disagree with, and Pai was one of them.
Virtually every lithium ion battery has a small chance to combust seemingly at random. A few iPhones make the news for doing it every year. A few Andriod phones too. The problem for Samsung is that when that inevitably happens to one of their phones, it won't be treated as the uncommon, unlikely occurrence it likely actually is, but will instead be used for clickbait headlines, fear-mongering, and generally unscrupulous "journalism".
Mind you, I say this as someone who is no fan of Samsung (I've been boycotting them ever since the previous slush fund scandal), but even I have to acknowledge that they have a Herculean task ahead of them.
They don't work for airports because these sorts of traps would damage the landing gear
Then I suppose you should get in touch with airports worldwide to let them know that the arresting systems they're currently using (see link above) "don't work" according to you.
As for the rest, you're ignoring obvious answers. Why use "a fleet of heavy machines" to extract a plane when you could simply loop the tarmac after the ramp so the plane could taxi itself back to the terminal as a routine matter of course? Why bring gravel into the situation instead of just letting gravity and brakes do the job like I described? Why close the entire runway if a single ramp is in use, when you'd have planes coming into different parts of the runway anyway, each of which would be serviced by a different set of ramps?
maximum braking occurs IN A STRAIGHT LINE
Exactly, and an inclined straight line is superior to a flat straight line, hence ramps for cases where maximum braking is needed. And for cases where maximum braking isn't needed, a curved line may well suffice.
maximum acceleration occurs IN A STRAIGHT LINE
Agreed, but why is that relevant? It's a runway of infinite length. As long as you can stay on the runway, you can keep accelerating. Poor traction may be a major problem, but poor acceleration? Not so much.
As for dipping wings and whatnot, allow me to quote what I already said:
I do want to be clear that I'm not necessarily suggesting circular runways make sense. I'm just pointing out that they may not be quite so problematic for the reason you pointed out.
Every other filesystem designed since ZFS has taken this lesson to heart.
So, I take it you're unaware of ext4? It's arguably the most wide-used filesystem designed since ZFS, but it doesn't support the end-to-end checksums you're talking about.
Straight runways handle that well.
I'd argue that they actually don't handle it well, given that straight runways preclude using cheaper, better techniques that are already employed elsewhere.
We routinely deal with runaway vehicles in other contexts, such as on mountain roads, where runaway trucks are a relatively common occurrence. That problem was elegantly solved by using runaway truck ramps to let gravity dissipate the excess energy. The ramps are cheap, non-destructive, low-maintenance, and work without impeding the flow of traffic. With a circular runway, we could spin ramps off at regular intervals with enough distance between them and the main runway to ensure they don't impede other aircraft, and because they're non-destructive, we wouldn't be limited to using them just for emergency stops. We could use them for the more common situation where a plane merely needs a little more runway to come to a safe stop.
Unfortunately, we haven't been able to use them with straight runways because they would impede takeoffs and landings. Instead, we've been forced to rely on inelegant, destructive techniques for quickly dissipating the excess energy, such as arrestor systems, berms, or other techniques of that sort that need to be replaced or repaired before they can be used again, not to mention the damage they cause to the plane itself.
Straight runways have tied our hands in many regards. A circular runway means we can pull lessons and techniques from all sorts of other industries for dealing with vehicles moving at high speeds along curved paths. Though, I do want to be clear that I'm not necessarily suggesting circular runways make sense. I'm just pointing out that they may not be quite so problematic for the reason you pointed out.
Wait. I thought you said a 'modern file system'. You know....like ZFS.
You need to recalibrate your sense of time. APFS was announced last year and launched today. ZFS has been around for a decade or so at this point. I'd wager you couldn't name a production-ready filesystem intended for widespread use that's newer than APFS without doing a search for one.
To be clear, I have no problem with ZFS. It has its shortcomings and strengths, just like anything else. I'm considering using it with a NAS I'm looking at putting together (via UnRAID). But this suggestion that APFS isn't "modern" is preposterous, given that it's a ground-up filesystem written in the last few years, taking into account the strengths and drawbacks of most other recent filesystems.
PLEASE Netflix, don't go down the route of fscking "reality tv"....please....
They already did, but it seems you didn't even notice.
My wife and I watched through their original series Ultimate Beastmaster a few weeks back, which is a reality TV show that knocks off American Ninja Warrior (and the shows it knocked off before it). The fact that you seem to have not been aware of its addition just goes to show why it's not a concern if they get into reality TV. Netflix can add content intended for me without displacing content intended for you. It's not a zero-sum game. My gain is not your loss, unlike with network TV, where my gain naturally comes at the loss of whatever show used to occupy that time slot.
All of which is to say, I'm fine with Netflix adding more content of more varieties for more people. That I don't enjoy all of it is fine, so long as they keep adding the stuff I enjoy too.
Strangely, this comes after Samsung denied plans to sell refurbished Note 7 devices. Maybe they weren't planning to do it at the time, hence the denial, but the reports in the news got them thinking that selling the old ones off might not be such a bad idea after all?
Interestingly, all of the comments up to this point have a negative reading (-1) as well.
I re use passwords too. There ain't no one who doesn't.
Sure there are. You're talking to a site full of nerds who use password managers that generate unique passwords. Hell, I've got my parents and wife doing it too.
Unlike copyrights, which have the DMCA to help them force companies like eBay to take down materials that allegedly violate copyright, there's no such protection for patents. Instead, patent owners need to directly take the issue up with the actual person violating their patent. ...which is how it should be. ...which is how copyrights should be too, but that's another topic.
Even if we took it to mean that, it doesn't change ZDNet's inability to use the info to narrow the range of dates.
The password was clearly still associated with an account, even if that account was no longer is active use. Likewise, the password may have been reused with inactive accounts elsewhere, any one of which may have been compromised at any time. Just because the person only used the account in question between 2011 and 2015 doesn't mean that that's the only time the credentials could have been stolen.
The producers, and generally the Fox production teams have turned the movies into horrible mess.
Did you mean Warner Bros.? Fox isn't particularly involved in the DCEU and its production, last I checked, given that Warner Bros. owns the rights.
More or less. Here's some information not mentioned in the summary...
By all appearances, Apple's assertion that this is a collection of information obtained from other sources, rather than an actual iCloud leak, appears to be true, so it's not likely a dictionary attack against iCloud, so much as it is data obtained from other hacks. Even so, that doesn't negate the risk these users face; it merely shifts the blame to third-parties. Of course, the fact that a lot of this data appears to be outdated or else linked to accounts no longer in use may end up saving quite a few people from the hassle of dealing with the fallout of a hacked account.
Also, sounds like this hacking group is a farce, given that they "fired" one of their members and have been sending conflicting messages to the media while asking whether or not CBS will cover them.
If you can't see that Apple has a superior update model [...]
You must've stopped reading my post, because I said they were ahead in this area. The reason I said neither was necessarily right was because they both comes with tradeoffs. There's no doubt that Apple's updates are far better, but what about their prices? Variety of hardware? Features that cater to niches? By maintaining such tight control, they sacrifice benefits in those other areas.
And, just so you know, if I've drunk any Kool-Aid, it's Apple's. I own zero Android devices. I own dozens of Apple devices, simply because they have been better for me and my uses. That doesn't make them right. Just better in the areas I care about.
No, it doesn't. Try it: the screen shakes and you're told "try again."
You didn't press the button. You placed your finger on the sensor without pressing the button.