Chroot into your damaged install, mount a devtmpfs and a/proc, maybe/sys, then, "for p in $(rpm -qa); do rpm --setperms $p; done"
Works on rpm-based distros at least.
If it's changing all the modes to 000 or something, do a "chmod -R 755/etc" or something on whatever files are causing trouble, then run the above to restore them to the correct state.
Yeah, I was going to post something similar. Unfortunately, of course, you're still hosed on userland files and anything non-packaged. And the kind of people running bleeding edge npm are probably those who barely understand permissions to begin with.
On any RHEL system that's the first place I'd start, then try to pick through the debris of what was left.
"I'll be honest, we're throwin' science at the wall here to see here what sticks. No idea what it'll do. Probably nothing. Best case scenario, you might get some superpowers. Worst case, some tumors. Which we'll cut out."
(And honestly, no one made a Portal reference already? Really? Oi.)
The Microsoft brand, on the other hand, has become much stronger under Satya Nadella's stewardship. It's gained respect.
That has to be written by a shill. Windows 8 and 10 lost whatever 'respect' they think they had left.
The anti-Windows 10 cauterwauling is mostly a Slashdot and niche thing. While Metro and Windows 8 had *major* issues, Windows 10 is doing quite well and is actually a pretty stable OS. It's probably my favorite experience I've had with Windows and reliability since back in the Win2kPro days.
Of course, tech users aren't the hugest drivers... Although important, it's really "consumer" mindshare that would be the determining factor. Anecdotally, non-techies seem to appreciate and be aware of "Microsoft" more than they have been, especially as Apple's stumbling on the computer side (with expensive options) has led to exploration of options.
"Bing" works as something to type into the address bar, but I can't say it's great as a brand. +1 to the article. "Microsoft Search" seems good enough. (And competition at the oligarchy level for Google is at least better than an effective monopoly.)
I can virtually guarantee that he was confused and enabled his mobile number as "the" mobile number on his Facebook account when setting up 2FA. (In fact, I'd be surprised if Facebook allowed a distinct 2FA number that hadn't already be validated as belonging to you to be set.)
As for why it showed up on his wall, maybe if he used Facebook more he'd realize that that's a feature. Send an SMS to the 5 digit SMS code and it will be interpreted as a FB Status update (unless it matches another string, like poking a user using a distinct notification number).
It's rarely used nowadays because a majority of folks probably use the app, but if you want to update via text message that's how you do it.
I really don't care about this sort of trivia. I hate that, much as spam drowns out the email you want to get, the blathering from the Rust community seems intent on making me have to care by flooding out the useful things with their social justice coding PR.
So workarounds, like the various Linux package managers, were created to try to handle the complex dependencies between applications and their shared libraries. This is effectively a complex form of static linking, done by keeping shared library versions consistent with the installed applications.
When that proved to be problematic, such as when there were different applications that depended on different versions of the same shared library, we started seeing a move toward this "containerization" nonsense. There are different approaches used, but again they all have one thing in common: they're a complex way of imitating static linking.
Here's the thing though... That wasn't problematic. We have perfectly good Linux distros that provide perfectly good platforms using dynamic linking. We have them at varying levels of stability and long term support: RHEL and its derivatives if you need Enterprise ABI guarantees so that you *don't* ever have a chance of shared library incompatibilities on the platform, and Fedora if you want more frequent updates, although with ABI stability mostly guaranteed within a given annual OS release.
These two OS's work fine. Yes, there were dependency problems initially, but yum and apt-get solved resolution issues DECADES ago. The only people who complain about dependency hell nowadays are those who don't understand that some things change and some things stay the same, and that you ideally will recompile for a new OS release.
In short, the people who don't understand this are Windows Developers and Java Developers.
They have no idea how shared libraries work on Linux, have little or no understanding of package management generally (Literally the only people who complain about 'dependency hell' are those trying to use RPM/dpkg to do YUM/apt-get's job.), or are trying to iterate with ABI breakage every 3 weeks like a generic Silicon Valley d-bag.
Statically compiling everything, adding three layers of virtualization nonsense, putting out 500MB.jar files, or live-including left-pad npm, because you don't know how packaging works is the epitome of the current industry approach. And it sucks for everyone else trying to keep some sanity in the mix.
This makes so much sense. Back when RAM and storage space were relatively scarce it seemed the way to go without a doubt. I observed the advantages, but we have since outgrown the scarcity of resources available on modern systems, and a self contained program does seem to make far more sense in this age of computing.
Lolwut?
Not when my phone keeps running out of space. Not when some glorified IRC chat program (Stride) requires 400MB of resident memory to run. Not when some idiot replaced perfect good shell scripts with a compiled monstrosity that's 10 times larger in an attempt to shave 5 seconds off a reboot that never happens.
People are making all sorts of dumb decisions because they think resources are limitless again. They're not. Resources are always limited. The only time things change are when the actual underlying technology changes. (E.g., moving from spindles to SSD means I/O performance has improved drastically for some use cases.)
I love HyperCard and HyperTalk; but it does NOT have nearly the "Natural Language" properties that Bill Atkinson and Dan Winkler thought it did. And as far as "wordiness", COBOL has NOTHING on HyperTalk!!!
Proof: One has to look no further than AppleScript, which is the syntactic kissing-cousin of HyperTalk.
That, then, raises a second question: If Apple didn't want to, or couldn't remember how to, reach back into the 80s and 90s, why not beef up AppleScript?
It's still an integral part of current OS releases, provides some level of natural text entry (or at least has DWIM syntax that's approachable by English-speaking beginners), and should provide a foundation for interfaces and modification easily enough.
There's so much that could have been done with AppleScript and OSA in general that hasn't... And yet here they are reinventing things again. Apple 2017 truly is reminiscent of Apple 1993.
Congratulations, guys, you've re-invented static binaries. I'm glad you're happy. I look forward to what we have in the smartphone ecosystem now, with vulnerabilities out the yin-yang, and 25 apps getting updated when some weird library has a flaw in it, and your other 75 not getting updated at all and remaining vulnerable even though you don't realize it.
The problem is that Comcast does not have a contract with Netflix and wants to force them into one so that it can make money off of Netflix's successful business. It is quite literally a protection racket ("those are some nice bits you have there...wouldn't want anything to happen to them, eh?"), and that is what net neutrality is meant to stop.
That's not the hysteria that people are spreading around, however.
Blocking is dumb. The Internet is designed to route around blocking, and Comcast knows this as well as any ISP employee does. Members of the public are already using VPNs in some place to get around geographic blocks to Netflix in some locations anyway and this use would simply accelerate. Comcast's ISP side are not the same as the Cable TV side and they're aware of this.
The arguments being made are either a) outright "censorship" of bad ideas (which is where Ajit Pai is absolutely right -- Google/Facebook has far more ability to meaningfully do this for the world than your particular ISP does), or b) QoS.
The problem with whining about QoS is that this is a legitimate technical decision an ISP might make for actual, bona-fide, service-provider reasons to ensure reasonable bandwidth. (Do you sign up for Internet on a plane? Congratulations, your Netflix is blocked there. You also don't have a reasonable "choice" at 35,000 feet. Go sue.) Alternatively, look at mobile ISPs -- they actually provide different cost plan structures and bandwidth allotments depending on how you want to access streaming media NOW and the market is healthy. This is a feature, not a bug.
With the added speeds of 4G LTE available in most populated areas of the US, and 5G (whatever tech is used) in the years to come, mobile data services are already able to match what expected broadband wireline services were able to provide only a few years ago -- and certainly within the FCC "broadband" definition in many cases, and at varying price-points.
Yes, truly rural customers might have few or 1 option, but that's been the case forever and is nothing new. Certainly nothing that's changed since 2015 when this rule came into affect.
The dumb, dumb arguments around Net Neutrality even here on places like Slashdot where techs should know better about the actually necessity of the regulation at this time boggles my mind. I'm sure the giant Social Media Services, communication platforms, and Google/Facebook advertising networks (which regulate the financial livelihood of 90% of the commercial ad-supported entities in tech and change policies on a whim) are glad to have the spotlight taken off of their arbitrary and potentially devastating behavior because someone thinks their cable company suddenly cares what website you personally go to.
Srsly, dude? Mac OSX is pretty much the slickest thing out there. Which OS, specifically, do you want Tim Cook to give you back? System 7? System 8? Because those were so much better..?
System 7.0.1 was awesome -- I don't know what you're talking about. And Mac OS 8.6 (with the NuKernel and a few cherry-picked Copland features) was damn stable for me too. Much better that MacOS 9, which was only useful for giving FileVault and VoicePrint login demos...
But try to stick 8.6 on Rhapsody and you kind of had a halfway decent OS, ya know?
Except for the fact the deep learning systems, may not be efficient enough. There are some tasks which it excels at, however some tasks there just isn't the volume or rewards for outcomes for the system to adapt fast enough to.
That sort of goes out the window once the Singularity hits, though. A sufficiently advanced AI with the ability to goal-seek improvements to itself will wrap its own subsystems in learning simulators. It won't need to train on real-world disasters, it will simply iterate on simulated ones and then iterate on updating the simulation. Meta-learning, if you will.
The Go AI, which is now approximately 100 times smarter than it was before and is becoming nearly impenetrable for Go experts to understand how/why it's making the decisions it is, is a prime example of this. After a certain point, its own mechanism of adaptation outpaces our own.
Why is Apple slightly less on the privacy-sucking radar (for most folks) -- battles with the FBI over the Secure Enclave notwithstanding? Because they aren't an advertising company and don't have a vested interest in prioritizing data collection on users over all else. (FWIW, neither is Microsoft, which makes the outcry over low-level telemetry stuff in Windows 10 here seem way over-blown.)
Facebook and, probably more importantly, Google, control 90% of all advertising on the web. With the crater-like decline in print advertising, and the in-progress collapse in traditional OTA and cable non-Tivo'd television (meaning broadcast, non-microtargeted) viewership, this is a HUGE chunk of National revenue combined with a HUGE chunk of data on nearly every internet-using person out there.
Breaking off data collection and advertising from the technology sides of the companies are the only way to ensure privacy practices are respected. Yes, that means disruption. Too bad. The alternative is looking more and more like the type of Dystopian, corporate-led Orwellian state that most of us believed was confined to bad science-fiction.
It's not the late-90s any more, despite the prevalence of Clinton sex scandals in the news. Time to revisit the regulations we passed for the internet back then and update them for the modern technology and consumer landscape.
If only there was some sort of Police Work that could be done to solve these crimes without taking away everyone rights of privacy...
For instance, a detailed record of all the calls & text messages you've made and received is available from the cellphone company with your righteous subpoena.
Why do you need into the phone again?
That would have been fine until about 2011. Nowadays, even a novice user can end up "accidentally" using over-the-top services whether they even really intended to or not, let alone someone who was half-way competent and intending to cover their tracks. It's not about getting into their POTS and SMS interfaces, it's about getting into the other data records present on the portable computer system they kept on them 24 hours a day.
Assuming the ipods are iOS based then you could use an app like iPENG classic to make the ipod into a squeezebox player Then you just need a computer or raspberry pi equivalent to run the server software on and you should be set to go
This is probably the best way to go.
A big question is whether you have multiple speakers you want to broadcast to at once. Also, I'm assuming you mean "iPod Touch" here and not the classic iPods. Classics cannot broadcast on their own except to whatever they're physically docked into (although that itself can do what it wants with it). However, neither has the ability to AirPlay to multiple devices simultaneously (which is what you want for a whole-house solution). Personally, I have a Windows box running iTunes constantly that serves as the main media repository. From there, any iOS device on your network can run the "Remote" App, which allows you to select and control music, as well as control multi-speaker output and volume. "Retune" I think is the app I was using on the Android side, although it's been a while.
It can be hard to find AirPlay speakers out there nowadays. I was fortunate enough to pick up 7 or 8 XtremeMac Tango Air speakers a while back for about $60/ea and they're great for this. Find something similar, or an AppleTV to interface with a full HDMI to your stereo system, and you should be all set.
I disagree personally. From what i understand, facebook is what you say, for narcissists.
You understand wrong. I'm a low UID Slashdot user and cranky Unix sysadmin. Facebook is not "for narcissists" any more than any interaction site is. It's simply much, much more efficient at both passive and active communication.
It's clear that not being actually on Facebook (and, presumably, not using social networking services more generally) has distorted your view of them and the issues (and benefits) they raise.
Although the cord-cutting movement has changed this in recent years (at least technically), the "I don't even have a FB" is the "I don't even have a TV" of yesteryear. Snobs who point that usually are ill-equipped to discuss the relative merits and concerns of various forms of broadcast serial media.
I had the pleasure of owning the first Android phone, the HTC Dream (T-Mobile G1) when it was a pretty new thing. The five-row keyboard, trackball, and extra hardware buttons basically meant that I had a tiny "laptop" in my pocket. I used it for VNC. I used it for SSH. I even ran a Debian overlay with X on it just because I could. It made the iPhones look stupid: one button, clunky touch-everything, dumbed down trash.
HTC Thunderbolt owner here, previously a connoisseur of the LG series, from the EnV on up to the Voyager. (Now I'm back to LG's G# and V20 ones.)
I'd love for a physical keyboard to return, but I also need a full-fledged and full-sized screen. Honestly, if something like the Sidewinder came back, I'd really seriously considering it. That's how much I love writing text.
The problem is that the market is limited, and with the learning spell check on most phones, the poor accuracy of fast touchscreen typing is often made up for with relatively little effort by the user all things considered.
For those that need frequent mobile access to a CLI, we have a better solution now that we didn't have then: Tablets. Set up your iPad with an integrated keyboard cover and you have something that will give you much more joy that anything you had before in a mobile factor for all but the most emergency-focused of sessions.
Apps for big services that have a website are almost always a step backwards and are ALWAYS bloated piles of trash compared to what they should be: a tiny extension for the website to access native phone features that web standards don't exist for. Of course, now we've got standards for most of those too, so why do we still need apps for most things AT ALL? Because Facebook can't mine your damn contacts if they don't have an app, that's why.
Yes and no. NOW, mining data and having closer access to the device is important (especially for advertising-supported apps and social media networks). Once the early days of WAP/WML -> "tablet versions of websites" -> mobile-friendly site conversion was completed, though, the only real reason many apps were created was for the ability to push notifications to the user. Now that there's a web standard for that, a lot of those apps could indeed be turned back into straight web sites -- but that bridge has been crossed and it probably won't be crossed back until the pain and annoyance of updating apps outweighs unified web sites again.
World-wide, penetration is growing but mostly limited by reliable internet access (hence the internet.org stuff).
I've been online since '92. I lament some of the changes as well. But bitterly walling yourself off from social media makes no sense and causes you to fail to understand the very real cultural issues that have been developing since then and how tech interacts with it.
I was geeky enough in '98 to still seek out Gopher nodes and lament poorly optimized table layouts. That doesn't mean I didn't keep using the web.
Your implication is that only one choice is the "correct, informed" choice.
Actually, no it isn't. I simply request that a rational argument be made by the voter in question. I don't have to agree with it. An *irrational vote* is as dangerous as flipping a coin.
There were rational arguments for all four major-ish candidates in the last cycle, IMO.
"Voter turnout" is not an end in and of itself. If it were, we'd simply make voting mandatory.
The ability to abstain is a basic rule of the common law parliamentary process for good reason: an uninformed voter or one who votes carelessly or randomly dilutes the decision-making ability of the remainder.
I don't want "more people to vote". I want people to "vote carefully". If someone is not capable of voting carefully, then I'd prefer that they don't vote.
In terms of getting "the right people to vote", the Senators didn't mention it, but Facebook has proved that it has the power to do exactly that by adjusting advertising and emotional tone of what it presents to users in their Newsfeed. If Facebook decides on election day to add a little "Don't forget to vote today!" notice on the top of the page for anyone who self-described as a Republican, and hides the "I voted!" posts otherwise visible to you if you self-describe as a Democrat, that would be rather worthy of censure, wouldn't it?
The leadership is focused on their fiduciary duty and/or utopian political aspirations. With Trump in office, they're facing the potential for negative regulatory actions against them for the first time since the DOJ went after Microsoft in the '90s... And frankly, they deserve it. Facebook and Google have more control over American lives than Standard Oil ever did.
Republicans might have a reputation for being pro-Big Business, but being yelled at for years by overpowered tech companies and their left-to-far-left workers can cause folks to do some surprising things with the recently-sharpened anti-monopoly perspectives.
It feels like the last major wave of legislation about internet companies, free speech, monopolization, and the like, happened in the late '90s and early 2000s. (DMCA, CCOPA, etc.) IMO it's time for an update of some of that to be better reflect the reality of what the internet has turned into in the last 5-10 years.
Slashdot Mirror
Chroot into your damaged install, mount a devtmpfs and a /proc, maybe /sys,
then, "for p in $(rpm -qa); do rpm --setperms $p; done"
Works on rpm-based distros at least.
If it's changing all the modes to 000 or something, do a "chmod -R 755 /etc" or something on whatever files are causing trouble, then run the above to restore them to the correct state.
Yeah, I was going to post something similar. Unfortunately, of course, you're still hosed on userland files and anything non-packaged. And the kind of people running bleeding edge npm are probably those who barely understand permissions to begin with.
On any RHEL system that's the first place I'd start, then try to pick through the debris of what was left.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmH7tAJ0SfA
"I'll be honest, we're throwin' science at the wall here to see here what sticks. No idea what it'll do. Probably nothing.
Best case scenario, you might get some superpowers. Worst case, some tumors. Which we'll cut out."
(And honestly, no one made a Portal reference already? Really? Oi.)
The Microsoft brand, on the other hand, has become much stronger under Satya Nadella's stewardship. It's gained respect.
That has to be written by a shill. Windows 8 and 10 lost whatever 'respect' they think they had left.
The anti-Windows 10 cauterwauling is mostly a Slashdot and niche thing. While Metro and Windows 8 had *major* issues, Windows 10 is doing quite well and is actually a pretty stable OS. It's probably my favorite experience I've had with Windows and reliability since back in the Win2kPro days.
Of course, tech users aren't the hugest drivers... Although important, it's really "consumer" mindshare that would be the determining factor. Anecdotally, non-techies seem to appreciate and be aware of "Microsoft" more than they have been, especially as Apple's stumbling on the computer side (with expensive options) has led to exploration of options.
"Bing" works as something to type into the address bar, but I can't say it's great as a brand. +1 to the article. "Microsoft Search" seems good enough. (And competition at the oligarchy level for Google is at least better than an effective monopoly.)
I can virtually guarantee that he was confused and enabled his mobile number as "the" mobile number on his Facebook account when setting up 2FA. (In fact, I'd be surprised if Facebook allowed a distinct 2FA number that hadn't already be validated as belonging to you to be set.)
As for why it showed up on his wall, maybe if he used Facebook more he'd realize that that's a feature. Send an SMS to the 5 digit SMS code and it will be interpreted as a FB Status update (unless it matches another string, like poking a user using a distinct notification number).
It's rarely used nowadays because a majority of folks probably use the app, but if you want to update via text message that's how you do it.
Ticket closed: PEBCAK (and stop whining)
Any who will determine is it is trustworthy, let me guess... AI...
Obviously it will be the Ministry of Truth.
Do you really care about this sort of trivia?
I really don't care about this sort of trivia. I hate that, much as spam drowns out the email you want to get, the blathering from the Rust community seems intent on making me have to care by flooding out the useful things with their social justice coding PR.
So workarounds, like the various Linux package managers, were created to try to handle the complex dependencies between applications and their shared libraries. This is effectively a complex form of static linking, done by keeping shared library versions consistent with the installed applications.
When that proved to be problematic, such as when there were different applications that depended on different versions of the same shared library, we started seeing a move toward this "containerization" nonsense. There are different approaches used, but again they all have one thing in common: they're a complex way of imitating static linking.
Here's the thing though... That wasn't problematic. We have perfectly good Linux distros that provide perfectly good platforms using dynamic linking. We have them at varying levels of stability and long term support: RHEL and its derivatives if you need Enterprise ABI guarantees so that you *don't* ever have a chance of shared library incompatibilities on the platform, and Fedora if you want more frequent updates, although with ABI stability mostly guaranteed within a given annual OS release.
These two OS's work fine. Yes, there were dependency problems initially, but yum and apt-get solved resolution issues DECADES ago. The only people who complain about dependency hell nowadays are those who don't understand that some things change and some things stay the same, and that you ideally will recompile for a new OS release.
In short, the people who don't understand this are Windows Developers and Java Developers.
They have no idea how shared libraries work on Linux, have little or no understanding of package management generally (Literally the only people who complain about 'dependency hell' are those trying to use RPM/dpkg to do YUM/apt-get's job.), or are trying to iterate with ABI breakage every 3 weeks like a generic Silicon Valley d-bag.
Statically compiling everything, adding three layers of virtualization nonsense, putting out 500MB .jar files, or live-including left-pad npm, because you don't know how packaging works is the epitome of the current industry approach. And it sucks for everyone else trying to keep some sanity in the mix.
This makes so much sense. Back when RAM and storage space were relatively scarce it seemed the way to go without a doubt. I observed the advantages, but we have since outgrown the scarcity of resources available on modern systems, and a self contained program does seem to make far more sense in this age of computing.
Lolwut?
Not when my phone keeps running out of space.
Not when some glorified IRC chat program (Stride) requires 400MB of resident memory to run.
Not when some idiot replaced perfect good shell scripts with a compiled monstrosity that's 10 times larger in an attempt to shave 5 seconds off a reboot that never happens.
People are making all sorts of dumb decisions because they think resources are limitless again. They're not. Resources are always limited. The only time things change are when the actual underlying technology changes. (E.g., moving from spindles to SSD means I/O performance has improved drastically for some use cases.)
Funny, it said it wasn't a drill, so the worker treated the alert as the real deal.
I'm glad we have that person ready to save Hawaii from a missile strike. If anything they deserve a raise for doing such a standup job.
Captcha: grenade
It also told the worker to exercise a lot, which apparently they didn't do.
Okay... That was funny.
Congratulations you invented LOGO!
Or, they could've dug through their own software catalogue:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HyperCard
I love HyperCard and HyperTalk; but it does NOT have nearly the "Natural Language" properties that Bill Atkinson and Dan Winkler thought it did. And as far as "wordiness", COBOL has NOTHING on HyperTalk!!!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Proof: One has to look no further than AppleScript, which is the syntactic kissing-cousin of HyperTalk.
That, then, raises a second question: If Apple didn't want to, or couldn't remember how to, reach back into the 80s and 90s, why not beef up AppleScript?
It's still an integral part of current OS releases, provides some level of natural text entry (or at least has DWIM syntax that's approachable by English-speaking beginners), and should provide a foundation for interfaces and modification easily enough.
There's so much that could have been done with AppleScript and OSA in general that hasn't... And yet here they are reinventing things again. Apple 2017 truly is reminiscent of Apple 1993.
It will be useful when we're trying to fight SkyNet during the inevitable upcoming robot apocalypse.
Congratulations, guys, you've re-invented static binaries. I'm glad you're happy. I look forward to what we have in the smartphone ecosystem now, with vulnerabilities out the yin-yang, and 25 apps getting updated when some weird library has a flaw in it, and your other 75 not getting updated at all and remaining vulnerable even though you don't realize it.
Everything old is new again. Woot.
The problem is that Comcast does not have a contract with Netflix and wants to force them into one so that it can make money off of Netflix's successful business. It is quite literally a protection racket ("those are some nice bits you have there...wouldn't want anything to happen to them, eh?"), and that is what net neutrality is meant to stop.
That's not the hysteria that people are spreading around, however.
Blocking is dumb. The Internet is designed to route around blocking, and Comcast knows this as well as any ISP employee does. Members of the public are already using VPNs in some place to get around geographic blocks to Netflix in some locations anyway and this use would simply accelerate. Comcast's ISP side are not the same as the Cable TV side and they're aware of this.
The arguments being made are either a) outright "censorship" of bad ideas (which is where Ajit Pai is absolutely right -- Google/Facebook has far more ability to meaningfully do this for the world than your particular ISP does), or b) QoS.
The problem with whining about QoS is that this is a legitimate technical decision an ISP might make for actual, bona-fide, service-provider reasons to ensure reasonable bandwidth. (Do you sign up for Internet on a plane? Congratulations, your Netflix is blocked there. You also don't have a reasonable "choice" at 35,000 feet. Go sue.) Alternatively, look at mobile ISPs -- they actually provide different cost plan structures and bandwidth allotments depending on how you want to access streaming media NOW and the market is healthy. This is a feature, not a bug.
With the added speeds of 4G LTE available in most populated areas of the US, and 5G (whatever tech is used) in the years to come, mobile data services are already able to match what expected broadband wireline services were able to provide only a few years ago -- and certainly within the FCC "broadband" definition in many cases, and at varying price-points.
Yes, truly rural customers might have few or 1 option, but that's been the case forever and is nothing new. Certainly nothing that's changed since 2015 when this rule came into affect.
The dumb, dumb arguments around Net Neutrality even here on places like Slashdot where techs should know better about the actually necessity of the regulation at this time boggles my mind. I'm sure the giant Social Media Services, communication platforms, and Google/Facebook advertising networks (which regulate the financial livelihood of 90% of the commercial ad-supported entities in tech and change policies on a whim) are glad to have the spotlight taken off of their arbitrary and potentially devastating behavior because someone thinks their cable company suddenly cares what website you personally go to.
Srsly, dude? Mac OSX is pretty much the slickest thing out there. Which OS, specifically, do you want Tim Cook to give you back? System 7? System 8? Because those were so much better..?
System 7.0.1 was awesome -- I don't know what you're talking about. And Mac OS 8.6 (with the NuKernel and a few cherry-picked Copland features) was damn stable for me too. Much better that MacOS 9, which was only useful for giving FileVault and VoicePrint login demos...
But try to stick 8.6 on Rhapsody and you kind of had a halfway decent OS, ya know?
Except for the fact the deep learning systems, may not be efficient enough. There are some tasks which it excels at, however some tasks there just isn't the volume or rewards for outcomes for the system to adapt fast enough to.
That sort of goes out the window once the Singularity hits, though. A sufficiently advanced AI with the ability to goal-seek improvements to itself will wrap its own subsystems in learning simulators. It won't need to train on real-world disasters, it will simply iterate on simulated ones and then iterate on updating the simulation. Meta-learning, if you will.
The Go AI, which is now approximately 100 times smarter than it was before and is becoming nearly impenetrable for Go experts to understand how/why it's making the decisions it is, is a prime example of this. After a certain point, its own mechanism of adaptation outpaces our own.
Why is Apple slightly less on the privacy-sucking radar (for most folks) -- battles with the FBI over the Secure Enclave notwithstanding? Because they aren't an advertising company and don't have a vested interest in prioritizing data collection on users over all else. (FWIW, neither is Microsoft, which makes the outcry over low-level telemetry stuff in Windows 10 here seem way over-blown.)
Facebook and, probably more importantly, Google, control 90% of all advertising on the web. With the crater-like decline in print advertising, and the in-progress collapse in traditional OTA and cable non-Tivo'd television (meaning broadcast, non-microtargeted) viewership, this is a HUGE chunk of National revenue combined with a HUGE chunk of data on nearly every internet-using person out there.
Breaking off data collection and advertising from the technology sides of the companies are the only way to ensure privacy practices are respected. Yes, that means disruption. Too bad. The alternative is looking more and more like the type of Dystopian, corporate-led Orwellian state that most of us believed was confined to bad science-fiction.
It's not the late-90s any more, despite the prevalence of Clinton sex scandals in the news. Time to revisit the regulations we passed for the internet back then and update them for the modern technology and consumer landscape.
If only there was some sort of Police Work that could be done to solve these crimes without taking away everyone rights of privacy...
For instance, a detailed record of all the calls & text messages you've made and received is available from the cellphone company with your righteous subpoena.
Why do you need into the phone again?
That would have been fine until about 2011. Nowadays, even a novice user can end up "accidentally" using over-the-top services whether they even really intended to or not, let alone someone who was half-way competent and intending to cover their tracks. It's not about getting into their POTS and SMS interfaces, it's about getting into the other data records present on the portable computer system they kept on them 24 hours a day.
Assuming the ipods are iOS based then you could use an app like iPENG classic to make the ipod into a squeezebox player
Then you just need a computer or raspberry pi equivalent to run the server software on and you should be set to go
This is probably the best way to go.
A big question is whether you have multiple speakers you want to broadcast to at once. Also, I'm assuming you mean "iPod Touch" here and not the classic iPods. Classics cannot broadcast on their own except to whatever they're physically docked into (although that itself can do what it wants with it). However, neither has the ability to AirPlay to multiple devices simultaneously (which is what you want for a whole-house solution). Personally, I have a Windows box running iTunes constantly that serves as the main media repository. From there, any iOS device on your network can run the "Remote" App, which allows you to select and control music, as well as control multi-speaker output and volume. "Retune" I think is the app I was using on the Android side, although it's been a while.
It can be hard to find AirPlay speakers out there nowadays. I was fortunate enough to pick up 7 or 8 XtremeMac Tango Air speakers a while back for about $60/ea and they're great for this. Find something similar, or an AppleTV to interface with a full HDMI to your stereo system, and you should be all set.
I disagree personally. From what i understand, facebook is what you say, for narcissists.
You understand wrong. I'm a low UID Slashdot user and cranky Unix sysadmin. Facebook is not "for narcissists" any more than any interaction site is. It's simply much, much more efficient at both passive and active communication.
It's clear that not being actually on Facebook (and, presumably, not using social networking services more generally) has distorted your view of them and the issues (and benefits) they raise.
Although the cord-cutting movement has changed this in recent years (at least technically), the "I don't even have a FB" is the "I don't even have a TV" of yesteryear. Snobs who point that usually are ill-equipped to discuss the relative merits and concerns of various forms of broadcast serial media.
I'm not convinced anyone outside of the Bay Area regularly "cod[es] on an iPad on the city bus".
Maybe the hipstery parts of New York City.
I had the pleasure of owning the first Android phone, the HTC Dream (T-Mobile G1) when it was a pretty new thing. The five-row keyboard, trackball, and extra hardware buttons basically meant that I had a tiny "laptop" in my pocket. I used it for VNC. I used it for SSH. I even ran a Debian overlay with X on it just because I could. It made the iPhones look stupid: one button, clunky touch-everything, dumbed down trash.
HTC Thunderbolt owner here, previously a connoisseur of the LG series, from the EnV on up to the Voyager. (Now I'm back to LG's G# and V20 ones.)
I'd love for a physical keyboard to return, but I also need a full-fledged and full-sized screen. Honestly, if something like the Sidewinder came back, I'd really seriously considering it. That's how much I love writing text.
The problem is that the market is limited, and with the learning spell check on most phones, the poor accuracy of fast touchscreen typing is often made up for with relatively little effort by the user all things considered.
For those that need frequent mobile access to a CLI, we have a better solution now that we didn't have then: Tablets. Set up your iPad with an integrated keyboard cover and you have something that will give you much more joy that anything you had before in a mobile factor for all but the most emergency-focused of sessions.
Apps for big services that have a website are almost always a step backwards and are ALWAYS bloated piles of trash compared to what they should be: a tiny extension for the website to access native phone features that web standards don't exist for. Of course, now we've got standards for most of those too, so why do we still need apps for most things AT ALL? Because Facebook can't mine your damn contacts if they don't have an app, that's why.
Yes and no. NOW, mining data and having closer access to the device is important (especially for advertising-supported apps and social media networks). Once the early days of WAP/WML -> "tablet versions of websites" -> mobile-friendly site conversion was completed, though, the only real reason many apps were created was for the ability to push notifications to the user. Now that there's a web standard for that, a lot of those apps could indeed be turned back into straight web sites -- but that bridge has been crossed and it probably won't be crossed back until the pain and annoyance of updating apps outweighs unified web sites again.
Most people aren't Facebook losers.
Most Americans are: 62% as of June 2017
World-wide, penetration is growing but mostly limited by reliable internet access (hence the internet.org stuff).
I've been online since '92. I lament some of the changes as well. But bitterly walling yourself off from social media makes no sense and causes you to fail to understand the very real cultural issues that have been developing since then and how tech interacts with it.
I was geeky enough in '98 to still seek out Gopher nodes and lament poorly optimized table layouts. That doesn't mean I didn't keep using the web.
Your implication is that only one choice is the "correct, informed" choice.
Actually, no it isn't. I simply request that a rational argument be made by the voter in question. I don't have to agree with it. An *irrational vote* is as dangerous as flipping a coin.
There were rational arguments for all four major-ish candidates in the last cycle, IMO.
"Voter turnout" is not an end in and of itself. If it were, we'd simply make voting mandatory.
The ability to abstain is a basic rule of the common law parliamentary process for good reason: an uninformed voter or one who votes carelessly or randomly dilutes the decision-making ability of the remainder.
I don't want "more people to vote". I want people to "vote carefully". If someone is not capable of voting carefully, then I'd prefer that they don't vote.
In terms of getting "the right people to vote", the Senators didn't mention it, but Facebook has proved that it has the power to do exactly that by adjusting advertising and emotional tone of what it presents to users in their Newsfeed. If Facebook decides on election day to add a little "Don't forget to vote today!" notice on the top of the page for anyone who self-described as a Republican, and hides the "I voted!" posts otherwise visible to you if you self-describe as a Democrat, that would be rather worthy of censure, wouldn't it?
The leadership is focused on their fiduciary duty and/or utopian political aspirations. With Trump in office, they're facing the potential for negative regulatory actions against them for the first time since the DOJ went after Microsoft in the '90s... And frankly, they deserve it. Facebook and Google have more control over American lives than Standard Oil ever did.
Republicans might have a reputation for being pro-Big Business, but being yelled at for years by overpowered tech companies and their left-to-far-left workers can cause folks to do some surprising things with the recently-sharpened anti-monopoly perspectives.
It feels like the last major wave of legislation about internet companies, free speech, monopolization, and the like, happened in the late '90s and early 2000s. (DMCA, CCOPA, etc.) IMO it's time for an update of some of that to be better reflect the reality of what the internet has turned into in the last 5-10 years.