Here's the spec sheet, scroll down a bit to Connectivity and you'll find the supported bands. It shouldn't be hard to find out which bands a particular carrier uses.
One good thing about this phone, I think it's the first one that has a single edition instead of localized versions. With the 3, for example, you could pick North America or Europe/Asia, but not a single phone that supports all of those bands. It looks like they finally have a radio that supports all kinds of bands and a single edition of the phone.
You plug it in with a USB cable and set it to file copy mode instead of charge mode. I just did that last night on my OnePlus One to pull several videos from my phone to computer. It's not hard.
That was the OnePlus Two (2015), they walked back support for Android 7. I have a OnePlus One with the stock Cyanogen still on it, and it's sitting at 6.0.1. The One launched in 2014 and I've been using it since without major issues since the first major update (the first update fixed several problems I had with the phone). It still feels fast and responsive, although it's running an older version of Android at this point. I never felt a need to upgrade the phone, but I may need to give the 5 a shot and sell mine.
Plopping something like this at the top of your file can help too: # ex: set tabstop=4 expandtab smarttab softtabstop=4 shiftwidth=4: # -*- Mode: tab-width: 4; indent-tabs-mode: nil; basic-offset: 4 -*- # (if your editor doesn't know what to do with those, it's not worthy of use)
I delete that cruft when I encounter it. Editor settings belong in an editor, not in my code, thank you very much.
Far better to get it a few years later, than never because the incentive wasn't there.
Yeah? So if someone has 6 months to live, but there's a life-saving medication out there that they can't afford, they're going to just be glad it's there for the rich? When you have 6 months to live, "better late than never" is pretty much the same thing.
Do you really think that the Paris climate deal was the major reason that American consumers decided to install rooftop solar or buy electric or hybrid vehicles?
Hell, the BBC article even said they were fairly certain it meant "coverage"
Why didn't Spicer just say that, then? He could have just said "it was a typo, he obviously meant coverage, let's move on", but instead he seemed to imply that 1) it was intentional and 2) that a "small group of people" got the message. Why not just end the story instead of dragging it out for a long painful death?
South Park already nailed that years ago with Giant Douche vs. Turd Sandwich. They didn't even have to change that for this election because it fits so perfectly. You can even immediately tell which is which.
Since the U.S. only allows a single vote for President, if nobody wins an outright majority (50%), you have to take into account votes for other candidates to really judge the will of the people in that election. This accounts for third parties siphoning votes away from the top candidates.
That doesn't really tell the whole picture, though. For example, I would have voted for Sanders if I could have, who is obviously liberal. Instead I voted for Johnson, who is included in the conservative total. That vote for Johnson doesn't mean I'm happy that Trump is president though.
The vast majority of Trump voters were in reality voting against Clinton, not for him.
I don't know how "vast" the majority was (I think it was actually a pretty small difference), but that was true for both candidates. Both candidates had more people voting against their opponent then in favor of them, at least according to polls a couple months before the election. There was a ridiculous level of apathy or disapproval with both candidates which I think caused a lot of people to not vote at all, which is what allowed the single most-disliked candidate in the history of presidential polling to defeat the second most-disliked candidate in the history of presidential polling. People just didn't really like either of them enough to come out and vote, which is why that election had the lowest voter turnout in 20 years despite the intense non-stop media coverage. And for some reason, back on topic to this article, Hillary just doesn't want to admit that the reason she lost is because people really just don't like her. She'll blame everything except the fact that she colluded with the DNC to force her into place over a more-liked (or at least considerably less-disliked) candidate in Sanders.
The U.S. is Number 1 in abortions of all the developed countries
Out of all of the stats you posted, that one stands out as being obvious. Of course we have the most abortions, we're the most populous developed country. It would be ridiculous if Switzerland had more abortions than the US. That's like saying we eat the most food or drink the most water of any developed country.
I wonder how much wage depression is the result of h-1bs?
Hmmm. Yeah. I also wonder how much termite farts contribute to global warming. Let's list some other things we wonder about in our spare time.
Back on track to the actual story though, I doubt this has much to do with wages, I bet there are a lot of people that could be paid $80,000 per year who would find a way to spend all of it. The article points out that around 40% of people 18-24, and only slightly less (38%?) of people 25-34 are saving exactly $0 each month for a down payment. I doubt this is solely due to wages, I think it has more to do with spending habits. I know that people have always been able to waste money, but within the past 15 years or so there has been an enormous market aimed at younger people with fairly expensive things. There are always new game consoles, games, phones, music players, tablets, etc that are little more than luxury items, which a lot of young people seem to be willing to cough up money for. They can find the money to pay for things like that, but they aren't in the habit of saving for anything major in the longer term. And this has fuck-all to do with H-1B visas.
I'm just trying to point out that there is not an agreed-upon explanation. Even though you might be satisfied with your explanation, not many other people are. It's interesting to say the least, because we haven't seen something like this before. One of the ways we detect or confirm exoplanets is because the particularly large ones will block around 0.5% of the star's light. Something blocking over 20%, that we can't see or otherwise detect, is so far unheard of. Even "only" blocking 3% of the light (the most recent dip) is 6 times more light than a large planet will block. All of this would be perfectly fine if we could detect the thing doing the blocking, the difficult part is that we can't detect any dust or gas, or any other heated object.
As for the artificial explanation, obviously that's an extreme long shot, but my major disappoint there is our tendency to say that if we don't detect any radio signals, then there must not be life there. That seems like a really narrow criterion for detecting life from 1300 light years away. I don't know of a better one, but I'm not really satisfied with the conclusion that there can't be life there because we pointed a radio telescope at it for a couple hours and didn't detect anything.
You're linking to a paper published a year and half ago, if that's the correct explanation then why did Tabby send out a Twitter blast to a bunch of observatories, and why did they respond by looking at the star? It's a "family" of exocomets or planetesimal fragments, right? We've known that for a year and half, why redirect all of our telescopes to watch it when it happens again?
Oh, and why isn't that cloud of comets or fragments giving off any IR radiation that would be expected? And, if it's gas, why can't we measure the absorption to figure out which gas it is? You've read the article fully, so I'm sure you know the answers to those.
I did see an article which mentioned that the latest dip in brightness is similar to an event that happened 3 years ago, which is why they are predicting more dips this week. But the real interesting thing about that is, if there is in fact an object orbiting that star at a distance that it takes 3 years to go around, and it's capable of blocking this much of the light, then that object is larger than the star itself. If it was a cloud of dust, it would be radiating the IR that it is absorbing from the star. These are the kinds of things which make this star interesting, and even though you might be satisfied with that year and half old guess, astronomers aren't and they're still looking.
Let me give you some advice the next time you want to criticize Wikipedia. Go click on that link above to the Wiki article. Now, look at the text, notice how it has various numbers in brackets in superscript. You can hover over them and some text will pop up. That's called a "reference". Those "references" are where the claims in the article come from. If you click on one of those, or scroll allllll the way down to the bottom, you'll see the list of references for the article, all 283 of them. Those are what you need to attack the credibility of, because the Wikipedia article itself is really just a collection of claims given in those references. Just go ahead and start at #1 and work your way down, debunking each of those references. Make sure not to skip #4, which quotes a report from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and National Intelligence Council:
We assess with high confidence that Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election, the consistent goals of which were to undermine public faith in the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump.
Make sure not to skip this one, either. You wouldn't want it to seem like you're cherry-picking.
Indentured servitude isn't far off. When someone's status in the US is H1, first off they aren't considered a resident of the country. So while they can do something like get a driver's license, they have a lot of problems trying to get loans or credit cards, housing, or even go to school. They have no bargaining power with their employer, they don't have any leverage to ask for a raise or any other benefits because if the employer fires them then they have to leave the country now. My wife doesn't work in tech, but she's here on an H1-B and it's been a nightmare for her. We're trying to get her status changed so that she's a resident but that process is slow and opaque. For the time being she can't even travel either, she can't go home to see her family. If she leaves the country then her petition for status adjustment is considered abandoned and the process starts over. Trump isn't making the situation any easier with his executive orders.
the usa is ranked round 23rd in math and god knows what in literacy
*Around
your all doomed there ok , if you want to teach kids that might actually learn move to another nation
*You're
I'd also like to see proper sentence capitalization, and punctuation usage other than excessive exclamation marks. Really, do 13 exclamation marks somehow add more to a sentence than a single one?
Overall I give that post a D. While comprehensible, it needs a lot of work.
A bigger annoyance than being forced to change your password is having the characters that you can use restricted. I can understand minimum complexity requirements, but I've seen some systems where the list of characters that I'm not allowed to use sounds like they're using my password to name a directory. I see no technical reason for restricting the list of possible characters, or the maximum length for that matter. When I find a system that tells me I can't use certain characters in a password that's an immediate red flag that these people are probably storing in plain text.
Just out of curiosity, do you happen to watch Blu-Ray on a PC? When I play new discs using an Asus drive and Cyberlink PowerDVD I still get a bunch of little digital artifacts like it's having problems decoding or something. It's even worse on VLC, VLC will just straight up crash on certain episodes. The artifacts aren't random either, if I watch the same scene multiple times it shows exactly the same way. The Asus drive doesn't seem to have any updated software either.
Just out of curiosity, what is the good solution to the problem of a vast network of unsecured or insecure IoT devices that have already been deployed? Instead of describing what manufacturers should have done, what good solution do you have for the existing problem?
How would you feel if this was your IoT device that was attacked?
How do you feel when IoT botnets deliver DDOS attacks in the range of hundreds of gigabits per second? Are you still looking for that good solution to the existing problem?
Slashdot Mirror
Here's the spec sheet, scroll down a bit to Connectivity and you'll find the supported bands. It shouldn't be hard to find out which bands a particular carrier uses.
https://oneplus.net/5/specs
One good thing about this phone, I think it's the first one that has a single edition instead of localized versions. With the 3, for example, you could pick North America or Europe/Asia, but not a single phone that supports all of those bands. It looks like they finally have a radio that supports all kinds of bands and a single edition of the phone.
You plug it in with a USB cable and set it to file copy mode instead of charge mode. I just did that last night on my OnePlus One to pull several videos from my phone to computer. It's not hard.
That was the OnePlus Two (2015), they walked back support for Android 7. I have a OnePlus One with the stock Cyanogen still on it, and it's sitting at 6.0.1. The One launched in 2014 and I've been using it since without major issues since the first major update (the first update fixed several problems I had with the phone). It still feels fast and responsive, although it's running an older version of Android at this point. I never felt a need to upgrade the phone, but I may need to give the 5 a shot and sell mine.
This is fake news. If you can't see indents with 2 spaces, another space isn't the solution to your problem. 3 is right out.
Plopping something like this at the top of your file can help too:
# ex: set tabstop=4 expandtab smarttab softtabstop=4 shiftwidth=4:
# -*- Mode: tab-width: 4; indent-tabs-mode: nil; basic-offset: 4 -*- #
(if your editor doesn't know what to do with those, it's not worthy of use)
I delete that cruft when I encounter it. Editor settings belong in an editor, not in my code, thank you very much.
We didn't elect you to troll the President
Hey, speak for yourself, pal.
Far better to get it a few years later, than never because the incentive wasn't there.
Yeah? So if someone has 6 months to live, but there's a life-saving medication out there that they can't afford, they're going to just be glad it's there for the rich? When you have 6 months to live, "better late than never" is pretty much the same thing.
Do you really think that the Paris climate deal was the major reason that American consumers decided to install rooftop solar or buy electric or hybrid vehicles?
Hell, the BBC article even said they were fairly certain it meant "coverage"
Why didn't Spicer just say that, then? He could have just said "it was a typo, he obviously meant coverage, let's move on", but instead he seemed to imply that 1) it was intentional and 2) that a "small group of people" got the message. Why not just end the story instead of dragging it out for a long painful death?
South Park already nailed that years ago with Giant Douche vs. Turd Sandwich. They didn't even have to change that for this election because it fits so perfectly. You can even immediately tell which is which.
Lets not get into where the "vast majority" of likely illegal alien votes were cast either.
Right, all 3 of those votes. I bet 2 of them came from the same place. That's two thirds!
Since the U.S. only allows a single vote for President, if nobody wins an outright majority (50%), you have to take into account votes for other candidates to really judge the will of the people in that election. This accounts for third parties siphoning votes away from the top candidates.
That doesn't really tell the whole picture, though. For example, I would have voted for Sanders if I could have, who is obviously liberal. Instead I voted for Johnson, who is included in the conservative total. That vote for Johnson doesn't mean I'm happy that Trump is president though.
The vast majority of voters voted for Hillary.
For certain definitions of "vast majority" which include a difference of 2.1%.
The vast majority of Trump voters were in reality voting against Clinton, not for him.
I don't know how "vast" the majority was (I think it was actually a pretty small difference), but that was true for both candidates. Both candidates had more people voting against their opponent then in favor of them, at least according to polls a couple months before the election. There was a ridiculous level of apathy or disapproval with both candidates which I think caused a lot of people to not vote at all, which is what allowed the single most-disliked candidate in the history of presidential polling to defeat the second most-disliked candidate in the history of presidential polling. People just didn't really like either of them enough to come out and vote, which is why that election had the lowest voter turnout in 20 years despite the intense non-stop media coverage. And for some reason, back on topic to this article, Hillary just doesn't want to admit that the reason she lost is because people really just don't like her. She'll blame everything except the fact that she colluded with the DNC to force her into place over a more-liked (or at least considerably less-disliked) candidate in Sanders.
The U.S. is Number 1 in abortions of all the developed countries
Out of all of the stats you posted, that one stands out as being obvious. Of course we have the most abortions, we're the most populous developed country. It would be ridiculous if Switzerland had more abortions than the US. That's like saying we eat the most food or drink the most water of any developed country.
I wonder how much wage depression is the result of h-1bs?
Hmmm. Yeah. I also wonder how much termite farts contribute to global warming. Let's list some other things we wonder about in our spare time.
Back on track to the actual story though, I doubt this has much to do with wages, I bet there are a lot of people that could be paid $80,000 per year who would find a way to spend all of it. The article points out that around 40% of people 18-24, and only slightly less (38%?) of people 25-34 are saving exactly $0 each month for a down payment. I doubt this is solely due to wages, I think it has more to do with spending habits. I know that people have always been able to waste money, but within the past 15 years or so there has been an enormous market aimed at younger people with fairly expensive things. There are always new game consoles, games, phones, music players, tablets, etc that are little more than luxury items, which a lot of young people seem to be willing to cough up money for. They can find the money to pay for things like that, but they aren't in the habit of saving for anything major in the longer term. And this has fuck-all to do with H-1B visas.
I'm just trying to point out that there is not an agreed-upon explanation. Even though you might be satisfied with your explanation, not many other people are. It's interesting to say the least, because we haven't seen something like this before. One of the ways we detect or confirm exoplanets is because the particularly large ones will block around 0.5% of the star's light. Something blocking over 20%, that we can't see or otherwise detect, is so far unheard of. Even "only" blocking 3% of the light (the most recent dip) is 6 times more light than a large planet will block. All of this would be perfectly fine if we could detect the thing doing the blocking, the difficult part is that we can't detect any dust or gas, or any other heated object.
As for the artificial explanation, obviously that's an extreme long shot, but my major disappoint there is our tendency to say that if we don't detect any radio signals, then there must not be life there. That seems like a really narrow criterion for detecting life from 1300 light years away. I don't know of a better one, but I'm not really satisfied with the conclusion that there can't be life there because we pointed a radio telescope at it for a couple hours and didn't detect anything.
You're linking to a paper published a year and half ago, if that's the correct explanation then why did Tabby send out a Twitter blast to a bunch of observatories, and why did they respond by looking at the star? It's a "family" of exocomets or planetesimal fragments, right? We've known that for a year and half, why redirect all of our telescopes to watch it when it happens again?
Oh, and why isn't that cloud of comets or fragments giving off any IR radiation that would be expected? And, if it's gas, why can't we measure the absorption to figure out which gas it is? You've read the article fully, so I'm sure you know the answers to those.
I did see an article which mentioned that the latest dip in brightness is similar to an event that happened 3 years ago, which is why they are predicting more dips this week. But the real interesting thing about that is, if there is in fact an object orbiting that star at a distance that it takes 3 years to go around, and it's capable of blocking this much of the light, then that object is larger than the star itself. If it was a cloud of dust, it would be radiating the IR that it is absorbing from the star. These are the kinds of things which make this star interesting, and even though you might be satisfied with that year and half old guess, astronomers aren't and they're still looking.
Let me give you some advice the next time you want to criticize Wikipedia. Go click on that link above to the Wiki article. Now, look at the text, notice how it has various numbers in brackets in superscript. You can hover over them and some text will pop up. That's called a "reference". Those "references" are where the claims in the article come from. If you click on one of those, or scroll allllll the way down to the bottom, you'll see the list of references for the article, all 283 of them. Those are what you need to attack the credibility of, because the Wikipedia article itself is really just a collection of claims given in those references. Just go ahead and start at #1 and work your way down, debunking each of those references. Make sure not to skip #4, which quotes a report from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and National Intelligence Council:
We assess with high confidence that Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election, the consistent goals of which were to undermine public faith in the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump.
Make sure not to skip this one, either. You wouldn't want it to seem like you're cherry-picking.
Indentured servitude isn't far off. When someone's status in the US is H1, first off they aren't considered a resident of the country. So while they can do something like get a driver's license, they have a lot of problems trying to get loans or credit cards, housing, or even go to school. They have no bargaining power with their employer, they don't have any leverage to ask for a raise or any other benefits because if the employer fires them then they have to leave the country now. My wife doesn't work in tech, but she's here on an H1-B and it's been a nightmare for her. We're trying to get her status changed so that she's a resident but that process is slow and opaque. For the time being she can't even travel either, she can't go home to see her family. If she leaves the country then her petition for status adjustment is considered abandoned and the process starts over. Trump isn't making the situation any easier with his executive orders.
the usa is ranked round 23rd in math and god knows what in literacy
*Around
your all doomed there ok , if you want to teach kids that might actually learn move to another nation
*You're
I'd also like to see proper sentence capitalization, and punctuation usage other than excessive exclamation marks. Really, do 13 exclamation marks somehow add more to a sentence than a single one?
Overall I give that post a D. While comprehensible, it needs a lot of work.
A bigger annoyance than being forced to change your password is having the characters that you can use restricted. I can understand minimum complexity requirements, but I've seen some systems where the list of characters that I'm not allowed to use sounds like they're using my password to name a directory. I see no technical reason for restricting the list of possible characters, or the maximum length for that matter. When I find a system that tells me I can't use certain characters in a password that's an immediate red flag that these people are probably storing in plain text.
Just out of curiosity, do you happen to watch Blu-Ray on a PC? When I play new discs using an Asus drive and Cyberlink PowerDVD I still get a bunch of little digital artifacts like it's having problems decoding or something. It's even worse on VLC, VLC will just straight up crash on certain episodes. The artifacts aren't random either, if I watch the same scene multiple times it shows exactly the same way. The Asus drive doesn't seem to have any updated software either.
You may have read too much into that post.
A bad solution is still a bad solution.
Just out of curiosity, what is the good solution to the problem of a vast network of unsecured or insecure IoT devices that have already been deployed? Instead of describing what manufacturers should have done, what good solution do you have for the existing problem?
How would you feel if this was your IoT device that was attacked?
How do you feel when IoT botnets deliver DDOS attacks in the range of hundreds of gigabits per second? Are you still looking for that good solution to the existing problem?