I'm not a big soda drinker, but I will stop completely if they start pulling things out of their ass.
You're probably not in their target demographic - they'll make more money turning regular soda drinkers from Coke to Pepsi than convincing an occasional soda drinker (who is probably not even brand-loyal) to drink an occasional Pepsi, it seems unlikely that they'll turn an occasional drinker into a regular drinker. The average American drinks 45 gallons of soda a year (~16 ounces/day) -- this is who they want.
You only have this surveillance if you gave Google access to the mic permission.
I suggest you go into your phone and access permissions, microphone and turn off everything but the camera app and phone apps.
The big problem with Android is you cannot deny apps NETWORK access, so I'd like to stop the phone and camera apps accessing networks.
You have a lot of faith that the creator of the operating system didn't give themselves a back-door way to enable the microphone anytime they like, regardless of what you've set the permissions to.
While I feel pretty confident that when I deny a random app's access to the microphone, that app really can't access it, but I have less confidence Google themselves can't turn on the mic anytime they want.
You seem to misunderstand -- the parachute isn't meant for normal landings, it's a last-ditch effort to save your life in the event your personal helicopter has a catastrophic failure...[ a study ]... found a 13-fold decrease in the odds of a fatality when the Cirrus Airframe Parachute System (CAPS, developed with Popov’s company, BRS Aerospace) was deployed in an accident, versus when it was not.
"last time I checked, the paper has not been cited by anybody." Whoops! Smells like unreproducible research.
Look how long the lines are on that huge parachute, nearly 100 feet. Expecting to get line stretch (beginning of deceleration) in less than 500 feet is pure fantasy. So, below 500 feet you're dead. Which will be the normal operating altitude of a flying car.
For someone that insists on peer reviewed papers, you sure know a lot about how imaginary flying cars will operate. So I'm going to need a citation for this 500 ft operating ceiling.
Obvious to who? You do know that a parachute big enough to land an entire vehicle and payload safely is large, and requires much more vertical altitude to open than your garden variety base jumping rig. And do you think a parachute is reliable like a doorbell? No, they flap and swirl and have vortexes, occasional line tangles... a parachute is not like a doorbell. You can't reliably predict how much vertical altitude it needs to open. Good luck trusting your life to a parachute at 300 feet and falling fast.
Also, where is your parachute going to land? Are you driving your flying care over buildings, wires, water, trees, busy roads? Is it windy? Dark? Parachute, yah right, that's the ticket to surviving your flying car power outage.
You seem to misunderstand -- the parachute isn't meant for normal landings, it's a last-ditch effort to save your life in the event your personal helicopter has a catastrophic failure.
Hitting the ground is unavoidable, but having a parachute can make the difference between surviving and not.
It's not like the it's a new idea, some aircraft already have emergency parachutes:
[ a study ]... found a 13-fold decrease in the odds of a fatality when the Cirrus Airframe Parachute System (CAPS, developed with Popov’s company, BRS Aerospace) was deployed in an accident, versus when it was not.
Might not matter much to a commando or drug lord, but for an insurance salesman... these things will have a 100% fatality rate per power failure.
Aside from the obvious solution of parachutes, these drones would have multiple redundant systems, including power. So with 16 small propellers, there could be 4 completely separate power and control systems, if you lose one, you only lose 25% lift, so you might need to make an emergency landing (and maybe it will be a little rough), but you won't necessarily die due to a simple electrical/mechanical failure.
"Where is the benefit of having it in your household? It's created to addict
The same applies to TV, games, playing cards, dice, books that aren't textbooks, alcohol, coffee, tea, sugar, etc. There are lots of things in the household that you don't really *need*, aren't required to sustain life, and you may use only because you enjoy it, not because there's any practical use/requirement.
How the fuck did this ever make it into production. Why is a 'second sensor' an upsell?
I think it's just the Disagree indicator (and Angle of Attack indicator) that are the add-ons, the second second comes standard, but only one is used for a time, and the pilot is expected to understand when MCAS was acting inappropriately. Turns out that determination (and resolution by turning it off) was not as clear as Boeing thought it was.
Though I'd also question why the airlines decided to save a few bucks by not buying it -- I bought the $3000 automated emergency braking upgrade for my car (which probably shoud have cost less than $500 if it wasn't bundled with other stuff I didn't need or want), so why didn't airlines pay the $80K for the extra indicators on a $100M airplane?
Forget about this. EU will definitely revenge for WV dieselgate, but everything else will stay where it is now. Look at Intel's Meltdown and Spectrum processors vulnerabilities, all exciting processors produced since 2005 are basically must replaced as soon as possible. Do you see anybody to sue Intel? The answer is "no", so it is the same for Boeing
Wait, what does West Virginia have to do with Diesel? I thought that was Coal Country and they were just waiting for Trump to bring back steam locomotives to make rail great again?
Electrical resistance heating is an expensive way to heat a house in any state, so you can still save money with LED's if you, say, have gas heat.
So what you are saying is that because there is a situation where someone benefits (gas heat)... lets stop talking about the situations where someone else can benefit (electric heat) if the government wasnt demanding that they live sub-optimally so coastal elites can feel good about them shallow empty lives...
No, I'm saying that there are very few people that are in a situation where they can even break even on the energy costs (resistance heating nearly year round), so it's not even worth making an exception for them since LED's are so cheap and long lived nowadays that even if you don't break even on the energy, you will on the overall cost of the bulbs.
The electricity difference is over rated in many states, where any "waste" energy helps heat the house in winter. [Now in summer, or Arizona you pay twice, for incandescants and to cool the house down !)
Electrical resistance heating is an expensive way to heat a house in any state, so you can still save money with LED's if you, say, have gas heat. Also lamps tend to be located in the ceiling where much of the heat escapes into the attic instead of heating the house.
Even if you heat your house with electrical resistance heating 9 months a year, LED's still pay for themselves after a few years.
Obvious solution: Buy them online, after reading the reviews.
I buy mine from Amazon, and only if they have at least 4.5 stars after several hundred reviews.
No problems so far.
That's not really safe -- there are lots of products with hundreds, even thousands of mostly fake reviews.
Better to stick with a known name brand. And that way you have some assurance that they've done longevity testing since they'll still be around to service that 3 or 5 year warranty. Bulbs from a fly-by-night manufacturer only have to last until the company changes names.
The bottom line is you're really not interesting enough for Google to care about. They probably already know your address from related searches and indexes of public information.
What are you talking about? It's not like they dedicate an employee to monitor everyone, their automated algorithms track *everyone* (even if you don't directly use Google services). So no one is too small to escape their interest.
But like you said, most people probably aren't diligent enough to keep Google from identifying them - simply not subscribing to a service won't stop that.
Oh, you mean the 1B customers that bought a phone so they can run apps on it?
But I say let the consumers decide how much that consistent experience is worth -- let them pay Spotify direct, or pay 30% more to use Apple's system to pay through the app.
And that fee covers everything from credit card processing to hosting and bandwidth, which for all of the free app downloads that Spotify enjoys is a non-negligible amount of money.
I think Spotify is more than happy to cover their own ~3% or so credit card processing fees.
The app is around 30MB, so even at 10 cents/GB for bandwidth, that's $0.003 per download, and again, I think Spotify would be more than happy to pay that if they could host the app on their own servers.
Apple charges developers $99/year for the app store, and developers should be able to choose whether or not they want to pay Apple for credit card fulfillment and bandwidth. Most small developers will likely still want to pay Apple, but larger developers may want to take that on themselves.
If she had an alibi for every event they claim she was part of, then that in itself is suspicious. Who would have an alibi for every random time that somebody tried to frame you for something?
If someone hacked her laptop and was using it to hack the grades while she was sleeping or away, then it's pretty likely that she had an alibi for every occurrence - I can document every time I'm sleeping with my smart watch and my smart-thermostat motion sensors. Every time I leave the house, it's captured on the cloud cam in the garage, as well as the camera at the corner gas station that I have to pass to leave the neighborhood. My car is pretty new, so I wouldn't be surprised if it was tracking me through the navigation system or other car computer. When I go for a run or a bike ride, my smart watch tracks me. When I go to work, my employer has video and badge swipe evidence. When I travel, I have airline receipts, or if driving, toll and gas receipts. And of course, I have smart phone, so both the phone manufacturer and my cellular carrier knows my every move. Some of these can be faked, others are outside of my control.
In modern times, it's pretty hard to *not* have an alibi unless you're trying not to.
Nope, what I'm going to be doing is looking at my speedometer instead of the road because that's what they've trained me to do. They've also trained some idiots to break on green lights. So while I'm distracted by my speedo, there's a good chance someone ahead of me is breaking for no reason.
I've never seen anyone brake at a green light at red light camera intersections, but I do see them stop earlier in the yellow, which sometimes causes problems when the car behind them had no intention of stopping, so needs to slam on the brakes to stop before he hits the guy that stopped when the light turned yellow.
It's not a problem for most drivers since if there's room for the car in front of you to stop on the yellow, there's more than enough room for the cars behind them to stop. But apparently some drivers can't even monitor their speed and drive safely, so I'm not surprised that they have trouble with traffic lights.
Iâ(TM)m sorry, I do not believe your own legal counsel agreed that misrepresentation (saying you had a client who was going to send spam if you did not) was a lawful way of escaping the contract.
They didn't know what our plan was, we just asked what would happen if the ISP terminated the contract for any reason. And we actually did have that client, but he wasn't a "spammer" per se - he was well known for emailing to "unverified contact lists" and ISP hopping as he got shut down for too many spam reports.
I once got an ISP to wave the early termination penalty by threatening to force them to invoke the "misuse of services" cancellation. The contract was poorly written and only had an early termination penalty (in the amount of all payments due for the remainder of the multiyear contract) in the event that I cancelled, the only penalty for misuse was "immediate termination of services". Our own legal counsel agreed -- if they terminated our service, we didn't have to pay.
So I called my sales rep to cancel and he said we' d have to pay the early termination penalty. So I told him that we had a client who was ready to use the connection to send spam (which was one of the activities they prohibited), and of course the sales rep said that they'd have to terminate our service and we'd still have to pay the penalty. So I asked him to run it past his own legal department and get back to me - this ISP already had an issue with their customers sending spam.
They let us terminate early without penalty. I never did service with that vendor again, so I don't know if they updated their contracts. They are long gone now, having been acquired (and that company acquired too).
Lawyers abused DCMA/Copyright, company initially complies, people notice it's not legit and complain, company then investigates and fixes it. The system works, that's still 99%+ uptime. Not even a bad outcome.
But it's still a bad system -- it was a Verge editor that asked for the strike to be rescinded -- if not for that (which was surely only due to perceived bad publicity), then what would have happened?
Shaming DMCA abusers into backing down doesn't sound like a reasonable policy.
13 bits of week numbers is about 137 years... Shouldn't it be good for at least a century? Presumably they moved the epoch for the new field as well.
Yeah, that was a typo, I should have typed "2137". I noticed it after I posted, didn't think anyone else would so didn't bother posted a followup. If only there was some web technology allowed one to edit posts.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not a big soda drinker, but I will stop completely if they start pulling things out of their ass.
You're probably not in their target demographic - they'll make more money turning regular soda drinkers from Coke to Pepsi than convincing an occasional soda drinker (who is probably not even brand-loyal) to drink an occasional Pepsi, it seems unlikely that they'll turn an occasional drinker into a regular drinker. The average American drinks 45 gallons of soda a year (~16 ounces/day) -- this is who they want.
You only have this surveillance if you gave Google access to the mic permission.
I suggest you go into your phone and access permissions, microphone and turn off everything but the camera app and phone apps.
The big problem with Android is you cannot deny apps NETWORK access, so I'd like to stop the phone and camera apps accessing networks.
You have a lot of faith that the creator of the operating system didn't give themselves a back-door way to enable the microphone anytime they like, regardless of what you've set the permissions to.
While I feel pretty confident that when I deny a random app's access to the microphone, that app really can't access it, but I have less confidence Google themselves can't turn on the mic anytime they want.
You seem to misunderstand -- the parachute isn't meant for normal landings, it's a last-ditch effort to save your life in the event your personal helicopter has a catastrophic failure ...[ a study ]... found a 13-fold decrease in the odds of a fatality when the Cirrus Airframe Parachute System (CAPS, developed with Popov’s company, BRS Aerospace) was deployed in an accident, versus when it was not.
"last time I checked, the paper has not been cited by anybody." Whoops! Smells like unreproducible research.
Look how long the lines are on that huge parachute, nearly 100 feet. Expecting to get line stretch (beginning of deceleration) in less than 500 feet is pure fantasy. So, below 500 feet you're dead. Which will be the normal operating altitude of a flying car.
For someone that insists on peer reviewed papers, you sure know a lot about how imaginary flying cars will operate. So I'm going to need a citation for this 500 ft operating ceiling.
Aside from the obvious solution of parachutes...
Obvious to who? You do know that a parachute big enough to land an entire vehicle and payload safely is large, and requires much more vertical altitude to open than your garden variety base jumping rig. And do you think a parachute is reliable like a doorbell? No, they flap and swirl and have vortexes, occasional line tangles... a parachute is not like a doorbell. You can't reliably predict how much vertical altitude it needs to open. Good luck trusting your life to a parachute at 300 feet and falling fast.
Also, where is your parachute going to land? Are you driving your flying care over buildings, wires, water, trees, busy roads? Is it windy? Dark? Parachute, yah right, that's the ticket to surviving your flying car power outage.
Splat calculator says you have 5 seconds to live.
You seem to misunderstand -- the parachute isn't meant for normal landings, it's a last-ditch effort to save your life in the event your personal helicopter has a catastrophic failure.
Hitting the ground is unavoidable, but having a parachute can make the difference between surviving and not.
It's not like the it's a new idea, some aircraft already have emergency parachutes:
https://www.airspacemag.com/da...
[ a study ]... found a 13-fold decrease in the odds of a fatality when the Cirrus Airframe Parachute System (CAPS, developed with Popov’s company, BRS Aerospace) was deployed in an accident, versus when it was not.
Might not matter much to a commando or drug lord, but for an insurance salesman... these things will have a 100% fatality rate per power failure.
Aside from the obvious solution of parachutes, these drones would have multiple redundant systems, including power. So with 16 small propellers, there could be 4 completely separate power and control systems, if you lose one, you only lose 25% lift, so you might need to make an emergency landing (and maybe it will be a little rough), but you won't necessarily die due to a simple electrical/mechanical failure.
On a side note, also can't have protestors messing with tunnels or aerial traffic, unlike bus routes and roads.
Seems like it'd be even easier for protestors to disrupt aerial traffic than road traffic with a drone fleet - possibly autonomous to prevent jamming.
Do any of those Amazonian countries offer 2-day prime shipping? I think not.
"Where is the benefit of having it in your household? It's created to addict
The same applies to TV, games, playing cards, dice, books that aren't textbooks, alcohol, coffee, tea, sugar, etc. There are lots of things in the household that you don't really *need*, aren't required to sustain life, and you may use only because you enjoy it, not because there's any practical use/requirement.
How the fuck did this ever make it into production. Why is a 'second sensor' an upsell?
I think it's just the Disagree indicator (and Angle of Attack indicator) that are the add-ons, the second second comes standard, but only one is used for a time, and the pilot is expected to understand when MCAS was acting inappropriately. Turns out that determination (and resolution by turning it off) was not as clear as Boeing thought it was.
Though I'd also question why the airlines decided to save a few bucks by not buying it -- I bought the $3000 automated emergency braking upgrade for my car (which probably shoud have cost less than $500 if it wasn't bundled with other stuff I didn't need or want), so why didn't airlines pay the $80K for the extra indicators on a $100M airplane?
Forget about this. EU will definitely revenge for WV dieselgate, but everything else will stay where it is now.
Look at Intel's Meltdown and Spectrum processors vulnerabilities, all exciting processors produced since 2005 are basically must replaced as soon as possible. Do you see anybody to sue Intel? The answer is "no", so it is the same for Boeing
Wait, what does West Virginia have to do with Diesel? I thought that was Coal Country and they were just waiting for Trump to bring back steam locomotives to make rail great again?
You forgot the quotes around "president".
Electrical resistance heating is an expensive way to heat a house in any state, so you can still save money with LED's if you, say, have gas heat.
So what you are saying is that because there is a situation where someone benefits (gas heat) ... lets stop talking about the situations where someone else can benefit (electric heat) if the government wasnt demanding that they live sub-optimally so coastal elites can feel good about them shallow empty lives...
No, I'm saying that there are very few people that are in a situation where they can even break even on the energy costs (resistance heating nearly year round), so it's not even worth making an exception for them since LED's are so cheap and long lived nowadays that even if you don't break even on the energy, you will on the overall cost of the bulbs.
The electricity difference is over rated in many states, where any "waste" energy helps heat the house in winter. [Now in summer, or Arizona you pay twice, for incandescants and to cool the house down !)
Electrical resistance heating is an expensive way to heat a house in any state, so you can still save money with LED's if you, say, have gas heat. Also lamps tend to be located in the ceiling where much of the heat escapes into the attic instead of heating the house.
Even if you heat your house with electrical resistance heating 9 months a year, LED's still pay for themselves after a few years.
Obvious solution: Buy them online, after reading the reviews.
I buy mine from Amazon, and only if they have at least 4.5 stars after several hundred reviews.
No problems so far.
That's not really safe -- there are lots of products with hundreds, even thousands of mostly fake reviews.
Better to stick with a known name brand. And that way you have some assurance that they've done longevity testing since they'll still be around to service that 3 or 5 year warranty. Bulbs from a fly-by-night manufacturer only have to last until the company changes names.
The bottom line is you're really not interesting enough for Google to care about. They probably already know your address from related searches and indexes of public information.
What are you talking about? It's not like they dedicate an employee to monitor everyone, their automated algorithms track *everyone* (even if you don't directly use Google services). So no one is too small to escape their interest.
But like you said, most people probably aren't diligent enough to keep Google from identifying them - simply not subscribing to a service won't stop that.
Oh, you mean the 1B customers that bought a phone so they can run apps on it?
But I say let the consumers decide how much that consistent experience is worth -- let them pay Spotify direct, or pay 30% more to use Apple's system to pay through the app.
And that fee covers everything from credit card processing to hosting and bandwidth, which for all of the free app downloads that Spotify enjoys is a non-negligible amount of money.
I think Spotify is more than happy to cover their own ~3% or so credit card processing fees.
The app is around 30MB, so even at 10 cents/GB for bandwidth, that's $0.003 per download, and again, I think Spotify would be more than happy to pay that if they could host the app on their own servers.
Apple charges developers $99/year for the app store, and developers should be able to choose whether or not they want to pay Apple for credit card fulfillment and bandwidth. Most small developers will likely still want to pay Apple, but larger developers may want to take that on themselves.
If she had an alibi for every event they claim she was part of, then that in itself is suspicious. Who would have an alibi for every random time that somebody tried to frame you for something?
If someone hacked her laptop and was using it to hack the grades while she was sleeping or away, then it's pretty likely that she had an alibi for every occurrence - I can document every time I'm sleeping with my smart watch and my smart-thermostat motion sensors. Every time I leave the house, it's captured on the cloud cam in the garage, as well as the camera at the corner gas station that I have to pass to leave the neighborhood. My car is pretty new, so I wouldn't be surprised if it was tracking me through the navigation system or other car computer. When I go for a run or a bike ride, my smart watch tracks me. When I go to work, my employer has video and badge swipe evidence. When I travel, I have airline receipts, or if driving, toll and gas receipts. And of course, I have smart phone, so both the phone manufacturer and my cellular carrier knows my every move. Some of these can be faked, others are outside of my control.
In modern times, it's pretty hard to *not* have an alibi unless you're trying not to.
Maybe Google should just cut out the middleman and show the accident data directly so drivers know which intersections are the most dangerous.
Nope, what I'm going to be doing is looking at my speedometer instead of the road because that's what they've trained me to do. They've also trained some idiots to break on green lights. So while I'm distracted by my speedo, there's a good chance someone ahead of me is breaking for no reason.
I've never seen anyone brake at a green light at red light camera intersections, but I do see them stop earlier in the yellow, which sometimes causes problems when the car behind them had no intention of stopping, so needs to slam on the brakes to stop before he hits the guy that stopped when the light turned yellow.
It's not a problem for most drivers since if there's room for the car in front of you to stop on the yellow, there's more than enough room for the cars behind them to stop. But apparently some drivers can't even monitor their speed and drive safely, so I'm not surprised that they have trouble with traffic lights.
Iâ(TM)m sorry, I do not believe your own legal counsel agreed that misrepresentation (saying you had a client who was going to send spam if you did not) was a lawful way of escaping the contract.
They didn't know what our plan was, we just asked what would happen if the ISP terminated the contract for any reason. And we actually did have that client, but he wasn't a "spammer" per se - he was well known for emailing to "unverified contact lists" and ISP hopping as he got shut down for too many spam reports.
I once got an ISP to wave the early termination penalty by threatening to force them to invoke the "misuse of services" cancellation. The contract was poorly written and only had an early termination penalty (in the amount of all payments due for the remainder of the multiyear contract) in the event that I cancelled, the only penalty for misuse was "immediate termination of services". Our own legal counsel agreed -- if they terminated our service, we didn't have to pay.
So I called my sales rep to cancel and he said we' d have to pay the early termination penalty. So I told him that we had a client who was ready to use the connection to send spam (which was one of the activities they prohibited), and of course the sales rep said that they'd have to terminate our service and we'd still have to pay the penalty. So I asked him to run it past his own legal department and get back to me - this ISP already had an issue with their customers sending spam.
They let us terminate early without penalty. I never did service with that vendor again, so I don't know if they updated their contracts. They are long gone now, having been acquired (and that company acquired too).
Lawyers abused DCMA/Copyright, company initially complies, people notice it's not legit and complain, company then investigates and fixes it. The system works, that's still 99%+ uptime. Not even a bad outcome.
But it's still a bad system -- it was a Verge editor that asked for the strike to be rescinded -- if not for that (which was surely only due to perceived bad publicity), then what would have happened?
Shaming DMCA abusers into backing down doesn't sound like a reasonable policy.
In one of the responses from Nest I read, it seemed you could disable the microphone via the app - so maybe you could have known that way before?
They should have let users know for sure, I was just wondering if that control was there the whole time and few if any noticed.
A software-disabled microphone is not the same as having no microphone at all, which is what many people thought they had.
13 bits of week numbers is about 137 years... Shouldn't it be good for at least a century? Presumably they moved the epoch for the new field as well.
Yeah, that was a typo, I should have typed "2137". I noticed it after I posted, didn't think anyone else would so didn't bother posted a followup. If only there was some web technology allowed one to edit posts.