Yes, what you're saying is true to a large extent, but pedestrians also act all superior and like they always have the right of way - they don't. Pardon the pun, but it's a two way street. I'd definitely like more pedestrian friendly areas with lower speed limits (and bike lanes for everyone!), seriously... but we don't have that, so pedestrians need to be careful to. Yes, I drive to work, but I otherwise do a lot of walking, and never presume someone sees me or that I have the right of way when I'm cutting across a street and not using a crosswalk.
Indeed. My dog and I walk a solid 3-4 miles a day. Every day we cross this same street where people want to make an unprotected right turn onto a bigger street. We have the walk symbol and always stop at that intersection and have a good look around because most of the right turners are too busy looking left to see us cross in front of them. Just this morning someone was trying to make an unprotected left after we started crossing. They thankfully saw us after they blocked the intersection they were attempting to cross. Everyone focuses on the cars around them and never bother to see if they might hit a pedestrian until it is too late.
This is technically inaccurate. Machine guns may not be manufactured for civilian ownership since 1986 ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... ), however any made before that time are able to be owned by civilians, once the NFA is complied with. This requires submitting a $200 tax/fee to the BATF along with documenting paperwork, background checks, and waiting several months for approval (a right delayed is not a right denied? Where have I heard that before?).
As anyone who understands supply and demand will know, a fixed supply and decades of demand growth means the very limited number of NFA items (the actual number is unknown as the BATF does not fulfil FOIA requests as they claim they are not a "government agency") have risen in price from as low as $50/each at the time of the law passing to $30k-80k in the case of M16s today, depending on model and condition. So poor citizens can't afford machine guns, the rich can collect them if they see fit. More rare or fancy MGs, like a minigun are in the +$100k range. The cheapest end of the spectrum is something like a MAC10 for $5k-10k. Prices keep rising. ( Example prices http://www.autoweapons.com/pro... )
I should add because of their price and controlled nature, you basically never see a legally registered and possessed NFA firearm used in crime, it is just too expensive and a semi-auto does the job just as well. In some ways the banning of MGs has been allowed by both sides of the gun issue because it lets the anti-gun feel safer those "evil guns" are hard to obtain, and the pro-gun people can point to it and say, "see the really scary stuff is basically illegal".
Ahh I didn't think that there were any M16's available from prior to the NFA. I was mistaken and you are correct. But mostly I was commenting because it seems that the GP thinks that an AR-15 is an 'M16' that anyone can go down to Cabellas and pick up. It's clear he wants to ban guns without even really knowing what he is talking about. The same GP probably would freak out if a politician or layman suggested banning encryption without understanding what encryption really is.
If that means that a few law-abiding citizens can't get access to an M-16 for entertainment purposes, than so be it.
Mission accomplished then. No law-abiding citizen may have access to an M-16 for entertainment purposes. Now there are certain organizations that may have access to an M-16 for business purposes, but no citizen may own one. Does that mean your gun control agenda has been completed, or do you want to do more?
It seems they updated the BIOS for the motherboard on my MBP with El Capitan and now it is reporting half the memory that is actually installed and at a lower FSB speed. I had upgraded my memory to 16GB, which I have been using without a problem for years. Now it's showing two sticks at 4GB each."
OT, but I'll chime in.
Firstly, I didn't know El Capitan rolled up a BIOS update as part of the OS installation, unless there was an outstanding update already available and your MBP needed it installed prior as a prerequisite. Either way, I haven't a clue. However, I have MBP - 13-inch, Mid 2012 model that just got El Capitan installed last night. It's still reporting 16GB (two sticks of 8GB @ 1600Mhz). And while yes, only 8GB is officially supported, the only aftermarket provider of RAM the I can rely on with 100% confidence is crucial.com; which is where I purchased my kit from.
Actually I think I was confused this morning - grabbed the wrong laptop. I opened the case and that one does indeed only have 8GB of RAM in it. But they do sometimes package new SMC code and other tidbits with the OS installers - that was why you could not revert backward from I think 10.6, for instance.
Question: Why wouldn't Apple have local cached servers in place? That seems redundantly silly for having an entire nation pull effectively the same content over trans transoceanic cables.
I have been wondering the same thing. I have issues downloading stuff from Apple in the US. Just the other day I was trying to download WatchOS 2 and was getting a blazing 0.02MB/s from Apple. On the same device I started downloading a file from a big content provider and was getting 7MB/s. WatchOS 2 speed did not increase or decrease based on whether or not I started or stopped that transfer. And I'm not far from one of Apple's big data centers.
Anyway, I feel like Apple is sliding quite a bit right now in quality and I am actually very pissed with them. It seems they updated the BIOS for the motherboard on my MBP with El Capitan and now it is reporting half the memory that is actually installed and at a lower FSB speed. I had upgraded my memory to 16GB, which I have been using without a problem for years. Now it's showing two sticks at 4GB each.
The high quality pirated movies are shot by theater employees using a camera on a tripod in the projection room (so the screen isn't distorted from a perfect rectangle) with a direct audio feed (so you get only the movie soundtrack - no people talking or coughing)..
Where did you get this silly idea from? Sure there are movie theater employees that do this but a lot of the movies you torrent are screen copies made for reviewers in the media. Some come from the special effects houses. You can find plenty that are marked as internal studio copies (doesn't cover the screen, but is in the letter boxing if you watch on a 4:3). You can even download the movies before they hit the theater in many cases. I haven't seen a pirated movie like you're talking about since Star Wars Episode I came out in 1999 or whenever it was.
Is there a reason we don't believe the answer he gave - that he was showing off to his shop teacher? (I think you may be underestimating the average electrical know-how of a junior high kid, by the way.) And that also begs the question - even if he's a complete suck up and show off who didn't do anything noteworthy... since when did that justify what happened to him?
Showing off his ability to unscrew a clock case? Have you looked up close at the circuit board? There's a god damned 9V battery backup lead on there. Why would you put that on your homemade clock? The traces and soldering all look like something you'd see on early 80's circuit boards. And if you don't believe me you can read the thoughts of actual experts at places like Fox News Or this article with a link to a YouTube video showing that the clock's innards are almost identical to a RadioShack brand 1970's alarm clock.
Again, it seems pretty obvious that this kid was up to something. It doesn't have to be a 'I'm going to blow up the school' kind of plot, but it wasn't a "Hey look at what I made at home" kind of thing. Anyone who is worth impressing with such electronics would take one look at it and know the kid disassembled a COTS product. There's absolutely no reason to believe that this was a viable bomb, I agree. We don't need to go overboard and I tried to indicate to you that I am not doing so. I was just merely pointing out that something like that is theoretically possible and you seem to be stuck on how amazing this kid is and how crazy everyone else is for being skeptical of him. Now what evidence do you have to refute the fact that the kid is a fraud?
Also, we've now added "manufacture of explosives" to the skill set of this kid, while leaving out "how to write ransom demands" or "being smart enough not to carry an explosive on your person all day". Not to mention that we've now created a scenario where the school can recognize that C4 could be hidden inside this box (meaning IT COULD BE A BOMB!1!), but is either (a) smart enough to see that there *isn't* C4 present (and thus there's no need to evacuate), or (b) is too stupid to live, because they *didn't evacuate the school in the presence of a possible bomb*
Simply put: if we're going to say "oh, there COULD have been a bomb there", then we also need to ask "if they thought there could be a bomb, why didn't they follow procedure and evacuate?"
Well first of all, someone could have manufactured it for him. People have used little kids to give bombs to soldiers in war zones before - sacrificing the life of the child who didn't even know they were going to die. And secondly the GP was indicating that there was nothing in the box but electronics and therefore could not be a bomb. That's obviously not true.
Of course the kid couldn't manufacture a bomb. He couldn't even manufacture that clock. It was pulled out of an old alarm clock and that is obvious from the pictures. The fact that he clearly didn't manufacture anything DOES suggest to me that the kid was obviously up to something. Since it wasn't for a homework assignment, what exactly was he trying to accomplish?
As bad as it goes, the infected apps really get less information than a typical app which wants to do in-app advertising.
Unless the infected app is supposed to request permissions for GPS, address book, calendar, photos access, etc etc. If snapchat were to become infected, as an example, they would have access to pretty much every piece of information you can get inside a single app except for the calendar.
Except maybe a bunch of bare electronics in an otherwise empty box.
Perhaps. I'm not saying that this high school kid had what he needed to do this but I am certain that someone who can manufacture C4 could also make said C4 fit inside the lining of an otherwise empty box. And yes, his box did appear to have a liner.
Yes, I stand by "stupid cracker". If you have a more apt term, I'm keen to hear it.
Stupid crackers or not, I don't think that kid even designed that circuit board. Many electronics experts agree that he just unscrewed the case of an old 1980s alarm clock and put the internals inside of a suitcase to make it look like it was something it was not.
So what? We weren't talking about Japanese automobiles, much less Subaru.
"It has a lot to do with their penchant for using flat 6 engines, which are particularly well-balanced compared to straights."
So a flat 6 is "particularly well-balanced" compared to a straight 6? Maybe you should review your sources. Or are you talking apples to oranges again?
Clearly the GP doesn't know what he is talking about. Subaru uses horizontally opposed Boxer engines, which do provide better balance and handling. But they're also more difficult to work on than standard engines because of the way the components are positioned in the engine compartment. Subaru typically uses a 4 cylinder, 2.5L engine and has for some time. You can, as of about 2008 I believe, get a 6 cylinder engine in certain premium models.
"My Subaru has already gone 100,000 miles with nothing but oil changes. I'm expecting to get a solid 10-15 years out of the Subaru./P."
And your point is? My Merc is from 2000, so already 15 years, 100.000 miles and just oil changes.
My point is that European cars in the US are not the quality, precision engineered machines they used to have the reputation for. While Japanese cars clearly out last the competition here. There are far more Mercedes models available in Europe than there are in the US. Perhaps it is only the models sold in the US that are garbage, I cannot say. Perhaps the US models are manufactured in a different plant than the European counterparts. But since Japanese cars clearly outshine the rest in the US, it clearly isn't something inherent to the driving conditions in the US.
And yes, there are plenty of European brands that aren't available in the US - though Fiat is making a come back. I rarely see any Renaults in the US and when I do they're very old. I've never seen a Skoda or any of the other of the dozens of brands that the VW Group owns (Outside of Audi, Porsche and VW), of course).
Well like I said, I didn't really want to comment on the validity of his arguments, just that it was a progression that ended at Jr and wasn't just referring to actions during Sr's term in office. The first gulf war was certainly far easier to justify to ourselves and the world than the second.
I'm sorry, I seem to have confused you. I was talking about Bush Jr.
So was he. He was specifically referring to the sequence of events that up to the Bush Jr. invasion of Iraq. Now, I'm not trying to say one thing or another about his arguments, but they are definitely geared towards justifying Bush Jr invading Iraq after they systematically failed to meet their obligations after the invasion of Kuwait.
"They must sell different VW's in the states than here in Germany"
Exactly my view. If you look at American car forums about their opinion on European cars, be them VW, Audi, BMW or Mercedes (those make about 99% of what "European" they know about), you couldn't believe they are talking about the same cars running here. Where here you usually run any one of them 150, 200.000Km without major problems, just standard maintenance, it seems they break apart at 50.000 miles in USA! it must the weather or something...
European cars have been almost as unreliable as US cars for the last 10-15 years or so. And they're far more complicated to work on. I've had a Honda civic run almost 400,000 miles with just a worn out clutch, a failed water pump, and worn out struts. My Subaru has already gone 100,000 miles with nothing but oil changes. I'm expecting to get a solid 10-15 years out of the Subaru./P.
Indeed. Even in the 80s California emissions laws kept certain models of cars from being imported, like hte Porsche 930 turbo. Hence the M491 option on the 911 (factory turbo look - a turbo car without the rear windshield wiper, or turbo script on the back end, and the NA 3.2L engine instead of the turbo charged version)
And in fact California is the very reason that manufacturers practically stopped selling diesel passenger vehicles in the United States to being with. They started coming back into style in the late 2000's after some law changes. But California has such strict emission standards that Subaru, for instance developed their PZEV technology. They entered into a compromise with the state of California so they could even have a chance to sell vehicles in the state without meeting all of the state's emission standards. The cost of that compromise with the state of California? A 15 year warranty on the emissions related parts of all PZEV vehicles.
I'm wondering how these apps made it through in the first place. Apple is known for being strict about vetting apps and what's allowed to enter the walled garden. If so many apps were able to make it past the vetting, it ought to raise concerns about what other malicious apps might be in the app store on a smaller scale. The vetting process probably lulls many users into a false sense of security that any app downloaded is going to be safe because Apple wouldn't let unsafe apps through. Obviously that's not the case, and it's not possible to know before downloading an app whether it's safe or not. Even reputable publishers could be compromised in this way. Although I think the walled garden is actually a good idea, it's obviously not sufficient, and there needs to be other layers of security. As much as I despise most antivirus software, it might be another good line of defense. I'd like to see more about app permissions like the old Android Market listing, and perhaps firewalling and only whitelisting certain sites for apps to connect to. It's reasonable that the browser you download would be able to connect to any site; that game, not so much. What's there now isn't enough and there really is no way for a user to know that an application is safe prior to installing it.
they run a static analyzer on app submissions that check for when a developer makes private API calls. It doesn't catch everything. I've worked on a white label app that had 280 successful reviews in the app store and randomly was rejected on 281st submission because I forgot to enable a new permission for the app prior to submission. My permissions files were all generated using a template so all apps were missing that permission. The users were still prompted to grant permissions. Apple generally doesn't let you enable permissions on functionality that you do not actually need for your app to function. If you used some Objective-C trickery to make hide private API calls it is quite possible that Apple will not even detect it unless that call is, perhaps, triggered during the app review process.
It is an advance over a normal silicon wafer with a small explosive charge, and probably a lot more legal for consumer goods; but you still need to know when to shatter the glass, and make sure that the attacker can't remove your ability to do so without triggering the failsafe.
When it comes to military applications, they will likely continue to use both an explosive charge and this technology. When an attack helicopter is downed, for instance, the pilots hit the master destruct button which blows up the PCMCIA card that contains encryption keys, maps and other sensitive data. Then the DART comes out (Downed Aircraft Rescue Team). If they can't save or salvage the aircraft, they pull out their WP grenades and attach them to key areas of the airframe and watch the fireworks show. So they already use double redundancy when it comes to destroying the data. The first go around is to make sure the data is destroyed if the aircraft is captured before salvage attempts are made. The second to prevent anyone from salvaging anything in the case of a total loss.
It's not double, watch the keynote, it's heavily compressed.
Can you cite something for that? I watched the keynote. They didn't say how much extra space its going to take, now did they? In fact the amount of storage required will depend on the composition of the shot so the best they could do is tell you the approximate compression which I do not recall them mentioning. But let's just assume that they do something like MJPEG (worst case) at 30 frames per second with 3 seconds of video. That's 91 full frames that are being stored at 12MP with a compression ratio no greater than 100:1. Now let's suppose they use something like H.265 (a codec designed specifically for high resolution progressive scanned video) - you still have 91 frames at a compression ratio no greater than 1000:1. So how do you get less than double the size of a single JPEG image unless you drastically reduce the resolution of the 'live photo'? At best it is 10x smaller than 91 jpegs at the same resolution. Or do you think that Apple has come up with their own standard that is significantly better than anything the MPEG has come out with?
Can't you stupid Apple Haters at least complain about something real?
And saying someone is going to have an issue with w mere 2x increase in size (again, it's not even that much) is just insane all by itself - this is a phone which is shooting *4k video*, and you think a small difference in still size would matter at all? Come on!!
How many people shoot video over photos? Do you and your friends have more home videos on your phone or home pictures? I'm willing to bet most people take more pictures that videos and will therefore hit their storage cap faster due to 'live photo' over shooting 4k video. Anyone who is serious about doing 4k video will use a real video camera. How many people do you know even have a 4k display in their home?
I'm sorry you can't comprehend the distinction, but it's very different from video, because it's not initiated by the user as a video. There's a big distinction in terms of result.
Oooh right. It's me that is having comprehension problems. And a rose by any other name is, what exactly? All they are doing is having the phone auto record ~1.0 second of video when you hit the shutter release. Therefore a 'live photo' is not a photo, it's a video.
I can't wait to say "Hey Siri" over the PA system at a large event! Should be entertaining.
I have an Apple watch and I glanced at the display during the presentation yesterday. The presenter said 'Hey Siri' and all of the sudden I lost my watch face and Siri came up. It will definitely be a great way to mess with people.
Slashdot Mirror
Have you tried having that record sealed or expunged? It'll cost you a few thousand dollars but it'll pay off in the long run.
Yes, what you're saying is true to a large extent, but pedestrians also act all superior and like they always have the right of way - they don't. Pardon the pun, but it's a two way street. I'd definitely like more pedestrian friendly areas with lower speed limits (and bike lanes for everyone!), seriously... but we don't have that, so pedestrians need to be careful to. Yes, I drive to work, but I otherwise do a lot of walking, and never presume someone sees me or that I have the right of way when I'm cutting across a street and not using a crosswalk.
Indeed. My dog and I walk a solid 3-4 miles a day. Every day we cross this same street where people want to make an unprotected right turn onto a bigger street. We have the walk symbol and always stop at that intersection and have a good look around because most of the right turners are too busy looking left to see us cross in front of them. Just this morning someone was trying to make an unprotected left after we started crossing. They thankfully saw us after they blocked the intersection they were attempting to cross. Everyone focuses on the cars around them and never bother to see if they might hit a pedestrian until it is too late.
This is technically inaccurate. Machine guns may not be manufactured for civilian ownership since 1986 ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... ), however any made before that time are able to be owned by civilians, once the NFA is complied with. This requires submitting a $200 tax/fee to the BATF along with documenting paperwork, background checks, and waiting several months for approval (a right delayed is not a right denied? Where have I heard that before?).
As anyone who understands supply and demand will know, a fixed supply and decades of demand growth means the very limited number of NFA items (the actual number is unknown as the BATF does not fulfil FOIA requests as they claim they are not a "government agency") have risen in price from as low as $50/each at the time of the law passing to $30k-80k in the case of M16s today, depending on model and condition. So poor citizens can't afford machine guns, the rich can collect them if they see fit. More rare or fancy MGs, like a minigun are in the +$100k range. The cheapest end of the spectrum is something like a MAC10 for $5k-10k. Prices keep rising. ( Example prices http://www.autoweapons.com/pro... )
I should add because of their price and controlled nature, you basically never see a legally registered and possessed NFA firearm used in crime, it is just too expensive and a semi-auto does the job just as well. In some ways the banning of MGs has been allowed by both sides of the gun issue because it lets the anti-gun feel safer those "evil guns" are hard to obtain, and the pro-gun people can point to it and say, "see the really scary stuff is basically illegal".
Ahh I didn't think that there were any M16's available from prior to the NFA. I was mistaken and you are correct. But mostly I was commenting because it seems that the GP thinks that an AR-15 is an 'M16' that anyone can go down to Cabellas and pick up. It's clear he wants to ban guns without even really knowing what he is talking about. The same GP probably would freak out if a politician or layman suggested banning encryption without understanding what encryption really is.
If that means that a few law-abiding citizens can't get access to an M-16 for entertainment purposes, than so be it.
Mission accomplished then. No law-abiding citizen may have access to an M-16 for entertainment purposes. Now there are certain organizations that may have access to an M-16 for business purposes, but no citizen may own one. Does that mean your gun control agenda has been completed, or do you want to do more?
It seems they updated the BIOS for the motherboard on my MBP with El Capitan and now it is reporting half the memory that is actually installed and at a lower FSB speed. I had upgraded my memory to 16GB, which I have been using without a problem for years. Now it's showing two sticks at 4GB each."
OT, but I'll chime in.
Firstly, I didn't know El Capitan rolled up a BIOS update as part of the OS installation, unless there was an outstanding update already available and your MBP needed it installed prior as a prerequisite. Either way, I haven't a clue. However, I have MBP - 13-inch, Mid 2012 model that just got El Capitan installed last night. It's still reporting 16GB (two sticks of 8GB @ 1600Mhz). And while yes, only 8GB is officially supported, the only aftermarket provider of RAM the I can rely on with 100% confidence is crucial.com; which is where I purchased my kit from.
Actually I think I was confused this morning - grabbed the wrong laptop. I opened the case and that one does indeed only have 8GB of RAM in it. But they do sometimes package new SMC code and other tidbits with the OS installers - that was why you could not revert backward from I think 10.6, for instance.
Question: Why wouldn't Apple have local cached servers in place? That seems redundantly silly for having an entire nation pull effectively the same content over trans transoceanic cables.
I have been wondering the same thing. I have issues downloading stuff from Apple in the US. Just the other day I was trying to download WatchOS 2 and was getting a blazing 0.02MB/s from Apple. On the same device I started downloading a file from a big content provider and was getting 7MB/s. WatchOS 2 speed did not increase or decrease based on whether or not I started or stopped that transfer. And I'm not far from one of Apple's big data centers.
Anyway, I feel like Apple is sliding quite a bit right now in quality and I am actually very pissed with them. It seems they updated the BIOS for the motherboard on my MBP with El Capitan and now it is reporting half the memory that is actually installed and at a lower FSB speed. I had upgraded my memory to 16GB, which I have been using without a problem for years. Now it's showing two sticks at 4GB each.
The high quality pirated movies are shot by theater employees using a camera on a tripod in the projection room (so the screen isn't distorted from a perfect rectangle) with a direct audio feed (so you get only the movie soundtrack - no people talking or coughing)..
Where did you get this silly idea from? Sure there are movie theater employees that do this but a lot of the movies you torrent are screen copies made for reviewers in the media. Some come from the special effects houses. You can find plenty that are marked as internal studio copies (doesn't cover the screen, but is in the letter boxing if you watch on a 4:3). You can even download the movies before they hit the theater in many cases. I haven't seen a pirated movie like you're talking about since Star Wars Episode I came out in 1999 or whenever it was.
Is there a reason we don't believe the answer he gave - that he was showing off to his shop teacher? (I think you may be underestimating the average electrical know-how of a junior high kid, by the way.) And that also begs the question - even if he's a complete suck up and show off who didn't do anything noteworthy... since when did that justify what happened to him?
Showing off his ability to unscrew a clock case? Have you looked up close at the circuit board? There's a god damned 9V battery backup lead on there. Why would you put that on your homemade clock? The traces and soldering all look like something you'd see on early 80's circuit boards. And if you don't believe me you can read the thoughts of actual experts at places like Fox News Or this article with a link to a YouTube video showing that the clock's innards are almost identical to a RadioShack brand 1970's alarm clock.
Again, it seems pretty obvious that this kid was up to something. It doesn't have to be a 'I'm going to blow up the school' kind of plot, but it wasn't a "Hey look at what I made at home" kind of thing. Anyone who is worth impressing with such electronics would take one look at it and know the kid disassembled a COTS product. There's absolutely no reason to believe that this was a viable bomb, I agree. We don't need to go overboard and I tried to indicate to you that I am not doing so. I was just merely pointing out that something like that is theoretically possible and you seem to be stuck on how amazing this kid is and how crazy everyone else is for being skeptical of him. Now what evidence do you have to refute the fact that the kid is a fraud?
Also, we've now added "manufacture of explosives" to the skill set of this kid, while leaving out "how to write ransom demands" or "being smart enough not to carry an explosive on your person all day". Not to mention that we've now created a scenario where the school can recognize that C4 could be hidden inside this box (meaning IT COULD BE A BOMB!1!), but is either (a) smart enough to see that there *isn't* C4 present (and thus there's no need to evacuate), or (b) is too stupid to live, because they *didn't evacuate the school in the presence of a possible bomb*
Simply put: if we're going to say "oh, there COULD have been a bomb there", then we also need to ask "if they thought there could be a bomb, why didn't they follow procedure and evacuate?"
Well first of all, someone could have manufactured it for him. People have used little kids to give bombs to soldiers in war zones before - sacrificing the life of the child who didn't even know they were going to die. And secondly the GP was indicating that there was nothing in the box but electronics and therefore could not be a bomb. That's obviously not true.
Of course the kid couldn't manufacture a bomb. He couldn't even manufacture that clock. It was pulled out of an old alarm clock and that is obvious from the pictures. The fact that he clearly didn't manufacture anything DOES suggest to me that the kid was obviously up to something. Since it wasn't for a homework assignment, what exactly was he trying to accomplish?
As bad as it goes, the infected apps really get less information than a typical app which wants to do in-app advertising.
Unless the infected app is supposed to request permissions for GPS, address book, calendar, photos access, etc etc. If snapchat were to become infected, as an example, they would have access to pretty much every piece of information you can get inside a single app except for the calendar.
Except maybe a bunch of bare electronics in an otherwise empty box.
Perhaps. I'm not saying that this high school kid had what he needed to do this but I am certain that someone who can manufacture C4 could also make said C4 fit inside the lining of an otherwise empty box. And yes, his box did appear to have a liner.
Yes, I stand by "stupid cracker". If you have a more apt term, I'm keen to hear it.
Stupid crackers or not, I don't think that kid even designed that circuit board. Many electronics experts agree that he just unscrewed the case of an old 1980s alarm clock and put the internals inside of a suitcase to make it look like it was something it was not.
"Subaru's reputation is well-deserved."
So what? We weren't talking about Japanese automobiles, much less Subaru.
"It has a lot to do with their penchant for using flat 6 engines, which are particularly well-balanced compared to straights."
So a flat 6 is "particularly well-balanced" compared to a straight 6? Maybe you should review your sources. Or are you talking apples to oranges again?
Clearly the GP doesn't know what he is talking about. Subaru uses horizontally opposed Boxer engines, which do provide better balance and handling. But they're also more difficult to work on than standard engines because of the way the components are positioned in the engine compartment. Subaru typically uses a 4 cylinder, 2.5L engine and has for some time. You can, as of about 2008 I believe, get a 6 cylinder engine in certain premium models.
"My Subaru has already gone 100,000 miles with nothing but oil changes. I'm expecting to get a solid 10-15 years out of the Subaru./P."
And your point is? My Merc is from 2000, so already 15 years, 100.000 miles and just oil changes.
My point is that European cars in the US are not the quality, precision engineered machines they used to have the reputation for. While Japanese cars clearly out last the competition here. There are far more Mercedes models available in Europe than there are in the US. Perhaps it is only the models sold in the US that are garbage, I cannot say. Perhaps the US models are manufactured in a different plant than the European counterparts. But since Japanese cars clearly outshine the rest in the US, it clearly isn't something inherent to the driving conditions in the US.
And yes, there are plenty of European brands that aren't available in the US - though Fiat is making a come back. I rarely see any Renaults in the US and when I do they're very old. I've never seen a Skoda or any of the other of the dozens of brands that the VW Group owns (Outside of Audi, Porsche and VW), of course).
Well like I said, I didn't really want to comment on the validity of his arguments, just that it was a progression that ended at Jr and wasn't just referring to actions during Sr's term in office. The first gulf war was certainly far easier to justify to ourselves and the world than the second.
Iraq didn't actually invade Kuwait?
I'm sorry, I seem to have confused you. I was talking about Bush Jr.
So was he. He was specifically referring to the sequence of events that up to the Bush Jr. invasion of Iraq. Now, I'm not trying to say one thing or another about his arguments, but they are definitely geared towards justifying Bush Jr invading Iraq after they systematically failed to meet their obligations after the invasion of Kuwait.
"They must sell different VW's in the states than here in Germany"
Exactly my view. If you look at American car forums about their opinion on European cars, be them VW, Audi, BMW or Mercedes (those make about 99% of what "European" they know about), you couldn't believe they are talking about the same cars running here. Where here you usually run any one of them 150, 200.000Km without major problems, just standard maintenance, it seems they break apart at 50.000 miles in USA! it must the weather or something...
European cars have been almost as unreliable as US cars for the last 10-15 years or so. And they're far more complicated to work on. I've had a Honda civic run almost 400,000 miles with just a worn out clutch, a failed water pump, and worn out struts. My Subaru has already gone 100,000 miles with nothing but oil changes. I'm expecting to get a solid 10-15 years out of the Subaru./P.
Indeed. Even in the 80s California emissions laws kept certain models of cars from being imported, like hte Porsche 930 turbo. Hence the M491 option on the 911 (factory turbo look - a turbo car without the rear windshield wiper, or turbo script on the back end, and the NA 3.2L engine instead of the turbo charged version)
And in fact California is the very reason that manufacturers practically stopped selling diesel passenger vehicles in the United States to being with. They started coming back into style in the late 2000's after some law changes. But California has such strict emission standards that Subaru, for instance developed their PZEV technology. They entered into a compromise with the state of California so they could even have a chance to sell vehicles in the state without meeting all of the state's emission standards. The cost of that compromise with the state of California? A 15 year warranty on the emissions related parts of all PZEV vehicles.
I'm wondering how these apps made it through in the first place. Apple is known for being strict about vetting apps and what's allowed to enter the walled garden. If so many apps were able to make it past the vetting, it ought to raise concerns about what other malicious apps might be in the app store on a smaller scale. The vetting process probably lulls many users into a false sense of security that any app downloaded is going to be safe because Apple wouldn't let unsafe apps through. Obviously that's not the case, and it's not possible to know before downloading an app whether it's safe or not. Even reputable publishers could be compromised in this way. Although I think the walled garden is actually a good idea, it's obviously not sufficient, and there needs to be other layers of security. As much as I despise most antivirus software, it might be another good line of defense. I'd like to see more about app permissions like the old Android Market listing, and perhaps firewalling and only whitelisting certain sites for apps to connect to. It's reasonable that the browser you download would be able to connect to any site; that game, not so much. What's there now isn't enough and there really is no way for a user to know that an application is safe prior to installing it.
they run a static analyzer on app submissions that check for when a developer makes private API calls. It doesn't catch everything. I've worked on a white label app that had 280 successful reviews in the app store and randomly was rejected on 281st submission because I forgot to enable a new permission for the app prior to submission. My permissions files were all generated using a template so all apps were missing that permission. The users were still prompted to grant permissions. Apple generally doesn't let you enable permissions on functionality that you do not actually need for your app to function. If you used some Objective-C trickery to make hide private API calls it is quite possible that Apple will not even detect it unless that call is, perhaps, triggered during the app review process.
Don't worry Elon, I have your Illudium Q-36 Explosive Space Modulator right here!
It is an advance over a normal silicon wafer with a small explosive charge, and probably a lot more legal for consumer goods; but you still need to know when to shatter the glass, and make sure that the attacker can't remove your ability to do so without triggering the failsafe.
When it comes to military applications, they will likely continue to use both an explosive charge and this technology. When an attack helicopter is downed, for instance, the pilots hit the master destruct button which blows up the PCMCIA card that contains encryption keys, maps and other sensitive data. Then the DART comes out (Downed Aircraft Rescue Team). If they can't save or salvage the aircraft, they pull out their WP grenades and attach them to key areas of the airframe and watch the fireworks show. So they already use double redundancy when it comes to destroying the data. The first go around is to make sure the data is destroyed if the aircraft is captured before salvage attempts are made. The second to prevent anyone from salvaging anything in the case of a total loss.
It's not double, watch the keynote, it's heavily compressed.
Can you cite something for that? I watched the keynote. They didn't say how much extra space its going to take, now did they? In fact the amount of storage required will depend on the composition of the shot so the best they could do is tell you the approximate compression which I do not recall them mentioning. But let's just assume that they do something like MJPEG (worst case) at 30 frames per second with 3 seconds of video. That's 91 full frames that are being stored at 12MP with a compression ratio no greater than 100:1. Now let's suppose they use something like H.265 (a codec designed specifically for high resolution progressive scanned video) - you still have 91 frames at a compression ratio no greater than 1000:1. So how do you get less than double the size of a single JPEG image unless you drastically reduce the resolution of the 'live photo'? At best it is 10x smaller than 91 jpegs at the same resolution. Or do you think that Apple has come up with their own standard that is significantly better than anything the MPEG has come out with?
Can't you stupid Apple Haters at least complain about something real?
And saying someone is going to have an issue with w mere 2x increase in size (again, it's not even that much) is just insane all by itself - this is a phone which is shooting *4k video*, and you think a small difference in still size would matter at all? Come on!!
How many people shoot video over photos? Do you and your friends have more home videos on your phone or home pictures? I'm willing to bet most people take more pictures that videos and will therefore hit their storage cap faster due to 'live photo' over shooting 4k video. Anyone who is serious about doing 4k video will use a real video camera. How many people do you know even have a 4k display in their home?
Oh I misheard him yesterday - it's 1.5 seconds on each side of the video and I thought he said 0.5. So it's 3 seconds of video.
it is still a video
I'm sorry you can't comprehend the distinction, but it's very different from video, because it's not initiated by the user as a video. There's a big distinction in terms of result.
Oooh right. It's me that is having comprehension problems. And a rose by any other name is, what exactly? All they are doing is having the phone auto record ~1.0 second of video when you hit the shutter release. Therefore a 'live photo' is not a photo, it's a video.
I can't wait to say "Hey Siri" over the PA system at a large event! Should be entertaining.
I have an Apple watch and I glanced at the display during the presentation yesterday. The presenter said 'Hey Siri' and all of the sudden I lost my watch face and Siri came up. It will definitely be a great way to mess with people.