The sea of cellphones is no different that flashes from cameras at the Olympics, or sight of raised lighters at concerts in the past - it is part of the concert experience which evolves with time. Heck, I could even argue that a cell phone is safer than a live flame. Artists use new technologies, so do the audiences. Want a private concert with the artist without any electronics (no cell phones, no lights, no microphones, no speakers) - maybe there are some people who crave this kind of old-school experience from the 1800's, though I bet most are not willing to pay for it as artists would ask for a ton of money for such live concert to a small group of people.
Not sure what is new here. Side channel attacks such as voltager glitching, timing, or power measurements have been known for a while (heard of meltdown lately? - timing attack).
That said, I'm still not sure this is even a real article. The images of Tesla used look like a click-bait to include the name "Tesla" in the article - many cars have parking sensors. Also, the figure of Tesla display in the article is BS - the right-most part (c) shows tire pressure, nothing to do with ultrasonic sensor readings shown in parts (a) (b), so it definitely does not show "jammed distance" as claimed in the article. That lack of readings will shows up when you first start driving, until the first TPMS sensor readings are picked up by the computer, so they hacked nothing. I bet you can jam the TPMS signals of course since they use radio to transmit information, but that is not news.
So there are no civil equivalents for SWATing or providing police incorrect information causing you damages? Similar to "wrongful death" being the civil equivalent of murder?
Do you really want to buy a product from a company which will SWAT you in return (intentionally or by accident)? I guess charging to audio jack adapters hasn't yielded sufficient profit, so now they are desperate to protect every dollar of profit.
Ok, say someone picks up a can of beer, then a can of Coke, then puts the can of Coke back on the beer shelf (assume same weight of full cans). Now: 1. Does the customer pay Coke prices for beer? 2. Are there robots which will then retrieve the Coke and put it back on the correct shelf?
The feature request to change the hard-coded password has been filed - it's making its way through triage and prioritization. A meeting to decide what the new password should be has been scheduled. New layer of security is being implemented - non-transparent extra-sticky notes to always cover for the ones with the password have been ordered.
When I was in high school I was a delivery driver for a drugstore. There was one "subsidized income" neighborhood where everyone was on welfare (I knew since they paid with welfare "stamps" for prescriptions) yet one had a nice porsche in the driveway, most had expensive electronics, etc. After a while I realized, that a good percentage of these people worked odd jobs "under the table" while collecting welfare - one guy drive delivering pizza for example and I asked him once about it - he said that delivering pizza was not going to sustain him and his family, and that he wouldn't do it the income was declared and simply deducted from his welfare (plus all the paperwork associated with it was a deterrent too), but will do it as "extra money" - along the reasoning of this finish study.
While I've always strongly believed that welfare should be a second chance, a social safety net to allow people to take bigger risks, rather than a way of life, the reality is that there will always be people who will do nothing unless starving, there are some on welfare which would contribute to society if welfare was in a form of basic income rather than welfare you have to qualify for. It also seems more fair and simpler to administer - everyone gets it, even the super-rich.
How many females eggs can a single male fertilize? It sounds like the previous "balanced" picture was 70% females anyways, now 86-99%, if the males can keep up fertilizing, wouldn't that mean that the "threat" they are under is exploding population (too many turtle babies)? Does the male turtle somehow take car of the babies and if so, how many can it take care of (even if not all, with more babies it still leaves a much more effective natural selection process)?
I think you flipped the cause and effect. If they run cooler, they may operate at a more narrow temperature range simply because they don't heat up as much. That said, often military or automotive spec parts actually support a wider range of temperatures. Go to ti.com or other chip manufacturers and lookup temperatures for higher grade/more expensive chips, sometimes called "enhanced".
That is actually incorrect - military grade chips are not from the discount bin. Are the they the fastest bin of parks coming off the line, of course not, but that's not because of cost, but purely because that is not what the spec calls for (and in some processes slower parts are more power efficient, hence less heat). A heat-sink is not going to solve a problem of wear either - it would help, but not. That said, I cannot say any more on the topic, so if you still think so, we'll just have to agree to disagree on this.
So your argument here is that I used the word "limited" instead of "derated"?
If you don't believe that all high end chips get slowed down, go build your favorite high end PC hardware (gamer PC built for performance). Image the hard drive, run your favorite CPU and GPU benchmarks. After a couple of years of gaming use, restore the imaged drive and re-run the benchmarks - I bet you would expect your benchmarks to be the same, but they won't be - even though the software will be identical, the hardware will have aged an will be throttled (or as marketing will sometimes call it - the "turbo boost" will no longer boost as high for as long as it did before).
First, battery and chip wear are independent. You can possibly replace the battery, but less likely to replace the main SoC. If the slowdowns began during the warranty period, that means that either Apple pushed the chip and/or the battery harder to get good benchmarks on new devices, or their modeling of typical usage is too conservative, with people hitting the throttle threshold earlier than expected. Usually throttling will kick in based on battery age, temperature, open circuit voltage, source resistance, and how long the peak current was drawn in the last second, few seconds, days or even total since new. Similar restrictions apply to chips like the main SoC and even voltage regulators.
Bottom line is, the harder you use your phone, the faster it ages. If this French challenge will hold, that will result in Apple "smoothing" the aging by either limiting performance across the board, or start limiting it based on daily or weekly usage (for example you will only be allowed peak performance for so many minutes per day) which isn't necessarily what consumers want, but it would prolong the phone life with everyone getting nice performance in the morning, and those who use it heavily seeing slowdowns later in the day.
I've worked in this industry for over a decade (never for Apple) What people don't realize is that batteries age, and so do chips especially when pushed to a limit. Ever wonder why military or even automotive grade chips are running so much slower and cooler? It's because they are rated for much longer lifetime than consumer grade devices - they are limited so they last the required number of years. Consumers want top performance, but they trade lifetime due to stress on the hardware. What Apple did here is cap the device performance increasing the device reliability and potential lifespan.
Sure chip design in mostly code. The difference is every patch costs a few hundred thousand dollars, and of course everyone who wants the patch will have to buy a new chip. This is why over 80% of code written for an ASIC is test/verification code.
Even with the privilege check they would still be susceptible to Spectre, so what in your opinion should they have known and done for that? There is an industry wide debate still by the way as to how to solve that. "They should have known" is such a Monday night quarterback thing to say. Cache timing attack is very close to a side channel attack, and sadly those are a cat and mouse game, as more clever people find side channel attacks those and closed and then new one get found - lather, rinse, repeat...
Are you sure it wasn't a phishing attempt to get you to click on the link (maybe 404 was after loading a malicious script in your browser, or maybe the hacker's site was down by the time you clicked it)?
What does puzzle me a bit, though, is how Birkenstock can prohibit certified Birkenstock retailers from selling on Amazon, and threaten to close them forever if they do. Wouldn't that run afoul of a bunch of competition laws?
Manufacturers can sell to whoever they want, as long as they don't discriminate based against any of the protected groups (race, religion, sex, age, etc). They can simply say "if you sell through Amazon, we will not longer sell to you". They are of course free to buy retail and re-sell on Amazon, but it doesn't make sense anymore. I've dealt with this in the past with manufacturers who set their prices based on country, and for the very same goods would charge as much as 3x depending on the destination country. There it makes sense to buy a trainload of shoes, for example, destined to a country where the shoes are cheaper, and then resell those shoes in countries where the price is 3x. This happens, but the re-sellers are very careful because if they caught selling to such "grey market" they lose their re-seller status. I've dealt with this in pre-Amazon days with shoes and once with cars as you used to be able to get away with it some small scale, but nowadays the manufacturers are viciously tracking this types of sales, so all re-sellers are scared.
I hear they are working on an achievement for buying Apple products. A sparkly gold star for buying 5 iPhoneX in one year! Next up, iPhoneX 200K HD display (ok techincally only 194.88K, but marketing likes rounding up)- line up 144 iPhoneX's in a 16x9 rectangle and use it as your big screen TV of unheard of resolution - 38976x10368. 4K HD TV's are left in the dust!;-)
In my neighborhood there were a whole bunch of rental homes, all owners who couldn't sell their homes because the home values have dropped (some have been holding onto those since before 2008). This year home prices finally reached pre-2008 levels and a whole lot of those rental homes suddenly went up for sale - owners happy they can finally get rid of them without writing the bank a large check.
Why do costs of operating a mining rig go up as the price of bitcoins goes up? Do you claim bitcoin is driving electricity prices? Do you think that PC's and GPU card prices are driven by bitcoins much?
Takes energy, water, fertilizer, time, etc - not at all free to create and actually more involved than just being a mining rig you just plug in. You can "split" them by reproducing them via seeds. But yes, it doesn't fit in a regular sized wallet, so I guess that is the distinction. Gold bars also don't fit in the wallet. The dot-com stocks had the form factor same as bitcoins however. Hmmm....
How is this different from full transparency? Are you somehow under the impression there are no security vulnerabilities in open source software, which is completely open to anyone for inspection?
Slashdot Mirror
The sea of cellphones is no different that flashes from cameras at the Olympics, or sight of raised lighters at concerts in the past - it is part of the concert experience which evolves with time. Heck, I could even argue that a cell phone is safer than a live flame. Artists use new technologies, so do the audiences. Want a private concert with the artist without any electronics (no cell phones, no lights, no microphones, no speakers) - maybe there are some people who crave this kind of old-school experience from the 1800's, though I bet most are not willing to pay for it as artists would ask for a ton of money for such live concert to a small group of people.
Not sure what is new here. Side channel attacks such as voltager glitching, timing, or power measurements have been known for a while (heard of meltdown lately? - timing attack).
That said, I'm still not sure this is even a real article. The images of Tesla used look like a click-bait to include the name "Tesla" in the article - many cars have parking sensors. Also, the figure of Tesla display in the article is BS - the right-most part (c) shows tire pressure, nothing to do with ultrasonic sensor readings shown in parts (a) (b), so it definitely does not show "jammed distance" as claimed in the article. That lack of readings will shows up when you first start driving, until the first TPMS sensor readings are picked up by the computer, so they hacked nothing. I bet you can jam the TPMS signals of course since they use radio to transmit information, but that is not news.
So there are no civil equivalents for SWATing or providing police incorrect information causing you damages? Similar to "wrongful death" being the civil equivalent of murder?
Do you really want to buy a product from a company which will SWAT you in return (intentionally or by accident)? I guess charging to audio jack adapters hasn't yielded sufficient profit, so now they are desperate to protect every dollar of profit.
Why slander? SWATt'ing maybe? Filing false police report?
Even if they offered up lifetime of free products as part of the settlement after you sue them for swatting you?
Ok, say someone picks up a can of beer, then a can of Coke, then puts the can of Coke back on the beer shelf (assume same weight of full cans). Now:
1. Does the customer pay Coke prices for beer?
2. Are there robots which will then retrieve the Coke and put it back on the correct shelf?
The feature request to change the hard-coded password has been filed - it's making its way through triage and prioritization. A meeting to decide what the new password should be has been scheduled. New layer of security is being implemented - non-transparent extra-sticky notes to always cover for the ones with the password have been ordered.
When I was in high school I was a delivery driver for a drugstore. There was one "subsidized income" neighborhood where everyone was on welfare (I knew since they paid with welfare "stamps" for prescriptions) yet one had a nice porsche in the driveway, most had expensive electronics, etc. After a while I realized, that a good percentage of these people worked odd jobs "under the table" while collecting welfare - one guy drive delivering pizza for example and I asked him once about it - he said that delivering pizza was not going to sustain him and his family, and that he wouldn't do it the income was declared and simply deducted from his welfare (plus all the paperwork associated with it was a deterrent too), but will do it as "extra money" - along the reasoning of this finish study.
While I've always strongly believed that welfare should be a second chance, a social safety net to allow people to take bigger risks, rather than a way of life, the reality is that there will always be people who will do nothing unless starving, there are some on welfare which would contribute to society if welfare was in a form of basic income rather than welfare you have to qualify for. It also seems more fair and simpler to administer - everyone gets it, even the super-rich.
How many females eggs can a single male fertilize? It sounds like the previous "balanced" picture was 70% females anyways, now 86-99%, if the males can keep up fertilizing, wouldn't that mean that the "threat" they are under is exploding population (too many turtle babies)? Does the male turtle somehow take car of the babies and if so, how many can it take care of (even if not all, with more babies it still leaves a much more effective natural selection process)?
I think you flipped the cause and effect. If they run cooler, they may operate at a more narrow temperature range simply because they don't heat up as much. That said, often military or automotive spec parts actually support a wider range of temperatures. Go to ti.com or other chip manufacturers and lookup temperatures for higher grade/more expensive chips, sometimes called "enhanced".
That is actually incorrect - military grade chips are not from the discount bin. Are the they the fastest bin of parks coming off the line, of course not, but that's not because of cost, but purely because that is not what the spec calls for (and in some processes slower parts are more power efficient, hence less heat). A heat-sink is not going to solve a problem of wear either - it would help, but not. That said, I cannot say any more on the topic, so if you still think so, we'll just have to agree to disagree on this.
So your argument here is that I used the word "limited" instead of "derated"?
If you don't believe that all high end chips get slowed down, go build your favorite high end PC hardware (gamer PC built for performance). Image the hard drive, run your favorite CPU and GPU benchmarks. After a couple of years of gaming use, restore the imaged drive and re-run the benchmarks - I bet you would expect your benchmarks to be the same, but they won't be - even though the software will be identical, the hardware will have aged an will be throttled (or as marketing will sometimes call it - the "turbo boost" will no longer boost as high for as long as it did before).
First, battery and chip wear are independent. You can possibly replace the battery, but less likely to replace the main SoC. If the slowdowns began during the warranty period, that means that either Apple pushed the chip and/or the battery harder to get good benchmarks on new devices, or their modeling of typical usage is too conservative, with people hitting the throttle threshold earlier than expected. Usually throttling will kick in based on battery age, temperature, open circuit voltage, source resistance, and how long the peak current was drawn in the last second, few seconds, days or even total since new. Similar restrictions apply to chips like the main SoC and even voltage regulators.
Bottom line is, the harder you use your phone, the faster it ages. If this French challenge will hold, that will result in Apple "smoothing" the aging by either limiting performance across the board, or start limiting it based on daily or weekly usage (for example you will only be allowed peak performance for so many minutes per day) which isn't necessarily what consumers want, but it would prolong the phone life with everyone getting nice performance in the morning, and those who use it heavily seeing slowdowns later in the day.
I've worked in this industry for over a decade (never for Apple) What people don't realize is that batteries age, and so do chips especially when pushed to a limit. Ever wonder why military or even automotive grade chips are running so much slower and cooler? It's because they are rated for much longer lifetime than consumer grade devices - they are limited so they last the required number of years. Consumers want top performance, but they trade lifetime due to stress on the hardware. What Apple did here is cap the device performance increasing the device reliability and potential lifespan.
Sure chip design in mostly code. The difference is every patch costs a few hundred thousand dollars, and of course everyone who wants the patch will have to buy a new chip. This is why over 80% of code written for an ASIC is test/verification code.
Even with the privilege check they would still be susceptible to Spectre, so what in your opinion should they have known and done for that? There is an industry wide debate still by the way as to how to solve that. "They should have known" is such a Monday night quarterback thing to say. Cache timing attack is very close to a side channel attack, and sadly those are a cat and mouse game, as more clever people find side channel attacks those and closed and then new one get found - lather, rinse, repeat...
Are you sure it wasn't a phishing attempt to get you to click on the link (maybe 404 was after loading a malicious script in your browser, or maybe the hacker's site was down by the time you clicked it)?
What does puzzle me a bit, though, is how Birkenstock can prohibit certified Birkenstock retailers from selling on Amazon, and threaten to close them forever if they do. Wouldn't that run afoul of a bunch of competition laws?
Manufacturers can sell to whoever they want, as long as they don't discriminate based against any of the protected groups (race, religion, sex, age, etc). They can simply say "if you sell through Amazon, we will not longer sell to you". They are of course free to buy retail and re-sell on Amazon, but it doesn't make sense anymore. I've dealt with this in the past with manufacturers who set their prices based on country, and for the very same goods would charge as much as 3x depending on the destination country. There it makes sense to buy a trainload of shoes, for example, destined to a country where the shoes are cheaper, and then resell those shoes in countries where the price is 3x. This happens, but the re-sellers are very careful because if they caught selling to such "grey market" they lose their re-seller status. I've dealt with this in pre-Amazon days with shoes and once with cars as you used to be able to get away with it some small scale, but nowadays the manufacturers are viciously tracking this types of sales, so all re-sellers are scared.
I hear they are working on an achievement for buying Apple products. A sparkly gold star for buying 5 iPhoneX in one year! ;-)
Next up, iPhoneX 200K HD display (ok techincally only 194.88K, but marketing likes rounding up)- line up 144 iPhoneX's in a 16x9 rectangle and use it as your big screen TV of unheard of resolution - 38976x10368. 4K HD TV's are left in the dust!
In my neighborhood there were a whole bunch of rental homes, all owners who couldn't sell their homes because the home values have dropped (some have been holding onto those since before 2008). This year home prices finally reached pre-2008 levels and a whole lot of those rental homes suddenly went up for sale - owners happy they can finally get rid of them without writing the bank a large check.
Why do costs of operating a mining rig go up as the price of bitcoins goes up? Do you claim bitcoin is driving electricity prices? Do you think that PC's and GPU card prices are driven by bitcoins much?
Takes energy, water, fertilizer, time, etc - not at all free to create and actually more involved than just being a mining rig you just plug in. You can "split" them by reproducing them via seeds. But yes, it doesn't fit in a regular sized wallet, so I guess that is the distinction. Gold bars also don't fit in the wallet. The dot-com stocks had the form factor same as bitcoins however. Hmmm....
Other than the fact that after the 1637 crash I guess you could plant the bulb or maybe even cook it and eat it.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik...
How is this different from full transparency? Are you somehow under the impression there are no security vulnerabilities in open source software, which is completely open to anyone for inspection?