I'm pretty happy with Google Play music, except for the fact that tidal (I assume) is taking artists away (my selection of Jay-Z has significantly reduced).
I'd like to see competition, but not in the form of exclusivity.
I left spotify because it sucked (no streaming to chromecast, no side loading, worse recommendations, no personal "library"), I suspect they fixed many of the issues, but that's why competition is good.
I'd think getting Saudi Arabia to pump more oil was all that needed to be done.
You don't think Putin is aware that his behavior and that are related? You don't think that's why he wanted to make sure there wasn't a democrat in office?
The recent trend for economists looking at more modern numbers is that immigrants do indeed increase demand, but that they drive down wages more so than was previously thought.
Immigration is good for an economy, but it definitely leads to some losers locally.
No, I just an assumption I made based on the quality of Google's spell check (constantly feed data and using it to improve) Vs MS's spell check (stand alone in word).
And the Word spell check was better than the any of the other stand alone ones I used.
$10 vs $15 for HBO (they are similar in quality of new output IMO).
I don't get why ad supported has failed with streaming services, but it seems to have (I would think advertisers would live to be able to buy their ads more targeted for demographic, but they seem to have lumped streaming with Youtube and not with TV as far as ad purchasing goes, and therefore don't pay a premium (or enough of one to make it sustainable).
It also depends on how it fails vs people. If a doctor is 90% correct, but this this only gives false negatives, this + doctor could be used to save lives by using an OR style process in determining more aggressive treatment.
It if it's 80% accurate when never giving an uncertain answer, but very accurate when allowed a certainty interval but passing on making a determination on 20% of the cases it could at the very least act as a check against doctors that missed something.
Additionally, if only false positives it could perhaps be used as a first screening saving doctor time (and therefore healthcare money) by having them only fully examine instances where it gives a positive.
These types of diagnostic engines are starting to be used in animal care so I'm sure they'll be well vetted (ugh, a pun) before used largely on humans.
A touch more, but not much (I remember paying $3-5 for new releases, a 2-3 days), and the back catalog varies, but outside of deals is close (http://www.vudu.com/movies/#!content/4798/Vertigo $2-4 for 3-5 days back in time)
It's not every time they watch (at least with Netflix), it's every time they relicense. Netflix is smart and doesn't want to disincentivize itself from having people actually use the service, they want their customers to use it every free moment (it allows Netflix to charge more in the end).
Netflix wants to be able to be an all you can eat service, and that requires them not having per view fees.
There would be a return (for the producer) every time Netflix reups with something, but there's that with format changes too.
I TouchPal shrunk and centered, I can't find any other keyboard that allows that, but it's still annoying because it keeps wanting to jump to one of the edges.
Also, my phone has a top and bottom area. I wouldn't mind losing the top area, but the bottom has a little bit of space for a physical button (no, it's not an iPhone), and that space also lets me type comfortably.
I wouldn't mind full left, I right, and top screen, but the bottom is very helpful, and I really wish there was a keyboard that locked to 75% wide, but centered, hitting letters on the edge is an uncomfortable contortion otherwise.
My browser can draw something not in the DOM (for example, it makes autofilled fields yellow, but I assume JS doesn't see that).
My browser can draw things on webpages that don't exist on the page (in the simplest form, a webpage cannot interact with the elements of an iframe (at least it didn't used to be able to).
My point is the icon to click is created by the browser, not the webpage, and it can be rendered to my screen without the website having any ability to interact with it via JS.
By requiring true user interaction to actually fill the form (as in put field contents into the DOM) there is no way for information to be scraped that the user did not place there.
as for my inattentive auto correct to "far" I'm at a loss too, probably "draw"
That's fine, but if the site is creating the data, it's not really slurping "private" information.
My understanding from the summary is that this attack works by having a visible name and e-mail field, and invisible address fields.
If one fills out the first two (less personal) info, they are leaking their address and phone number (by the auto fill of the other fields).
If the browser (an update I suspect will come soon after this being revealed, or at least implemented like this in browsers implementing this in the future) simply left the autofill information unavailable to the DOM until the user actually clicked to fill a field, this attack no longer works.
You do this by instead of filling the field, have an icon in it or some such, and a click fills it, still quite convenient for the user, but protected from secret fields the user can't see.
Sorry, I meant to say fields with hidden visibility (color tricks, size tricks, etc) would never be sent if the auto complete was not put into the field (by the browser) until it was clicked.
For the sake of slurping information, I assumed these were not fields kg the type hidden, but fields hidden from being seen, like text fields that couldn't be seen.
If the browser didn't fill the DOM until a field was interacted with, then it couldn't be sneakily taken.
Though this doesn't require JS to work (as once one hits submit it goes anyway), but it does give me an idea for a pretty much total fix browser side.
Fields auto fill yellow, they aren't actually "filled" until they're clicked and turn white. Hidden fields would be unclickable, and never actually sent.
Additionally, this wouldn't work for attempts to swipe via JS showing all fields, but grabbing the auto complete profile before submit.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm pretty happy with Google Play music, except for the fact that tidal (I assume) is taking artists away (my selection of Jay-Z has significantly reduced).
I'd like to see competition, but not in the form of exclusivity.
I left spotify because it sucked (no streaming to chromecast, no side loading, worse recommendations, no personal "library"), I suspect they fixed many of the issues, but that's why competition is good.
I'd think getting Saudi Arabia to pump more oil was all that needed to be done.
You don't think Putin is aware that his behavior and that are related? You don't think that's why he wanted to make sure there wasn't a democrat in office?
Who is they?
What I see in articles is that the economy is decent, but rough for entry level, as the young cohort is the largest in a long while.
It's the opposite of the 80s when the economy was soft, but there weren't as many young people, so it was good to be looking for entry level.
The recent trend for economists looking at more modern numbers is that immigrants do indeed increase demand, but that they drive down wages more so than was previously thought.
Immigration is good for an economy, but it definitely leads to some losers locally.
No, I just an assumption I made based on the quality of Google's spell check (constantly feed data and using it to improve) Vs MS's spell check (stand alone in word).
And the Word spell check was better than the any of the other stand alone ones I used.
Also, is it even poasibkentonmake one that maintanes privacy?
Don't these systems work so well because they are always improving based on their usage?
I used to, but legal streaming wins out in convenience for me, and I have a decent job.
But my point is that even with multiple services, it makes sense to give up on cable.
I pay about $5/month over what I would for basic cable + HBO (I have Hulu, Netflix, HBO). I still find it better than cable.
I save myself a box and a remote, it's worth the $5 for that reason alone.
Because ads?
Also, I think Netflix is driving down the price.
$10 vs $15 for HBO (they are similar in quality of new output IMO).
I don't get why ad supported has failed with streaming services, but it seems to have (I would think advertisers would live to be able to buy their ads more targeted for demographic, but they seem to have lumped streaming with Youtube and not with TV as far as ad purchasing goes, and therefore don't pay a premium (or enough of one to make it sustainable).
It isn't about exposing all or none, it's about trying to expose it all or none.
I see no evidence that WL is partisan though, there's no evidence that they turn down offered leaks for political reasons.
Also, I don't see them targeting the US disproportionately. Aside from size and power.
It also depends on how it fails vs people.
If a doctor is 90% correct, but this this only gives false negatives, this + doctor could be used to save lives by using an OR style process in determining more aggressive treatment.
It if it's 80% accurate when never giving an uncertain answer, but very accurate when allowed a certainty interval but passing on making a determination on 20% of the cases it could at the very least act as a check against doctors that missed something.
Additionally, if only false positives it could perhaps be used as a first screening saving doctor time (and therefore healthcare money) by having them only fully examine instances where it gives a positive.
These types of diagnostic engines are starting to be used in animal care so I'm sure they'll be well vetted (ugh, a pun) before used largely on humans.
Can't beat the Netflix service perhaps, but around the same price as Blockbuster used to be for a new realese:
http://www.vudu.com/movies/#!c...
http://www.vudu.com/movies/#!c...
A touch more, but not much (I remember paying $3-5 for new releases, a 2-3 days), and the back catalog varies, but outside of deals is close (http://www.vudu.com/movies/#!content/4798/Vertigo $2-4 for 3-5 days back in time)
Here's UK rental prices over time, I seem to be in the ballpark. https://stephenfollows.com/the...
Sure, it's a one day rental now, but you don't need the extra time to return it, so that seems reasonable to me.
Definitely more expensive than Netflix by mail, but in the ballpark of rental stores I think
It's not every time they watch (at least with Netflix), it's every time they relicense. Netflix is smart and doesn't want to disincentivize itself from having people actually use the service, they want their customers to use it every free moment (it allows Netflix to charge more in the end).
Netflix wants to be able to be an all you can eat service, and that requires them not having per view fees.
There would be a return (for the producer) every time Netflix reups with something, but there's that with format changes too.
Is an insider release not the equivalent of an alpha or beta release?
I've used plenty of Linux alpha and beta distros with some pretty big bugs.
I TouchPal shrunk and centered, I can't find any other keyboard that allows that, but it's still annoying because it keeps wanting to jump to one of the edges.
Also, my phone has a top and bottom area. I wouldn't mind losing the top area, but the bottom has a little bit of space for a physical button (no, it's not an iPhone), and that space also lets me type comfortably.
I wouldn't mind full left, I right, and top screen, but the bottom is very helpful, and I really wish there was a keyboard that locked to 75% wide, but centered, hitting letters on the edge is an uncomfortable contortion otherwise.
I'd say the SNES had better graphics than the Genesis.
It had its better and worse elements, but IMO, the better color palette gave it the upper hand.
The fame cube had graphics on par with the PS2, Xbox, and Dream cast.
The N64 had some slight edges over the PlayStation, but overall, I'd say it was worse.
My browser can draw something not in the DOM (for example, it makes autofilled fields yellow, but I assume JS doesn't see that).
My browser can draw things on webpages that don't exist on the page (in the simplest form, a webpage cannot interact with the elements of an iframe (at least it didn't used to be able to).
My point is the icon to click is created by the browser, not the webpage, and it can be rendered to my screen without the website having any ability to interact with it via JS.
By requiring true user interaction to actually fill the form (as in put field contents into the DOM) there is no way for information to be scraped that the user did not place there.
as for my inattentive auto correct to "far" I'm at a loss too, probably "draw"
Is there any evidence they intend to change the name of search etc?
Last I checked, I still use Google Search, not alphabet search
Except the browser doesn't need to put the icon in the DOM either.
The browser can far something that the user can interact with, but not JS.
The icon would be drawn by the browser, not the website, it wouldn't be any more accessible (due to implementation) to JS than a separate window.
That's fine, but if the site is creating the data, it's not really slurping "private" information.
My understanding from the summary is that this attack works by having a visible name and e-mail field, and invisible address fields.
If one fills out the first two (less personal) info, they are leaking their address and phone number (by the auto fill of the other fields).
If the browser (an update I suspect will come soon after this being revealed, or at least implemented like this in browsers implementing this in the future) simply left the autofill information unavailable to the DOM until the user actually clicked to fill a field, this attack no longer works.
You do this by instead of filling the field, have an icon in it or some such, and a click fills it, still quite convenient for the user, but protected from secret fields the user can't see.
I have a decent collection in Google Play of cached music.
It does exactly what you describe. I stream to have e a broader collection and find new things.
Most of the time bandwidth and charge aren't so relevant.
If I'm somewhere without Wi-Fi and power (a plane for example) I still have plenty.
Sorry, I meant to say fields with hidden visibility (color tricks, size tricks, etc) would never be sent if the auto complete was not put into the field (by the browser) until it was clicked.
For the sake of slurping information, I assumed these were not fields kg the type hidden, but fields hidden from being seen, like text fields that couldn't be seen.
If the browser didn't fill the DOM until a field was interacted with, then it couldn't be sneakily taken.
Though this doesn't require JS to work (as once one hits submit it goes anyway), but it does give me an idea for a pretty much total fix browser side.
Fields auto fill yellow, they aren't actually "filled" until they're clicked and turn white. Hidden fields would be unclickable, and never actually sent.
Additionally, this wouldn't work for attempts to swipe via JS showing all fields, but grabbing the auto complete profile before submit.
Im pretty sure that's why fracking was mentioned as an "if we're lucky".
Every step of it is far better than coal, and it's cheaper.
In general for new production green > gas > coal
I almost cancelled Comcast and went with the $95 plan yesterday.
I live alone, so there's no need for internet when I'm not around.
Would save me $35/month (but it would have been $55, Comcast knocked $20 off when I called to cancel).
I wasn't on a promotional plan, but they still bumped my price up $45% as of January.