The joke of this is that it actually inspired me to finally download all the roms for the systems I love. It's not like there is a legal way for me to download and play these games. Such a pointless waste.
Sure there is.
Archive.org has a legal exemption to the DMCA to preserve copyright protected works for when their limited time protection expires. They have preserved NES games in their collection as well . (Note that while they can legally distribute them to you, you still can't legally distribute them from there to others)
Despite Nintendo's decades of lying about ownership of the MOS Technology 6502 CPU, they had zero part in designing or creating that chip, so their claims that emulator software violate their rights are just that, lies. Perhaps the first claim back in the 90s was just a mistake, but after being corrected a few million times, it's clear those claims are malicious and since the DMCA has passed their claims are also criminal.
Emulators are legal to download if the software creator releases it with a license allowing you to, you can safely ignore Nintendo's claims of ownership on other peoples property.
Because that is what artists agreed to for copyright to exist.
You don't just get to limit everyone's rights for no reason or benefit to them. We exchanged some of our rights for a limited time, to give you some incentive to create art.
Remember that our deal to you was optional, it is todays government that is forcing that deal upon you no matter if you like it or not. Go blame them for that.
Or alternately if you'd prefer, if we didn't get anything out of the copyright deal, we wouldn't GIVE you a deal at all. So limited is there so you have an additional reason to make art, you have a time to profit. Not limited means no deal, you get nothing, no protection, no time to profit, nothing.
The thing is, as an artist, you have to follow the law just like everyone else. Perhaps not you personally, but the VAST majority of artists today feel so entitled they can simply break the law and ignore the deal set forth in copyright law.
Finally, eventually, we have said fuck it. If artists refuse to follow the law, there is no reason for us to do so either, thus the piracy is pretty universally thought of as moral. Even artists who say it isn't moral pirate, showing they really feel the same.
Look at Nintendo. Right there in their statement:
According to Nintendo's official site, ROMs and video game emulation also represent "the greatest threat to date to the intellectual property rights of video game developers,"
You may not be aware, but Nintendo has consistently claimed emulator software is illegal and infringes their rights. They are, falsely, claiming ownership of a CPU they never were involved in making. They have NO rights to the 6502 CPU yet right there in bold they claim they own all rights to a piece of hardware completely designed and produced by MOS Technology.
Nintendo has no problem claiming things created by not-nintendo are theirs. How can they, or you for them, possibly follow that up saying its OK when they claim ownership on other peoples property, but not OK when we claim ownership of Nintendo's property?
Nintendo doesn't wish to follow the law, they outright admit following the law shouldn't be done, evidenced by the fact they haven't done so for over 30 years. There is no moral complaint possible from them when we don't follow the law either and refuse to give them any copyright protection.
This thinking isn't unique to Nintendo either, most all artists think this way, and your question implies you do or did think that was somehow the normal and standard.
You should think long and hard about questioning the value of a gift given to you, because the fact of the matter is we chose to give that gift to you in the first place, and we can choose to stop offering you gifts completely when everyone is so ungrateful for it.
"Gee, now if the certs would last longer than Trump's attention span, Let's Encrypt could actually become useful. At this point, they should rename it "Let's Momentarily Encrypt.""
"If you can't figure out how to set cron to execute a command every 3 months then you really shouldn't be even remotely in charge of something as important as the encryption on your server."
That being the post Opportunist expanded upon, adding to your reply to them with:
"You shouldn't be in charge of an internet facing machine altogether..."
That being the post you responded to with insults and claiming it wasn't an addition:
"Another high value post brought to you by an opportunist who was hoping no one noticed that he added nothing to the conversation."
It is clear you're having problems following a conversation thread, obviously mistaking his statement as directed at you, instead of what actually happened being he expanded on your statement directed to the same person you replied to.
This brings us to my reply saying his addition was correct and explaining in detail why that is.
(You know, slashdot has a thread view mode for this)
The only reason the first person would even mention the cert validity time being short is if they didn't automate the renewal, so they clearly didn't automate it. The only reason the first person would complain about the short time, already shown not to be automated, is if it was a problem. Manually renewing it, though silly, also does work when you do it. One only complains if they don't or can't, so they clearly are not doing so.
The proper solution is to automate the renewal, just like you pointed out, solving the "even mentioning it" part. The proper solution to not manually renewing it, aka maintaining the system, is to not be in a system admin role, as Opportunist pointed out, solving the "complaining" part.
Is this really all that confusing?
You are literally making personal attacks directed at those of us confirming your original statement here. Are you attempting to argue we are wrong or something? If so, being we are expanding upon and reconfirming what you yourself originally said, wouldn't us being wrong also make your statement wrong? Why did you post it then?
If you are not attempting to say we are wrong, then why the hostility?
Another high value post brought to you by an opportunist who was hoping no one noticed that he added nothing to the conversation.
Except he's correct.
If one explicitly choose not to automatically schedule a once-per-three-month task and perform it manually, yet can't manage to find the time or inclination to actually do so manually every three months, one would have much worse problems than your certificate expiring.
That means using the same demonstrated behavior and thinking, that person would refuse to automate system updates and security patches opting to install them manually, and then not having the time or inclination to actually manually install those security updates and system patches.
Security patches tend to get released much more frequent than once every three months as well. By the time the certificate expires, the same system is at least three months behind on patching potentially remotely exploitable security vulnerabilities.
If one makes the choice to provide full admin/root access on your systems to any random scan bot and script kiddie that happens along, complaining that its certificate (that is no longer actually protecting anything) has expired isn't a priority.
USB3 can handle 5gbs of data. Which is enough for most devices... However the issue comes in when you start using multiple devices at the same time. So that USB SSD if is doing a lot of reading, will slow down your network speed. Due to USB being Serial.
It's not so much being serial as the master/slave structure that slows it down with multiple devices.
The computer host chip is the master, all else are slaves, and slaves can't talk until spoken to. So the computer needs to set aside time on the wire for querying each and every USB device it knows of to see if it has anything to send, and if it does have something to send it gets an equal share of time as anything else.
I heard usb 3, or is that usb c, was supposed to support device-to-device communications without involving the host, but thankfully I haven't been that deep into USB specifics since then.
This is why firewire at 400mbit felt so much faster than USB2 at 480mbit. Firewire being based off SCSI could have any device talk to any other, the host was nothing special just one more ID on the bus. Having one drive send data to another drive without pestering the host and taking time away from other things was just something USB2 and earlier couldn't do.
Even sata and sas are both serial interfaces for disks, and sas 4 can go up to like 22 gbs. It's really fast not due to being serial (or being not serial as you imply) but because each drive gets its own serial lines to the disk controller and they are not shared with other disks.
At some point if us hypocrites don't speak up nothing will ever improve
Actually speaking up isn't likely to help much if at all. Only changing your behaviors will. You'd have to stop giving them your money, and in reality a large number of people will have to stop giving them money, to actually prompt any change in what they are doing.
Just to be completely honest as well, I say "you" not to imply I don't buy the same abused Chinese labor built crap, because I do, I just don't have a problem with it or complain about it. So that just means I'm not a hypocrite, but instead I'm a shitty person:P
However despite that I think my point is still valid.
No doubt the phone companies whose processes were criminally negligent in allowing a person like this to engineer transfer of the number will also be brought to trial and punished.
Ha ha ha. I crack myself up!
Something you may find even more hilarious, or sadly hilarious perhaps.
When the company I work for was sold, our new parent company wanted to bring our phone system into their fold, and into their main account. At the very end of the transition we had a big conference call with everyone involved with the cut-over, myself as the POC here, the technical POC at HQ, one of the HQ phone company reps, and a couple people who specialize in Cisco VoIP in case anything went wrong.
They asked me if I was ready for them to pull the trigger on porting our 100 DIDs (aka our outside phone numbers) over to their phone co, so I replied by asking if I should conference in our own phone company rep to authorize the port.
Their reply: That won't be necessary, we will initiate it on our end.
Over the next 10 minutes each number was moved (I assume they were doing each one by hand instead of scripted/automated) and said I should start verifying the ones on our critical list as still functional. From a technical stand point, all went well and worked. From a procedural stand point, what the fucking hell?!?
No authorization, no informing our phone co this was happening, nothing in place to prevent it, and most disturbing, nothing from the phone co to me to even say it happened.
I called them up after the conference call anyway to ensure service was terminated. I was told *that* part was automated! Once the numbers are ported off-network the current bill will be prorated for the rest of the month, the account closed at the end of the month, and that I'd be contacted within 30 days after termination to arrange for returning their CPE to them...
This is all just SOP when it comes to porting numbers around. The only response they seem to have if done by mistake is to port the numbers back, after the fact, and presumably after any damage is done.
This seems like a logical step, although personally I think the tall skinny format brought about entirely due to phones is horrendous in general.
What's funny is that was my initial thought regarding this change, what bizarre things will those videos do with the new player.
So I pulled one up I accidentally had saved in a playlist awhile back (don't ask) and to my surprise it still has the black bars on the side and looks as awful as it ever did, and the playback controls are still spilling over those black bars. (and my lord, I just notice that video was uploaded as 144p too... what kind of monster does this)
Perhaps the new player isn't fully pushed out to everyone or something, but if it has then at the very least this player change hasn't made things any worse.
Now adaptive optics have improved the resolution so much that they are able to track stars at the center of the galaxy. This is through all the intervening dust and closer stars obstructing the view.
It's about 20 seconds worth, but uses data spanning the 90's and early 00's, gathered from telescopes using adaptive optics.
That data was the first time 20-ish years ago S2 was observed at the 17 light-hour distance from the black hole. The latest data is the second observation of its orbit at this point, but now with many more telescopes and with much more sensitive instruments.
It's also worth noting that the testing of the theory of relativity done this time was simply not possible before.
In the 20-ish year time between observing this event, we have advanced from a simple optical observation in the infrared wavelength of a single 8 meter instrument, to the latest observation using four separate 8 meter instruments plus another two 10 meter telescopes that when combined can collect enough photons to determine the stars redshift!
I for one can't wait to see how far technology will be improved by the time S2 orbits again.
The problem is not, if a patent is valid or not. The problem is how to determine if a patent is valid or not. If someone can claim souvereignity, the processual possibilities to invalidate a patent in his ownership are limited. Basicly he can say: Don't touch it, it's mine! And because the USPTO once agreed to the claims and issued the patent, it is valid as of now, and because of the don't-touch-it-doctrin, the state of validity can't be changed.
Silly question, but what would the case be if you replaced "native american" with any other citizenship that isn't US based?
For example say an Australian sent a patent filing to the USPTO, paid the fees, and the patent was initially granted without issue. Later the patent was challenged and the USPTO agreed it was not valid to be issued after all.
What happens?
It seems obvious the patent wouldn't be legally valid in the US, but what about Internationally? Is the patent then only seen as invalid to the rest of the world due to a treaty, some equivalent of the berne convention of copyright but for patents instead? Are sovereign native americans not a party to such a treaty?
I just don't understand why a native american tribe would be any different to any other countries citizen doing the same, or perhaps don't understand what you mean when you say "Don't touch it, it's mine" in this context.
(One day I might even try designing my own pattern.)
If you have a Windows 10 system kicking around anywhere, you may want to checkout the included "3D Builder" program.
It can import/export STL files and is a surprisingly good 3D design program for being Microsoft born.
I picked up the basic controls and functions within an hour, and after a few hours over a long weekend it no longer felt like I was fighting with 2d input devices in a 3d world.
My first project was to grab an NES cartridge slot lid from thingiverse and modify it for a retropie case mod. I now have a lid with a hole and screw mounts for a 0.9" LCD, and the i2c wiring within the plastic running back to the hinge, as well as a custom logo cavity on the front.
Editing an existing design made it far quicker with the learning curve required and worked far better than KiCad for me. Perhaps once I get to making things from scratch I'll revisit higher end CAD programs, but for just dinking around to learn it works great. It might even impress the kids by letting them throw their own little personal touches on an existing design without too much frustration.
I believe that one difference between enterprise and consumer SSDs is that the enterprise SSDs have a capacitor or battery or something to insure sufficient power to complete this process should power be removed at the wrong time.
That is a very good point as well. You are correct about the enterprise SSDs having backup power capability that consumer SSDs do not have.
One of our servers here has a mix of SSD and hard disk storage, both SAS-2 and on an IBM ServeRaid controller. The SSDs are "IBM 99Y1329" 400gb, and have some funky type of capacitor providing backup power to flush the RAM cache if need be. They call them "Organic Capacitors" which I have to admit to not hearing about before this particular SSD.
I don't recall the exact price but I think those little bastards were a few hundred bucks each when new. The RAID controller is also specifically made to utilize them differently than the regular SAS HDs in terms of what data is stored there, and the controller has its own battery attached to protect its cache RAM.
There are good reasons for all of that extra tech (and extra cost) in most enterprise grade solutions just to protect your data.
As to the original question... I prefer something more reliable than "most of the time you'll be OK."
My protip: If your data is so unimportant that saving a few seconds is acceptable, then imagine how many minutes you would save by simply not copying the data to a flash device in the first place! Of course not copying the data at all will yield a 100% chance your data won't be there, but as those odds are already acceptable this is clearly not a problem. Then you'll have quite a lot more time to spend whatever is deemed more important than the data existing.
Yes, by older I mean roughly 20 years ago, some of the initial nand devices on the market.
These days a 128-256kB nand page size is typical. I also recall Intel at least saying something about 512kB on some of their higher end offerings, but don't remember what class of devices that was about or if it's one of those "coming soon" things or not.
Fortunately even though the page size keeps going up, the flash write speeds also are going up, so it doesn't tend to take that much more total time to commit a write by the controller chip.
The window of opportunity for data loss doesn't change a lot because of that, but the amount of data that can be lost if you yank power during that window can be greater.
Depends how many places "confirmed" saved data can be cached in RAM.
Spinning hard drives have their own cache, which isn't written to the actual disk until either the cache is "full enough" or you instruct it to do so. This data will be lost if you power the device down before the cache is flushed to disk, after the drive reported the data saved.
Flash sort of depends, an SSD for example tends to do the same thing, but there are different ways it can go about it.
Older SSDs can only write 4k blocks, it wasn't possible to write less data. So to write for example 300 bytes, the controller has to pull in a 4k block to its RAM, edit those 300 bytes, and write out the entire 4k block again. Pull power before this is done and your 300 bytes are gone.
"Removable" USB flash drives, the better ones at least, tend to not report data as saved before it really is, just to help avoid this problem. There is little hope for a non-technical person to know what their particular flash drive is doing however, and not even obvious to technical people either.
On top of that, your OS likely caches data to be written to any disk in RAM, completely independent of what the disk itself is doing.
If one is absolutely certain how all of these caches function, and can be completely assured all data is written in a method that doesn't rely on the disk claiming it is or isn't, then in that case it would be safe to power down the device.
For average and above average users, that will just not be true. Even for experts, outside of a small set of cases like highly customized and tuned systems, it may be true the expert knows what is going on, but would tell you from that knowledge it wouldn't be safe and is a silly risk to take, with a high cost of data loss in exchange for a couple of seconds of time saved.
Hell, even I am still in the habit of issuing three 'sync' commands in a row before an unmount command, and that's despite the knowledge the unmount command will do a 'sync' call of its own!
But as this advice is for average or below people, as bad as it is, isn't the worst things commonly done. Average or below people rarely even make backups, which has a far higher cost when (never IF) a drive fails. Corrupting a couple files on a single USB drive compared to not having any backups is like complaining your car only has 5 airbags instead of 6 while driving it off of a cliff...
I sure hope they didn't pay much, because that's so far below the lowest common denominator of modern IT services that the only thing I can think of is that some amateur BBS operator from the mid-90s accidentally fell into an icy lake, his frozen body was found a few years ago, was resuscitated and went into the business of responding to Federal government procurements, with all the knowledge and ability an amateur BBS operator from the mid-90s could bring to 21st century IT.
Please begin your xmodem transfer now. CCC...C...C...
On an unrelated side note, is it cold in here for anyone else? and where did all the Blind Melon CDs go?
Because Sony seems to have all the best exclusives right now, and MS has specifically stated that all their Xbox exclusive games can be played on a PC too. So remind me why I should thrown down another $500 on a Xbox in 2020 after I just wasted $500 on one in 2017 and could just buy a PS5 and PC instead?
"You" personally, or "you" in general?
You personally, from your description, probably shouldn't.
You in general may want to for any number of reasons, a couple good ones being A) you in general doesn't own a PC or a good enough one, and/or B) you in general prefers consoles over computers.
Neither of the above apply to you personally, thus the different answers. In case it needs stated: not everyone in the world is exactly identical to me or you, and having different options for different peoples wants and needs is a good thing.
But I thought that libel was something that forum sites were protected against.
No, actual legally defined libel has no specific protections. The site when served legal papers requesting it, is supposed to pass on the information they have about the poster. Failing to do that can very well make the legal buck stop on the sites shoulders.
But that isn't really the issue here.
The questions are if the comments even qualify to potentially be libel, and if and only if so, did a court deem them so.
Options by definition can never be libel or slander. Claims to facts are the only things that potentially can be libel or slander.
This alone makes the companies claim dubious, when they word it as "ANY suggestion that our current or future products pose any threat to users is absolutely false and libelous"
Posting "I think they would do _" can never be libel, as it is an opinion that can't be proven. Posting "They have done _" however is a fact, and if found to be a false-fact may qualify as libel.
Specifically: " It is a tort (civil wrong) making the person or entity open to a lawsuit for damages by the person who can prove the statement about him/her was a lie." "Publication need only be to one person, but it must be a statement which claims to be fact and is not clearly identified as an opinion."
and to your question about websites or forums being protected: "Most states provide for a party defamed by a periodical to demand a published retraction. If the correction is made, then there is no right to file a lawsuit. "
Unless someone has their machine connected directly to the internet (in which case you've got a whole lot of bigger problems), what's the likelyhood that this would actually be exploited?
An attack sourced from the Internet would be highly unlikely, or more specifically would be zero percent for the vast majority of Steam users.
LAN attacks are more realistic, especially if one is the LAN party hosting type.
Malware that makes it behind the NAT could also be used to exploit this. PC infecting malware for certain could be used to reach and infect other systems running Steam on the LAN other than the infected one.
Can web browsers do UDP from their sandbox these days? There have been browser based malware in the past that utilized TCP sockets to attack home routers web interfaces from the inside LAN side. While I admit I don't know, part of me still hopes UDP is a thing kept out of the javascript and sandbox passing commands available to the browser, but fear I could be wrong...
What made the Intellivision unique was the numpad controller with slide-in plastic overlays. Hard to reproduce that in an emulator As a kid I spent more hours on my Intellivision with the voice box than my PS3 and PS4 combined.
Actually raphnet has an adapter to use Intellivision controllers with a PC via USB, was $20 I think. It of course mapped the keypad part to HID events, and there are places to get and print off the overlays. The only hard to source part might be an actual controller if you don't have a system still hanging around.
If you'd like the hard DIY version, the DB9 matrix pinout they used its out there to read the controllers directly
I'd even go so far to say the intellivision controllers were the most innovative at the time. I just hope they release new controllers without the fingernail removal disc:P
Slashdot Mirror
Let it be a bit harder for the technically inept to pirate things. The masses bring too much negative attention to pirating services.
Except kodi isn't a pirating service, it's a video player.
Just like Windows Media Player or your Chrome Cast dongle.
If you are the person instructing any of those players to play pirated content, that is 100% on your head for doing it, not the video player.
The joke of this is that it actually inspired me to finally download all the roms for the systems I love. It's not like there is a legal way for me to download and play these games. Such a pointless waste.
Sure there is.
Archive.org has a legal exemption to the DMCA to preserve copyright protected works for when their limited time protection expires. They have preserved NES games in their collection as well
.
(Note that while they can legally distribute them to you, you still can't legally distribute them from there to others)
Despite Nintendo's decades of lying about ownership of the MOS Technology 6502 CPU, they had zero part in designing or creating that chip, so their claims that emulator software violate their rights are just that, lies.
Perhaps the first claim back in the 90s was just a mistake, but after being corrected a few million times, it's clear those claims are malicious and since the DMCA has passed their claims are also criminal.
Emulators are legal to download if the software creator releases it with a license allowing you to, you can safely ignore Nintendo's claims of ownership on other peoples property.
Why LIMITED though?
Because that is what artists agreed to for copyright to exist.
You don't just get to limit everyone's rights for no reason or benefit to them. We exchanged some of our rights for a limited time, to give you some incentive to create art.
Remember that our deal to you was optional, it is todays government that is forcing that deal upon you no matter if you like it or not. Go blame them for that.
Or alternately if you'd prefer, if we didn't get anything out of the copyright deal, we wouldn't GIVE you a deal at all.
So limited is there so you have an additional reason to make art, you have a time to profit.
Not limited means no deal, you get nothing, no protection, no time to profit, nothing.
The thing is, as an artist, you have to follow the law just like everyone else.
Perhaps not you personally, but the VAST majority of artists today feel so entitled they can simply break the law and ignore the deal set forth in copyright law.
Finally, eventually, we have said fuck it. If artists refuse to follow the law, there is no reason for us to do so either, thus the piracy is pretty universally thought of as moral. Even artists who say it isn't moral pirate, showing they really feel the same.
Look at Nintendo. Right there in their statement:
According to Nintendo's official site, ROMs and video game emulation also represent "the greatest threat to date to the intellectual property rights of video game developers,"
You may not be aware, but Nintendo has consistently claimed emulator software is illegal and infringes their rights.
They are, falsely, claiming ownership of a CPU they never were involved in making. They have NO rights to the 6502 CPU yet right there in bold they claim they own all rights to a piece of hardware completely designed and produced by MOS Technology.
Nintendo has no problem claiming things created by not-nintendo are theirs.
How can they, or you for them, possibly follow that up saying its OK when they claim ownership on other peoples property, but not OK when we claim ownership of Nintendo's property?
Nintendo doesn't wish to follow the law, they outright admit following the law shouldn't be done, evidenced by the fact they haven't done so for over 30 years.
There is no moral complaint possible from them when we don't follow the law either and refuse to give them any copyright protection.
This thinking isn't unique to Nintendo either, most all artists think this way, and your question implies you do or did think that was somehow the normal and standard.
You should think long and hard about questioning the value of a gift given to you, because the fact of the matter is we chose to give that gift to you in the first place, and we can choose to stop offering you gifts completely when everyone is so ungrateful for it.
yet can't manage to find the time
Who said that? Must have been that magical person who can edit Slashdot posts.
This post said that:
"Gee, now if the certs would last longer than Trump's attention span, Let's Encrypt could actually become useful. At this point, they should rename it "Let's Momentarily Encrypt.""
That being the person you responded to, saying:
"If you can't figure out how to set cron to execute a command every 3 months then you really shouldn't be even remotely in charge of something as important as the encryption on your server."
That being the post Opportunist expanded upon, adding to your reply to them with:
"You shouldn't be in charge of an internet facing machine altogether..."
That being the post you responded to with insults and claiming it wasn't an addition:
"Another high value post brought to you by an opportunist who was hoping no one noticed that he added nothing to the conversation."
It is clear you're having problems following a conversation thread, obviously mistaking his statement as directed at you, instead of what actually happened being he expanded on your statement directed to the same person you replied to.
This brings us to my reply saying his addition was correct and explaining in detail why that is.
(You know, slashdot has a thread view mode for this)
The only reason the first person would even mention the cert validity time being short is if they didn't automate the renewal, so they clearly didn't automate it.
The only reason the first person would complain about the short time, already shown not to be automated, is if it was a problem.
Manually renewing it, though silly, also does work when you do it. One only complains if they don't or can't, so they clearly are not doing so.
The proper solution is to automate the renewal, just like you pointed out, solving the "even mentioning it" part.
The proper solution to not manually renewing it, aka maintaining the system, is to not be in a system admin role, as Opportunist pointed out, solving the "complaining" part.
Is this really all that confusing?
You are literally making personal attacks directed at those of us confirming your original statement here. Are you attempting to argue we are wrong or something?
If so, being we are expanding upon and reconfirming what you yourself originally said, wouldn't us being wrong also make your statement wrong? Why did you post it then?
If you are not attempting to say we are wrong, then why the hostility?
Another high value post brought to you by an opportunist who was hoping no one noticed that he added nothing to the conversation.
Except he's correct.
If one explicitly choose not to automatically schedule a once-per-three-month task and perform it manually, yet can't manage to find the time or inclination to actually do so manually every three months, one would have much worse problems than your certificate expiring.
That means using the same demonstrated behavior and thinking, that person would refuse to automate system updates and security patches opting to install them manually, and then not having the time or inclination to actually manually install those security updates and system patches.
Security patches tend to get released much more frequent than once every three months as well.
By the time the certificate expires, the same system is at least three months behind on patching potentially remotely exploitable security vulnerabilities.
If one makes the choice to provide full admin/root access on your systems to any random scan bot and script kiddie that happens along, complaining that its certificate (that is no longer actually protecting anything) has expired isn't a priority.
USB3 can handle 5gbs of data. Which is enough for most devices... However the issue comes in when you start using multiple devices at the same time. So that USB SSD if is doing a lot of reading, will slow down your network speed. Due to USB being Serial.
It's not so much being serial as the master/slave structure that slows it down with multiple devices.
The computer host chip is the master, all else are slaves, and slaves can't talk until spoken to.
So the computer needs to set aside time on the wire for querying each and every USB device it knows of to see if it has anything to send, and if it does have something to send it gets an equal share of time as anything else.
I heard usb 3, or is that usb c, was supposed to support device-to-device communications without involving the host, but thankfully I haven't been that deep into USB specifics since then.
This is why firewire at 400mbit felt so much faster than USB2 at 480mbit.
Firewire being based off SCSI could have any device talk to any other, the host was nothing special just one more ID on the bus. Having one drive send data to another drive without pestering the host and taking time away from other things was just something USB2 and earlier couldn't do.
Even sata and sas are both serial interfaces for disks, and sas 4 can go up to like 22 gbs. It's really fast not due to being serial (or being not serial as you imply) but because each drive gets its own serial lines to the disk controller and they are not shared with other disks.
At some point if us hypocrites don't speak up nothing will ever improve
Actually speaking up isn't likely to help much if at all. Only changing your behaviors will.
You'd have to stop giving them your money, and in reality a large number of people will have to stop giving them money, to actually prompt any change in what they are doing.
Just to be completely honest as well, I say "you" not to imply I don't buy the same abused Chinese labor built crap, because I do, I just don't have a problem with it or complain about it. :P
So that just means I'm not a hypocrite, but instead I'm a shitty person
However despite that I think my point is still valid.
No doubt the phone companies whose processes were criminally negligent in allowing a person like this to engineer transfer of the number will also be brought to trial and punished.
Ha ha ha. I crack myself up!
Something you may find even more hilarious, or sadly hilarious perhaps.
When the company I work for was sold, our new parent company wanted to bring our phone system into their fold, and into their main account.
At the very end of the transition we had a big conference call with everyone involved with the cut-over, myself as the POC here, the technical POC at HQ, one of the HQ phone company reps, and a couple people who specialize in Cisco VoIP in case anything went wrong.
They asked me if I was ready for them to pull the trigger on porting our 100 DIDs (aka our outside phone numbers) over to their phone co, so I replied by asking if I should conference in our own phone company rep to authorize the port.
Their reply: That won't be necessary, we will initiate it on our end.
Over the next 10 minutes each number was moved (I assume they were doing each one by hand instead of scripted/automated) and said I should start verifying the ones on our critical list as still functional.
From a technical stand point, all went well and worked.
From a procedural stand point, what the fucking hell?!?
No authorization, no informing our phone co this was happening, nothing in place to prevent it, and most disturbing, nothing from the phone co to me to even say it happened.
I called them up after the conference call anyway to ensure service was terminated. I was told *that* part was automated!
Once the numbers are ported off-network the current bill will be prorated for the rest of the month, the account closed at the end of the month, and that I'd be contacted within 30 days after termination to arrange for returning their CPE to them...
This is all just SOP when it comes to porting numbers around.
The only response they seem to have if done by mistake is to port the numbers back, after the fact, and presumably after any damage is done.
This seems like a logical step, although personally I think the tall skinny format brought about entirely due to phones is horrendous in general.
What's funny is that was my initial thought regarding this change, what bizarre things will those videos do with the new player.
So I pulled one up I accidentally had saved in a playlist awhile back (don't ask) and to my surprise it still has the black bars on the side and looks as awful as it ever did, and the playback controls are still spilling over those black bars.
(and my lord, I just notice that video was uploaded as 144p too... what kind of monster does this)
Perhaps the new player isn't fully pushed out to everyone or something, but if it has then at the very least this player change hasn't made things any worse.
Now adaptive optics have improved the resolution so much that they are able to track stars at the center of the galaxy. This is through all the intervening dust and closer stars obstructing the view.
Here is a video showing the tracked motion of the stars orbiting our central black hole, including S2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_gggKHvfGw
It's about 20 seconds worth, but uses data spanning the 90's and early 00's, gathered from telescopes using adaptive optics.
That data was the first time 20-ish years ago S2 was observed at the 17 light-hour distance from the black hole.
The latest data is the second observation of its orbit at this point, but now with many more telescopes and with much more sensitive instruments.
It's also worth noting that the testing of the theory of relativity done this time was simply not possible before.
In the 20-ish year time between observing this event, we have advanced from a simple optical observation in the infrared wavelength of a single 8 meter instrument, to the latest observation using four separate 8 meter instruments plus another two 10 meter telescopes that when combined can collect enough photons to determine the stars redshift!
I for one can't wait to see how far technology will be improved by the time S2 orbits again.
The problem is not, if a patent is valid or not. The problem is how to determine if a patent is valid or not. If someone can claim souvereignity, the processual possibilities to invalidate a patent in his ownership are limited. Basicly he can say: Don't touch it, it's mine! And because the USPTO once agreed to the claims and issued the patent, it is valid as of now, and because of the don't-touch-it-doctrin, the state of validity can't be changed.
Silly question, but what would the case be if you replaced "native american" with any other citizenship that isn't US based?
For example say an Australian sent a patent filing to the USPTO, paid the fees, and the patent was initially granted without issue. Later the patent was challenged and the USPTO agreed it was not valid to be issued after all.
What happens?
It seems obvious the patent wouldn't be legally valid in the US, but what about Internationally?
Is the patent then only seen as invalid to the rest of the world due to a treaty, some equivalent of the berne convention of copyright but for patents instead?
Are sovereign native americans not a party to such a treaty?
I just don't understand why a native american tribe would be any different to any other countries citizen doing the same, or perhaps don't understand what you mean when you say "Don't touch it, it's mine" in this context.
(One day I might even try designing my own pattern.)
If you have a Windows 10 system kicking around anywhere, you may want to checkout the included "3D Builder" program.
It can import/export STL files and is a surprisingly good 3D design program for being Microsoft born.
I picked up the basic controls and functions within an hour, and after a few hours over a long weekend it no longer felt like I was fighting with 2d input devices in a 3d world.
My first project was to grab an NES cartridge slot lid from thingiverse and modify it for a retropie case mod.
I now have a lid with a hole and screw mounts for a 0.9" LCD, and the i2c wiring within the plastic running back to the hinge, as well as a custom logo cavity on the front.
Editing an existing design made it far quicker with the learning curve required and worked far better than KiCad for me. Perhaps once I get to making things from scratch I'll revisit higher end CAD programs, but for just dinking around to learn it works great.
It might even impress the kids by letting them throw their own little personal touches on an existing design without too much frustration.
The warning isn't fucking unobtrusive, that's the problem.
They changed the "(i)" icon to now say "(i) Not Secure" just to the left of the URL in the address bar.
How is that obtrusive?
Do you consider the padlock icon with the words "Secure" equally as obtrusive?
They are now the exact same length as each other.
Too bad nerds like you quite often have shorter sight than your coke-bottle glasses lets on.
No, we just prefer to ignore assholes that make shit up that is demonstrably not true.
This is literally the change you are bitching up a storm about as "The warning isn't fucking unobtrusive"
I believe that one difference between enterprise and consumer SSDs is that the enterprise SSDs have a capacitor or battery or something to insure sufficient power to complete this process should power be removed at the wrong time.
That is a very good point as well.
You are correct about the enterprise SSDs having backup power capability that consumer SSDs do not have.
One of our servers here has a mix of SSD and hard disk storage, both SAS-2 and on an IBM ServeRaid controller.
The SSDs are "IBM 99Y1329" 400gb, and have some funky type of capacitor providing backup power to flush the RAM cache if need be. They call them "Organic Capacitors" which I have to admit to not hearing about before this particular SSD.
I don't recall the exact price but I think those little bastards were a few hundred bucks each when new.
The RAID controller is also specifically made to utilize them differently than the regular SAS HDs in terms of what data is stored there, and the controller has its own battery attached to protect its cache RAM.
There are good reasons for all of that extra tech (and extra cost) in most enterprise grade solutions just to protect your data.
As to the original question... I prefer something more reliable than "most of the time you'll be OK."
My protip: If your data is so unimportant that saving a few seconds is acceptable, then imagine how many minutes you would save by simply not copying the data to a flash device in the first place!
Of course not copying the data at all will yield a 100% chance your data won't be there, but as those odds are already acceptable this is clearly not a problem.
Then you'll have quite a lot more time to spend whatever is deemed more important than the data existing.
Yes, by older I mean roughly 20 years ago, some of the initial nand devices on the market.
These days a 128-256kB nand page size is typical.
I also recall Intel at least saying something about 512kB on some of their higher end offerings, but don't remember what class of devices that was about or if it's one of those "coming soon" things or not.
Fortunately even though the page size keeps going up, the flash write speeds also are going up, so it doesn't tend to take that much more total time to commit a write by the controller chip.
The window of opportunity for data loss doesn't change a lot because of that, but the amount of data that can be lost if you yank power during that window can be greater.
Depends how many places "confirmed" saved data can be cached in RAM.
Spinning hard drives have their own cache, which isn't written to the actual disk until either the cache is "full enough" or you instruct it to do so.
This data will be lost if you power the device down before the cache is flushed to disk, after the drive reported the data saved.
Flash sort of depends, an SSD for example tends to do the same thing, but there are different ways it can go about it.
Older SSDs can only write 4k blocks, it wasn't possible to write less data.
So to write for example 300 bytes, the controller has to pull in a 4k block to its RAM, edit those 300 bytes, and write out the entire 4k block again.
Pull power before this is done and your 300 bytes are gone.
"Removable" USB flash drives, the better ones at least, tend to not report data as saved before it really is, just to help avoid this problem. There is little hope for a non-technical person to know what their particular flash drive is doing however, and not even obvious to technical people either.
On top of that, your OS likely caches data to be written to any disk in RAM, completely independent of what the disk itself is doing.
If one is absolutely certain how all of these caches function, and can be completely assured all data is written in a method that doesn't rely on the disk claiming it is or isn't, then in that case it would be safe to power down the device.
For average and above average users, that will just not be true.
Even for experts, outside of a small set of cases like highly customized and tuned systems, it may be true the expert knows what is going on, but would tell you from that knowledge it wouldn't be safe and is a silly risk to take, with a high cost of data loss in exchange for a couple of seconds of time saved.
Hell, even I am still in the habit of issuing three 'sync' commands in a row before an unmount command, and that's despite the knowledge the unmount command will do a 'sync' call of its own!
But as this advice is for average or below people, as bad as it is, isn't the worst things commonly done.
Average or below people rarely even make backups, which has a far higher cost when (never IF) a drive fails. Corrupting a couple files on a single USB drive compared to not having any backups is like complaining your car only has 5 airbags instead of 6 while driving it off of a cliff...
Nah, I think we should be going back to switches on the front console. Now, that was a user interface!
Pft, you kids and your switches and lights and visage ledgers.
This UI has been time tested for over 3000 years!
Another addition of fun facts on time for programmers, more specifically to time zones.
(Now with more video! Batteries still not included)
"The Problem with Time & Timezones" from Computerphile (~10 minutes)
https://youtu.be/-5wpm-gesOY
I sure hope they didn't pay much, because that's so far below the lowest common denominator of modern IT services that the only thing I can think of is that some amateur BBS operator from the mid-90s accidentally fell into an icy lake, his frozen body was found a few years ago, was resuscitated and went into the business of responding to Federal government procurements, with all the knowledge and ability an amateur BBS operator from the mid-90s could bring to 21st century IT.
Please begin your xmodem transfer now.
CCC...C...C...
On an unrelated side note, is it cold in here for anyone else? and where did all the Blind Melon CDs go?
If you let that happen then you won't even be left with dog food.
Actually, retraining the displaced market and economic analysts into a future job of becoming dog food was our plan all along!
My invitation must have gotten lost in the mail.
Actually I submitted the invitation hash-signature to the new copyright system claiming it as my own.
Until the EU settles up the fine they owe me, they won't be allowed to upload it to you :P
Sorry about that!
Because Sony seems to have all the best exclusives right now, and MS has specifically stated that all their Xbox exclusive games can be played on a PC too. So remind me why I should thrown down another $500 on a Xbox in 2020 after I just wasted $500 on one in 2017 and could just buy a PS5 and PC instead?
"You" personally, or "you" in general?
You personally, from your description, probably shouldn't.
You in general may want to for any number of reasons, a couple good ones being A) you in general doesn't own a PC or a good enough one, and/or B) you in general prefers consoles over computers.
Neither of the above apply to you personally, thus the different answers.
In case it needs stated: not everyone in the world is exactly identical to me or you, and having different options for different peoples wants and needs is a good thing.
But I thought that libel was something that forum sites were protected against.
No, actual legally defined libel has no specific protections.
The site when served legal papers requesting it, is supposed to pass on the information they have about the poster. Failing to do that can very well make the legal buck stop on the sites shoulders.
But that isn't really the issue here.
The questions are if the comments even qualify to potentially be libel, and if and only if so, did a court deem them so.
Options by definition can never be libel or slander.
Claims to facts are the only things that potentially can be libel or slander.
This alone makes the companies claim dubious, when they word it as "ANY suggestion that our current or future products pose any threat to users is absolutely false and libelous"
Posting "I think they would do _" can never be libel, as it is an opinion that can't be proven.
Posting "They have done _" however is a fact, and if found to be a false-fact may qualify as libel.
Both libel and slander are forms of tort law (libel being a written tort and slander being a spoken tort)
https://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=1153
Specifically:
" It is a tort (civil wrong) making the person or entity open to a lawsuit for damages by the person who can prove the statement about him/her was a lie."
"Publication need only be to one person, but it must be a statement which claims to be fact and is not clearly identified as an opinion."
and to your question about websites or forums being protected:
"Most states provide for a party defamed by a periodical to demand a published retraction. If the correction is made, then there is no right to file a lawsuit. "
Unless someone has their machine connected directly to the internet (in which case you've got a whole lot of bigger problems), what's the likelyhood that this would actually be exploited?
An attack sourced from the Internet would be highly unlikely, or more specifically would be zero percent for the vast majority of Steam users.
LAN attacks are more realistic, especially if one is the LAN party hosting type.
Malware that makes it behind the NAT could also be used to exploit this.
PC infecting malware for certain could be used to reach and infect other systems running Steam on the LAN other than the infected one.
Can web browsers do UDP from their sandbox these days?
There have been browser based malware in the past that utilized TCP sockets to attack home routers web interfaces from the inside LAN side.
While I admit I don't know, part of me still hopes UDP is a thing kept out of the javascript and sandbox passing commands available to the browser, but fear I could be wrong...
What made the Intellivision unique was the numpad controller with slide-in plastic overlays. Hard to reproduce that in an emulator
As a kid I spent more hours on my Intellivision with the voice box than my PS3 and PS4 combined.
Actually raphnet has an adapter to use Intellivision controllers with a PC via USB, was $20 I think.
It of course mapped the keypad part to HID events, and there are places to get and print off the overlays. The only hard to source part might be an actual controller if you don't have a system still hanging around.
If you'd like the hard DIY version, the DB9 matrix pinout they used its out there to read the controllers directly
I'd even go so far to say the intellivision controllers were the most innovative at the time. :P
I just hope they release new controllers without the fingernail removal disc