No. Android doesn't automatically give the phone access to SOME of the system functions without confirmation (often even when unlocked) but there is still an open communication channel between the USB device and the phone even when the phone is locked. You can see that because the device will identify itself on the lockscreen, or when I plug my locked phone into a laptop to charge I can see the full USB details of the phone on my laptop (I just can't do anything with it since Android blocks access to the file system until I unlock and confirm).
I too was thrown by the 1 hour window. How often outside of sleepy time does one's phone remain unlocked for an entire hour?
It's a question of nefarious timing. You go out and get pulled over for a DUI or some other stupid crap like that. The police try to sting you with a crime by fishing through your phone, but you refuse to unlock it for them. You've already wasted 15min like there. These systems aren't cheap, and every officer isn't carrying one. What are the odds of getting that phone to one of these devices in the remaining 45min?
Apple isn't working against nation state attacks against specific targets here, they are working against the FBI and police and their thousands of seized phones.
Actually I think it's more that you cannot write given you refuted a point with a cite, then agreed the cite isn't a problem, and now complained that no one can follow you.
It's interesting that a community is destroyed and doesn't return, but all the people are healthy and survived. Basic sociology would dictate that either a new community has been formed or another community is has grown as a result.
Personally I don't understand the obsession with a place or a job. An asteroid could hit my house right now and I wouldn't give a shit, I certainly wouldn't pine for it. It's just a house, a place somewhere on this giant rock. There are billions more like it.
Mind you do you hold the number of people displaced due to oil and resource related wars to the same standard? Or is a couple of people from one small city all you care about because #bias?
Only on Slashdot could Apple helping give the scientific community performance gains with existing hardware be considered "throwing away the scientific community"
By locking them into an inferior and non standard system instead of adopting Vulkan?
Yes they are throwing away the scientific community.
Because we're working on nicer things? Honestly I think we have plenty of nice things, and sitting on our asses fine tuning ad nauseam won't help that. Leave the perfection to the mainframes counting our money.
But Apple did, and does, have a serious foothold in the creative industries
Apple did, but "does" is stretching it. A lot of creatives have dropped Apple, and that includes developer support which used to favour that platform incredibly who are now just treating it as yet another platform. There used to be so many exclusive titles that you were hamstrung by working with a windows platform. Now they are comparable. Adobe used to release on Apple first, that changed to release to Apple at the same time, and that even changed to skipping releases on Apple when things changed (e.g. Apple didn't get a 64bit version of CS until well after Windows did).
I do wonder if Adobe is pulling all stops to resolve this, or if this is going to be another blemish in the history of Apple where the creative platform of choice ended up being left behind. God knows I know a few people in the professional video industry which dropped Apple as they weren't able to develop the hardware they need.
Well thats bullshit. It was known ahead of time that AMD was moving to a smaller node and would thus make up the entire difference.
No. It was known ahead of time that AMD was moving to a smaller node. That is it. The end of anything that anyone knew ahead of time. AMD has had quite a recent history of miserable product releases barely staying relevant in the face of the competition even with its discounted pricing model.
That they came out with what they did, and wiped the floor with Intel was a surprise to absolutely everyone in the industry.
That's just it. People look at it in absolutes rather than in terms of value.
Let's say you buy a short game with a crappy single player campaign for $70. After 10 hours of finishing the campaign and throwing away never to be played again you're at $7/hour.
About half the cost of seeing a movie in the cinema. About a quarter of the cost of seeing a band play. Less than the cost of going out to dinner, and far less than going to the pub with others. About half the hourly cost of a trip to a themepark or water park. Cheaper than bowling, or hiring a tennis court.
If you get a game with a more decent campaign (I've sunk 50 hours into Nier so far), or a multiplayer option, or replay value, it becomes the cheapest form of entertainment you can buy.
As pointed out in another thread, the blocking of../ didn't work and was only very recently (in terms of tar's life) was fixed. tar was vulnerable to this for a good 25 years.
No one is thinking of the Koch Brothers. They will be the least affected by the result. On the other hand the continued wealth of the rich is of great interest to a lot of people nearing retirement age, as their wealth is pegged to the same source of value.
Also no one is saying that we should do anything to avoid the crisis, just that the crisis will happen.
Also also, the question of if the supply is infinite is missing the fundamental cause that will lead to the collapse. The useful life of equipment is dependent on the sources of energy. The abandonment is taken into account of the financing which is clear from the up-front estimation of the size of oil and gas fields. It what makes them viable or not. The end of a field and the associated cost is normal. What we are seeing here is a potential shift away from these resources leading to a devaluation of the field, or a premature abandonment. That is what causes accounting books to not balance, and what moves share prices around.
I still disagree. If there's one thing that Facebook has shown it's that people not only don't think about the data they hand over, but also when shown how much data these companies have, when shown how data is used to manipulate, when shown how it could have an effect on an entire nation... they shrug and continue to hand over data.
I would say that categorically people don't give a crap about their privacy, not even related to liking it or not, just flat out not caring in the slightest.
The excuse that they didn't know is no longer defensible.
It's not the cost of the primary energy that will upset the economy. It is the cost of the disposal of assets, the sunk investments, the many jobs supported, etc. It isn't about newer and cheaper, it's about too big to fail actually failing and also being too big to prop up.
You expect a collapse in energy prices and the massive availability of cheap energy to negatively effect industrial economies ?
No. He expects it to negatively effect the financial world which has a lot riding on the traditional energy users. Too big to fail is such due to the impact the failure itself has on the economy. Industry itself will be doing just fine as will the general economy. The fewer job prospects isn't really anything to do with the number of jobs as much as the competition.
Also your comparisons to the switch to coal and oil isn't quite fair. The coal and oil for its most part provided new opportunities rather than replacing existing ones. Buggy whip manufacturers aside the world economy wasn't propped up by people selling horses and hay. The same can not be said for the trillions of of dollars sitting in the oil industry. We are talking about active replacement / destruction of industries as the end goal now. Expect it to be quite different from the steam age.
Who judges what performance? Do we need to show our tax statements before we qualify or will it be available to then young too? For the young, do we then ask the opinions of their teachers as to if they will ever amount to anything? Because I agree we shouldn't allow people like Einstein who show no promise to survive. After all someone has declared them a poor performer.
Sorry to break it to you but this the very problem with universal health care. We as a society can't make this type of treatment ( until we invent automation and mass production around it ) available to all.
No. That's the very problem with your view on universal healthcare. The whole point of socialising the cost is that it becomes trivial to spread across a population. The reality of social healthcare is exactly the opposite: ONLY a society can make that kind of treatment available to all. If left up to individuals you will get non empathetic asshats who think only the rich deserve to live.
It's not. I thought that would be painfully obvious to everyone by now. Facebook, Google, etc show quite clearly that it doesn't even register as part of the thought process for people let alone have any weight.
Is either story untrue? Both seem easy to fact-check.
Something doesn't need to be true or false in order to achieve a goal of crediting or discrediting something or someone. One can always find positive and negative things about everyone and almost anything. The positive or negative bias comes with which stories run with which spin.
You can see this in articles we discussed on the weekend: "Smartphone shipments are down for the first time in 2017" was quickly spun in the comments to "Apple smartphones defiant against an android slump in 2017" Both are true, both are based on the same data, and both drive different agendas from the person making the comments.
Oh no I read it. I just assumed if your entire point lingered on one key assumption you would have more than one anecdotal data point. Maybe you should do some reading next time before making a post.
Slashdot Mirror
No. Android doesn't automatically give the phone access to SOME of the system functions without confirmation (often even when unlocked) but there is still an open communication channel between the USB device and the phone even when the phone is locked. You can see that because the device will identify itself on the lockscreen, or when I plug my locked phone into a laptop to charge I can see the full USB details of the phone on my laptop (I just can't do anything with it since Android blocks access to the file system until I unlock and confirm).
This wouldn't stop a carefully crafted exploit.
I too was thrown by the 1 hour window. How often outside of sleepy time does one's phone remain unlocked for an entire hour?
It's a question of nefarious timing. You go out and get pulled over for a DUI or some other stupid crap like that. The police try to sting you with a crime by fishing through your phone, but you refuse to unlock it for them. You've already wasted 15min like there. These systems aren't cheap, and every officer isn't carrying one. What are the odds of getting that phone to one of these devices in the remaining 45min?
Apple isn't working against nation state attacks against specific targets here, they are working against the FBI and police and their thousands of seized phones.
Can you not read?
Actually I think it's more that you cannot write given you refuted a point with a cite, then agreed the cite isn't a problem, and now complained that no one can follow you.
It's interesting that a community is destroyed and doesn't return, but all the people are healthy and survived. Basic sociology would dictate that either a new community has been formed or another community is has grown as a result.
Personally I don't understand the obsession with a place or a job. An asteroid could hit my house right now and I wouldn't give a shit, I certainly wouldn't pine for it. It's just a house, a place somewhere on this giant rock. There are billions more like it.
Mind you do you hold the number of people displaced due to oil and resource related wars to the same standard? Or is a couple of people from one small city all you care about because #bias?
Only on Slashdot could Apple helping give the scientific community performance gains with existing hardware be considered "throwing away the scientific community"
By locking them into an inferior and non standard system instead of adopting Vulkan?
Yes they are throwing away the scientific community.
This is why we never have nice things
Because we're working on nicer things? Honestly I think we have plenty of nice things, and sitting on our asses fine tuning ad nauseam won't help that.
Leave the perfection to the mainframes counting our money.
But Apple did, and does, have a serious foothold in the creative industries
Apple did, but "does" is stretching it. A lot of creatives have dropped Apple, and that includes developer support which used to favour that platform incredibly who are now just treating it as yet another platform. There used to be so many exclusive titles that you were hamstrung by working with a windows platform. Now they are comparable. Adobe used to release on Apple first, that changed to release to Apple at the same time, and that even changed to skipping releases on Apple when things changed (e.g. Apple didn't get a 64bit version of CS until well after Windows did).
I do wonder if Adobe is pulling all stops to resolve this, or if this is going to be another blemish in the history of Apple where the creative platform of choice ended up being left behind. God knows I know a few people in the professional video industry which dropped Apple as they weren't able to develop the hardware they need.
There's nothing wrong with milking the architecture as long as the performance / price point increases. Developing new architectures is not trivial.
Well thats bullshit. It was known ahead of time that AMD was moving to a smaller node and would thus make up the entire difference.
No. It was known ahead of time that AMD was moving to a smaller node. That is it. The end of anything that anyone knew ahead of time. AMD has had quite a recent history of miserable product releases barely staying relevant in the face of the competition even with its discounted pricing model.
That they came out with what they did, and wiped the floor with Intel was a surprise to absolutely everyone in the industry.
That's just it. People look at it in absolutes rather than in terms of value.
Let's say you buy a short game with a crappy single player campaign for $70. After 10 hours of finishing the campaign and throwing away never to be played again you're at $7/hour.
About half the cost of seeing a movie in the cinema.
About a quarter of the cost of seeing a band play.
Less than the cost of going out to dinner, and far less than going to the pub with others.
About half the hourly cost of a trip to a themepark or water park.
Cheaper than bowling, or hiring a tennis court.
If you get a game with a more decent campaign (I've sunk 50 hours into Nier so far), or a multiplayer option, or replay value, it becomes the cheapest form of entertainment you can buy.
As pointed out in another thread, the blocking of ../ didn't work and was only very recently (in terms of tar's life) was fixed. tar was vulnerable to this for a good 25 years.
No one is thinking of the Koch Brothers. They will be the least affected by the result. On the other hand the continued wealth of the rich is of great interest to a lot of people nearing retirement age, as their wealth is pegged to the same source of value.
Also no one is saying that we should do anything to avoid the crisis, just that the crisis will happen.
Also also, the question of if the supply is infinite is missing the fundamental cause that will lead to the collapse. The useful life of equipment is dependent on the sources of energy. The abandonment is taken into account of the financing which is clear from the up-front estimation of the size of oil and gas fields. It what makes them viable or not. The end of a field and the associated cost is normal. What we are seeing here is a potential shift away from these resources leading to a devaluation of the field, or a premature abandonment. That is what causes accounting books to not balance, and what moves share prices around.
I still disagree. If there's one thing that Facebook has shown it's that people not only don't think about the data they hand over, but also when shown how much data these companies have, when shown how data is used to manipulate, when shown how it could have an effect on an entire nation ... they shrug and continue to hand over data.
I would say that categorically people don't give a crap about their privacy, not even related to liking it or not, just flat out not caring in the slightest.
The excuse that they didn't know is no longer defensible.
It's not the cost of the primary energy that will upset the economy. It is the cost of the disposal of assets, the sunk investments, the many jobs supported, etc. It isn't about newer and cheaper, it's about too big to fail actually failing and also being too big to prop up.
You expect a collapse in energy prices and the massive availability of cheap energy to negatively effect industrial economies ?
No. He expects it to negatively effect the financial world which has a lot riding on the traditional energy users. Too big to fail is such due to the impact the failure itself has on the economy. Industry itself will be doing just fine as will the general economy. The fewer job prospects isn't really anything to do with the number of jobs as much as the competition.
Also your comparisons to the switch to coal and oil isn't quite fair. The coal and oil for its most part provided new opportunities rather than replacing existing ones. Buggy whip manufacturers aside the world economy wasn't propped up by people selling horses and hay. The same can not be said for the trillions of of dollars sitting in the oil industry. We are talking about active replacement / destruction of industries as the end goal now. Expect it to be quite different from the steam age.
If you are willing to perform like a trained monkey, I'm not sure anything can help you.
I'm sure we can find your pressure points and get you to dance for us too. The question is just what are they.
Better performers should get greater rewards.
Who judges what performance? Do we need to show our tax statements before we qualify or will it be available to then young too? For the young, do we then ask the opinions of their teachers as to if they will ever amount to anything? Because I agree we shouldn't allow people like Einstein who show no promise to survive. After all someone has declared them a poor performer.
Sorry to break it to you but this the very problem with universal health care. We as a society can't make this type of treatment ( until we invent automation and mass production around it ) available to all.
No. That's the very problem with your view on universal healthcare. The whole point of socialising the cost is that it becomes trivial to spread across a population. The reality of social healthcare is exactly the opposite: ONLY a society can make that kind of treatment available to all. If left up to individuals you will get non empathetic asshats who think only the rich deserve to live.
and this legislation could cause serious financial harm
So 100% consistent with the rest of the USA medical industrial complex then?
This is fucking amazing, should be on every front page, everywhere.
It is and it is :-).
At least it's front page on:
http://www.abc.net.au/news
http://www.npr.org/sections/ne...
http://www.theguardian.com/uk
If privacy is important
It's not. I thought that would be painfully obvious to everyone by now. Facebook, Google, etc show quite clearly that it doesn't even register as part of the thought process for people let alone have any weight.
Is either story untrue? Both seem easy to fact-check.
Something doesn't need to be true or false in order to achieve a goal of crediting or discrediting something or someone. One can always find positive and negative things about everyone and almost anything. The positive or negative bias comes with which stories run with which spin.
You can see this in articles we discussed on the weekend: "Smartphone shipments are down for the first time in 2017" was quickly spun in the comments to "Apple smartphones defiant against an android slump in 2017" Both are true, both are based on the same data, and both drive different agendas from the person making the comments.
Who's paying for this?
Not everyone needs to be paid to shit on things or people they don't like.
I don't care, I am not going to patronize a regime that supports ISIS.
What you are or are not going to do has nothing to do with why others do what they do.
Oh no I read it. I just assumed if your entire point lingered on one key assumption you would have more than one anecdotal data point. Maybe you should do some reading next time before making a post.