I'm really curious what feature causes my Kindle app to need phone access. I was curious why FitBit needed camera access until I realized it had a barcode scanner. But I don't use its barcode scanner, so I'd be perfectly fine with denying it camera access permanently, and if that means having the OS lie to it about the existence or state of the hardware, so be it. Is fitbit going to refuse to install on anything that doesn't have a camera (there's gotta be something out there without a camera...)?
Android apps request everything anyway. What I want is a way to say "yeah, I know you want this, but you ain't getting it. Install anyway, and the OS will just pretend that function returns nothing."
The ones for cars hopefully are, because the car companies have a concept of liability for poor design decisions and they're likely to have or know someone who realizes that RTOS is going to work better for that case than what you'd put on a web server. Like the folks who do the firmware for the engine control system; that's got some reasonably tight time tolerances.
Toasters, not so much. Then again, toasters don't really care about windblown bags.
true, but "channel" is not necessarily equivalent to "frequency", and it sounds like they're just looking at sharing the frequency. TDM would indeed count as fast switching half duplex, but polarization might not.
yeah, on my personal laptop (not part of a domain) the Date and Time window has a tab named "Internet Time" that my work laptop doesn't. That's NTP (or was last time I actually dug into it), though their list of servers is kinda small.
that's kind of the point. "piracy" is a term loaded with negative connotations. "copyright infringement" isn't. That's why those who wish to increase penalties for infringement like to use the term "piracy"; it whips up more outrage. But many people don't feel that the act of copyright infringement for personal use deserves that much approbation, and therefore the term "piracy" is not appropriate.
I'm sure that has some effect, although intuitively it seems likely that unless your diet is _really_ weird (I mean you're actively avoiding some element that some strain of flora needs but you don't), any strain of gut flora is going to be able to find enough food in your food to keep afloat. Oral antibiotics, on the other hand, are at their most concentrated when the intestinal flora encounter them, and given what we've already seen in terms of resistant bacteria in the wild, they could easily weaken one strain to a level where other, more resistant strains can take over the territory. And if that other strain is one that converts hard-to-absorb calories (like complex carbs) into easy-to-absorb calories (like sugar), well, suddenly you may be getting a bunch more usable calories from the same amount of food and seeing your weight start climbing when you haven't changed behavior.
If that's what it takes, yes. I'd prefer one line that carries the stuff and N suppliers who can each feed into that line at my request, but no way you're going to get Comcast to share the wire, and no way you're going to get anyone else to buy it from Comcast and share it, so yeah, I'll take more than one wire.
My ISP (comcast) is not, never has been, never will be, and never expected to be a symmetric netizen. I feel it entirely appropriate for them to come talk to me if traffic that is on their network because of me is a problem... which describes every netflix stream that ever hit my router.
In the long run it comes out the same either way; netflix bills me or comcast bills me. But I feel it's more honest of Comcast to just bill me directly instead of making netflix do it.
That's normal for core networks where traffic is expected to be roughly equal in both directions and generally unsolicited (by the network). Comcast is neither; they won't _let_ me send as much as I receive (to be equal, I would have to essentially get nothing but email, and send quite a bit of email out), and everything I receive other than email is by my request. It's not anyone else's fault that Comcast traffic related to me isn't symmetric, it's theirs and mine. So if they need more money to handle the traffic that is on their network because of me, they should talk to me.
My understanding of the US interpretation of the fifth amendment is that "could be used to obtain evidence" is fine; "could be used as evidence" is not.
Slashdot Mirror
true, but that tends to drop the water back off further away than would be optimal for this situation.
I'm really curious what feature causes my Kindle app to need phone access. I was curious why FitBit needed camera access until I realized it had a barcode scanner. But I don't use its barcode scanner, so I'd be perfectly fine with denying it camera access permanently, and if that means having the OS lie to it about the existence or state of the hardware, so be it. Is fitbit going to refuse to install on anything that doesn't have a camera (there's gotta be something out there without a camera...)?
Android apps request everything anyway. What I want is a way to say "yeah, I know you want this, but you ain't getting it. Install anyway, and the OS will just pretend that function returns nothing."
The ones for cars hopefully are, because the car companies have a concept of liability for poor design decisions and they're likely to have or know someone who realizes that RTOS is going to work better for that case than what you'd put on a web server. Like the folks who do the firmware for the engine control system; that's got some reasonably tight time tolerances.
Toasters, not so much. Then again, toasters don't really care about windblown bags.
so, since the attackers came with prewritten exploits, that essentially means that IE got tested first. And this means what?
Which is not to say that it's a bad thing, just that it doesn't match the suggested description
That's not deciding how many are needed, it's experimenting to see how many can survive.
true, but "channel" is not necessarily equivalent to "frequency", and it sounds like they're just looking at sharing the frequency. TDM would indeed count as fast switching half duplex, but polarization might not.
*looks at the number of wifi SSIDs visible from my apartment* yes.
That makes sense. I hadn't considered the difference in speed of travel. Thanks!
Yeah, putting those DEC guys on Mach to generate the next version of OS/2 worked out pretty well.
How will an eclipse affect the solar panels more (or differently) than a cloudy sky would?
yeah, on my personal laptop (not part of a domain) the Date and Time window has a tab named "Internet Time" that my work laptop doesn't. That's NTP (or was last time I actually dug into it), though their list of servers is kinda small.
that's kind of the point. "piracy" is a term loaded with negative connotations. "copyright infringement" isn't. That's why those who wish to increase penalties for infringement like to use the term "piracy"; it whips up more outrage. But many people don't feel that the act of copyright infringement for personal use deserves that much approbation, and therefore the term "piracy" is not appropriate.
Not always. Some obese people eat less (which means less poo), but they process it more efficiently (which means even less poo).
I'm sure that has some effect, although intuitively it seems likely that unless your diet is _really_ weird (I mean you're actively avoiding some element that some strain of flora needs but you don't), any strain of gut flora is going to be able to find enough food in your food to keep afloat. Oral antibiotics, on the other hand, are at their most concentrated when the intestinal flora encounter them, and given what we've already seen in terms of resistant bacteria in the wild, they could easily weaken one strain to a level where other, more resistant strains can take over the territory. And if that other strain is one that converts hard-to-absorb calories (like complex carbs) into easy-to-absorb calories (like sugar), well, suddenly you may be getting a bunch more usable calories from the same amount of food and seeing your weight start climbing when you haven't changed behavior.
oh, they can't be kids anyway. That'd be neglect and abuse on the part of their parents.
maybe that'll eventually lead to some understanding and treatment of mental illness, instead of shunning.
If that's what it takes, yes. I'd prefer one line that carries the stuff and N suppliers who can each feed into that line at my request, but no way you're going to get Comcast to share the wire, and no way you're going to get anyone else to buy it from Comcast and share it, so yeah, I'll take more than one wire.
My ISP (comcast) is not, never has been, never will be, and never expected to be a symmetric netizen. I feel it entirely appropriate for them to come talk to me if traffic that is on their network because of me is a problem... which describes every netflix stream that ever hit my router.
In the long run it comes out the same either way; netflix bills me or comcast bills me. But I feel it's more honest of Comcast to just bill me directly instead of making netflix do it.
That's normal for core networks where traffic is expected to be roughly equal in both directions and generally unsolicited (by the network). Comcast is neither; they won't _let_ me send as much as I receive (to be equal, I would have to essentially get nothing but email, and send quite a bit of email out), and everything I receive other than email is by my request. It's not anyone else's fault that Comcast traffic related to me isn't symmetric, it's theirs and mine. So if they need more money to handle the traffic that is on their network because of me, they should talk to me.
Of course Netflix bears some costs. They pay their ISP just like I pay mine.
My understanding of the US interpretation of the fifth amendment is that "could be used to obtain evidence" is fine; "could be used as evidence" is not.
Trained drivers may be what we want, but we'll have autonomous cars first.
I've heard it said that he got successful enough that editors stopped telling him when it wasn't working.