There is nothing clever about this. This is just security failing because of the incompetency of the gas station managers. Nothing about this could be called a hack.
Tesla basically forbids you from working on your own car. I think it'd be great if they weren't allowed to service the vehicles they sell. Tit for tat.
Yeah, back when I first started on the internet, it was well understood that you didn't post personal info or let kids wonder by themselves on it. It seems now we are on the reverse, where everyone posts everything on the internet, and parents expect the internet to raise their kids for them.
Is this what it's like getting old in the tech industry? I hope not, and at the same time, 3.5mm has been around for longer than anyone I know has been alive, so maybe it's more tech jackassery coming from the tech giants.
Android being an open source (not necessarily free) operating system, why should it? Assuming you have the hardware to put it into, you should be able to support the 3.5mm jack.
Hearing the difference now isn’t the reason to encode to FLAC. FLAC uses lossless compression, while MP3 is ‘lossy’. What this means is that for each year the MP3 sits on your hard drive, it will lose roughly 12kbps, assuming you have SATA – it’s about 15kbps on IDE, but only 7kbps on SCSI, due to rotational velocidensity. You don’t want to know how much worse it is on CD-ROM or other optical media.
I started collecting MP3s in about 2001, and if I try to play any of the tracks I downloaded back then, even the stuff I grabbed at 320kbps, they just sound like crap. The bass is terrible, the midrangewell don’t get me started. Some of those albums have degraded down to 32 or even 16kbps. FLAC rips from the same period still sound great, even if they weren’t stored correctly, in a cool, dry place. Seriously, stick to FLAC, you may not be able to hear the difference now, but in a year or two, you’ll be glad you did./pasta
Yeah, but it also rules out simulations that we might come up with, and there's no reason to believe problems like this wouldn't exist in the "real" world if we are indeed in a simulation. The fact is that simulation of a universe is kind of far-fetched.
No, they don't own anything. They have the right to copy things, legally, and I do not, but simply because murder or slavery are illegal, it doesn't meant that we suddenly make whips and guns illegal as well, or that we have someone breathing down our necks to stop us from doing this. It's illegal for me to give a minor alcohol, but a bottle of whiskey doesn't come with an ID check once I've bought it. I get that you like bending over for corporations and copyright holders, but I don't and the vast majority of/. does not share your fetish.
Copyright != ownership. People need to get this through their heads. I own the computer, and as such, I get to dictate what that device does, not some copyright holder, that owns nothing involved.
Are you implying that movies and music would not get made without Hollywood big wigs? That's patently ridiculous. We already have examples of people crowd-funding things. It is not beyond the realm of possibility to do this. You simply refuse to see. We don't need Hollywood, and I'd probably be happier if more movies got made that weren't shackled to the bottom line of some big Hollywood studio that is in it for the money and not the art.
Well, obviously the solution is to eliminate "the industry" and simply fund films directly. We do not need the Hollywood companies, and DRM will never fix the problem of their business model being fundamentally broken. As it is, it's not my problem. It's their problem. It becomes my problem when they want to control me so they can keep themselves convinced that they are making all the money they can make.
DRM is neveer fine, even if it's the least intrusive form of it. As for me not viewing "their" content, this does not make any sense. They do not own that content in any sense of the word.
Intellectual property doesn't and shouldn't exist. As for recovering the costs, maybe it's time to pay upfront to developers instead of middle-men like the media companies.
The idea that you shouldn't be able to record a copy of anything that plays on your machine is ridiculous. I listen to internet radio, but if I wanted to record it, I could. Nobody else should be dictating what my machine does or does not do, except for me. I don't care if it's copyright infringement. This is a bigger tragedy than some studio "losing out on profit" because some teen recorded video or music. The idea that you were or were not supposed to do x with something on your machine is already an admission of defeat.
What I want is for people to stop bending over when a company demands that you use DRM to view content. Users are real bootlickers when it comes to this. Just talk to anyone under 25, and they'll actually defend DRM or even claim their preferred system of DRM is not, in fact, DRM.
What exactly do you mean small leak? Air fills the vacuum at the speed of sound. A wall of air hitting you at that speed would likely kill you. Face it, hyperloop is trash.
Even if he is among the makers, I don't see a future where the vast majority chooses to live in poverty out of some moral imperative, and their numbers keep growing.
Slashdot Mirror
There is nothing clever about this. This is just security failing because of the incompetency of the gas station managers. Nothing about this could be called a hack.
Tesla basically forbids you from working on your own car. I think it'd be great if they weren't allowed to service the vehicles they sell. Tit for tat.
So the police haven't even considered that he might have spoofed his MAC address? Or that he used a burner device? Nice police work.
You don't realy need a citation to know that Debian is the best.
Yeah, back when I first started on the internet, it was well understood that you didn't post personal info or let kids wonder by themselves on it. It seems now we are on the reverse, where everyone posts everything on the internet, and parents expect the internet to raise their kids for them.
You say that, but consumers will fall for this and some idiots will even defend it. Telecoms have to eat too, don't you know?
They're not trying to kill it in hopes that better tech replaces it, but tech that is under their control.
Is this what it's like getting old in the tech industry? I hope not, and at the same time, 3.5mm has been around for longer than anyone I know has been alive, so maybe it's more tech jackassery coming from the tech giants.
Why, just why do they insist on this? I own headphones, good headphones, you jackass.
Android being an open source (not necessarily free) operating system, why should it? Assuming you have the hardware to put it into, you should be able to support the 3.5mm jack.
Hearing the difference now isn’t the reason to encode to FLAC. FLAC uses lossless compression, while MP3 is ‘lossy’. What this means is that for each year the MP3 sits on your hard drive, it will lose roughly 12kbps, assuming you have SATA – it’s about 15kbps on IDE, but only 7kbps on SCSI, due to rotational velocidensity. You don’t want to know how much worse it is on CD-ROM or other optical media. I started collecting MP3s in about 2001, and if I try to play any of the tracks I downloaded back then, even the stuff I grabbed at 320kbps, they just sound like crap. The bass is terrible, the midrangewell don’t get me started. Some of those albums have degraded down to 32 or even 16kbps. FLAC rips from the same period still sound great, even if they weren’t stored correctly, in a cool, dry place. Seriously, stick to FLAC, you may not be able to hear the difference now, but in a year or two, you’ll be glad you did. /pasta
Well, it was certainly more important to him than it is for the current president.
Yeah, but it also rules out simulations that we might come up with, and there's no reason to believe problems like this wouldn't exist in the "real" world if we are indeed in a simulation. The fact is that simulation of a universe is kind of far-fetched.
No, they don't own anything. They have the right to copy things, legally, and I do not, but simply because murder or slavery are illegal, it doesn't meant that we suddenly make whips and guns illegal as well, or that we have someone breathing down our necks to stop us from doing this. It's illegal for me to give a minor alcohol, but a bottle of whiskey doesn't come with an ID check once I've bought it. I get that you like bending over for corporations and copyright holders, but I don't and the vast majority of /. does not share your fetish.
Copyright != ownership. People need to get this through their heads. I own the computer, and as such, I get to dictate what that device does, not some copyright holder, that owns nothing involved.
Are you implying that movies and music would not get made without Hollywood big wigs? That's patently ridiculous. We already have examples of people crowd-funding things. It is not beyond the realm of possibility to do this. You simply refuse to see. We don't need Hollywood, and I'd probably be happier if more movies got made that weren't shackled to the bottom line of some big Hollywood studio that is in it for the money and not the art.
Well, obviously the solution is to eliminate "the industry" and simply fund films directly. We do not need the Hollywood companies, and DRM will never fix the problem of their business model being fundamentally broken. As it is, it's not my problem. It's their problem. It becomes my problem when they want to control me so they can keep themselves convinced that they are making all the money they can make.
DRM is neveer fine, even if it's the least intrusive form of it. As for me not viewing "their" content, this does not make any sense. They do not own that content in any sense of the word.
Intellectual property doesn't and shouldn't exist. As for recovering the costs, maybe it's time to pay upfront to developers instead of middle-men like the media companies.
The idea that you shouldn't be able to record a copy of anything that plays on your machine is ridiculous. I listen to internet radio, but if I wanted to record it, I could. Nobody else should be dictating what my machine does or does not do, except for me. I don't care if it's copyright infringement. This is a bigger tragedy than some studio "losing out on profit" because some teen recorded video or music. The idea that you were or were not supposed to do x with something on your machine is already an admission of defeat.
What I want is for people to stop bending over when a company demands that you use DRM to view content. Users are real bootlickers when it comes to this. Just talk to anyone under 25, and they'll actually defend DRM or even claim their preferred system of DRM is not, in fact, DRM.
What exactly do you mean small leak? Air fills the vacuum at the speed of sound. A wall of air hitting you at that speed would likely kill you. Face it, hyperloop is trash.
Too soon.
Well, your butt will be all about it, seeing as how at that speed, you'd turn to pudding very quickly, delicious human pudding.
Even if he is among the makers, I don't see a future where the vast majority chooses to live in poverty out of some moral imperative, and their numbers keep growing.