So fucking what? It's not a strawman, there's no big benefit to them being DC. The lights are all right next to each other in a chain, so of course it makes sense to have a single converter. You're not going to power multiple rooms or even a whole room full of these lights with a single converter, only lights that are very close to each other, so you'd still have to run separate high-speed network connections to each converter, which is a lot of wiring.
You know people use DC strip lights right now, right? Just for the light.
Citation needed.
The only DC lights I've heard about are powered by an AC-to-DC converter somewhere close to the lights. They don't have a single converter for the whole building, with long runs of copper carrying low-voltage DC.
I didn't realize large, monolithic corporations we capable of crying. Doesn't go well with greed, lack of compassion and disdain for anyone who disagrees with you mantra that most of them seem to employ.;)
This is a misconception. Sociopathic, purely evil people such as advertisers aren't robots; they do have emotions, and they can cry when things go badly for them. They just don't care about anyone else, and will gleefully cause pain misery for others if it benefits them.
On my Android phone, I don't have this problem at all: I have Firefox loaded there, with uBlock Origin (just like my Linux PC). No ads.
But with a stupid Apple device, you're only allowed to use an Apple browser, and aren't allowed to use alternative parts of the OS like you are on Android. Android has its faults to be sure, but at least you're able to replace big parts of it with alternatives if you want.
There's a difference between infeasible and impossible. If ads are inlined, it'll be very, very difficult to block them, and probably infeasible. Identifying them would be far more difficult a problem, and would require a lot more computational resources on the browser end, which would defeat one of the main reasons we use ad-blockers in the first place: to cut down resource consumption. Not only that, but you'd need a lot more effort on the ad-blocking development end to come up with algorithms to identify and block ads, and to maintain the blockers and their lists with these new algorithms. That's why ad-blockers work so well now: the ads are served by third-party sites like doubleclick.com which are easy to identify and discriminate against. It doesn't take much CPU power to block requests to a list of blacklisted domains.
I disagree. If my browser sends a request and they respond with a web page, then as far as I'm concerned they are inviting me onto their property. If my browser declines to follow all the links and load all the JavaScript on their page, and their site continues to send me web pages, again I consider that as acceptance.
If they don't want me on their site, then they need to stop responding to my requests, or they need to respond with a web page that has no content at all, and just a notice that I'm not welcome there. They aren't doing that.
I mostly agree, the problem is that the bad advertisers have pretty much ruined it for everyone.
However, some of these things are difficult-to-impossible to block with regular ad-blockers. For instance, your #1, "people who bought X also bought Y" isn't really the kind of ad that is targeted by ad-blockers. This is commonly seen on web stores like Amazon, and is served up by the site itself, not a third-party advertiser. It's really not even part of the debate about web advertising, which is that content-serving websites (like news sites, blogs, etc.) need ads to pay the bills, or else they can't afford to generate and serve content. This just isn't the case for something like Amazon: they get money by selling you stuff directly, not by having you see ads when you go there to read articles or look at videos. And while it's probably technically possible, I can't imagine an ad-blocker writer would waste his time trying to block the "people who bought X also bought Y" ads on Amazon; no one sane is objecting to those.
Same goes for bargains; those you usually see when you're on a merchant's website: "since you're looking at products in category X, look, we're having a sale on this product in that category!". No one is objecting to those either, and they're not third-party.
Fundamentally new items are a good example, but I do have to say I don't think I've ever learned of such a thing from a web ad, only from word-of-mouth (usually people talking about them on forums) or from news articles. If something is really that interesting, people will talk about it without needing to be paid to.
You don't have to give your neighbors free internet access. Haven't you heard of WPA2? It's not hard to use.
The problem with multiple APs is that then you have to figure out a way to wire them all up to your router. Depending on how your house is laid out, that may not be that easy to do.
You do have a good point, however, about setting up multiple APs being a pain in the ass; generally, you need enterprise-level equipment, RADIUS authentication, etc. to do that.
And from what I've read, on Win10 you still can't disable all the telemetry that way, they hide some of it in other places.
I'm sorry, if my OS vendor is working against me that much, it's time to find a new OS. That's like buying a car that constantly tries to steer itself over a cliff. "Oh, it's not that bad, you can just flip these switches in a particular way to disable it for a little while, it usually works!"
Except you're comparing a single weirdo to a whole city full of angry people. You can complain about the city full of angry people all you want, but you're not going to change them, especially when you keep shooting at them and oppressing them with troops, they're just going to get angrier and angrier. So if you want to move next door to that and risk getting killed, go right ahead.
To use your rape analogy, it's a bit like a pretty women going by herself, without guards, into a prison full of violent-conviction men who haven't had sex in years. You can fume all you want about how she "didn't ask for it", but in that case, she really did.
The entire metro interface is what's wrong with Windows 10, UI-wise. I don't think I need to go into any detail. It's complete and utter shit, plain and simple. And it's fucking ugly too.
The other problem you completely skipped over is all the spyware. I'm not going to use an OS that spies on me and has a keylogger to capture my passwords.
If someone is "religious" by refusing to be spied on willingly, then so be it.
The easiest way to do it would be to install some DC LED lights, powered by a single DC power supply somewhere. DC strip lights currently do this, and it's more efficient than having a power supply built into each bulb, so it's probably the way of the future anyway.
No, it's not. 110VAC is more efficient, even with the conversion losses, because low-voltage DC has too many losses if your wire run is more than a few feet or so. In a house, you're looking at hundreds of feet of wire to connect lighting circuits to the breaker panel. With a single DC supply, you'll end up having drastically different light levels at the bulbs because the actual voltage at each bulb will be different.
Yeah, you can transmit data over AC, but the speed will be terrible; you'll get better speed just installing a WiFi system. The whole point of this silly one-way LiFi stuff is very high speed to the device, so bottlenecking it with a low-speed data-over-AC connection will make it useless for its intended task.
It's completely impossible for this technology to actually work.
For one thing, it would only be one-way: from the light bulbs to your device. There's no easy to go the other direction.
But aside from that, it's just plain impossible: for your light bulbs to transmit LiFi, they would need a high-speed data connection to them, presumably gigabit Ethernet. This means that you would have to rewire your house to have Ethernet going to every single lightbulb, plus a giant 48-port switch somewhere connecting all these Ethernet lines to your router.
That isn't going to happen. The cost of the hardware alone is going to be high (24- and 48-port switches aren't cheap, though I guess you could make cheaper versions since they really only need to be transmit-only and don't need to actually switch data between all the bulbs, just distribute it), but the installation cost would be astronomical on any existing building. A WiFi router, OTOH, is dirt cheap and only needs to be installed one place, and will generally give you coverage all over your house.
They *are* being helpful. Windows 10 is completely unusable because of its UI and because of its spyware. There's only way to deal with that, and that's not to use it.
If someone bought a car with no seatbelts, no brakes, and a big spike in the middle of the steering wheel and asked how to make it safer, the answer is obviously to get another car. This is no different.
I'm sorry, but Windows 8/10 is completely unusable because of its awful UI. No, MS Office is not better, again because it requires the use of a completely unusable UI to get to it, so it's not even an option. And finally, MS's spyware makes Windows 10 a complete non-option.
This post of yours is a perfect example of why Slashdot's moderation system sucks. I'd mod you up if I could. This could very well be why my S4 wasn't charging worth a crap on my new "high current" Scosche car charger (I was using some little generic 3ft cable), but when I got a new, expensive cable with 20awg conductors that advertises itself as a "charge only" cable, it worked great.
You're screwing up the analogy. I didn't say anything about modifying some spike heels and miniskirts, I said you should your own clothes. Similarly here, instead of trying to take someone else's hardware and modify it, you need to make your own hardware. With Arduino and friends, it's really not that hard anymore. A thermostat? Are you kidding? Do you have any idea how simple a thermostat is to build? You just need a microcontroller, a temperature sensor, and a relay or two. With an Arduino, you could even make a nice LCD screen and fancy-looking UI for it out of some off-the-shelf components. And you can slap on a WiFi module too.
There's a couple reasons for this: 1) He's not privy to secrets about his new gulag, so he can't really comment on it too much. He was privy to secrets about his former gulag, so he spilled those. 2) He has a choice between two gulags. His new gulag treats him a lot better than his old would if he went back. So it'd be pretty stupid to complain about his new gulag. 3) Maybe the new gulag actually isn't as bad as the old gulag. I never hear news stories about Russian police constantly shooting people in the back, for instance. I have heard of a few cases of high-profile political people dying mysteriously, but that's no different than the US, where Bill and Hillary Clinton had some guy murdered.
I don't see any reason either, even despite the use for intelligence-gathering. With such a short range, it's only going to be useful within the Gaza Strip. There shouldn't be any Israeli troops in there anyway, it's not their territory.
If there's a whole bunch of murderous people living together, and you know about this, and they hate you and want to murder you, and you insist on moving in right next door to them all, then yes, you are stupid, and I for one won't mourn you when they murder you because you made yourself and easy target.
The problem with microUSB is that the charging speed is limited to less than 500mA with that. So you need a special "charge only" cable to actually charge at a higher speed (or a special Samsung-specific charger).
You can't just take a generic microUSB cable, plug it into some generic charger, and get any decent charging speed on a Samsung phone. I found this out the hard way. The cable has to internally short the data pins for high-speed charging to be enabled. The charger could do it too, but chargers will not do it because that's not the way iPhones work, and the aftermarket charger makers only care about their devices working with iDevices.
Slashdot Mirror
So fucking what? It's not a strawman, there's no big benefit to them being DC. The lights are all right next to each other in a chain, so of course it makes sense to have a single converter. You're not going to power multiple rooms or even a whole room full of these lights with a single converter, only lights that are very close to each other, so you'd still have to run separate high-speed network connections to each converter, which is a lot of wiring.
You know people use DC strip lights right now, right? Just for the light.
Citation needed.
The only DC lights I've heard about are powered by an AC-to-DC converter somewhere close to the lights. They don't have a single converter for the whole building, with long runs of copper carrying low-voltage DC.
I didn't realize large, monolithic corporations we capable of crying. Doesn't go well with greed, lack of compassion and disdain for anyone who disagrees with you mantra that most of them seem to employ. ;)
This is a misconception. Sociopathic, purely evil people such as advertisers aren't robots; they do have emotions, and they can cry when things go badly for them. They just don't care about anyone else, and will gleefully cause pain misery for others if it benefits them.
It's too bad we can't transport all the advertisers to another planet and then blow it up with a Death Star.
Just make sure it's some crappy planet first. Let's not waste a perfectly good planet on blowing up advertisers.
That's what you get for having an iPhone.
On my Android phone, I don't have this problem at all: I have Firefox loaded there, with uBlock Origin (just like my Linux PC). No ads.
But with a stupid Apple device, you're only allowed to use an Apple browser, and aren't allowed to use alternative parts of the OS like you are on Android. Android has its faults to be sure, but at least you're able to replace big parts of it with alternatives if you want.
There's a difference between infeasible and impossible. If ads are inlined, it'll be very, very difficult to block them, and probably infeasible. Identifying them would be far more difficult a problem, and would require a lot more computational resources on the browser end, which would defeat one of the main reasons we use ad-blockers in the first place: to cut down resource consumption. Not only that, but you'd need a lot more effort on the ad-blocking development end to come up with algorithms to identify and block ads, and to maintain the blockers and their lists with these new algorithms. That's why ad-blockers work so well now: the ads are served by third-party sites like doubleclick.com which are easy to identify and discriminate against. It doesn't take much CPU power to block requests to a list of blacklisted domains.
I disagree. If my browser sends a request and they respond with a web page, then as far as I'm concerned they are inviting me onto their property. If my browser declines to follow all the links and load all the JavaScript on their page, and their site continues to send me web pages, again I consider that as acceptance.
If they don't want me on their site, then they need to stop responding to my requests, or they need to respond with a web page that has no content at all, and just a notice that I'm not welcome there. They aren't doing that.
I mostly agree, the problem is that the bad advertisers have pretty much ruined it for everyone.
However, some of these things are difficult-to-impossible to block with regular ad-blockers. For instance, your #1, "people who bought X also bought Y" isn't really the kind of ad that is targeted by ad-blockers. This is commonly seen on web stores like Amazon, and is served up by the site itself, not a third-party advertiser. It's really not even part of the debate about web advertising, which is that content-serving websites (like news sites, blogs, etc.) need ads to pay the bills, or else they can't afford to generate and serve content. This just isn't the case for something like Amazon: they get money by selling you stuff directly, not by having you see ads when you go there to read articles or look at videos. And while it's probably technically possible, I can't imagine an ad-blocker writer would waste his time trying to block the "people who bought X also bought Y" ads on Amazon; no one sane is objecting to those.
Same goes for bargains; those you usually see when you're on a merchant's website: "since you're looking at products in category X, look, we're having a sale on this product in that category!". No one is objecting to those either, and they're not third-party.
Fundamentally new items are a good example, but I do have to say I don't think I've ever learned of such a thing from a web ad, only from word-of-mouth (usually people talking about them on forums) or from news articles. If something is really that interesting, people will talk about it without needing to be paid to.
You don't have to give your neighbors free internet access. Haven't you heard of WPA2? It's not hard to use.
The problem with multiple APs is that then you have to figure out a way to wire them all up to your router. Depending on how your house is laid out, that may not be that easy to do.
You do have a good point, however, about setting up multiple APs being a pain in the ass; generally, you need enterprise-level equipment, RADIUS authentication, etc. to do that.
And I want to fight with my OS like this why?
And from what I've read, on Win10 you still can't disable all the telemetry that way, they hide some of it in other places.
I'm sorry, if my OS vendor is working against me that much, it's time to find a new OS. That's like buying a car that constantly tries to steer itself over a cliff. "Oh, it's not that bad, you can just flip these switches in a particular way to disable it for a little while, it usually works!"
Except you're comparing a single weirdo to a whole city full of angry people. You can complain about the city full of angry people all you want, but you're not going to change them, especially when you keep shooting at them and oppressing them with troops, they're just going to get angrier and angrier. So if you want to move next door to that and risk getting killed, go right ahead.
To use your rape analogy, it's a bit like a pretty women going by herself, without guards, into a prison full of violent-conviction men who haven't had sex in years. You can fume all you want about how she "didn't ask for it", but in that case, she really did.
The entire metro interface is what's wrong with Windows 10, UI-wise. I don't think I need to go into any detail. It's complete and utter shit, plain and simple. And it's fucking ugly too.
The other problem you completely skipped over is all the spyware. I'm not going to use an OS that spies on me and has a keylogger to capture my passwords.
If someone is "religious" by refusing to be spied on willingly, then so be it.
The easiest way to do it would be to install some DC LED lights, powered by a single DC power supply somewhere. DC strip lights currently do this, and it's more efficient than having a power supply built into each bulb, so it's probably the way of the future anyway.
No, it's not. 110VAC is more efficient, even with the conversion losses, because low-voltage DC has too many losses if your wire run is more than a few feet or so. In a house, you're looking at hundreds of feet of wire to connect lighting circuits to the breaker panel. With a single DC supply, you'll end up having drastically different light levels at the bulbs because the actual voltage at each bulb will be different.
Face it, this whole idea is dumb.
Yeah, you can transmit data over AC, but the speed will be terrible; you'll get better speed just installing a WiFi system. The whole point of this silly one-way LiFi stuff is very high speed to the device, so bottlenecking it with a low-speed data-over-AC connection will make it useless for its intended task.
Yes, they should move farther than 160 feet away from people who want to kill them. Is that really such a hard thing to do?
It's completely impossible for this technology to actually work.
For one thing, it would only be one-way: from the light bulbs to your device. There's no easy to go the other direction.
But aside from that, it's just plain impossible: for your light bulbs to transmit LiFi, they would need a high-speed data connection to them, presumably gigabit Ethernet. This means that you would have to rewire your house to have Ethernet going to every single lightbulb, plus a giant 48-port switch somewhere connecting all these Ethernet lines to your router.
That isn't going to happen. The cost of the hardware alone is going to be high (24- and 48-port switches aren't cheap, though I guess you could make cheaper versions since they really only need to be transmit-only and don't need to actually switch data between all the bulbs, just distribute it), but the installation cost would be astronomical on any existing building. A WiFi router, OTOH, is dirt cheap and only needs to be installed one place, and will generally give you coverage all over your house.
They *are* being helpful. Windows 10 is completely unusable because of its UI and because of its spyware. There's only way to deal with that, and that's not to use it.
If someone bought a car with no seatbelts, no brakes, and a big spike in the middle of the steering wheel and asked how to make it safer, the answer is obviously to get another car. This is no different.
I'm sorry, but Windows 8/10 is completely unusable because of its awful UI. No, MS Office is not better, again because it requires the use of a completely unusable UI to get to it, so it's not even an option. And finally, MS's spyware makes Windows 10 a complete non-option.
This post of yours is a perfect example of why Slashdot's moderation system sucks. I'd mod you up if I could. This could very well be why my S4 wasn't charging worth a crap on my new "high current" Scosche car charger (I was using some little generic 3ft cable), but when I got a new, expensive cable with 20awg conductors that advertises itself as a "charge only" cable, it worked great.
Cameras might see a few hundred feet more. So what? If they're inside Gaza, they're not going to see anything they don't have a right to see.
You're screwing up the analogy. I didn't say anything about modifying some spike heels and miniskirts, I said you should your own clothes. Similarly here, instead of trying to take someone else's hardware and modify it, you need to make your own hardware. With Arduino and friends, it's really not that hard anymore. A thermostat? Are you kidding? Do you have any idea how simple a thermostat is to build? You just need a microcontroller, a temperature sensor, and a relay or two. With an Arduino, you could even make a nice LCD screen and fancy-looking UI for it out of some off-the-shelf components. And you can slap on a WiFi module too.
There's a couple reasons for this:
1) He's not privy to secrets about his new gulag, so he can't really comment on it too much. He was privy to secrets about his former gulag, so he spilled those.
2) He has a choice between two gulags. His new gulag treats him a lot better than his old would if he went back. So it'd be pretty stupid to complain about his new gulag.
3) Maybe the new gulag actually isn't as bad as the old gulag. I never hear news stories about Russian police constantly shooting people in the back, for instance. I have heard of a few cases of high-profile political people dying mysteriously, but that's no different than the US, where Bill and Hillary Clinton had some guy murdered.
I don't see any reason either, even despite the use for intelligence-gathering. With such a short range, it's only going to be useful within the Gaza Strip. There shouldn't be any Israeli troops in there anyway, it's not their territory.
If there's a whole bunch of murderous people living together, and you know about this, and they hate you and want to murder you, and you insist on moving in right next door to them all, then yes, you are stupid, and I for one won't mourn you when they murder you because you made yourself and easy target.
The problem with microUSB is that the charging speed is limited to less than 500mA with that. So you need a special "charge only" cable to actually charge at a higher speed (or a special Samsung-specific charger).
You can't just take a generic microUSB cable, plug it into some generic charger, and get any decent charging speed on a Samsung phone. I found this out the hard way. The cable has to internally short the data pins for high-speed charging to be enabled. The charger could do it too, but chargers will not do it because that's not the way iPhones work, and the aftermarket charger makers only care about their devices working with iDevices.