That is correct, and in why only in recent years has it really started to work.
People trying to subvert democracy often attack it by misinforming the population
Indeed that has been happening for a few decades now by a central core of media that withhold and shape information.
in the last few years by convincing people that everything is fake and a lie
And how did they do that? By in fact showing people directly, what were fakes and lies.
simply choosing their own preferred truth is a valid choice.
That's the thing though. Now anyone can really get the whole picture. They can see the actual video of what people did, and judge them on that instead of what the media claims they said or did.
People complain that Trump voters ignore the "Truth" that Trump is whatever - racist, homophobic, etc. The reason Trump never has much impact from those claims, is because for the first time you can really see the falseness of them - you can see how Trump behaves now and in the past around women, around people of color, even around supporting gay marriage.
Trump is unique compared to a lot of current politicians in that there is a lot of prior video of him and so people already had a sense of him before the media started trying to craft an alternative image.
But going forward, more and more politicians will have the same thing apply - people will judge them based on what they have actually said and done instead of what the media claims about them. You can even see that with newer politicians like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez - she gets a lot of flak from the right, but you can watch a lot of video from her that is fairly reasonable, so the calls that she is crazy do not really stick.
She has some ideas about socialism that I and others find wrong, but you can actually go see what she says and judger her based on that instead of by what others sat about her. So how is any of that a "lie"? People can be better informed now that at any point in history - the real problem is that the professional political class by and large suck giant donkey balls, and now that is easy for anyone to see. In the end that is not a "problem" at all, that is a solution and the world is undergoing a correction based on this new fact...
"Donnie" has done a million things to piss off Russia since the election, if Donald and he were ever friends that terminated the moment he became president. Even if "Donnie" has pretended to work with Russia he obviously played them for rubes...
Further proof that "Donnie" is the shrewdest man alive.
On top of that, it's not like they are spending money without result - they have had huge hits with shows like Stranger Things, and more recently Bird Box.
Netflix at this point is a stronger force for original content than HBO, which has just a few hits on the level that Netflix has (though granted one of them is Game of Thrones - but that ends this year).
Summary: SW has 34 (with lots more ordered), AA has 24.
If they are the newer SW planes I've flown on recently, I will say one thing about them - I can't know how the controls are to operate, but I can say they've thinned up the seat cushioning a bit and they are not quite as comfortable as the older SW planes.
Another fact is that neither AA nor SW has had any reported incidences or close calls, despite many flights with these planes...
Southwest, and I think American have both said they don't think anything is fundamentally wrong with the plane. Possibly this is some kind of training issue.
Given there have been no issues here, I don't think it's unreasonable for other carriers to keep flying them even while they figure out what happened.
The FCC should ban number spoofing, unless the company doing it has full legal control over both the calling number and the spoofed number.
Sounds great (and I don't mean that sarcastically), is that better accomplished through the FCC or Congress? Not sure myself. I am sure we need some kind of action.
Which is consolidate content and give you one stop shopping for the bulk of what you want to watch.
The AppleTV is actually really nice for this - because you can search for a show or movie, and see which services are offering it. That's pretty handy.
What isn't great (and really is what you are getting at) is that you would need three or four services to really get everything. I'm willing to buy some shows on iTunes and I get other things from Amazon and Netflix. But Hulu is an experience that just sucks too much for me to use currently and there are some things I would like from there... maybe if they are on the AppleTV service, I'd consider that. But I really doubt it given how content providers are going hard silo and not letting other services play stuff from them.
To me, I just don't see how an ApppleTV service can gain much traction. Even with some original content, they are competing against a lot of huge players now, including Amazon and Netflix, with huge original content productions underway. Apple will be very much at the mercy of whatever content they can pay to acquire for the site... maybe Apple is willing to sink a few billion into trying to make it work but I don't see even that being viable long term.
Apple News, I just don't see having any chance of being profitable. It is a kind act of charity to help dying news orgs but I don't see where it would gain traction as a paid service, when even now I don't like using the free version they have.
Maybe they have some trick to make these compelling, but I doubt it... we shall see.
Now, it takes an actual app checking in with a hundred thousand other users and blocking numbers by the million.
I am saying, I already needed that three years ago. I was already getting multiple spam calls a day, from different numbers every day.
Like I said, I already agree it is worse now - because even with two call blocking apps, I get some spam calls going through now. But let's not pretend it was not bad enough 3-4 years ago to already warrant serious action. The massive numbers we see now are a direct consequence of that whole problem being ignored, spammers realizing there was no repercussion, and thus really going for it.
There's a reason the phrase "nip that in the bud" is popular. Only it was already a full grown plant four years ago, and now is like the jungle from Annihilation...
So what is wrong with any of what I said there? Instead of down-modding me, please explain what the FCC can do? I am all for demanding the FCC do something, if there's something they can do - so what is that? What are we trying to harass the FCC into doing - exactly, with details?
They have been, but those calls have exploded in volume in the last 2 or 3 years.
That is true, but I know for a fact I installed my robo-call blocking apps way before Trump was elected.
It is ALSO true it was enough of a problem when Obama was president, the FCC should have been doing something at that point.
Doesn't mean they shouldn't do something about it now as well.
One fun new trick I've just started seeing in the last few months - calls from *international* numbers where the number ends up looking like a local number - so a call from Greece for example has a country code of "+30". You get a call from 304-298-8442 (not a real number), and if you are not looking closely for the leading "+" in callerID, you don't realize it's international number instead of a number from West Virginia (for example).
Let that soak in fo ra bit - calls are so cheap that even if you start doing something about U.S. numbers. spammers may just move to international lines.
What I would love to see is a discussion of - what CAN the FCC actually do to stop this? What would work? Or does the solution need to come from somewhere else, like congress? Maybe a few spammers wake up to a Seal Team 6 visit, or inside a CIA black site? I'm open to ideas here.
I would hope people learn a few lessons from this and are not keeping any documents that need to survive long-term in Google Docs...
I have to say, there's no wasted time on my part since I saw the service probably wouldn't get much traction even from launch, and never used it.
There is one thing I find amusing about his post though - he states :
"Example: my review of an Antarctica cruise on the Ocean Diamond. It was so easy to publish the photos via Picasa"
Well that's the classic computer problem right there, you should have known it was wrong when it was "so easy". Anything easy is almost always not permanent, anyone who has been using computers as long as he (or I) have should know better about how long "Easy" lasts.
All of the sunglasses I have work fine with the iPhone X, just make sure what you use does not block IR.
Sitting in my car after I get home at night (too dark)
FaceID works in pitch blackness since it uses an IR emitter to illuminate your face. It cannot be "too dark" for it to work. I use it at night in unlit rooms... and also at night in my car.
Wearing my gamma rays and turtle beach while playing games
Why does this not work. FaceID is pretty flexible.
If you really truly need to wear something that will not pass IR all the time, train your face with that on as an alternate face and disable the attention requirement so it doesn't need to see your eyes to unlock.
I was hoping the X would allow my thumb at the bottom.
Not quite sure I follow, what does "allow my thumb at the bottom" mean?
I've had the iPhone X since last year and I miss nothing about TouchID at all, I find FaceID vastly better in every way.
Aren't you going to be looking at it at some point? What value is there in unlocking a phone you do not see.
with the face recognition I have to hold the thing in front of my face which is annoying.
Lots more annoying to have to take gloves off in winter to unlock a device, or even to have to think about unlocking at all. With FaceID I don't think about unlocking, I pull out the phone and it's unlocked by my holding it.
With facial recognition software, you don't need fakes. You just need to wave the phone in front of their face and presto, unlocked!
Would not work on an iPhone if the subject had eyes shut, or had triggered the "temporarily disable FaceID" feature before entering an area they thought the phone was at risk.
You seriously think it's HARDER to grab someone's hand and forcibly press one finger on a device? Two people, maybe eve one, could easily manage this with anyone.
You cannot force someone eyes open in a way that FaceID would accept the face as valid...
SpaceX currently charges $62 million to launch 50k lb satellites
No, they say it costs $62 million for each Falcon 9 launch.
Form Earth.
So it would be pretty expensive to send gold to the moon. Luckily for people working on this plan, they only need to get gold from the moon back to the Earth - way cheaper since you just have to launch from the moon's gravity well, and basically takes controlled falling back to Earth to recover.
Also of course, SpaceX launch costs are predicted to get much cheaper over time.
You might say, well the rocket has to get there... true, but since it would go to the moon mostly empty to pick up shipments, it would could also have a paying cargo like satellites that get released before it heads to the moon.
The economic feasibility of the plan is good, just needs the BFR (which is more made for these kind of land and re-takeoff missions) to make it practical.
All you'd be paying for would be the rocket and not the fuel, which would be made on the moon. Heck you'l probably come back with some extra fuel so that would further reduce the cost of the flight as SpaceX could credit a mining org for that.
Can't remember what the day one patch for Spider Man on the PS4 was, but I think it may have been nearly that large... it kind of makes you wonder if it's meant to help push you into buying games online since you are essentially downloading most of it anyway...
Even a baM marvel movie can make money, and what I hear from real people, is that the movie is bad.
Second wake take will be more interesting to see.
Personally I wasn't going to see it in a theater anyway, as I have watched pretty much every Marvel movie at home (and plan to keep up the trend even with the new Spider Man and Infinity War conclusion). I'll wait to hear from others if I even decide to rent it...
A fact I've always heard is that going to the moon is so expensive
"A fact" huh?
Don't you think your intel is pretty dated?
That was true when a handful of governments could get you into space. But now clearing the atmosphere has been made far cheaper thanks to companies like SPaceX and Blue Origin, and driving costs cheaper.
Anyone can do the math and see that it might make a lot of sense to try mining valuable minerals from space objects now, and if not certainly within 10 years it will be easily viable.
Tourism is another valid angle, but there's much more to see (much more quickly and safely) in LEO and that hasn't taken off either.
It's just starting but the uptake will be quick. I'd way rather visit the moon than just do an orbital visit though.
Slashdot Mirror
Democracy needs an informed population to work.
That is correct, and in why only in recent years has it really started to work.
People trying to subvert democracy often attack it by misinforming the population
Indeed that has been happening for a few decades now by a central core of media that withhold and shape information.
in the last few years by convincing people that everything is fake and a lie
And how did they do that? By in fact showing people directly, what were fakes and lies.
simply choosing their own preferred truth is a valid choice.
That's the thing though. Now anyone can really get the whole picture. They can see the actual video of what people did, and judge them on that instead of what the media claims they said or did.
People complain that Trump voters ignore the "Truth" that Trump is whatever - racist, homophobic, etc. The reason Trump never has much impact from those claims, is because for the first time you can really see the falseness of them - you can see how Trump behaves now and in the past around women, around people of color, even around supporting gay marriage.
Trump is unique compared to a lot of current politicians in that there is a lot of prior video of him and so people already had a sense of him before the media started trying to craft an alternative image.
But going forward, more and more politicians will have the same thing apply - people will judge them based on what they have actually said and done instead of what the media claims about them. You can even see that with newer politicians like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez - she gets a lot of flak from the right, but you can watch a lot of video from her that is fairly reasonable, so the calls that she is crazy do not really stick.
She has some ideas about socialism that I and others find wrong, but you can actually go see what she says and judger her based on that instead of by what others sat about her. So how is any of that a "lie"? People can be better informed now that at any point in history - the real problem is that the professional political class by and large suck giant donkey balls, and now that is easy for anyone to see. In the end that is not a "problem" at all, that is a solution and the world is undergoing a correction based on this new fact...
Binary files?
Pretty sure, since it is running on a computer, it will handle binary files since even text files are binary files...
Unless you were wondering about your custom Trinary files that used 0, 1, and the Prince symbol to represent data.
"Donnie" has done a million things to piss off Russia since the election, if Donald and he were ever friends that terminated the moment he became president. Even if "Donnie" has pretended to work with Russia he obviously played them for rubes...
Further proof that "Donnie" is the shrewdest man alive.
I'm no Apple fanboy, but I don't even know how to respond to this comment. I don't consider Netflix a threat by a long shot.
Why not?
They spent over $12 billion on original content last year.
This year they will spend about $15 billion...
On top of that, it's not like they are spending money without result - they have had huge hits with shows like Stranger Things, and more recently Bird Box.
Netflix at this point is a stronger force for original content than HBO, which has just a few hits on the level that Netflix has (though granted one of them is Game of Thrones - but that ends this year).
There are only like 150~ of them made, I think SW has like 20 of them.
I personally prefer to know rather than guess.
Summary: SW has 34 (with lots more ordered), AA has 24.
If they are the newer SW planes I've flown on recently, I will say one thing about them - I can't know how the controls are to operate, but I can say they've thinned up the seat cushioning a bit and they are not quite as comfortable as the older SW planes.
Another fact is that neither AA nor SW has had any reported incidences or close calls, despite many flights with these planes...
Southwest, and I think American have both said they don't think anything is fundamentally wrong with the plane. Possibly this is some kind of training issue.
Given there have been no issues here, I don't think it's unreasonable for other carriers to keep flying them even while they figure out what happened.
The FCC should ban number spoofing, unless the company doing it has full legal control over both the calling number and the spoofed number.
Sounds great (and I don't mean that sarcastically), is that better accomplished through the FCC or Congress? Not sure myself. I am sure we need some kind of action.
Which is consolidate content and give you one stop shopping for the bulk of what you want to watch.
The AppleTV is actually really nice for this - because you can search for a show or movie, and see which services are offering it. That's pretty handy.
What isn't great (and really is what you are getting at) is that you would need three or four services to really get everything. I'm willing to buy some shows on iTunes and I get other things from Amazon and Netflix. But Hulu is an experience that just sucks too much for me to use currently and there are some things I would like from there... maybe if they are on the AppleTV service, I'd consider that. But I really doubt it given how content providers are going hard silo and not letting other services play stuff from them.
They do a better job of playing music (especially in pairs), however no smart speakers really appeal to me so I just leave that whole space alone.
To me, I just don't see how an ApppleTV service can gain much traction. Even with some original content, they are competing against a lot of huge players now, including Amazon and Netflix, with huge original content productions underway. Apple will be very much at the mercy of whatever content they can pay to acquire for the site... maybe Apple is willing to sink a few billion into trying to make it work but I don't see even that being viable long term.
Apple News, I just don't see having any chance of being profitable. It is a kind act of charity to help dying news orgs but I don't see where it would gain traction as a paid service, when even now I don't like using the free version they have.
Maybe they have some trick to make these compelling, but I doubt it... we shall see.
where the sitting President is literally a traitor who admitted to obstructing justice
Time for your weekly reminder - Hillary is not president.
Now, it takes an actual app checking in with a hundred thousand other users and blocking numbers by the million.
I am saying, I already needed that three years ago. I was already getting multiple spam calls a day, from different numbers every day.
Like I said, I already agree it is worse now - because even with two call blocking apps, I get some spam calls going through now. But let's not pretend it was not bad enough 3-4 years ago to already warrant serious action. The massive numbers we see now are a direct consequence of that whole problem being ignored, spammers realizing there was no repercussion, and thus really going for it.
There's a reason the phrase "nip that in the bud" is popular. Only it was already a full grown plant four years ago, and now is like the jungle from Annihilation...
So what is wrong with any of what I said there? Instead of down-modding me, please explain what the FCC can do? I am all for demanding the FCC do something, if there's something they can do - so what is that? What are we trying to harass the FCC into doing - exactly, with details?
I live in CO now
Ahh, then any moment you too can start getting the spam calls from Greece ( +303-XXX-XXXX )
If you see a + at the start, do not answer the call.
I've never had an early Rabo-Call that I know of, but I have had a handful come at 9-10pm at night... that's new.
They have been, but those calls have exploded in volume in the last 2 or 3 years.
That is true, but I know for a fact I installed my robo-call blocking apps way before Trump was elected.
It is ALSO true it was enough of a problem when Obama was president, the FCC should have been doing something at that point.
Doesn't mean they shouldn't do something about it now as well.
One fun new trick I've just started seeing in the last few months - calls from *international* numbers where the number ends up looking like a local number - so a call from Greece for example has a country code of "+30". You get a call from 304-298-8442 (not a real number), and if you are not looking closely for the leading "+" in callerID, you don't realize it's international number instead of a number from West Virginia (for example).
Let that soak in fo ra bit - calls are so cheap that even if you start doing something about U.S. numbers. spammers may just move to international lines.
What I would love to see is a discussion of - what CAN the FCC actually do to stop this? What would work? Or does the solution need to come from somewhere else, like congress? Maybe a few spammers wake up to a Seal Team 6 visit, or inside a CIA black site? I'm open to ideas here.
I would hope people learn a few lessons from this and are not keeping any documents that need to survive long-term in Google Docs...
I have to say, there's no wasted time on my part since I saw the service probably wouldn't get much traction even from launch, and never used it.
There is one thing I find amusing about his post though - he states :
"Example: my review of an Antarctica cruise on the Ocean Diamond. It was so easy to publish the photos via Picasa"
Well that's the classic computer problem right there, you should have known it was wrong when it was "so easy". Anything easy is almost always not permanent, anyone who has been using computers as long as he (or I) have should know better about how long "Easy" lasts.
Yes, it's overly dramatic bullshit that has no effect on the elections, where people can prevent this crap,
That's the difference between the EU and other places - no amount of elections can "correct" what the EU chooses to do.
It's cruel dictatorship by committee, so no one person is actually responsible for the suffering the machine generates.
Wearing sunglasses in the car
All of the sunglasses I have work fine with the iPhone X, just make sure what you use does not block IR.
Sitting in my car after I get home at night (too dark)
FaceID works in pitch blackness since it uses an IR emitter to illuminate your face. It cannot be "too dark" for it to work. I use it at night in unlit rooms... and also at night in my car.
Wearing my gamma rays and turtle beach while playing games
Why does this not work. FaceID is pretty flexible.
If you really truly need to wear something that will not pass IR all the time, train your face with that on as an alternate face and disable the attention requirement so it doesn't need to see your eyes to unlock.
I was hoping the X would allow my thumb at the bottom.
Not quite sure I follow, what does "allow my thumb at the bottom" mean?
I've had the iPhone X since last year and I miss nothing about TouchID at all, I find FaceID vastly better in every way.
I can unlock the iPhone 8 without looking at it
Aren't you going to be looking at it at some point? What value is there in unlocking a phone you do not see.
with the face recognition I have to hold the thing in front of my face which is annoying.
Lots more annoying to have to take gloves off in winter to unlock a device, or even to have to think about unlocking at all. With FaceID I don't think about unlocking, I pull out the phone and it's unlocked by my holding it.
With facial recognition software, you don't need fakes. You just need to wave the phone in front of their face and presto, unlocked!
Would not work on an iPhone if the subject had eyes shut, or had triggered the "temporarily disable FaceID" feature before entering an area they thought the phone was at risk.
You seriously think it's HARDER to grab someone's hand and forcibly press one finger on a device? Two people, maybe eve one, could easily manage this with anyone.
You cannot force someone eyes open in a way that FaceID would accept the face as valid...
SpaceX currently charges $62 million to launch 50k lb satellites
No, they say it costs $62 million for each Falcon 9 launch.
Form Earth.
So it would be pretty expensive to send gold to the moon. Luckily for people working on this plan, they only need to get gold from the moon back to the Earth - way cheaper since you just have to launch from the moon's gravity well, and basically takes controlled falling back to Earth to recover.
Also of course, SpaceX launch costs are predicted to get much cheaper over time.
You might say, well the rocket has to get there... true, but since it would go to the moon mostly empty to pick up shipments, it would could also have a paying cargo like satellites that get released before it heads to the moon.
The economic feasibility of the plan is good, just needs the BFR (which is more made for these kind of land and re-takeoff missions) to make it practical.
All you'd be paying for would be the rocket and not the fuel, which would be made on the moon. Heck you'l probably come back with some extra fuel so that would further reduce the cost of the flight as SpaceX could credit a mining org for that.
Can't remember what the day one patch for Spider Man on the PS4 was, but I think it may have been nearly that large... it kind of makes you wonder if it's meant to help push you into buying games online since you are essentially downloading most of it anyway...
Even a baM marvel movie can make money, and what I hear from real people, is that the movie is bad.
Second wake take will be more interesting to see.
Personally I wasn't going to see it in a theater anyway, as I have watched pretty much every Marvel movie at home (and plan to keep up the trend even with the new Spider Man and Infinity War conclusion). I'll wait to hear from others if I even decide to rent it...
A fact I've always heard is that going to the moon is so expensive
"A fact" huh?
Don't you think your intel is pretty dated?
That was true when a handful of governments could get you into space. But now clearing the atmosphere has been made far cheaper thanks to companies like SPaceX and Blue Origin, and driving costs cheaper.
Anyone can do the math and see that it might make a lot of sense to try mining valuable minerals from space objects now, and if not certainly within 10 years it will be easily viable.
Tourism is another valid angle, but there's much more to see (much more quickly and safely) in LEO and that hasn't taken off either.
It's just starting but the uptake will be quick. I'd way rather visit the moon than just do an orbital visit though.