Since it works, it does indeed make it valid. Perhaps you mean some other word.
even though a little thought tells you that it's a bad idea.
With even more thought you realize it's a very good idea indeed that most people have protection at all, which they generally did not before biometrics made it somewhat tolerable to have a passcode on your phone.
it just means lots of people are being stupid.
No, just a handful of biometric deniers...
Interesting variation on a rubber hose attack.
99.9999999999999% of people will have no security if it takes any work at all to bypass.
Even fewer have anything of true value stored on mobile devices that it really matters in the long run.
Your sense of what works and what is even needing protection is utterly whack.
Well it's good then the topic is privacy and not security... perhaps you should try at least a little to keep up with the discussion at hand before posting?
I truly wish some OS would emerge that I could PAY FOR that would leave my privacy intact.
In what way does an iPhone not meet that criteria.
You can turn off location and know an app is not getting your location (from cell tower or otherwise, it can still do some determination based on IP address of the phone, but you can use a VPN to work around that).
You certainly will never be asked if you like a location looking it up in Apple Maps...
And of course since Apple makes money from the phones and not you, Apple is not getting any data you do not want them to have.
it's hard to see how an ARM-based Mac could do the necessary x86 emulation at an acceptable speed
I'm not sure about this either - it could be Apple is banking on enough apps being uploaded to the Mac App Store with Bitcode to be able to be deployed from the App Store without even a new build, though things like Photoshop would drag for years after... maybe they have something up the sleeve to get reasonable performance for most apps they can't do real ARM binaries for.
Probably just a few of the most portable travel models would be ARM at first, with other systems coming later. Maybe also the Mac Pro is a dual ARM-x86 system where it can offload anything possible to the more efficient and performant ARM chip, and have x86 in there for compatibility.
They said double the field of view for the new model - I also tried the original and it was a bit too limited. I think 2x might be enough improvement to be decent, really hoping I can try one of these out at some point.
At the price they are charging they definitely will be more for enterprise or other serious applications, and that's probably a good thing in terms of taking over a niche they can build on. Maybe someday a consumer model...
The Samsung screen I thought, had a foldable screen that flexed in the middle so was continuous when opened...
The design of this Huawei device is the opposite, where there's a screen on front and back that fold put to meet each other - I think there is a hairline where the meet though it's very hard to see in the video they have in the story.
2) Spending quite a lot longer until they comeuppance with a design they really like, instead of releasing a kind of hacky initial version.
That's the main thing I worry about with the initial versions of the folding phones, that they will not have design kinks really worked out for the first few revs.
Some may say this new category of folding phones are too expensive, but I really like the idea of these things - it seems like a great combination of a phone which you always have, plus a better media/reading/creating surface to work with.
I am super curious to see how these turn out and eagerly await the comparison of models like this with the Samsung to be coming out... I really wonder how the folding action will feel (the Samsung sounded nice in theory).
Yes, exactly - and Apple automatically gains some comparative performance boost with other systems by simply not having to have the system performance impacting workarounds Intel chips have to use today, which as you noted don't even really solve the problem entirely.
Apple has stated repeatedly they want nothing like the singularity, that desktops are inherently different than tablets or mobile devices.
All that is happening here is a processor switch, because Intel has dropped so many balls they are more balls than company now. Apple wants to be able to control the processor so they can actually realize some gains, and avoid some of the shoddy design issues that have come to light in intel processors recently...
I for one am fine with the change, these days adding support for another architecture is not THAT bad and Apple pulled it off really well before.
Right, you're not an artist so you don't imagine that art comes from somewhere.
That is incorrect. I have been a photographer, including fine art, for decades. I have had my work on display for corporations, and had it hanging in galleries as well.
Obviously Art CAN come from somewhere. But does it have to? You are ignoring that sometimes are is spontaneous as well for the creator.
Whatever the artist says their art is, it is. OK. Very subjective.
That is just one side. You are ignoring the fact the viewer is also part of the concept of Art.
That doesn't apply to the viewer of the art. When I create art, and you look at it, it doesn't stop being what I created
Aha, it doesn't stop being what you created. But every viewer defines what it means to them. It becomes something unique, and in a very real way is as much a process of transformation to Art as the creation was in the first place... that is why nature can be Art.
Take a step back and think about the original topic this way though, AI created Art is a long way from naturally occurring Art. It is way closer to human art - even if you do not believe in the agency of AI itself, why can you not simply conceptualize AI art as being one step removed from the actual handling of the brush? To me AI art seems very close to something like the works of Clyfford Still or other abstract impressionists - one of the techniques he used was flinging paint at a canvas while hanging from above. I would call this Art, so why can't AI art be Art when a human created the AI?
I agree, so the question is - does the patent give enough information for others to reproduce the result he claims?
Also you would think, if he does have this working is the Navy planning to make use of this in some way? Seems like a word from them on adoption (they don't have to be specific) would go a long way to back his claims.
Seriously though, bollocks. A nationalist is "a person who strongly identifies with their own nation and vigorously supports its interests
True, and exactly what I said.
especially to the exclusion or detriment of the interests of other nations.
Fake News propagated by people that hate peace and diversity loving nationalists.
As I said, people against nationalism want to stamp out any uniqueness or individuality everywhere. They are the villains from pretty much every SciFi movie looking to conquer Earth and make it in their own image, having utter dominion over all inhabitants.
We will fight you, Bland Man Group, to the last man, woman and child.
Do you know what you're saying is fundamentally wrong?
Guess that makes you the stupid one. At least I can figure out how to post a link.
I'll let you have the last response, since stupid people like to chatter on and on and on and cannot understand how truly stupid they have become, so it's kind of a waste of my time to try and help you any further. Sad.
It is as stupid as saying that a cloud was an artist because the snow was so pretty.
So not at all? Because people say that all the time, and it makes a lot of sense. Even something generated by purely natural processes can be aesthetically pleasing, and art.
Something is art (noun) if it the act of creation was art (verb).
I disagree. I consider Art to be whatever the viewer declares to be Art. It is about perception and whatever it is you are experiencing bringing something to your consciousness. That is why it does not matter how the art is created.
One thing the military is involved in a lot of places around the world is humanitarian relief, since they can bring in basically a small city with modern medical supplies, doctors, food and water purification plants on demand to any coast.
So don't forget you are demanding not to help THAT either. Seems fairly short-sighted and ill considered to me.
I watch all the foreign language stuff with subtitles, the 3% actors were generally excellent so I'm sad to hear the dub was so bad. It held up really well even through season two and had a solid ended, so it's worth trying that out and see if you can grow to like the subtitles...
News flash, for most people what being a "nationalist" means is enjoying and celebrating the uniqueness of your culture. It doesn't mean they want everyone and everything else to be like them - quite the opposite.
Anyone who enjoys travel and visiting people across the world is inherently a nationalist, someone who would not welcome all cultures being ironed out into one boring mass.
So of course people are interested in watching shows that explore other cultures around the world, even if that is secondary to the purpose of the show...
I really like some of the foreign shows Netflix for a unique cultural perspective they bring - my favorite of those is "3%", a show from Brazil that anyone would enjoy. Others like Babylon Berlin are really interesting...
Slashdot Mirror
That does not make the tech valid.
Since it works, it does indeed make it valid. Perhaps you mean some other word.
even though a little thought tells you that it's a bad idea.
With even more thought you realize it's a very good idea indeed that most people have protection at all, which they generally did not before biometrics made it somewhat tolerable to have a passcode on your phone.
it just means lots of people are being stupid.
No, just a handful of biometric deniers...
Interesting variation on a rubber hose attack.
99.9999999999999% of people will have no security if it takes any work at all to bypass.
Even fewer have anything of true value stored on mobile devices that it really matters in the long run.
Your sense of what works and what is even needing protection is utterly whack.
I'll let you have the last word, because JFC.
You have no idea what you're blathering about. They're two distinct problems
They are not at all, because we have only so much money, and time to devote to policing either real pollution, or CO2.
Would you rather waste time reducing a gas that plants use to grow, or to eliminate actually unnatural contaminants from our ecosystem?
I choose to work for, rather than against, life.
BioMetrics is not a valid identity or security mechanism and will never be.
Literally hundreds of millions of people already use it every day.
you could lose access to your devices if your bio-metrics change.
All mobile devices that support biometrics allow for PIN entry if the biometric will not work.
even worse a lopped off limb could get you locked out of you device.
If you lopped off all my limbs I could still use my nose to enter a PIN.
Not only that but the technology to scan and learn you bio-metrics is the same technology to be used to store that data and use it in a replay.
You know nothing Jon Snow.
Well it's good then the topic is privacy and not security... perhaps you should try at least a little to keep up with the discussion at hand before posting?
I truly wish some OS would emerge that I could PAY FOR that would leave my privacy intact.
In what way does an iPhone not meet that criteria.
You can turn off location and know an app is not getting your location (from cell tower or otherwise, it can still do some determination based on IP address of the phone, but you can use a VPN to work around that).
You certainly will never be asked if you like a location looking it up in Apple Maps...
And of course since Apple makes money from the phones and not you, Apple is not getting any data you do not want them to have.
I look forward to lifeline analytics, so that the phone can send out texts if it thinks you are in peril that day.
I wonder how unique palm prints are, never have seen studies on that...
it's hard to see how an ARM-based Mac could do the necessary x86 emulation at an acceptable speed
I'm not sure about this either - it could be Apple is banking on enough apps being uploaded to the Mac App Store with Bitcode to be able to be deployed from the App Store without even a new build, though things like Photoshop would drag for years after... maybe they have something up the sleeve to get reasonable performance for most apps they can't do real ARM binaries for.
Probably just a few of the most portable travel models would be ARM at first, with other systems coming later. Maybe also the Mac Pro is a dual ARM-x86 system where it can offload anything possible to the more efficient and performant ARM chip, and have x86 in there for compatibility.
They said double the field of view for the new model - I also tried the original and it was a bit too limited. I think 2x might be enough improvement to be decent, really hoping I can try one of these out at some point.
At the price they are charging they definitely will be more for enterprise or other serious applications, and that's probably a good thing in terms of taking over a niche they can build on. Maybe someday a consumer model...
The Samsung screen I thought, had a foldable screen that flexed in the middle so was continuous when opened...
The design of this Huawei device is the opposite, where there's a screen on front and back that fold put to meet each other - I think there is a hairline where the meet though it's very hard to see in the video they have in the story.
The question though is this: Where is APPLE?
1) Waiting to see if people like folding phones.
2) Spending quite a lot longer until they comeuppance with a design they really like, instead of releasing a kind of hacky initial version.
That's the main thing I worry about with the initial versions of the folding phones, that they will not have design kinks really worked out for the first few revs.
Some may say this new category of folding phones are too expensive, but I really like the idea of these things - it seems like a great combination of a phone which you always have, plus a better media/reading/creating surface to work with.
I am super curious to see how these turn out and eagerly await the comparison of models like this with the Samsung to be coming out... I really wonder how the folding action will feel (the Samsung sounded nice in theory).
Yes, exactly - and Apple automatically gains some comparative performance boost with other systems by simply not having to have the system performance impacting workarounds Intel chips have to use today, which as you noted don't even really solve the problem entirely.
riding downhill at top speed while hitting a pothole or other obstacle -- excessive brake force on the front wheel can occur
Just when we thought humanity might be avoiding evolutionary correction, along come scooters to redress the problem!
I am literally laying out the distinction for you. Read what I wrote again.
You are denying there is more than one possible aspect to Art, which is absurd.
I'll let you have the last word here, as I've made my case and you present no cogent counterargument.
Apple has stated repeatedly they want nothing like the singularity, that desktops are inherently different than tablets or mobile devices.
All that is happening here is a processor switch, because Intel has dropped so many balls they are more balls than company now. Apple wants to be able to control the processor so they can actually realize some gains, and avoid some of the shoddy design issues that have come to light in intel processors recently...
I for one am fine with the change, these days adding support for another architecture is not THAT bad and Apple pulled it off really well before.
As people age, fingerprints get vary hard for machines to read - I wonder if this approach will work better, it sounds like it.
Seems like a nice advancement for that tech, although I still prefer FaceID to even a faster fingerprint scanner (especially in winter).
Right, you're not an artist so you don't imagine that art comes from somewhere.
That is incorrect. I have been a photographer, including fine art, for decades. I have had my work on display for corporations, and had it hanging in galleries as well.
Obviously Art CAN come from somewhere. But does it have to? You are ignoring that sometimes are is spontaneous as well for the creator.
Whatever the artist says their art is, it is. OK. Very subjective.
That is just one side. You are ignoring the fact the viewer is also part of the concept of Art.
That doesn't apply to the viewer of the art. When I create art, and you look at it, it doesn't stop being what I created
Aha, it doesn't stop being what you created. But every viewer defines what it means to them. It becomes something unique, and in a very real way is as much a process of transformation to Art as the creation was in the first place... that is why nature can be Art.
Take a step back and think about the original topic this way though, AI created Art is a long way from naturally occurring Art. It is way closer to human art - even if you do not believe in the agency of AI itself, why can you not simply conceptualize AI art as being one step removed from the actual handling of the brush? To me AI art seems very close to something like the works of Clyfford Still or other abstract impressionists - one of the techniques he used was flinging paint at a canvas while hanging from above. I would call this Art, so why can't AI art be Art when a human created the AI?
I agree, so the question is - does the patent give enough information for others to reproduce the result he claims?
Also you would think, if he does have this working is the Navy planning to make use of this in some way? Seems like a word from them on adoption (they don't have to be specific) would go a long way to back his claims.
Seriously though, bollocks. A nationalist is "a person who strongly identifies with their own nation and vigorously supports its interests
True, and exactly what I said.
especially to the exclusion or detriment of the interests of other nations.
Fake News propagated by people that hate peace and diversity loving nationalists.
As I said, people against nationalism want to stamp out any uniqueness or individuality everywhere. They are the villains from pretty much every SciFi movie looking to conquer Earth and make it in their own image, having utter dominion over all inhabitants.
We will fight you, Bland Man Group, to the last man, woman and child.
Do you know what you're saying is fundamentally wrong?
Turns out it's not .
Guess that makes you the stupid one. At least I can figure out how to post a link.
I'll let you have the last response, since stupid people like to chatter on and on and on and cannot understand how truly stupid they have become, so it's kind of a waste of my time to try and help you any further. Sad.
It is as stupid as saying that a cloud was an artist because the snow was so pretty.
So not at all? Because people say that all the time, and it makes a lot of sense. Even something generated by purely natural processes can be aesthetically pleasing, and art.
Something is art (noun) if it the act of creation was art (verb).
I disagree. I consider Art to be whatever the viewer declares to be Art. It is about perception and whatever it is you are experiencing bringing something to your consciousness. That is why it does not matter how the art is created.
One thing the military is involved in a lot of places around the world is humanitarian relief, since they can bring in basically a small city with modern medical supplies, doctors, food and water purification plants on demand to any coast.
So don't forget you are demanding not to help THAT either. Seems fairly short-sighted and ill considered to me.
I watch all the foreign language stuff with subtitles, the 3% actors were generally excellent so I'm sad to hear the dub was so bad. It held up really well even through season two and had a solid ended, so it's worth trying that out and see if you can grow to like the subtitles...
Pretty astounded that no-one savaged me for the Turing->Turning typo there! It gives me new hope for Slashdot, that you all knew what I meant there.
Put works by both humans and AI in a museum, see if anyone can pick out which is which.
Turns out not only can an AI be an artists, but many humans claiming to be artists are not.
News flash, for most people what being a "nationalist" means is enjoying and celebrating the uniqueness of your culture. It doesn't mean they want everyone and everything else to be like them - quite the opposite.
Anyone who enjoys travel and visiting people across the world is inherently a nationalist, someone who would not welcome all cultures being ironed out into one boring mass.
So of course people are interested in watching shows that explore other cultures around the world, even if that is secondary to the purpose of the show...
I really like some of the foreign shows Netflix for a unique cultural perspective they bring - my favorite of those is "3%", a show from Brazil that anyone would enjoy. Others like Babylon Berlin are really interesting...