"Protected" Blu Ray discs do in fact get copied. So it is not an uncrackable DRM.
> there is one company (DVD Ranger I think) who claims they cracked it but testing showed that all they did was find a way to replace the audio during ripping with a Cinavia free AC-3 file
Maybe. Unless you can point to some updated information, people *speculated* that *maybe* that's what DVD Ranger does. DVD Ranger said no, they remove it. We can't be sure. However later, in 2015, Slysoft was removing it, and I haven't seen even speculation that they weren't.
I suspect most people looking at it may have made it too complicated. As you know, all Blu Ray players after a certain date are required to be able to read the Cinavia water mark, which is in the analog audio signal so that it plugs the "analog hole". One bit of digital mark takes five seconds of audio. Anyway, the point is you can get the reader code out of any firmware update to a Blu Ray enabled device - the format of the watermark isn't a secret. We know that to embed an "A" bit you apply the function to the audio in one direction, for the opposite bit ^A the opposite direction. (I'm using A and ^A rather than 0 and 1 to avoid confusing 0 with the original audio).
It should therefore be quite possible to add your own Cinavia watermark to the audio. Suppose the "theatrical release only" bits are AA^AA^A^AA. You could probably embed those bits yourself, right, given that you have access to the code that reads them? Similarly, you should be able to embed the bits ^A^AA^AAA^A - the opposite bits. When the detector finds that the signal is neither A nor ^A, but halfway in between, that's going to look a lot like the original audio - like there never was any Cinavia watermark. I haven't actually coded that and tested it, but that general approach seems like it will likely work, when someone does it.
> doesn't rely on the hash being "unbreakable", it just relies on it being non-trivial, and barring a general quntum computer, we know it to be non-trivial.... the whole working principle of BitCoin (mining) is "cracking SHA-2".
Indeed Bitcoin is based on the presumption that preimage of a complete SHA-256 is very, very hard - infeasible. The difficulty level is how many bits of the hash need to match. Unfortunately, it's not true that "we know it to be non-trivial". We have strong evidence that there IS an attack which makes it easy. In 2012 Sony demonstrated an attack on 52 rounds. Extending that to the full 64 rounds is exceedingly likely. It's just a matter of when someone wants to put in the time AND go public with the results. I'd be surprised if ONI or NSA hasn't already extended it past 52 rounds, if they aren't at perhaps 60 rounds, just four left to go.
If they were paying attention, they would probably say that can switch to a new version which uses SHA-3 or another hash. That's true IF they make the switch BEFORE SHA-2 is broken the rest of the way.
However, five years ago, in 2011, a preimage attack was demonstrated 52 out of 64 rounds. It's ALREADY half broken, so the next step will probably be a complete compromise and there is no indication that BTC intends to upgrade before they are fucked.
A preimage may not break some applications that have long inputs, but for a short input like BTC uses, the preimage result will very likely be the desired bytes.
Really it's not even a RISK that you MIGHT lose your money in bitcoin, it is virtually guaranteed if you hold bitcoin long enough. Bitcoin depends on the security of the SHA-2 hash algorithm. Once SHA-2 is broken, everyone can generate all the BTC they want easily, sending the value to zero.
There have been dozens of hash algorithms. A few which have been popular over the years include RIPEMD, MD5, DES-based (crypt()), SHA-0, SHA-1, and now SHA-2. The first four listed have all been cracked. SHA-1 is mostly cracked and SHA-2 about 35% cracked. Betting that SHA-2 will be the first hash function in history to not be cracked, by holding Bitcoin, is an awefully optimistic bet. Presumably these are the same people who keep thinking you can make uncrackable DRM. Everything is cracked, and when SHA-2 is cracked the rest of the way there goes any value Bitcoin had.
It would be nice if Firefox allowed extensions signed by trusted certs, rather than just their own. The infrastructure is already there for certs uses for TLS.
Since they didn't do that:
> So if you have an in-house developed extension that contains proprietary business information, you must choose between getting it signed or running versions of firefox that do not receive regular security updates
A third option is to separate your proprietary logic algorithms from the user interface. Firefox is one UI. Your magic logic is ALREADY a seperate component if your development standards are at all secure, so it should be straightforward to run that proprietary logic in a separate process. The extension can communicate with the logic via SOAP or anybof several other methods.
Confusion between the local network and the internet is the source of the problem. Windows is supposed to automatically log in to LOCAL shares. Instead it will automatically log in to shares anywhere on the internet, when it sees a link to a share.
I'm sure there are; yet over 17 years on Linux I've used WINE roughly twice. Normally, its not the best solution.
Do you typically use emulation to run the Linux versions of most programs on Windows, or do you run the Windows version on Windows? Running the Windows version on Linux doesn't normally make sense - on Linux, run the Linux software.
A lot of daily use software brands are compiled for Linux, often developed for Linux FIRST, then ported to Windows. Firefox, Chrome, OpenOffice/LibreOffice, etc are all available native for Linux.
If the specific brand of softeware you used to use is Windows-only (and therefore probably proprietary), there is probably other open, free software that does the same job on Linux. Unlike the Windows software, the software designed for Linux doesn't include telemetry, onerous licensing, etc. For example, rather than MS Outlook, there are dozens of other email qnd groupware programs for Linux. Sylpheed Claws / Claws Mail is one.
The single software package most often mentioned as a counter-example is Photoshop. If you're a professional graphic artist, you'll probably be happiest with a Mac. If you want to adjust brightness and color curves of your snapshots, or do any simple to moderate photo editing, you can use one of the tools used by Dreamworks and ILM - Gimp. True, Gimp not exactly the same as Photoshop. However, Gimp is powerful enough to be used by major Hollywood effects studios.
> For example, U.S. intelligence agencies have concluded that Russia was behind the release of DNC emails before the party convention
Citation sorely needed. The DNC has suggested it's possible Russia was involved. A small security company called ThreatConnect pointed out that one of the tools used had some Russian language strings, meaning that the attacker used a tool which was written by someone who spoke Russian.
"US intelligence agencies" have announced no conclusions and there is scant evidence that "Russia", the Russian government, was involved.
> You can not enter in to contract with a minor. It is legally invalid. That is the law.
A minor *can* disaffirm a contract in most cases. The contract is neither "invalid" nor "void", until the minor declares that they wish to disaffirm. There are several exceptions.
Here's the actual text of the statute in California which lays out the general rule. It also includes one of the exceptions: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-...
Exceptions aren't all listed in one place. Here's an example - for a high value contract like Justin Bieber's recording contract, the parties can have a court to approve the contract. The contract must set-aside some of the earnings in a trust fund for the minor to have later and meet other conditions. Once approved by the court, it cannot be disaffirmed. http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-...
For cases in which a large amount is at stake, paying the cost of a good professional makes sense. Just like getting a highly competent and well trained software programmer IF your business depends upon the software.
For small claims, and little scripts you use at home, the cost of a professional who is both well trained and actually good at what they do may not be justified.
If you're involved in a law suit for $250,000 or you are making your business database avaiable via the web (where hackers abound), hire the right professional. Last week I thought I might have to file suit for $4,500. It wouldn't have made sense to spend $2,000 on an attorney in order to increase may chance of winning by 15%.
Your analysis is correct - ONLY for those in a swing state. Most states are NOT swing states.
For most of us, there is 0% chance that our vote could possibly tilt the balance between jackass and crook. Er, Trump amd Clinton. In this particular election, we already know which way our state and its electoral votes will go. For example, my state will go to Trump, regardless of how I vote. The best we can hope for is to have some effect on his policies and on future elections.
The major parties are trying to pick up another 1% or 2% for themselves, if they see 12% of the vote go Libertarian, the majors will very much want a piece of that 12%. It's then in their self-interest to look at the Libertarian platform and think about which ideas they can adopt. The same goes for elected officials. Suppose the results are 45% Trump, 44% Clinton, 11% Johnson. Considering they want to get re-elected, president Trump or Clinton should look at that 11% who voted Johnson and do things to try to get those voters to vote for them next time.
If only 1% vote Libertarian, the major parties would have no reason to adopt some Libertarian udeas.
No need for an app. You can load up my web page. It will both send an sms and provide a Google maps link. For SMS, put the recipient's phone number after the question mark un the URL:
Suppose your car has a fingerprint scanner, along with a keyfob. That's something you HAVE and something you ARE.
Theoretically, could a thief steal your key fob and your fingerprint? Yes, of course. Would it be easier to just a call bring a trailer and steal your car directly? Yes, of course.
People will ALWAYS be able to steal. Security isn't about making it impossible. It's EASIER to steal a key fob than to steal both a fingerprint and a key fob. Therefore, adding the fingerprint increases security.
The general concept of onion routing was first created by the Navy. Because they operate offshore and need to use open-air signals to communicate, Navies have had a strong interest in signals intelligence for a couple thousand years.
DARPA later developed the concept a bit more, then back to Navy contractors for a working implementation. The problem then was that an "anonymized" network which is only used by the US Navy and US spies isn't all that anonymous. If a doctor in Syria is using Tor, the Syrian government would react without needing to know *exactly* who the doctor is talking to - he's talking to either the US military or US intelligence. So they needed lots of people to use Tor. That way nobody could tell which Tor users were spies and which were downloading cracked games. The contractors began to be funded by the EFF.
IMHO, I especially don't trust Tor. It's an obvious place that three-letter agencies would be looking. If I drive down Crack Avenue with a busted taillight, I *expect* that police will be patrolling the area and probably pull me over. It would, imho, be silly to think that authorities aren't patrolling the digital equivalent of Crack Avenue.
There's no fallacy of appeal to authority here, for two reasons. The fallacy of appeal to authority would be citing Michael Jordan's opinions on DNA editing, or Kaku's style preferences. It has the form: Proposition A must be true because person B says it is, and person B is authoritative in some field (but not the field in question).
GP says "for more details", listen to Kaku's explanation in the video. There's no claim that Kaku must be right because Kaku is Kaku. Rather, Kaku explains and supports his position. The reader is encouraged to listen to Kaku's arguments, not assume that Kaku is always right.
Secondly, the H1B program was *designed* to allow world-class people, top scientists and the like, to work in the US. Michio Kaku is a top scientist working in the US. Therefore he can be expected to have legitimate insight into the potential effects of losing his Nobel-winning colleagues to other countries. On the topic of eliminating the H1B program rather than fixing it, and therefore losing top scientists, Kaku does in fact have knowledge and experience that most of us don't have.
> You give 40+ hours of your week away to corporate bosses, just so you can feed yourself. That's called slavery.
So you think that sitting in your air-conditioned office posting on Slashdot and getting paid $100K for doing so is just exactly like slavery https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/ma...
Sometimes I wish you whiny little spoiled liberals could spend six seconds on the whipping post in order to start getting a clue how incredibly fortunate you are. I EXPECT you to be a whiny, spoiled brat, but when you start saying that your experience of sitting here posting on Slashdot is *slavery*, just like people who are chained up and whipped, you cross the line and I'm going to call you on it. Your ridiculous "I'm a victim because I didn't get a free iPhone 6" crap trivializes the real suffering of actual victims, and it's deeply offensive.
The vast majority of Yahoo's value is the Alibaba stock the own. Owning Yahoo is an indirect way of owning Alibaba. Plus you own yahoo mail as a side dish.
When the summary says "removing the ~1200 png assets we were maintaining before", that means they got rid of the PNGs. In other words, now they are NOT using png anymore. You fool.
Try this out for yourself. Get a piece of paper and a pen. Draw a large curve across the paper. You've just executed the programmatic function draw_curve().
Compare that to what it looks like when you enlarge a bitmap which has a few pixels roughly approximating a curve.
> Whether you call it stretching or scaling, you're still enlarging a bitmap
It's NOT enlarging a bitmap (or doesn't have to be). It's *drawing* the object at the appropriate size. The graphics libraries have functions like draw_curve().
Google "vector graphics". Drawing a line at a 20 degree angle does not result in the same pixels as scaling up a smaller bitmap which also approximates a 20 degree line. It is the same at 0, 45, and 90 degrees.
> . There's nothing someone can do to stop you copying a VHS if the recorder ignores macrovision, and most of them do.
Macrovision was originally developed for VCRs that were ALREADY in use. The VCR doesn't have to support Macrovision. It pulses the off-screen lines very bright, then very low, causing the AGC to adjust the picture brightness in the opposite direction.
I imagine two groups of people are still buying them, aside for specialty uses.
Some people BUY movies, and some of those have hundreds of video tapes they've purchased over the years. For some old movies, they can be replaced with DVD iexpensively, but Disney is an important exception. 50 Disney movies isn't cheap.
I also know people for whom their primary entertainment is shows they've recorded. They are comfortable with their routine. Current DVRs available for purchase haven't converted all of these people, and DVRs rented from the cable company are expensive.
Then there are 200 niche uses, with ten or twenty people in each niche.
Yeah invisible lasers are normally considered MORE dangerous. When even a 5mw visible laser hits your eye, you instinctively turn away immediately. The extremely bright light is uncomfortable. If you can't see it, you don't instinctively turn away. See Chuang LH, Lai CC, Yang KJ, Chen TL, Ku WC (2001). "A traumatic macular hole secondary to a high-energy Nd:YAG laser".
OSHA and other bodies require EXTRA safety measures for invisible or nearly invisible lasers. (Near infrared fiber optic lasers can appear to be a dim red. They are actually very bright, just on the verge on the wavelength humans can see.)
Slashdot Mirror
"Protected" Blu Ray discs do in fact get copied. So it is not an uncrackable DRM.
> there is one company (DVD Ranger I think) who claims they cracked it but testing showed that all they did was find a way to replace the audio during ripping with a Cinavia free AC-3 file
Maybe. Unless you can point to some updated information, people *speculated* that *maybe* that's what DVD Ranger does. DVD Ranger said no, they remove it. We can't be sure. However later, in 2015, Slysoft was removing it, and I haven't seen even speculation that they weren't.
I suspect most people looking at it may have made it too complicated. As you know, all Blu Ray players after a certain date are required to be able to read the Cinavia water mark, which is in the analog audio signal so that it plugs the "analog hole". One bit of digital mark takes five seconds of audio. Anyway, the point is you can get the reader code out of any firmware update to a Blu Ray enabled device - the format of the watermark isn't a secret. We know that to embed an "A" bit you apply the function to the audio in one direction, for the opposite bit ^A the opposite direction. (I'm using A and ^A rather than 0 and 1 to avoid confusing 0 with the original audio).
It should therefore be quite possible to add your own Cinavia watermark to the audio. Suppose the "theatrical release only" bits are AA^AA^A^AA. You could probably embed those bits yourself, right, given that you have access to the code that reads them? Similarly, you should be able to embed the bits ^A^AA^AAA^A - the opposite bits. When the detector finds that the signal is neither A nor ^A, but halfway in between, that's going to look a lot like the original audio - like there never was any Cinavia watermark. I haven't actually coded that and tested it, but that general approach seems like it will likely work, when someone does it.
> doesn't rely on the hash being "unbreakable", it just relies on it being non-trivial, and barring a general quntum computer, we know it to be non-trivial. ... the whole working principle of BitCoin (mining) is "cracking SHA-2".
Indeed Bitcoin is based on the presumption that preimage of a complete SHA-256 is very, very hard - infeasible. The difficulty level is how many bits of the hash need to match. Unfortunately, it's not true that "we know it to be non-trivial". We have strong evidence that there IS an attack which makes it easy. In 2012 Sony demonstrated an attack on 52 rounds. Extending that to the full 64 rounds is exceedingly likely. It's just a matter of when someone wants to put in the time AND go public with the results. I'd be surprised if ONI or NSA hasn't already extended it past 52 rounds, if they aren't at perhaps 60 rounds, just four left to go.
If they were paying attention, they would probably say that can switch to a new version which uses SHA-3 or another hash. That's true IF they make the switch BEFORE SHA-2 is broken the rest of the way.
However, five years ago, in 2011, a preimage attack was demonstrated 52 out of 64 rounds. It's ALREADY half broken, so the next step will probably be a complete compromise and there is no indication that BTC intends to upgrade before they are fucked.
A preimage may not break some applications that have long inputs, but for a short input like BTC uses, the preimage result will very likely be the desired bytes.
Really it's not even a RISK that you MIGHT lose your money in bitcoin, it is virtually guaranteed if you hold bitcoin long enough. Bitcoin depends on the security of the SHA-2 hash algorithm. Once SHA-2 is broken, everyone can generate all the BTC they want easily, sending the value to zero.
There have been dozens of hash algorithms. A few which have been popular over the years include RIPEMD, MD5, DES-based (crypt()), SHA-0, SHA-1, and now SHA-2. The first four listed have all been cracked. SHA-1 is mostly cracked and SHA-2 about 35% cracked. Betting that SHA-2 will be the first hash function in history to not be cracked, by holding Bitcoin, is an awefully optimistic bet. Presumably these are the same people who keep thinking you can make uncrackable DRM. Everything is cracked, and when SHA-2 is cracked the rest of the way there goes any value Bitcoin had.
It would be nice if Firefox allowed extensions signed by trusted certs, rather than just their own. The infrastructure is already there for certs uses for TLS.
Since they didn't do that:
> So if you have an in-house developed extension that contains proprietary business information, you must choose between getting it signed or running versions of firefox that do not receive regular security updates
A third option is to separate your proprietary logic algorithms from the user interface. Firefox is one UI. Your magic logic is ALREADY a seperate component if your development standards are at all secure, so it should be straightforward to run that proprietary logic in a separate process. The extension can communicate with the logic via SOAP or anybof several other methods.
It can be over the internet.
Confusion between the local network and the internet is the source of the problem. Windows is supposed to automatically log in to LOCAL shares. Instead it will automatically log in to shares anywhere on the internet, when it sees a link to a share.
If that's the case, he better gtfo of my house. :)
Right now I'm listening to four hours of Amazon AWS "training" (sales pitch) in other window. Their training is almost word-for-word what you posted.
> Any good WINE tutorials out there?
I'm sure there are; yet over 17 years on Linux I've used WINE roughly twice. Normally, its not the best solution.
Do you typically use emulation to run the Linux versions of most programs on Windows, or do you run the Windows version on Windows? Running the Windows version on Linux doesn't normally make sense - on Linux, run the Linux software.
A lot of daily use software brands are compiled for Linux, often developed for Linux FIRST, then ported to Windows. Firefox, Chrome, OpenOffice/LibreOffice, etc are all available native for Linux.
If the specific brand of softeware you used to use is Windows-only (and therefore probably proprietary), there is probably other open, free software that does the same job on Linux. Unlike the Windows software, the software designed for Linux doesn't include telemetry, onerous licensing, etc. For example, rather than MS Outlook, there are dozens of other email qnd groupware programs for Linux. Sylpheed Claws / Claws Mail is one.
The single software package most often mentioned as a counter-example is Photoshop. If you're a professional graphic artist, you'll probably be happiest with a Mac. If you want to adjust brightness and color curves of your snapshots, or do any simple to moderate photo editing, you can use one of the tools used by Dreamworks and ILM - Gimp. True, Gimp not exactly the same as Photoshop. However, Gimp is powerful enough to be used by major Hollywood effects studios.
> For example, U.S. intelligence agencies have concluded that Russia was behind the release of DNC emails before the party convention
Citation sorely needed. The DNC has suggested it's possible Russia was involved. A small security company called ThreatConnect pointed out that one of the tools used had some Russian language strings, meaning that the attacker used a tool which was written by someone who spoke Russian.
"US intelligence agencies" have announced no conclusions and there is scant evidence that "Russia", the Russian government, was involved.
> You can not enter in to contract with a minor. It is legally invalid. That is the law.
A minor *can* disaffirm a contract in most cases. The contract is neither "invalid" nor "void", until the minor declares that they wish to disaffirm. There are several exceptions.
Here's the actual text of the statute in California which lays out the general rule. It also includes one of the exceptions:
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-...
Exceptions aren't all listed in one place. Here's an example - for a high value contract like Justin Bieber's recording contract, the parties can have a court to approve the contract. The contract must set-aside some of the earnings in a trust fund for the minor to have later and meet other conditions. Once approved by the court, it cannot be disaffirmed.
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-...
For cases in which a large amount is at stake, paying the cost of a good professional makes sense. Just like getting a highly competent and well trained software programmer IF your business depends upon the software.
For small claims, and little scripts you use at home, the cost of a professional who is both well trained and actually good at what they do may not be justified.
If you're involved in a law suit for $250,000 or you are making your business database avaiable via the web (where hackers abound), hire the right professional. Last week I thought I might have to file suit for $4,500. It wouldn't have made sense to spend $2,000 on an attorney in order to increase may chance of winning by 15%.
Your analysis is correct - ONLY for those in a swing state. Most states are NOT swing states.
For most of us, there is 0% chance that our vote could possibly tilt the balance between jackass and crook. Er, Trump amd Clinton. In this particular election, we already know which way our state and its electoral votes will go. For example, my state will go to Trump, regardless of how I vote. The best we can hope for is to have some effect on his policies and on future elections.
The major parties are trying to pick up another 1% or 2% for themselves, if they see 12% of the vote go Libertarian, the majors will very much want a piece of that 12%. It's then in their self-interest to look at the Libertarian platform and think about which ideas they can adopt. The same goes for elected officials. Suppose the results are 45% Trump, 44% Clinton, 11% Johnson. Considering they want to get re-elected, president Trump or Clinton should look at that 11% who voted Johnson and do things to try to get those voters to vote for them next time.
If only 1% vote Libertarian, the major parties would have no reason to adopt some Libertarian udeas.
No need for an app. You can load up my web page. It will both send an sms and provide a Google maps link. For SMS, put the recipient's phone number after the question mark un the URL:
http://clonebox.net/where/?123...
You can also view the source of the page to see how I request the location and make your own page, if you like.
Please don't use mine thousands of times. If you need to get locations from tens of thousands of people, let me know and I'll make you your own copy.
Suppose your car has a fingerprint scanner, along with a keyfob. That's something you HAVE and something you ARE.
Theoretically, could a thief steal your key fob and your fingerprint? Yes, of course. Would it be easier to just a call bring a trailer and steal your car directly? Yes, of course.
People will ALWAYS be able to steal. Security isn't about making it impossible. It's EASIER to steal a key fob than to steal both a fingerprint and a key fob. Therefore, adding the fingerprint increases security.
The general concept of onion routing was first created by the Navy. Because they operate offshore and need to use open-air signals to communicate, Navies have had a strong interest in signals intelligence for a couple thousand years.
DARPA later developed the concept a bit more, then back to Navy contractors for a working implementation. The problem then was that an "anonymized" network which is only used by the US Navy and US spies isn't all that anonymous. If a doctor in Syria is using Tor, the Syrian government would react without needing to know *exactly* who the doctor is talking to - he's talking to either the US military or US intelligence. So they needed lots of people to use Tor. That way nobody could tell which Tor users were spies and which were downloading cracked games. The contractors began to be funded by the EFF.
> You can't trust anybody, not even Tor.
IMHO, I especially don't trust Tor. It's an obvious place that three-letter agencies would be looking. If I drive down Crack Avenue with a busted taillight, I *expect* that police will be patrolling the area and probably pull me over. It would, imho, be silly to think that authorities aren't patrolling the digital equivalent of Crack Avenue.
There's no fallacy of appeal to authority here, for two reasons. The fallacy of appeal to authority would be citing Michael Jordan's opinions on DNA editing, or Kaku's style preferences. It has the form:
Proposition A must be true because person B says it is, and person B is authoritative in some field (but not the field in question).
GP says "for more details", listen to Kaku's explanation in the video. There's no claim that Kaku must be right because Kaku is Kaku. Rather, Kaku explains and supports his position. The reader is encouraged to listen to Kaku's arguments, not assume that Kaku is always right.
Secondly, the H1B program was *designed* to allow world-class people, top scientists and the like, to work in the US. Michio Kaku is a top scientist working in the US. Therefore he can be expected to have legitimate insight into the potential effects of losing his Nobel-winning colleagues to other countries. On the topic of eliminating the H1B program rather than fixing it, and therefore losing top scientists, Kaku does in fact have knowledge and experience that most of us don't have.
> You give 40+ hours of your week away to corporate bosses, just so you can feed yourself. That's called slavery.
So you think that sitting in your air-conditioned office posting on Slashdot and getting paid $100K for doing so is just exactly like slavery https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/ma...
Sometimes I wish you whiny little spoiled liberals could spend six seconds on the whipping post in order to start getting a clue how incredibly fortunate you are. I EXPECT you to be a whiny, spoiled brat, but when you start saying that your experience of sitting here posting on Slashdot is *slavery*, just like people who are chained up and whipped, you cross the line and I'm going to call you on it. Your ridiculous "I'm a victim because I didn't get a free iPhone 6" crap trivializes the real suffering of actual victims, and it's deeply offensive.
The vast majority of Yahoo's value is the Alibaba stock the own. Owning Yahoo is an indirect way of owning Alibaba. Plus you own yahoo mail as a side dish.
When the summary says "removing the ~1200 png assets we were maintaining before", that means they got rid of the PNGs. In other words, now they are NOT using png anymore. You fool.
Try this out for yourself. Get a piece of paper and a pen. Draw a large curve across the paper. You've just executed the programmatic function draw_curve().
Compare that to what it looks like when you enlarge a bitmap which has a few pixels roughly approximating a curve.
> Whether you call it stretching or scaling, you're still enlarging a bitmap
It's NOT enlarging a bitmap (or doesn't have to be). It's *drawing* the object at the appropriate size. The graphics libraries have functions like draw_curve().
Google "vector graphics". Drawing a line at a 20 degree angle does not result in the same pixels as scaling up a smaller bitmap which also approximates a 20 degree line. It is the same at 0, 45, and 90 degrees.
> . There's nothing someone can do to stop you copying a VHS if the recorder ignores macrovision, and most of them do.
Macrovision was originally developed for VCRs that were ALREADY in use. The VCR doesn't have to support Macrovision. It pulses the off-screen lines very bright, then very low, causing the AGC to adjust the picture brightness in the opposite direction.
I imagine two groups of people are still buying them, aside for specialty uses.
Some people BUY movies, and some of those have hundreds of video tapes they've purchased over the years. For some old movies, they can be replaced with DVD iexpensively, but Disney is an important exception. 50 Disney movies isn't cheap.
I also know people for whom their primary entertainment is shows they've recorded. They are comfortable with their routine. Current DVRs available for purchase haven't converted all of these people, and DVRs rented from the cable company are expensive.
Then there are 200 niche uses, with ten or twenty people in each niche.
Yeah invisible lasers are normally considered MORE dangerous. When even a 5mw visible laser hits your eye, you instinctively turn away immediately. The extremely bright light is uncomfortable. If you can't see it, you don't instinctively turn away. See Chuang LH, Lai CC, Yang KJ, Chen TL, Ku WC (2001). "A traumatic macular hole secondary to a high-energy Nd:YAG laser".
OSHA and other bodies require EXTRA safety measures for invisible or nearly invisible lasers. (Near infrared fiber optic lasers can appear to be a dim red. They are actually very bright, just on the verge on the wavelength humans can see.)