Yeah, I'm going to believe the NYT about something stupid Trump is doing. Their unbiased reporting is top notch. If they are saying something farfetched and stupid, it's only because they have hard evidence. *rolls eyes*
At this point, the opposition media isn't even credible. Really? The Chinese and Russians have bugged DJT's iPhone? How? Our government can't even do that at this point. They have real proof?
It is a crying shame they shit all over the reputation over 100 years of reporting has created for them.
The New York Times seems to be competing with The Onion for satirical excellence.
Fucking infuriating, and what's worse is we no longer have editorial press in this country. Now, who can we rely on to deliver us real truth?
Those hashes are used to reverse a hash of a master key for your system which unlocks the file system. That way, both that hash and your pin code work. You need a master key, and then your authentication vectors re-encrypt the master key. You therefore have multiple avenues of logging in and authenticating, because each way provides you with a key you can unlock
The anonymous ass-hat is exhibiting confirmation bias. He can't believe in such an important decision like which $1000 phone to purchase, he made the wrong choice. He isn't mentally equipped to say "hmm, maybe I should have made a different choice. The other ones are far more concerned with my privacy than the one I chose."
He has no argument to stand on, so he throws feces around hoping no one will judge his bad decisions
Well, lets get a few things strait. Autopilot and Full Self Driving are two completely different products Tesla sells.
Autopilot: Is available today, you can pay for it still, and it will work just as advertised. It is getting better and better with software updates (lane merging is smoother since 9.0, it detects objects around you more accurately, and will soon have "Drive on Nav" which will enable the Tesla to move between freeway to freeway intersections, weave through traffic to get around slow drivers, and find your Freeway exit.
Autopilot (for those of you who have never been in a cockpit), is a perfectly valid name for what the technology does, almost too perfect. Why?
1. Like autopilot, the actual pilot is required to be at the controls and aware 100% of the time. Pilots do this. They do not turn on autopilot on a 12 hour flight and go to schmooze with the hot flight attendants.
2. Like autopilot, its primary use is major causeways for the majority of the trip, not all of the trip. Sure. Autopilots could handle takeoff and landing, but pilots do this manually. Just like Tesla. Tesla say to use Autopilot on freeways. Tesla Autopilot doesn't handle stop signs and red lights yet, so surface driving (like when a plane taxis around the airport and takes off) is specifically in the hands of the pilot. See the similarities?
3. Like autopilot, it can help you avoid impacts. It isn't perfect, and can warn the pilot of impending crashes ("Pull up!", "Terrain").
Full Self Driving: This is a separate and independent feature of making the Autopilot handle self recharges (through equipped Supercharging stations), allowing it to handle itself on the vast majority of roads (including surface streets), and ultimately allowing someone to call their car to them from across the country with no driver required. This is the product Tesla took out of their "new car ordering" system, but allows you to add later (just as those who purchased a Tesla without the FSD option were and are still able to do.
I realize this. And, I agree with you that some things the government should provide (roads are another example). Power infrastructure to carry power across public spaces should be maintained by the government. So should waterworks, so to should data connectivity infrastructure. The private party enters at the supply side, not the side that maintains the public ways.
The government should have the right to charge maintenance and construction fees to the two parties (supplier, consumer).
But, I am speaking about an encroachment on government where none is needed. Tech companies are not monopolies. There isn't one single trillion dollar company crushing all others. They are all healthy, and the market is very healthy (as illustrated by the advance in technology at a breathtaking pace, coupled by the reduction in its price and general high availability to consume it).
This is encroachment of government. First, the idea was monopolies are bad, and they are. But, government is the only place to get a monopoly these days.
If there is a monopoly that forms, it won't stay a monopoly for long. At some point, it's profits will reflect its monopoly, and new entrants will raise the necessary capital to compete with it, based on a stronger value proposition (sacrificing those profits in the industry for market share).
Natural monopolies do not need to exist. We just got jinxed into believing they need to. Power companies are a great example. In Texas you can purchase power from any producer you choose, and the rates are pretty good.
The government used monopolies as an excuse to rip apart companies that were big. Now, they are looking to do so to companies that are not as big (relative to their market's size), because what they really don't want is companies that can influence government.
Facebook and Twitter has a strong effect on the elections, which is why we are here.
This is for shitty cars by traditional companies that are based in those places where the grid is shit.
Tesla's, no matter what you have to say about them, make their batteries in Reno. That's where the gigs factory is, where solar is king. So, this argument doesn't apply to them. They are also the largest installer of batteries on the planet, so this makes me think this article is oil company FUD.
It's always a choice. Car broke down and costs a few hundred to fix? Too bad you just had to have the latest iPhone. Got sick and had shitty insurance? Too bad you didn't pay for better insurance.
We have such a strong safety net in this country, and are THE MOST generous nation on earth (literally, in terms of dollars donated). If you are truly poor, go to a church, or other NGO. Fill out help forms from your city, county, state, and federal programs. People will help you. For fuck's sake; start a go-fund-me page. Do something.
But don't bitch because you lived at or beyond your means and didn't save for a rainy day. That's your own damn fault.
I can't believe this guy. Be thankful your fiscal irresponsibility was mitigated by the credit system which caught your back when you needed it. Now you can get back to work, or get healthy again, and practice living on a little less so you can pay that off. When you are done with that, stay at that spending level, and save what you used to spend. BE RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR OWN WELLBEING.
The govornment is creating debt, thereby lending it out. It gives you the ability to spend it (though bank lending). You don't have to take out a loan. You can start from $0 and work for your money. When you earn, you can spend, invest, and save. If you save, then the bank you saved with lends that out to others. So in a sense, you can have people indebted to you, just for being financially responsible.
A common mis-conception. Having good credit means making a payment every month (which you can't do if your balance is $0). You need to make a purchase (even just filling up gas), and then pay it down to $0. What mostly determines your score is:
A) How long your accounts have been open for and in good standing B) Your payment history (again, you should make a payment every month, even if it's for a pack of gum). C) Your debt to income ratio (this one is mis-understood: the less debt you have, the better! All the way down to $0) D) Your available credit (the less balances you have, again the better). E) Your applications for credit. You take a hit when you enquire a few times. In fact, the new FICO 9.0 score is supposed to take into consideration multiple enquiries and not have them all affect your score if its because you were shopping your loan for some large purchase around).
You absolutely can rent a car with a debit card, they typically place a hold on around $250.00 which isn't that much. If you think its too much, you probably don't have the means to be financially responsible for damage you cause it.
Also, if you don't want debt, don't spend on credit what you can not pay off. All of my cards are at $0.00 balance every month, because that helps keep me in check. I only finance what I have to (home, auto), and the auto is at 2.9% which is just about the same as the rate of inflation, so its near 0.
You don't have to be a "slave". You can be... responsible.
The iPhone requires that you look at it or give it attention. Can the police demand through a warrant that you look at the phone? Can a warrant even demand that?
"Sir, you are hereby ordered by a court of law to look at the camera". - I don't know if this is legal. A warrant allows the search and seizure, not compelling action.
I think if the police tried to make me look at my phone by force, id just shut my eyelids. If they try and force my eyelids open, their hands would just disqualify the read, and even then, id look as far away as possible.
Anyone and everyone in tech understands the nature of encryption. It's so sad that politicians don't. At some point, some government is going to pass a shitty version of this law, and then, the real show down begins.
That doesn't matter for most connections, but it does matter since you are using interstate connections most of the time you connect to anything (except maybe your corporate office or mail server).
While I am a proponent in general of Net Neutrality, and I want ISPs to treat the internet as just a phone call with no ifs, ands or buts; the FCC is right in this case. What we really need is for this question to be answered where the framers meant for it to be answered: in law.
We can't change the rules for something as long-lasting and fundamental as the internet every time we change administrations. We can't rely on the executive branch to define the rules. The constitution calls on Congress to make the rules, and the administration (executive branch) to enforce them. Congress has to act. This purview should be codified into a bill, and passed. Thereby Establishing legal authority and imperative.
Your sig says "debt is slavery". Are you suggesting those that accumulated debt are putting people into slavery? No one asked them to sign up for credit cards, car loans, home loans, or anything else. Slavery means "without consent". When you apply, sign, and shop, you consented.
Plus, being big in education wasn't enough to push Mac beyond windows. What makes anyone think that strategy will work now when it hasn't before?
Windows rules when you "grow up" because of its enterprise manageability and work-focused apps. Quick books for Mac is a joke, and was never on par with the Windows versions. Same thing goes for other titles like Sage MAS titles, Autocad, and so, so many others.
Simultaneously, an alkaline electrolyser (1.2 MW) locally generates 240 cubic meters of renewable hydrogen per hour by making use of excess on-site photovoltaic energy.
Looks like it uses 1.2MW of locally generated solar power that is in excess of the rest of the plant.
You could also add a few more steps to the process to use as rocket fuel. The rocket fuel that doesn't get spent on accents or fall back to earth would no doubt remove that carbon from the atmosphere.
I think they mean for airplanes. Jet fuel can't be substituted for electricity yet, energy density and conversion rates are too low. You'd spend most of the energy lugging around the spent batteries anyway. Airplanes get more efficient as they run out of fuel, since it makes them lighter.
Fun fact: very large airplanes can not land once they take off, because the take off weight plus fuel exceeds max landing weight. If there is an emergency, airplanes have essentially carte Blanche authority to dump fuel to get to landing weight. This is also one reason why many flights don't fill tanks to the brim. If you made it to your destination having not burned enough fuel, not only have you spent extra lugging that fuel you didn't need, you'd also have to dump it before landing, since that is too much stress for landing gear.
Usually, banned cars will remain banned. This is an exciting development for the getting at least the legal roadblocks (see what I did there?) out of the way for self-driving cars. I'm looking forward to seeing the 9.0 update from Tesla. Onramp to Offramp seems pretty cool. They need to recognize stop signs, red lights, and such too.
The speed of this progress is cool, and I'm glad the legal regulations seem not to be impeding the progress to much.
Pray you never have to find out. Inbound ICBMs comes to mind. So does space hazards, a large nuclear disaster with winds... just to name a few. Better to have it and not need it, than need it any not have it in this case.
I don't think you understood what he meant. He didn't want to see another establishmentarian president. He didn't want a Bush, or a Clinton, or some senator with 20 years in Washington with debts, skeletons, allegiances, and scores to settle. He wanted an outsider. If you think trump isn't one, your the one who's fucking retarded.
No. Sorry. If planes are being hijacked, and the scale isn't understood, you can't confine the alert to a region.
Secondly, SMSs do work on domestic flights these days, but that's besides the point. You're saying a system shouldn't exist because of technical challenges without knowing what the technical solution is. Most domestic planes have cell repeaters for use with SMS, not to mention WiFi on board.
But forget all that. Let's say you are right about this specific use case. 1. That's something we should fix. 2. Let's say we detect a space bound ICBM heading to the US, can't pinpoint the trajectory. Great, just alert everyone to duck and cover for 10 Minutes, might save a million or so lives. Even more so if there are more incoming.
No. You just can't stand the guy at the top.
I think one of the roles of government should be protecting and defending its populace. This serves to further that goal.
Because with Trump, the level of obstructionism is reaching levels not seen since the civil war, the last time democrats tried to obstruct this much, 600,000 Americans lost their lives.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, I'm going to believe the NYT about something stupid Trump is doing. Their unbiased reporting is top notch. If they are saying something farfetched and stupid, it's only because they have hard evidence. *rolls eyes*
At this point, the opposition media isn't even credible. Really? The Chinese and Russians have bugged DJT's iPhone? How? Our government can't even do that at this point. They have real proof?
It is a crying shame they shit all over the reputation over 100 years of reporting has created for them.
The New York Times seems to be competing with The Onion for satirical excellence.
Fucking infuriating, and what's worse is we no longer have editorial press in this country. Now, who can we rely on to deliver us real truth?
No, not exactly. But close.
Those hashes are used to reverse a hash of a master key for your system which unlocks the file system. That way, both that hash and your pin code work. You need a master key, and then your authentication vectors re-encrypt the master key. You therefore have multiple avenues of logging in and authenticating, because each way provides you with a key you can unlock
The anonymous ass-hat is exhibiting confirmation bias. He can't believe in such an important decision like which $1000 phone to purchase, he made the wrong choice. He isn't mentally equipped to say "hmm, maybe I should have made a different choice. The other ones are far more concerned with my privacy than the one I chose."
He has no argument to stand on, so he throws feces around hoping no one will judge his bad decisions
Well, lets get a few things strait. Autopilot and Full Self Driving are two completely different products Tesla sells.
Autopilot: Is available today, you can pay for it still, and it will work just as advertised. It is getting better and better with software updates (lane merging is smoother since 9.0, it detects objects around you more accurately, and will soon have "Drive on Nav" which will enable the Tesla to move between freeway to freeway intersections, weave through traffic to get around slow drivers, and find your Freeway exit.
Autopilot (for those of you who have never been in a cockpit), is a perfectly valid name for what the technology does, almost too perfect. Why?
1. Like autopilot, the actual pilot is required to be at the controls and aware 100% of the time. Pilots do this. They do not turn on autopilot on a 12 hour flight and go to schmooze with the hot flight attendants.
2. Like autopilot, its primary use is major causeways for the majority of the trip, not all of the trip. Sure. Autopilots could handle takeoff and landing, but pilots do this manually. Just like Tesla. Tesla say to use Autopilot on freeways. Tesla Autopilot doesn't handle stop signs and red lights yet, so surface driving (like when a plane taxis around the airport and takes off) is specifically in the hands of the pilot. See the similarities?
3. Like autopilot, it can help you avoid impacts. It isn't perfect, and can warn the pilot of impending crashes ("Pull up!", "Terrain").
Full Self Driving: This is a separate and independent feature of making the Autopilot handle self recharges (through equipped Supercharging stations), allowing it to handle itself on the vast majority of roads (including surface streets), and ultimately allowing someone to call their car to them from across the country with no driver required. This is the product Tesla took out of their "new car ordering" system, but allows you to add later (just as those who purchased a Tesla without the FSD option were and are still able to do.
Just thought I would clear all that up :)
I realize this. And, I agree with you that some things the government should provide (roads are another example). Power infrastructure to carry power across public spaces should be maintained by the government. So should waterworks, so to should data connectivity infrastructure. The private party enters at the supply side, not the side that maintains the public ways.
The government should have the right to charge maintenance and construction fees to the two parties (supplier, consumer).
But, I am speaking about an encroachment on government where none is needed. Tech companies are not monopolies. There isn't one single trillion dollar company crushing all others. They are all healthy, and the market is very healthy (as illustrated by the advance in technology at a breathtaking pace, coupled by the reduction in its price and general high availability to consume it).
This is encroachment of government. First, the idea was monopolies are bad, and they are. But, government is the only place to get a monopoly these days.
If there is a monopoly that forms, it won't stay a monopoly for long. At some point, it's profits will reflect its monopoly, and new entrants will raise the necessary capital to compete with it, based on a stronger value proposition (sacrificing those profits in the industry for market share).
Natural monopolies do not need to exist. We just got jinxed into believing they need to. Power companies are a great example. In Texas you can purchase power from any producer you choose, and the rates are pretty good.
The government used monopolies as an excuse to rip apart companies that were big. Now, they are looking to do so to companies that are not as big (relative to their market's size), because what they really don't want is companies that can influence government.
Facebook and Twitter has a strong effect on the elections, which is why we are here.
This is for shitty cars by traditional companies that are based in those places where the grid is shit.
Tesla's, no matter what you have to say about them, make their batteries in Reno. That's where the gigs factory is, where solar is king. So, this argument doesn't apply to them. They are also the largest installer of batteries on the planet, so this makes me think this article is oil company FUD.
It's always a choice. Car broke down and costs a few hundred to fix? Too bad you just had to have the latest iPhone. Got sick and had shitty insurance? Too bad you didn't pay for better insurance.
We have such a strong safety net in this country, and are THE MOST generous nation on earth (literally, in terms of dollars donated). If you are truly poor, go to a church, or other NGO. Fill out help forms from your city, county, state, and federal programs. People will help you. For fuck's sake; start a go-fund-me page. Do something.
But don't bitch because you lived at or beyond your means and didn't save for a rainy day. That's your own damn fault.
I can't believe this guy. Be thankful your fiscal irresponsibility was mitigated by the credit system which caught your back when you needed it. Now you can get back to work, or get healthy again, and practice living on a little less so you can pay that off. When you are done with that, stay at that spending level, and save what you used to spend. BE RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR OWN WELLBEING.
The govornment is creating debt, thereby lending it out. It gives you the ability to spend it (though bank lending). You don't have to take out a loan. You can start from $0 and work for your money. When you earn, you can spend, invest, and save. If you save, then the bank you saved with lends that out to others. So in a sense, you can have people indebted to you, just for being financially responsible.
A common mis-conception. Having good credit means making a payment every month (which you can't do if your balance is $0). You need to make a purchase (even just filling up gas), and then pay it down to $0. What mostly determines your score is:
A) How long your accounts have been open for and in good standing
B) Your payment history (again, you should make a payment every month, even if it's for a pack of gum).
C) Your debt to income ratio (this one is mis-understood: the less debt you have, the better! All the way down to $0)
D) Your available credit (the less balances you have, again the better).
E) Your applications for credit. You take a hit when you enquire a few times. In fact, the new FICO 9.0 score is supposed to take into consideration multiple enquiries and not have them all affect your score if its because you were shopping your loan for some large purchase around).
There. now you know.
You absolutely can rent a car with a debit card, they typically place a hold on around $250.00 which isn't that much. If you think its too much, you probably don't have the means to be financially responsible for damage you cause it.
Also, if you don't want debt, don't spend on credit what you can not pay off. All of my cards are at $0.00 balance every month, because that helps keep me in check. I only finance what I have to (home, auto), and the auto is at 2.9% which is just about the same as the rate of inflation, so its near 0.
You don't have to be a "slave". You can be... responsible.
The iPhone requires that you look at it or give it attention. Can the police demand through a warrant that you look at the phone? Can a warrant even demand that?
"Sir, you are hereby ordered by a court of law to look at the camera". - I don't know if this is legal. A warrant allows the search and seizure, not compelling action.
I think if the police tried to make me look at my phone by force, id just shut my eyelids. If they try and force my eyelids open, their hands would just disqualify the read, and even then, id look as far away as possible.
Anyone and everyone in tech understands the nature of encryption. It's so sad that politicians don't. At some point, some government is going to pass a shitty version of this law, and then, the real show down begins.
That doesn't matter for most connections, but it does matter since you are using interstate connections most of the time you connect to anything (except maybe your corporate office or mail server).
While I am a proponent in general of Net Neutrality, and I want ISPs to treat the internet as just a phone call with no ifs, ands or buts; the FCC is right in this case. What we really need is for this question to be answered where the framers meant for it to be answered: in law.
We can't change the rules for something as long-lasting and fundamental as the internet every time we change administrations. We can't rely on the executive branch to define the rules. The constitution calls on Congress to make the rules, and the administration (executive branch) to enforce them. Congress has to act. This purview should be codified into a bill, and passed. Thereby Establishing legal authority and imperative.
Your sig says "debt is slavery". Are you suggesting those that accumulated debt are putting people into slavery? No one asked them to sign up for credit cards, car loans, home loans, or anything else. Slavery means "without consent". When you apply, sign, and shop, you consented.
Just wait until Amazon gets ahold of this company. Those raises wont have been so expensive after all.
Plus, being big in education wasn't enough to push Mac beyond windows. What makes anyone think that strategy will work now when it hasn't before?
Windows rules when you "grow up" because of its enterprise manageability and work-focused apps. Quick books for Mac is a joke, and was never on par with the Windows versions. Same thing goes for other titles like Sage MAS titles, Autocad, and so, so many others.
Chrome books won't fix it either.
Simultaneously, an alkaline electrolyser (1.2 MW) locally generates 240 cubic meters of renewable hydrogen per hour by making use of excess on-site photovoltaic energy.
Looks like it uses 1.2MW of locally generated solar power that is in excess of the rest of the plant.
You could also add a few more steps to the process to use as rocket fuel. The rocket fuel that doesn't get spent on accents or fall back to earth would no doubt remove that carbon from the atmosphere.
I think they mean for airplanes. Jet fuel can't be substituted for electricity yet, energy density and conversion rates are too low. You'd spend most of the energy lugging around the spent batteries anyway. Airplanes get more efficient as they run out of fuel, since it makes them lighter.
Fun fact: very large airplanes can not land once they take off, because the take off weight plus fuel exceeds max landing weight. If there is an emergency, airplanes have essentially carte Blanche authority to dump fuel to get to landing weight. This is also one reason why many flights don't fill tanks to the brim. If you made it to your destination having not burned enough fuel, not only have you spent extra lugging that fuel you didn't need, you'd also have to dump it before landing, since that is too much stress for landing gear.
Usually, banned cars will remain banned. This is an exciting development for the getting at least the legal roadblocks (see what I did there?) out of the way for self-driving cars. I'm looking forward to seeing the 9.0 update from Tesla. Onramp to Offramp seems pretty cool. They need to recognize stop signs, red lights, and such too.
The speed of this progress is cool, and I'm glad the legal regulations seem not to be impeding the progress to much.
Pray you never have to find out. Inbound ICBMs comes to mind. So does space hazards, a large nuclear disaster with winds... just to name a few. Better to have it and not need it, than need it any not have it in this case.
I don't think you understood what he meant. He didn't want to see another establishmentarian president. He didn't want a Bush, or a Clinton, or some senator with 20 years in Washington with debts, skeletons, allegiances, and scores to settle. He wanted an outsider. If you think trump isn't one, your the one who's fucking retarded.
No. Sorry. If planes are being hijacked, and the scale isn't understood, you can't confine the alert to a region.
Secondly, SMSs do work on domestic flights these days, but that's besides the point. You're saying a system shouldn't exist because of technical challenges without knowing what the technical solution is. Most domestic planes have cell repeaters for use with SMS, not to mention WiFi on board.
But forget all that. Let's say you are right about this specific use case. 1. That's something we should fix. 2. Let's say we detect a space bound ICBM heading to the US, can't pinpoint the trajectory. Great, just alert everyone to duck and cover for 10
Minutes, might save a million or so lives. Even more so if there are more incoming.
No. You just can't stand the guy at the top.
I think one of the roles of government should be protecting and defending its populace. This serves to further that goal.
Because with Trump, the level of obstructionism is reaching levels not seen since the civil war, the last time democrats tried to obstruct this much, 600,000 Americans lost their lives.