Websites that change owners frequently pretty much scream "potentially valuable asset that nobody has figured out how to make money on!" Because if they did actually make money, they wouldn't be getting sold. So Slashdot is a pretty obvious money sink, but it does have a desirable reading audience, many of whom are absurdly vocal about how they don't want to read ads, subscribe or otherwise do anything that would, you know, make the site profitable.
I think that's the vocal minority.
First, - ads. There's a lot of ads (regular ads, not the sponsored articles) and most of them are quite irrelevant, motion and browser-slow crap. Find some tasteful self-hosted manually-screened ads appropriate to the audience, and only have one, or two tops on a page.
Second - subscriptions. Offer subscriptions and promote the benefits. One of the biggest ones is subscribers get HTTPS access (!). Given the current environment, sell that - let people subscribe for HTTPS. Naturally get rid of the ads (you're buying privacy!) but hey, now you have a value-add that many people would find valuable. People don't care for early access to stories - they want real features. HTTPS is one of those.
If you're an SEO company, you should know exactly your audience to optimize for them. If they did their research, they should know what the audience wants.
An aircraft in inclement weather using GPS to find an airport might also have a problem with a 4km error.
Nope, because if you were using a GPS approach, you'd have checked your destination for sufficient GPS satellite coverage. RAIM (Receiver autonomous integrity monitoring) is something a safety-critical GPS receiver provides. If there are less than 24 satellites in the constellation, it MUST be consulted.
Basically when you have more satellites than needed to acquire a GPS fix, the additional satellites give you two things - one, an oversolution (Finding GPS location is solving a system of equations - if you have three satellites, you can do an X, Y and Time and get a 2D fix. To get a 3D fix, you need four satellites. If you have more satellites, they can be used to hone your position further.
The second use is to detect bad satellites - by comparing the results with one satellite out of the calculations at the time, you can detect the bad satellite because your calculations with the satellite in will be vastly different than if it is out. This is what RAIM does, and for GPS approaches, you must have sufficient satellite coverage for RAIM to operate and work. At a minimum, it's +1 more satellite
Well, there are still commits going into the git repo - so there's some work being done.
If the complaint is that they haven't "released" anything In years, then well, it's OSS - technically you can call each new checkin a new release.
So it's far from a dead project, and it'll be far from the only OSS project where the last release was years ago and everyone just pulls the latest source code and settles with that.
Why would it make sense? Because Elon said so? If the truck will actually be used like a truck there won't be any chargers around. If you are talking about rich dorks running around town to show off, than maybe you are right.
And why are pickup trucks basically the top-selling vehicle in North America? Are there seriously that many people who use it to haul around cargo so often that it's justified?
Like SUVs, the vast majority of them will never more "off road" than a gravel paved road. And most will never haul more gear than maybe a few sports bags. (Yeah, you can use it to haul a fridge or something, but then again, I'd get that delivered and let the guys with a ramp or electric lift bring it down from the truck than to try to do it by hand).
This seems like such an age-specific question. I expect most of us who were adults 30 years ago were just putting in our usual workday. We weren't watching the launch, though, and didn't find out until a coworker's wife called to tell us about it.
Which makes it more interesting to ask.
Because one of the reasons a civilian was on board the shuttle was to renew interest in the space program - you might forget, but at the time, shuttle launches were becoming regular things, and fairly boring. (24 previous launches, Challenger being used on 10 of them). So this was done to drum up interest, which is why a lot of children were to see the launch, why it was in the news, etc.
Now, most adults probably didn't care since it's just another shuttle launch, albeit with a teacher onboard who's going to teach from space.
Encryption is prohibited for amateur radio communications.
Unlicensed use of licensed frequencies is also prohibited.
Those Baofeng radios are basically ham 2m/440cm radios, and most people just pick them up at the store without realizing that they require a license to operate. Because of their low cost, they're really available at any store, especially outdoor outfitters.
So, provided they were already breaking the law anyways, well...
Then again, because they were designed for amateur radio, they wouldn't have encryption anyways because no one allows encryption. So they'd have to design their own radios or use some other (more expensive) rigs operating on a different frequency.
And good ol' Uncle Sam's response was to bolster the local economy and boost the value of the US dollar, basically saying "it's better to pay taxes when the exchange rate is high than play stupid games until it tanks".
I don't say it often, but when I do, I mean it: The US Government made the right call. I'm sure Apple has lost more value in the money they've kept overseas by now than they'd have paid in taxes, hopefully that is a lesson learned.
That assumes two things. First, the tax rate to reimport the money is around 40%, so the $200B Apple has would turn into $120B re-imported. The second this is Apple may be keeping things in US dollars "natively" - i.e., that $200B Apple has is still worth $200B - because Apple kept it in US dollars offshore. This is a really common thing - many companies use a foreign currency as their "primary currency" because that's the currency they deal with. If you're an international company, you'd probably use US dollars, or Euros for that reason - you do everything in the currency your customers are used to.
The real problem is that it makes Apple's goods more expensive. For example, Apple does things in US dollars. So if you write an app for $0.99, Apple converts that to other currencies for you. Right now, in order to pay the app developer their $0.70 owed when someone buys that app, Apple raised their prices elsewhere - that US$0.99 app is now CAD$1.39. That is not ideal, since it makes apps more expensive, hurting hardware sales, plus, it makes hardware sales more expensive - that iPad that cost $999 would now be $1399,or more.
So no, repatriating the money may not work at all because the currency exchange may not have hurt Apple if they've kept everything in US dollars the whole time (which they probably have). However, what does hurt is everything they sell - the rise of the US dollar means iPhones, iPads, Macs and everything else jumped in price, and anyone with even the simplest sense of supply and demand curves know that will hurt sales.
Apple and everyone else is really stuck - they could choose to keep prices in US dollars and hope it's a temporary problem, or they could eat some of the increase and make a little less margin. Some people already have - if your business relies heavily on foreigners (i.e., tourism), they've already cut rates - airfare, hotel, etc have plummeted because visitors from elsewhere simply are not coming, and tourism-dependent businesses are hurting.
I don't know if he could get to the required 87 octane with lab-refined gasoline. He'd either have to create some MTBE, or use ethanol, which would damage some parts of the engine (fortunately not until long after they'd split) but more importantly probably confuse the primitive on-board computer. I seem to remember him trying to make some substitute in the movie, and failing. It was probably 100% ethanol-- definitely not good for a computer-controlled engine designed for gasoline. Might have had more luck trying to replace the EFI with a carburetor.
Or really, just wait a few years - gasoline was actually readily available at the start of the 20th century - not from a traditional gas station, but from a chemist (what a pharmacy was called back then).
It was really a waste product because until the popularization of the ICE, there was no real use for it.
And really, if he could make a sniper scope, and a ice maker, I'm sure he could refine gas to the required octane.
And yes, the engine was busted (violently) running it on ethanol.
Which is apparently true - cars of that era run very poorly on ethanol while modern vehicles have very sophisticated computers that actually compensate for this. In fact, it's actually possible run a 92-octane car on 87 octane fuel - the computer will note the octane irregularity and the knock sensor will keep the engine from knocking/preignition as the computer adjusts the timing to run on the gas.
Not something you want to do (might void your warranty) to save money but if you're stuck and you need gas, it's an option.
Though I'm sure the results wouldn't have ended as violently as well, either. The seals, piping and such would rot, yes, but that takes a little while - at least enough to return home and then get it fixed.
Where that all went wrong of course was the plugs-out test where you're trying to simulate the ship in a vacuum when it's really surrounded by sea-level air. One way to do that is to pump up the interior pressure to one atmosphere plus a bit ( I think they were running about 16psi ) so you can check for leaks and such. If you make up that pressure with pure O2 -- which they did -- you're asking for trouble. Trouble like stuff that doesn't burn well in 3psi O2 might go up like a torch in 16psi O2... which nobody tested until after the fire. (Or if they did, higher management and NASA didn't listen, kind of like the deal with letting the O-rings get too cold on Shuttle boosters.)
Well, it was more of a "it's obvious" sort of thing - I mean, sea level pressure is around 14psi or so, so bumping it up +3psi would simulate the conditions. The engineers behind it saw it as "low risk" because on the face of it, it seems low risk - just push the capsule pressure up 3 PSI and you're done, forgetting that oxygen gets more reactive the more you have of it concentrated in a space.
Management signed off on it because the engineers said It was low risk, and many of the safety protocols were bypassed, again, because it was low risk.
It was a simple oversight that really, on the face of it people would assume it would be OK, just someone didn't stop for a second and think.
I thought I had read that many of them were already outraged and many had taken the step of registering their planes with shell LLCs so that existing flight trackers and tail watchers couldn't decode who was on the plane.
If they look it up, all they get it something bogus like "AirplaneHoldings23, LLC, a Delaware Corporation, Proxy Manager, John Smith, Esq."
It's the same gambit the super rich do for high dollar real estate so that the transactions and ownership are completely opaque.
Well, part of the gambit is because the flight information is public - when you file a flight plan, that information is public. As well, your plane's registration is also public information, so you can take any plane's registration and lookup information about it.
All the super rich have done was hide their names behind proxies so as to not make their information public on these databases.
Of course, I suppose it's possible to manually tag who's on what plane despite hiding the registration.
My first gut reaction was to agree with you. But then I realized that means anyone can build an airport (or after-hours nightclub) in the middle of any subdivision, there would be no zoning laws allowed. I'm not sure if that's a great idea or not.
I kind of like the current situation in Texas - cities have zoning, counties pretty much don't. So outside the city limits you can do what you want, within the city you have to be more mindful of how your actions effect neighbors next door. That lets you choose - do you want (enforced) peace and quiet, or do you want to be able to target practice in your back yard? You can either.
it's actually a very messy situation - airports (certified aerodromes) are federal government objects, and state governments have tried, but failed to ocerrule them. Chicago tried, digging up the runways at Meigs Field, but was fined millions for contract violation (the FAA makes agreements for airport funding and improvements, provided the land stays as an airport for X years, usually 25+). The situation was so messy that the crash happened and the valuable real estate deals fell through. What was Meigs Field is now a dumpy "park" (really just a bunch of now-disintegrating buildings and overgrown weeds over pavement). All the jobs that were there flew (literally) to other jurisdictions.
Now, if you're not an airport, well, you could try setting up a private aerodrome - there are plenty of those (at least 10 times as many), but just because you can land your aircraft there doesn't mean it's necessarily legal - there's still noise ordinances and such to obey.
In the end, airports are usually established a ways from civilization and flight routes planned so existing residences don't get disturbed unnecessarily (noise abatement procedures - usually have you turning one way or the other when able and safe so you're disturbing the peace as little as possible).
And of course, even when you're out in the sticks, you can be the middle of it all in under a decade and having to deal with complaints from people who should've known better. Many an airport and railway have shut down because new neighbours moved in and complained.
Standing up to the Government, and Telling people you are standing up to the Government are two very different things. From a business point of view they must be seen to be defending their customers, else their customers will switch to using jailbroken Android phones that have been locked down (can't do that with an Iphone, no source code). Apple is (therefore) the most vulnerable phone maker, they must be seen to take a leadership role or they will die.
The other reason is that it's the only stance Apple can take that genuinely Google cannot.
That's why Apple is committed to privacy and moving a lot of former cloud based services to on-device services. Because they can go and say they don't sell or transmit your information or need to violate your privacy, while Google can't (because Google needs the information for ad purposes). Sure, you can hack an Android phone to be more privacy aware, but out of the box is a lot better than having to do a million steps to secure it.
It's the one thing that Apple can say iOS is better than Android, and one that can stick until Google changes their business plan.
Well, as the summary says it's not a stock Rubik's cube but rather one that has been modified and permanently installed into the system. That means that they don't really need to monitor the progress optically. They just need to keep track of how much the stepper motors have turned.
Since you can't place a stock cube in there I also don't really see the point of having the physical manifestation. If they were to render a cube on a display they could easily get the time down to 10ms.
All solvers, be it human or mechanical only look at the cube once - it's the only way humans can solve it In under 5 seconds. The human visual system is too slow to provide feedback while solving.
Basically once you scan in the cube and figure out the squares, you solve it based on the known algorithms and moves to get it to the solved state, and you update your internal state of the cube at the same time. Looking at it incurs a processing delay that will just slow down your solving.
" The banana uses a special new circuit board from Makey Makey"
Really? The Pi has GPIO pins, and you can't interface to a banana without a special new circuit board?
You want a BS170 FET and a really high resistance pull-up/down, about 10M should do it. Two components, about 10p worth of parts, and a bit of wire.
Well, then you need a few diodes to protect the FET - a high impedance input is perfect for getting destroyed by ESD, and it's why CMOS logic needs ESD protection.
So unless he adds ESD protection, he's probably going to be looking at replacing that circuit every couple of days or so.
Then you have to debounce the contact - even through the lag of the Linux kernel, you can still get multiple "touches" because of contact bounce. I don't know if the RPi's GPIOs have ESD protection as well, but that would be necessary as well.
Plus, the reliability of the whole thing needs to be tested and evaluated - will everyone be able to trigger it just once per touch (debounce, etc)? Or will some people have trouble activating it? And what if there's low-level EMI going on? Even after debouncing, there's a chance induced power line frequency may cause false touches, or if a user touches it, it cauess multiple triggers.
And the system has to be reliable - chances are his USB thing would work and survive, while your cheap solution may require repairs and fixing every few days as well as a lot of software tweaks.
If the USB adapter cost $20 or so, that extra effort isn't really worth it for a one-off project.
And by stupid I mean the licensing deals. We're in 2016 and there's still idiots out there who can't understand that people can't subscribe to 10+ services to watch everything they want.
Actually, they're intentionally doing it.
Because they don't want another Apple to happen.
Remember way back, over 10 years ago when Steve Jobs started eslling music online? And how iTunes grew to become THE source for music? And how Apple managed to bully the music industry? And how every attempt by the music industry to dethrone Apple failed?
Well, it took them a long time before they took the nuclear option - DRM free. To which they granted it to Amazon so Amazon could sell music for iPods, and actually compete.
And how because of this, the music industry regained control - neither Apple nor Amazon could dictate terms to them.
Well, the content industry observed, and realized that movies and TVs were in the same boat. They could give their content to one big player and let the smaller players wither away, creating a monopsony (monopoly, the other way - many sellers, one customer). Or they could try to distribute as far and wide as possible, as well as ensuring that not everyone gets all the content so there will be no big player who can dictate the terms and conditions.
Though if you really want stupid - you should ask why a show created by a provider like Amazon is not available where Amazon is available - I mean, Amazon created the show, so they have distribution rights. Why do they keep it within the US only? Everything Netflix produces is available on every Netflix site...
Well, Apple did - they're basically abandoning iAds now.
Probably because Google feels it's no longer necessary - remember iAds was the ONLY reason why Google was allowed to buy AdMob - the DoJ felt that Apple's iAds was a sufficient competitor in the mobile advertising space that Google's purchase of AdMob would not harm competitiveness.
Of course, anyone who actually ran the numbers knew iAds was a joke. I don't think I even ever saw any real ads other than for apps using iAds (app developers could buy iAds for a low price). And it's hard for Apple to justify all the expense of maintaining iAds.
There had to be more at play - perhaps Google was kicking some money towards Apple to create iAds as a "competitor" to AdMob, and Apple just took the money and didn't really bother actually doing anything with it.
Thanks to that, carriers are being forced to get updated software through QA faster
Why is that even a thing? I can understand changes to the modem being an issue but isn't Android modular enough that things like a kernel patch, or some updated software can be delivered without a carrier having to vet anything?
No, because some carriers get anal and demand things work in certain ways.
It's a lot better now, but in the past, things like the color of the send button must be a certain shade of green, for example. Then there are the test commands that carriers want, and how many bars correspond to certain signals (remember when AT&T demanded that Apple show "4G" on the iPhone 4S when doing HSPA?).
Then there are other things like phones must not show things like call timers or data counts or must adjust them somehow so it more reflects how the carrier counts, etc.
Telling me "password" is a bad password isn't news. It's obvious. And you know what? For accounts I don't care about, it's a perfectly good password.
You want me to create an account to leave a comment on your stupid little blog? I don't see what's wrong with password.
Hell, a lot of forums are like that too - want to get this download? Register for an account! So yes, I'm going to use password, because chances are, I won't ever visit it again.
Now, my Amazon, Paypal, banking and other passwords? You can bet they aren't on that list!
And guess what? There's a ton of sites that need registration, so no wonder they stay on the top - for these worthless accounts, people will use worthless passwords. If your password database has a lot of these passwords, perhaps you might want to rethink your account strategy. Maybe your visitors don't see your accounts system as valuable as you do.
This kind of information TOTALLY USELESS unless the fear mongers in question actually tell us how this thing gets on a system. That's very important because it tells us how to AVOID this stuff. That's the whole point of ANY sort of problem report even if you're just talking about an unsupported printer.
Vague accusations are of no use to anyone except trolls.
How do you defend against this? How do you fix whatever security hole it's using?
The nature of the infection vector is really the only bit of relevant information and it seems to be missing.
Well, it'll come in the same way any malware does - through an infection vector. For Linux, it probably comes in through commercial software piracy (yes, Linux has commercial software) via warez or cracks or keygens, or even stuff like WordPress themes that people actually pay money for.
So for Linux, as long as you stick with your distro's repos (that aren't compromised - but given these days packages are signed it'll be hard) or source code, you're fine. But start downloading commercial software for free and stuff, well...
If we are getting that much of a performance boost, we are most likely not spending as much time maxing out the card's performance (and using that extra energy) as we were before.
Ah, but 10 years ago or so, we were really happy to get 1080p resolution working. Then we added to it - quad HD (2560x1440 - 4x 720p), and now ultra-HD/4K (3840x2160).
So a lot of performance improvements have gone to quadrupling the number of pixels we render out, including the increase in texture resolution and details.
The trouble is, depending on your age, you almost HAVE to take them when you get to retirement age.
This money was forceably taken from my pay over many decades, rather than giving me a choice on how best to invest it for myself. If given that choice early on in my employment history, I could have e invested it and I'd be more well off by having that money grow more, and I could use it.
But when you get close to retirement age, well....you've thrown so much money into the pot, it makes no sense not to try to draw a little of it back from the well.
Guess what? It's going to be taken from you no matter what.
People seem to think "social safety net? That's for irresponsible people". Guess what? There are irresponsible people, and they cost you and I money. Either we plan for this and accommodate the fact that there will be irresponsible people and make it so everyone gets to benefit, for we pay for it via increased costs in everything.
Let's take a few examples. Say you save for retirement. You don't want to give money for stuff that others need like social security because you're responsible, so you want to keep that money for yourself and invest it giving yourself a nice retirement account. Well, what about those who didn't, couldn't, or wouldn't? The end up on the street, and do petty crimes and all that. If they shoplift, well, the stores have to pay for the missing goods, increased security, etc., by raising prices. We all suffer because we, the responsible ones, pay for that increased cost. If they get caught and are sent through the justice system, WE again pay for the policing, the courts and the jails. In other words, we pay.
Healthcare - again, people seem to think they can buy insurance, or just save it themselves. Well, there's a group who qualified for neither, or again, could not, would not, save for health. They get sick, they go to the ER, and everyone else pays for the medical treatment. Even worse, emergency room medical treatment is among the most EXPENSIVE treatment there is - so not only are we paying for other's irresponsibility, we're paying for the most expensive care available.
I can go on and on and on. But it basically shows that you DO have to plan for others to be irresponsible because it's human nature, and if you don't, you end up paying for it. It's why countries have social security nets, national healthcare, etc - because really, you're going to pay anyhow, so why not pay to make it efficient and available to everyone rather than those who end up gaming the system and costing us all.
And it's why ideas like basic income are being reinvigorated, because we're all going to pay somehow or other.
Anyone who claims otherwise is just looking to reduce their tax bill in favor of making you pay more.
You also might notice, women aren't making a huge push for "diversity" across other male dominated fields, like garbage truck driver. I don't see Google throwing around millions of dollars to train girls how to be welders. This shit isn't about diversity, it's about driving wages down across the board.
Well, if you're going to be specific like that, perhaps not. But among professional drivers (notably, truck drivers) there is an increase in female drivers. And the work is hard.
And Google doesn't need to increase female welders - welders aren't a part of Google's business. Though, there is a push for more women in trades, including welding.
And other male-dominated fields, like aviation, are making strides attracting females, including into mechanics and pilots, both of whom are in the low single digit percentages. There are a few well known groups dedicated to getting more women into aviation, and they're starting young these days by attracting them as kids.
Of course, one of the biggest issues is stereotypes remain - teachers are female, as are nurses, while doctors and mechanics are male. It's hard to beat since it's been culturally ingrained since birth and reinforced through tv shows, books, etc.
I believe really that they will make tools to whatever spec the customer aggressively tracks, monitors and enforces every little detail of; and as soon as there is a hint of flexibility or laxity in the oversight, will slip through lower quality where ever they think they can get away with. This includes things like "crimes of omission", where they will actively seek to work around the spec and poke holes where the inspectors may not be looking or may not have even thought to look. It is taking an approach of delivery of the least possible quality, rather than a good faith effort to meet or exceed the intent of the customer.
Depends on the factory and your supply chain.
Choose a good factory (and there are plenty of companies stateside that WILL help you with this, and their reputations are on the line so they only vet the honest companies) and all will go well. It's the same as shopping in the US - if the company has been around long, they probably have established a reputation they wish to protect. Chinese companies are similar.
It's just in China, there's more people willing to skimp to make a buck, and these are literally fly by night operations - once your job is done, they will disappear into the ether, never to be heard from again. (You could say that China is the ultimate embodiment of the free market sans all the pesky "liberal" and "left wing" stuff that makes doing business annoying in the US).
There are very honest Chinese companies, who pride themselves on producing top quality products. These factories even have onsite labs to test incoming raw materials and will reject failed suppliers. It just requires doing a lot of research and using as many tools as you have to find them - including local domestic companies whose jobs are to help you outsource to China and to realize that if you don't try to penny pinch, you CAN get high quality product. And they're hyper-vigilant because they know their reputation is on the line - they will not cut corners because it would dry up their entire business overnight.
Of course, though, considering it's trivially easy to set up shop in China (no pesky left wing crap to deal with - money money money and profits all the way!) well you have to make sure your shop doesn't make your product and then disappear into the ether.
Slashdot Mirror
I think that's the vocal minority.
First, - ads. There's a lot of ads (regular ads, not the sponsored articles) and most of them are quite irrelevant, motion and browser-slow crap. Find some tasteful self-hosted manually-screened ads appropriate to the audience, and only have one, or two tops on a page.
Second - subscriptions. Offer subscriptions and promote the benefits. One of the biggest ones is subscribers get HTTPS access (!). Given the current environment, sell that - let people subscribe for HTTPS. Naturally get rid of the ads (you're buying privacy!) but hey, now you have a value-add that many people would find valuable. People don't care for early access to stories - they want real features. HTTPS is one of those.
If you're an SEO company, you should know exactly your audience to optimize for them. If they did their research, they should know what the audience wants.
Nope, because if you were using a GPS approach, you'd have checked your destination for sufficient GPS satellite coverage. RAIM (Receiver autonomous integrity monitoring) is something a safety-critical GPS receiver provides. If there are less than 24 satellites in the constellation, it MUST be consulted.
Basically when you have more satellites than needed to acquire a GPS fix, the additional satellites give you two things - one, an oversolution (Finding GPS location is solving a system of equations - if you have three satellites, you can do an X, Y and Time and get a 2D fix. To get a 3D fix, you need four satellites. If you have more satellites, they can be used to hone your position further.
The second use is to detect bad satellites - by comparing the results with one satellite out of the calculations at the time, you can detect the bad satellite because your calculations with the satellite in will be vastly different than if it is out. This is what RAIM does, and for GPS approaches, you must have sufficient satellite coverage for RAIM to operate and work. At a minimum, it's +1 more satellite
Well, there are still commits going into the git repo - so there's some work being done.
If the complaint is that they haven't "released" anything In years, then well, it's OSS - technically you can call each new checkin a new release.
So it's far from a dead project, and it'll be far from the only OSS project where the last release was years ago and everyone just pulls the latest source code and settles with that.
And why are pickup trucks basically the top-selling vehicle in North America? Are there seriously that many people who use it to haul around cargo so often that it's justified?
Like SUVs, the vast majority of them will never more "off road" than a gravel paved road. And most will never haul more gear than maybe a few sports bags. (Yeah, you can use it to haul a fridge or something, but then again, I'd get that delivered and let the guys with a ramp or electric lift bring it down from the truck than to try to do it by hand).
Which makes it more interesting to ask.
Because one of the reasons a civilian was on board the shuttle was to renew interest in the space program - you might forget, but at the time, shuttle launches were becoming regular things, and fairly boring. (24 previous launches, Challenger being used on 10 of them). So this was done to drum up interest, which is why a lot of children were to see the launch, why it was in the news, etc.
Now, most adults probably didn't care since it's just another shuttle launch, albeit with a teacher onboard who's going to teach from space.
Unlicensed use of licensed frequencies is also prohibited.
Those Baofeng radios are basically ham 2m/440cm radios, and most people just pick them up at the store without realizing that they require a license to operate. Because of their low cost, they're really available at any store, especially outdoor outfitters.
So, provided they were already breaking the law anyways, well...
Then again, because they were designed for amateur radio, they wouldn't have encryption anyways because no one allows encryption. So they'd have to design their own radios or use some other (more expensive) rigs operating on a different frequency.
That assumes two things. First, the tax rate to reimport the money is around 40%, so the $200B Apple has would turn into $120B re-imported. The second this is Apple may be keeping things in US dollars "natively" - i.e., that $200B Apple has is still worth $200B - because Apple kept it in US dollars offshore. This is a really common thing - many companies use a foreign currency as their "primary currency" because that's the currency they deal with. If you're an international company, you'd probably use US dollars, or Euros for that reason - you do everything in the currency your customers are used to.
The real problem is that it makes Apple's goods more expensive. For example, Apple does things in US dollars. So if you write an app for $0.99, Apple converts that to other currencies for you. Right now, in order to pay the app developer their $0.70 owed when someone buys that app, Apple raised their prices elsewhere - that US$0.99 app is now CAD$1.39. That is not ideal, since it makes apps more expensive, hurting hardware sales, plus, it makes hardware sales more expensive - that iPad that cost $999 would now be $1399,or more.
So no, repatriating the money may not work at all because the currency exchange may not have hurt Apple if they've kept everything in US dollars the whole time (which they probably have). However, what does hurt is everything they sell - the rise of the US dollar means iPhones, iPads, Macs and everything else jumped in price, and anyone with even the simplest sense of supply and demand curves know that will hurt sales.
Apple and everyone else is really stuck - they could choose to keep prices in US dollars and hope it's a temporary problem, or they could eat some of the increase and make a little less margin. Some people already have - if your business relies heavily on foreigners (i.e., tourism), they've already cut rates - airfare, hotel, etc have plummeted because visitors from elsewhere simply are not coming, and tourism-dependent businesses are hurting.
Or really, just wait a few years - gasoline was actually readily available at the start of the 20th century - not from a traditional gas station, but from a chemist (what a pharmacy was called back then).
It was really a waste product because until the popularization of the ICE, there was no real use for it.
And really, if he could make a sniper scope, and a ice maker, I'm sure he could refine gas to the required octane.
And yes, the engine was busted (violently) running it on ethanol.
Which is apparently true - cars of that era run very poorly on ethanol while modern vehicles have very sophisticated computers that actually compensate for this. In fact, it's actually possible run a 92-octane car on 87 octane fuel - the computer will note the octane irregularity and the knock sensor will keep the engine from knocking/preignition as the computer adjusts the timing to run on the gas.
Not something you want to do (might void your warranty) to save money but if you're stuck and you need gas, it's an option.
Though I'm sure the results wouldn't have ended as violently as well, either. The seals, piping and such would rot, yes, but that takes a little while - at least enough to return home and then get it fixed.
Well, it was more of a "it's obvious" sort of thing - I mean, sea level pressure is around 14psi or so, so bumping it up +3psi would simulate the conditions. The engineers behind it saw it as "low risk" because on the face of it, it seems low risk - just push the capsule pressure up 3 PSI and you're done, forgetting that oxygen gets more reactive the more you have of it concentrated in a space.
Management signed off on it because the engineers said It was low risk, and many of the safety protocols were bypassed, again, because it was low risk.
It was a simple oversight that really, on the face of it people would assume it would be OK, just someone didn't stop for a second and think.
That only powers the time circuits. The engine itself is a regular ICE that takes unleaded. You need both in order to time travel.
Sadly, the electric car mod was something Doc Brown did not do to his DeLorean.
If you stick with Google Play, you're safe from this.
It is only a problem if you side load apps from untrusted sources.
Well, part of the gambit is because the flight information is public - when you file a flight plan, that information is public. As well, your plane's registration is also public information, so you can take any plane's registration and lookup information about it.
All the super rich have done was hide their names behind proxies so as to not make their information public on these databases.
Of course, I suppose it's possible to manually tag who's on what plane despite hiding the registration.
it's actually a very messy situation - airports (certified aerodromes) are federal government objects, and state governments have tried, but failed to ocerrule them. Chicago tried, digging up the runways at Meigs Field, but was fined millions for contract violation (the FAA makes agreements for airport funding and improvements, provided the land stays as an airport for X years, usually 25+). The situation was so messy that the crash happened and the valuable real estate deals fell through. What was Meigs Field is now a dumpy "park" (really just a bunch of now-disintegrating buildings and overgrown weeds over pavement). All the jobs that were there flew (literally) to other jurisdictions.
Now, if you're not an airport, well, you could try setting up a private aerodrome - there are plenty of those (at least 10 times as many), but just because you can land your aircraft there doesn't mean it's necessarily legal - there's still noise ordinances and such to obey.
In the end, airports are usually established a ways from civilization and flight routes planned so existing residences don't get disturbed unnecessarily (noise abatement procedures - usually have you turning one way or the other when able and safe so you're disturbing the peace as little as possible).
And of course, even when you're out in the sticks, you can be the middle of it all in under a decade and having to deal with complaints from people who should've known better. Many an airport and railway have shut down because new neighbours moved in and complained.
The other reason is that it's the only stance Apple can take that genuinely Google cannot.
That's why Apple is committed to privacy and moving a lot of former cloud based services to on-device services. Because they can go and say they don't sell or transmit your information or need to violate your privacy, while Google can't (because Google needs the information for ad purposes). Sure, you can hack an Android phone to be more privacy aware, but out of the box is a lot better than having to do a million steps to secure it.
It's the one thing that Apple can say iOS is better than Android, and one that can stick until Google changes their business plan.
All solvers, be it human or mechanical only look at the cube once - it's the only way humans can solve it In under 5 seconds. The human visual system is too slow to provide feedback while solving.
Basically once you scan in the cube and figure out the squares, you solve it based on the known algorithms and moves to get it to the solved state, and you update your internal state of the cube at the same time. Looking at it incurs a processing delay that will just slow down your solving.
Well, then you need a few diodes to protect the FET - a high impedance input is perfect for getting destroyed by ESD, and it's why CMOS logic needs ESD protection.
So unless he adds ESD protection, he's probably going to be looking at replacing that circuit every couple of days or so.
Then you have to debounce the contact - even through the lag of the Linux kernel, you can still get multiple "touches" because of contact bounce. I don't know if the RPi's GPIOs have ESD protection as well, but that would be necessary as well.
Plus, the reliability of the whole thing needs to be tested and evaluated - will everyone be able to trigger it just once per touch (debounce, etc)? Or will some people have trouble activating it? And what if there's low-level EMI going on? Even after debouncing, there's a chance induced power line frequency may cause false touches, or if a user touches it, it cauess multiple triggers.
And the system has to be reliable - chances are his USB thing would work and survive, while your cheap solution may require repairs and fixing every few days as well as a lot of software tweaks.
If the USB adapter cost $20 or so, that extra effort isn't really worth it for a one-off project.
Actually, they're intentionally doing it.
Because they don't want another Apple to happen.
Remember way back, over 10 years ago when Steve Jobs started eslling music online? And how iTunes grew to become THE source for music? And how Apple managed to bully the music industry? And how every attempt by the music industry to dethrone Apple failed?
Well, it took them a long time before they took the nuclear option - DRM free. To which they granted it to Amazon so Amazon could sell music for iPods, and actually compete.
And how because of this, the music industry regained control - neither Apple nor Amazon could dictate terms to them.
Well, the content industry observed, and realized that movies and TVs were in the same boat. They could give their content to one big player and let the smaller players wither away, creating a monopsony (monopoly, the other way - many sellers, one customer). Or they could try to distribute as far and wide as possible, as well as ensuring that not everyone gets all the content so there will be no big player who can dictate the terms and conditions.
Though if you really want stupid - you should ask why a show created by a provider like Amazon is not available where Amazon is available - I mean, Amazon created the show, so they have distribution rights. Why do they keep it within the US only? Everything Netflix produces is available on every Netflix site...
Well, Apple did - they're basically abandoning iAds now.
Probably because Google feels it's no longer necessary - remember iAds was the ONLY reason why Google was allowed to buy AdMob - the DoJ felt that Apple's iAds was a sufficient competitor in the mobile advertising space that Google's purchase of AdMob would not harm competitiveness.
Of course, anyone who actually ran the numbers knew iAds was a joke. I don't think I even ever saw any real ads other than for apps using iAds (app developers could buy iAds for a low price). And it's hard for Apple to justify all the expense of maintaining iAds.
There had to be more at play - perhaps Google was kicking some money towards Apple to create iAds as a "competitor" to AdMob, and Apple just took the money and didn't really bother actually doing anything with it.
No, because some carriers get anal and demand things work in certain ways.
It's a lot better now, but in the past, things like the color of the send button must be a certain shade of green, for example. Then there are the test commands that carriers want, and how many bars correspond to certain signals (remember when AT&T demanded that Apple show "4G" on the iPhone 4S when doing HSPA?).
Then there are other things like phones must not show things like call timers or data counts or must adjust them somehow so it more reflects how the carrier counts, etc.
This.
Telling me "password" is a bad password isn't news. It's obvious. And you know what? For accounts I don't care about, it's a perfectly good password.
You want me to create an account to leave a comment on your stupid little blog? I don't see what's wrong with password.
Hell, a lot of forums are like that too - want to get this download? Register for an account! So yes, I'm going to use password, because chances are, I won't ever visit it again.
Now, my Amazon, Paypal, banking and other passwords? You can bet they aren't on that list!
And guess what? There's a ton of sites that need registration, so no wonder they stay on the top - for these worthless accounts, people will use worthless passwords. If your password database has a lot of these passwords, perhaps you might want to rethink your account strategy. Maybe your visitors don't see your accounts system as valuable as you do.
Well, it'll come in the same way any malware does - through an infection vector. For Linux, it probably comes in through commercial software piracy (yes, Linux has commercial software) via warez or cracks or keygens, or even stuff like WordPress themes that people actually pay money for.
So for Linux, as long as you stick with your distro's repos (that aren't compromised - but given these days packages are signed it'll be hard) or source code, you're fine. But start downloading commercial software for free and stuff, well...
Ah, but 10 years ago or so, we were really happy to get 1080p resolution working. Then we added to it - quad HD (2560x1440 - 4x 720p), and now ultra-HD/4K (3840x2160).
So a lot of performance improvements have gone to quadrupling the number of pixels we render out, including the increase in texture resolution and details.
So we're likely back to where we started.
Guess what? It's going to be taken from you no matter what.
People seem to think "social safety net? That's for irresponsible people". Guess what? There are irresponsible people, and they cost you and I money. Either we plan for this and accommodate the fact that there will be irresponsible people and make it so everyone gets to benefit, for we pay for it via increased costs in everything.
Let's take a few examples. Say you save for retirement. You don't want to give money for stuff that others need like social security because you're responsible, so you want to keep that money for yourself and invest it giving yourself a nice retirement account. Well, what about those who didn't, couldn't, or wouldn't? The end up on the street, and do petty crimes and all that. If they shoplift, well, the stores have to pay for the missing goods, increased security, etc., by raising prices. We all suffer because we, the responsible ones, pay for that increased cost. If they get caught and are sent through the justice system, WE again pay for the policing, the courts and the jails. In other words, we pay.
Healthcare - again, people seem to think they can buy insurance, or just save it themselves. Well, there's a group who qualified for neither, or again, could not, would not, save for health. They get sick, they go to the ER, and everyone else pays for the medical treatment. Even worse, emergency room medical treatment is among the most EXPENSIVE treatment there is - so not only are we paying for other's irresponsibility, we're paying for the most expensive care available.
I can go on and on and on. But it basically shows that you DO have to plan for others to be irresponsible because it's human nature, and if you don't, you end up paying for it. It's why countries have social security nets, national healthcare, etc - because really, you're going to pay anyhow, so why not pay to make it efficient and available to everyone rather than those who end up gaming the system and costing us all.
And it's why ideas like basic income are being reinvigorated, because we're all going to pay somehow or other.
Anyone who claims otherwise is just looking to reduce their tax bill in favor of making you pay more.
Well, if you're going to be specific like that, perhaps not. But among professional drivers (notably, truck drivers) there is an increase in female drivers. And the work is hard.
And Google doesn't need to increase female welders - welders aren't a part of Google's business. Though, there is a push for more women in trades, including welding.
And other male-dominated fields, like aviation, are making strides attracting females, including into mechanics and pilots, both of whom are in the low single digit percentages. There are a few well known groups dedicated to getting more women into aviation, and they're starting young these days by attracting them as kids.
Of course, one of the biggest issues is stereotypes remain - teachers are female, as are nurses, while doctors and mechanics are male. It's hard to beat since it's been culturally ingrained since birth and reinforced through tv shows, books, etc.
Depends on the factory and your supply chain.
Choose a good factory (and there are plenty of companies stateside that WILL help you with this, and their reputations are on the line so they only vet the honest companies) and all will go well. It's the same as shopping in the US - if the company has been around long, they probably have established a reputation they wish to protect. Chinese companies are similar.
It's just in China, there's more people willing to skimp to make a buck, and these are literally fly by night operations - once your job is done, they will disappear into the ether, never to be heard from again. (You could say that China is the ultimate embodiment of the free market sans all the pesky "liberal" and "left wing" stuff that makes doing business annoying in the US).
There are very honest Chinese companies, who pride themselves on producing top quality products. These factories even have onsite labs to test incoming raw materials and will reject failed suppliers. It just requires doing a lot of research and using as many tools as you have to find them - including local domestic companies whose jobs are to help you outsource to China and to realize that if you don't try to penny pinch, you CAN get high quality product. And they're hyper-vigilant because they know their reputation is on the line - they will not cut corners because it would dry up their entire business overnight.
Of course, though, considering it's trivially easy to set up shop in China (no pesky left wing crap to deal with - money money money and profits all the way!) well you have to make sure your shop doesn't make your product and then disappear into the ether.