- The SC ruled infrared scanners that passively looked through walls required a warrant, as the founding fathers, and Americans' expectations, were such that an area was secure from warrantless examination.
Actually, the primary consideration is less "privacy" and more "the public can't get access to the equipment". As in you're free to use binoculars and telescopes to look in through the windows because they're something the public can get their hands on and anything seen through it is fair game.
You're not allowed to use a FLIR to see into a building because they were not equipment the public could get access to easily. Though that may change in a few years when consumer level thermal imagers become more easily obtainable.
Likewise using NVGs is restricted to what consumer level gear is available.
Apple made the business decision to have the instant credit provided by a 3rd party. There was a lot of money to be made in this channel and Apple is sitting on billions in cash so why did Apple not provide the credit directly? Because they knew this would be abused and they couldn't put a solid number on the potential downside. There are probably some interesting emails to be subpoenaed by an enterprising attorney on this subject. I would guess the Apple CFO would have been for offering the credit directly and the CMO against it.
Probably because banking regulations get hairy, quickly. Offering credit isn't an easy thing (especially if you want to legally be able to collect the money owed) and there will be plenty of edge cases that Apple needs to handle. Plus, with legislation varying between states, that's a nasty furball.
Sure, Apple could do it, but they have no experience in the area, no way of being able to tell good risk from bad risk, having to deal with pulling credit reports, late payments/bankruptcy/nonpayment, and even tricky ones like overpayment and refunds.
Here is my idea (Apple would call it an invention and patent it). All banks, instead of bothering with nonsense like my mother's maiden name, should ask a series of questions like "Are you an Apple fanboy?" They could protect themselves and me from a lot of grief and fraud by recognizing that there are a lot of customers who would be glad to share the fact that they will never buy an Apple product and don't want their card to be used for such purchases. I would gladly list other biases that I have that I never want my credit card involved in financial transactions for. Compiling that information from those who voluntarily contribute it could go a long way to stopping and catching this kind of fraud.
You can do that - call up your credit card provider and they can enter it into their fraud profile on you so if your card gets charged at that company, it triggers a fraud alert.
The problem isn't that though. The trick is different. You see, in the US, Apple offers instant financing through BarclayCard - basically an instant sign up credit card. And that's what happened here - the receptionist at the dental office took the stolen credentials, and then gave it to their Apple store buddies who used it to apply for BarclayCard credit cards. They then used those cards to buy gift cards. Those gift cards were then used to buy Apple products which were the sold for cash (classic money laundering).
So telling your bank wouldn't really have helped because they applied for new credit - this wasn't a case of the receptionist capturing the credit card information you used to pay for the dentist, but using the information in your file to apply for new credit (standard identify theft).
No doubt because Apple's own employees were involved that Apple would be forced to eat some of that (and that it was Apple's own initiative to allow for instant financing). Of course, perhaps Apple should send the victims some free gifts as compensation for potential time lost having to deal with whoever manages BarclayCard and the unexpected bills.
this is a HUGE pet peeve of mine! if we deployed self-driving cars tomorrow we'd see a huge drop in overall accident rates...
The above is merely your opinion, and is NOT to be confused with a fact, most especially because there is no data to support your absurd claims.
Fortunately, people who are far more intelligent than you are will be the people who make the decision regarding whether autonomous cars are used for more than testing.
I don't think it's that much speculation.
First off - during your commute, how many people do you see doing something other than driving? I mean, paying attention and driving as if it was the only thing that mattered.
Then look at what everyone else who isn't treating driving as the serious activity it is - what are they doing? Texting, chatting, reading, watching TV/movies, etc. These people seriously do not want to drive - they don't care enough about driving to actually give it their full attention. (In fact, distracted driving is the #1 cause of accidents now, not drunk driving).
You tell me if putting those people who don't really care about driving in cars that do driving for them whether the roads will be safer. You can ignore the distracted driving as the cause of accidents if it helps you make your case.
And it ignores the fact that even in the edge case, damage can be reduced because an autonomous vehicle can react in a fraction of a second - most human drivers take several times between the event, seeing the event, recognizing and processing and deciding on a course of action, and executing the action.
If someone cuts right in front of you, an autonomous vehicle can be at max braking in under a second, while a human would take a couple of seconds if they were fast, to 10 seconds or more if they were taking a selfie. (And yes, I've seen drivers take selfies while driving.).
Even gear isn't a guarantee... I've seen people take shit pictures with an SLR, and I've seen people take quite good shots with a point and shoot.
Generally speaking, this has always been true. A good photographer can take excellent photos with a cellphone or a disposable. While a good camera cannot turn a snapshot into a photo.
The same rules of composition, lighting, framing, etc., apply whether or not you use a dSLR, a point and shoot, or a cellphone camera. While limitations in each may make taking some kinds of photos hard (e.g., low depth of field shots in anything but a dSLR with beautiful bokeh), it just means one has to creatively come up with another way to turn that shot into a good one.
They always say things like that, but we just keep using bigger and bigger batteries (partly because of bigger screens) and yet battery life seems to only get worse year after year.
Well, ARM's power consumption has been pretty stable the entire time - about 1mW/MHz.
The reason it's consuming tons of power and you need thermal throttling is because you're starting to pack a lot of MHz on a die.
I mean, say 2.5GHz quad core. That's 2.5W/core at full tilt. With 4 of them, that's 10W! There's no way to get that sort of heat out of the package quickly enough so you need to throttle it down, and well, that much power draw does drain the battery a fair bit.
Want less shitty battery life? Find out why you need 4 2.5GHz cores instead of trying to live with say, 2 1GHz cores. Because the former consumes 10W, while the latter, 2.
I think the big uproar is all the other phone manufacturers had lots and lots of patents between them and offered up their 'share' of patents + peanuts for the use of the others. Apple comes along, wants to just pay peanuts, but was unwilling to share any of their stuff and then complained.
Those "shared" patents are FRAND as well. As in those companies decided to trade patent licenses because everyone needed to license them anyhow.
Apple had NO patents in the pool. There is nothing anyone has to license from Apple to make a phone. So Apple didn't have to share anything because there was nothing in their portfolio that was required per the standards.
It's why Motorola, Nokia, etc., were royally pissed at the Nano-SIM standard that Apple proposed. It doesn't matter it was royalty free and all that, It meant that Apple was part of the game. Apple didn't care much about the patent, but the big names did because if Apple was on the outside, they were in a far better bargaining position.
Technical standards committees are basically one part old boy's club (sharing favors and getting as many patents in it as possible), one part clique (can't let anyone new in), and all about the political power plays. And once in a while technical stuff gets hashed out.
What really irks me about Apple and the judgements it's won is that they can get billions of dollars for the fluff-stuff yet the holders of the patents which make the damn phones work in the first place are screwed.
Well, that's the business decision that every company makes.
Get your patent in the standard, and you'll be forced to give up some rights to it. In return, since EVERYONE has to license the patent, it's a guaranteed money maker. (Though, you're also just one patent amongst many, but it means you get royalties on a regular basis).
Exclude your patent from the standard, and you'll keep full patent rights. But the standards committees probably will work around your patent, so there's no guaranteed revenue source. You'll have to market and sell license to your patent yourself and convince others to use it (or just hold it back).
That's the choice - you can be forced to license your patent in return for lots of people licensing it, or be a big fish in a small pond while you try to get your patent licensed, or use it to ensure people don't try to replicate your ideas.
Attempting to use FRAND patents in the normal way really breaks the spirit of FRAND and is more of a case of trying to have your cake and eat it too. You're forced to license it, so all means should be tried to achieve licensing first.
The "Department of Justice" sounds nice, but it's this a fight that any one vendor could still take straight to court (since DoJ is just a wing of the administrative branch)?
Basically, what the DoJ has done is said that the IEEE can as part of its membership rules and participating in various standards committees, ban any member who agreed to have their patents licensed FRAND from pursuing an injunction without going through other avenues of remedy first.
Basically the rules are if your patent is required for a standard, then as part of the windfall you get for this, the patent becomes FRAND licensed. And as a holder, you cannot ask for an injunction on an FRAND license without exhausting other avenues of redress first. Do this and the IEEE can kick you off the technical standards committee and the next standard will not incorporate your patents.
Remember in technical standards committees the goal is to get your patents in as much as possible, even doing backroom deals (I'll scratch your back if you scratch mine) as getting your patent in means everyone has to license from you. it's just in this case, FRAND patents are no longer like regular patents - because they're standards essential, you must try other forms of redress - injunctions are only allowed if the whole process falis.
This was brought on because of Motorola and Samsung who were trying to assert FRAND patents against Microsoft and Apple respectively and to which it was decreed that it's a big violation of the FRAND spirit.
i would characterize the defense lawyers as having sold the accused on a harebrained defense strategy
when the evidence was overwhelming and unambiguous, and we quickly found him guilty
i wouldn't be surprised that the novelty of ulbricht's case excited some defense lawyers at some angles they wanted to explore, and ulbricht put faith in their excitement, to naught
(btw, from reading TFA, ulbricht still has additional murder-for-hire charges facing him at another trial)
Well, I wouldn't call it harebrained - perhaps that was the only possibility left of getting a not-guilty verdict.
Some people and prosecutors can realize the case they're handling is basically a "gimme" or a sure-win. The evidence is so overwhelming for the prosecution that the guy really IS guilty. So what's a defense attorney to do? He's got to give his client a defense, but he knows deep down it's a lost cause.
So the only way is to see if anyone made a critical error and get off on a technicality. But until that is seen, you need to come up with something so you can see the prosecution's hand.
Sometimes people really are guilty. No amount of lawyering can get around that, other than trying to force a technicality that could get him off. But even if it's completely hopeless, an attorney must give his client the best possible defense no matter how slim the chance of actually winning is.
So if you're on the jury and the defense is presenting something completely oddball, chances are that's the only cards he has to play.
I think if someone were to create a simulation model of a truly free market with no regulation, and seed it with hundreds (thousands) of little businesses to start with, given enough time, you'll end up single monopoly that controls every industry, service, and product.
Generally speaking, that is correct - the end game for a completely free market is monopoly.
Though, in the retail sector, I'm fairly certain there's plenty of competition in office supplies. Sure for walk-in business there's Staples and Office Depot, but few people do walk-in to get office supplies (mostly just home businesses). Everyone else orders from a catalog or online, and it doesn't matter if the truck says Staples, Amazon, Costco, Home Depot, Ikea or others. If you need 20 desks, you order 20 desks and a truck comes by with 20 desks. Rarely do people go to a supply store and order 20 desks that way.
Most walk-in traffic for Staples is usually for their print center or to grab emergency supplies - the office is out of paper and you need a ream of 8.5x11 stat. (But even then, those kinds of sundry supplies are carried by lots of stores).
In the B2B world, Staples is not your only choice for office supplies. Maybe if you walk into the store, but most businesses phone or online order their supplies. It's quicker, easier and often cheaper because someone doesn't have to run out to the store at full salary.
I don't have a lot of time in the air, but from the little time that I've flown at night and my general understanding the cockpit of a small aircraft is typically kept very dark, since most of the time you're relying on visual navigation and sighting of stuff that isn't well-lit. A bright flash of light would probably make it hard to even see your instruments until you fumbled for the brightness dial (which would be even harder to find in the dark).
My CFI tried to discourage chit-chat of any kind during critical flight phases.
Now, my understanding is that airliners tend to operate with more light in the cockpit in general and they tend to land at fields with very bright runway lighting and of course they're always in instrument flight rules and most of the time during critical flight phases they're in controlled airspace besides. So, night-blindness would be less of an issue in an airliner, but of course any airline is going to forbid messing around with cameras while in critical phases of flight.
Night vision is very important for pilots - because when you're away from the bright lights of a city (say, by flying above it), it gets very dark very fast. And what was one easy landmarks to see become quite difficult - that highway you routinely flew along becomes a thin black line amongst the blackness of the ground surrounding it. If you're lucky, you chose a busy highway so you can see the line of cars.
Cities on charts have outlines that show their approximate light profile because all you can really see is blobs of light.
Oh yeah, navigation lights and beacons of other aircraft in the area aren't that bright, but bright enough to be seen for miles in the blackness of night. Even at 1500 feet over a city the light dropoff is so startling you can see the stars again. (If you've lived in a city all your life, it's quite a change. I was in a dark suburb growing up so I saw stars, but I haven't seen them ever since until I did night flying).
And night vision is so easily destroyed and not easily gained back - it takes 20 minutes to recover. Worst thing is to have to return to the FBO after doing the preflight because the preflight gets your night vision going, but once you enter the FBO, the lights kill it. Also why one must never leave their strobes on upon leaving the runway because that'll kill night vision for everyone on the ramp.
As for brightness dials? They're easy to find since they're knobs located in areas where there usually aren't as many knobs. The problem is not the instruments, but seeing *outside*. Very few landings are made CAT III ILS (full to the ground guidance powerful enough to use the autopilot), so there's always a few hundred feet where you have to navigate visually and land visually.
As for chitchat during critical phases? Your instructor is right - there is what's known as the sterile cockpit rule - during crucial phases of flight, the cockpit goes sterile - no unnecessary chatter related to the task at hand or other distractions during phases like takeoff and landing. It applies not only to big iron, but little insect buzzers as well.
And no, commercial aviation isn't much different - the cockpits are still dark and while the airports are brighter, it's still dark and you have to see the runway in the dark (remember, few airports have a full CAT III ILS so the majority of landings are hand-flown)
It's why a laser flashing into a cockpit is so very dangerous - besides potential eye damage, the bright flash ruins night vision. (Since people generally don't use RED lasers, as the high powered ones are green/blue - red light doesn't destroy night vision much which is why you have red flashlights in the cockpit).
Of course, if you want to be an armchair captain, the correct course of action is aviate, and if you're blinded in a crucial phase like landing, you immediately execute a go-around where you want to put as much air between you and the ground as quickly as possible. Then navigate to try to avoid any obstacles in the path (like a mountain), then tell ATC so they can block off an area so you can circle around a bit to get your night vision back.
How on Earth can Apple tie your account activity to a credit card without ever having that credit card number to generate that token?
And, if at ANY point in this chain Apple has your credit card number... why would I trust they (or any other corporation) aren't retaining that.
I don't see how any of this one-time token stuff can be generated without first having your credit card information.
There's either a missing step there in which they certainly do have it... or there is voodoo magic by which they can attach your account information to you without knowing anything.
Well, they have your credit card number, for a few seconds during setup.
Here's what happens:
You get your phone, and you snap a photo of your credit card. Your phone recognizes the card and number, and forwards that information to Apple Corporate HQ. Apple then uses that information to determine which bank to talk to (because all banks have different ways to implement this step, and why Apple Pay only works with certain banks). Apple forwards that information to the bank. Apple also forwards some hardware information hash to the bank.
Your bank then calls you (or verifies you in some way) to ensure that you're actually registering your card (the bank looks up the information - Apple doesn't have that information after all). If it's approved, the bank sends Apple a token. The token is a virtual credit card where the last 4 digits are identical to the real credit card. That token is what is stored on your device, and the credit card information promptly forgotten as it's no longer necessary.
When you use Apple Pay, you select the card, and then use the fingerprint reader. When the iPhone talks to the payment system, it passes on the token and a hash representing your hardware ID. The payment system sees the token, and passes it onto the bank who verifies the hardware ID against their own database. If it matches, then they lookup the token against their database to find which account to charge.
The credit card is used during initial setup only - after that you're passing around tokens which are unique identifiers for your card, phone, account by the bank. The bank issues the token and generates the mapping of tokens to cardholder accounts.
If your number is stolen, then attempts to use it will fail because the hardware ID is invalid, and the bank sends you a NEW token to replace your old one.
If you lose your phone, you can wipe your phone's secure element which erases keys to access your card information.
Apple Pay is a fancy term for the EMV payment standard - there's no magic in it, and it's just implementing what the payment industry says is how they want to do it. It's why it "just works" in a lot of stores because the standard was done a while ago and implemented.
Well, we can use them for HUDs so you can display information while still keeping your eyes on the road.
Integrate them into glasses and you can do a Google Glass style overlays - great for workers who need to access technical documentation and other things while deep inside a complex piece of equipment. Or first responders who can get information when they need it without having to look at equipment (firefighters would love to have a moving map of their location when you're navigating through smoke, as well as thermal imagery to help locate victims, and to do both without looking at a handheld so they can keep situational awareness).
Add controllable transparency and you can use them in "smart windows" that can be used to show the outside or replace it with something else if the weather isn't good.
The difference is that SysAdmins hate SystemD and FreeBSD is primarily developed by SysAdmins. When FreeBSD has to solve the same problems that SystemD is hoping to solve, FreeBSD will do it in a way that SysAdmins will be more comfortable with.
SystemD is attempting to solve problems without understanding how they should best be solved. Get a decade or two of managing tens of thousands of servers, then come back and attempt to solve the problems, You'll probably do it a bit differently.
More like different focuses.
FreeBSD is nice, but it's very server-oriented. Sure you can use it on a desktop through ports, but everything's still basically assuming you're on a server.
SystemD is like PulseAudio, CUPS, and NetworkManager - they're tools to handle the complex desktop use cases that don't exist with servers.
Of course, one thing FreeBSD does have is a general guidance and an avoidance of the latest shiny or political plays, which means a lot of Linux cruftiness is avoided, so stability in that form means things don't change too much.
But, desktop users have a lot of requirements that just cannot be band-aided over like they do in Linux where you have spitwads, gum and duct tape holding together a lot of the system. Sure it works, but it's an extremely fragile system that's just begging for breakage.
Here's some use cases that are extremely common in a desktop, but not at all on a server, and how various packages handle them.
Audio - modern desktops have multiple audio paths - from HDMI to plain old speaker/headphone/line outs. And new ones appear and disappear constantly (say, Bluetooth). And audio needs to be mixed because the user might be watching a YouTube video when the system needs to alert them via a system sound. Or say, the user is listening to music, and then a VoIP call comes in which means muting the audio from the music player and activating the communications audio path (which can be completely different audio paths - the music may play through a speaker path, while the VoIP takes place over a headset using either a separate set of ADCs and DACs, Bluetooth, or whatever). Or perhaps the user is listening to music over their A/V system using HDMI audio. Then they turn off their A/V system losing the audio connection - audio now needs to be transported to a secondary source transparently to the application (can't have apps crashing because the audio device disappeared). Or how about a user opening an audio device for exclusive use (low latency, bit-perfect, whatever), and the system needs to play a sound (VoIP, alert, whatever). If there's no other audio path, it's a too-bad situation. But if there's another set of speakers or audio, why not route that audio that way so the user can get the alert through a secondary audio path?
Networks are just as tricky - you want to connect to many different networks with differing roles - perhaps if you're at home, you bring down the firewall, while if you're on the go, the firewall goes up and maybe the VPN does too. Suddenly media connections are very important too because once you disconnect, you don't know if the next attachment will be to a trusted or untrusted network. And the firewall may need to manage different rules - like perhaps the HTTP server is allowed on all networks - public, private, VPN, whatever, while say Samba should only be accessible on private networks only. Repeat for other applications as necessary.
SystemD is similar - a lot of services these days aren't launched on the system's behalf, but on the user. Right now there are dozens of different ways to have services launch when you log in - every environment provides a different way of doing it and there's no standard, so perhaps if you need a service to launch on Ubuntu when you log in, it won't work on Fedora. That's a huge mess - why not have something that's good at managing processes do it? Sure you have system services that start up on system boot, but there are a lot
I mean, I have a super brilliant idea. The bank creates a website, and you can enter some previously-agreed to credentials, perhaps obtained while you were at the branch setting up your account. For simplicity, I'll call it an "customer ID" and a "password" for lack of a better term.
The customer uses the web site, and logs into the bank and all dealings with the bank are through that website. Perhaps the bank can add features that shows them all their accounts with the bank in a nice list, complete with transaction history. Maybe even go so far as to *gasp*, let them make their own transactions like sending money to other people (perhaps we can all it "paying bills"?), or moving money between accounts. And heck, if there are loans, perhaps moving money can also involve putting money in those loans (call it "paying off the loan"?).
And heck, why not have the bank offer me services like let me apply for a new credit card? Or mortgage? The forms could be simple HTML forms you submit and they can be approved in the same ways that you go into the bank, fill in the paper versions of the form and all that.
I mean, it'll be like dealing with the branch, except online. Like an online ATM. Perhaps I'll patent this "Online ATM" idea. Or "Online Bank Branch".
And you know, if the bank needs my attention, they either call me to come on in, or to use their Online Bank Branch to deal with the matters. Maybe they can even send me an email saying they need my attention and to please visit the Online Bank Branch. Even better, said Online Bank Branch can dangle huge notices saying I need to do things - something the real branches can't do.
And there is no feedback mechanism for Taxi companies right now. NONE. This (Uber/Lyft) is a vast improvement to the current system allowing for immediate feedback on QOS. If a customer or driver is an asshole, they won't be around much, making it better for both.
Actually there is. There's a reason why the taxi number and driver name are posted on the back seat. If you have a problem, you take it up with your local transit board about it (or livery commission) and file a complaint. Or even with the taxi company itself (whose name is prominently displayed).
Granted, you actually have to file a complaint, but they do generally listen
Sure it's not as simple as a star rating, but they do want to weed out the janky ones who just are never satisfied or those who file complaints because there was a tear on the underside of the seat.
I wonder if we'll get to the point where a driver won't leave a rating until the customer does and vice-versa, to prevent revenge ratings which were a problem on eBay.
A random stranger sends you an executable file and tells you it's their picture. Go ahead, click on it.
Yeah, seems legit. Come on.
Anyone who falls for such transparent hacking attempts deserves what they get.
Lots of people do. it's called Dancing Pigs (or rabbits) and is probably the biggest security hole in computing today.
We like to complain about Apple's walled garden and such, but such a security model isn't governed from Jobs' ass - it came from deep understanding that humans are vulnerable, and most malware attacks take advantage of that vector. From sending seniors "hey, I'm your nephew, send me $100" scams to "I'm trapped in London, wire me $2000 for a plane ticket" sent to friends.
It doesn't take much to go beyond that - just get the person's trust and you can accomplish a lot. It's a lot more like spear phishing than anything - the user trusts the source and the guard goes down. Hell, I'm sure if you did a survey, most parents would click on an attachment if it appeared to be sent from their children, especially if said child works in IT. Perhaps even your parents will think "well, if he sent it, it must be something I need to do".
That said, let me remind you that 99.999% of YouTube viewers don't, and more importantly could care less
This is actually quite important, because YouTube itself can play the audio wrong. Depending on how it plays, you can get sample rate issues - i.e., the audio is 44.1kHz, but YouTube plays it back at 48khz. Not that much of a difference, other than music gets pitched up.
For most people, you won't actually notice, but if you have a better ear (musician, for example) you can hear that the pitch of the note is actually wrong.
Anyhow, a good reason music piracy is down is well, legitimate sources of music are up. I mean, sure you could pirate, but if iTunes sells it for 99 cents, that's just easier. Or you can just use Spotify or Pandora or Beats or whatever other streaming radio thing there is.
It's hard to compete with free, but you can make it convenient, and that matters. And while piracy in other countries is higher, the US represents a disproportionally large part of the pirates so if they're getting their fix, well, they're not pirating.
People are shocked, shocked! to discover that the email service that makes money by showing them targeted ads based on their messages examines the content of the messages for this purpose.
I mean, come on: nobody was forced to sign up for gmail.
What about people who have to talk to people using Gmail?
Given its popularity, you can avoid using Google products and still have Google have a significant (50-75%) chunk of your email correspondence.
You can find chinese SoC boards with much more performance and RAM for as little as $5-10 more. Yeah yeah, everyone gets it, the Pi is not meant to be a work horse and no one ever claimed otherwise, but what good is it if it's a total pain in the arse to use because of way too little power and memory to offer up a decent user experience? There's just no rationalizing away the fact that they have been grossly underpowered regardless of context. This new model steps up a little bit but it's still a few paces behind where it could be for the same $35.
So no one said you had to buy a rPi. Go buy the Chinese board instead.
What you'll find is probably no shocker. First, you can order the board today, but tomorrow no, the board is completely different and won't work with your software today.
Second, your board is obsolete and no matter how you beg, they will not make more, so you have to move your project to a new board and start over.
Third, documentation? If you're lucky, it's in Chinese. Forget about a community - these guys just produce hardware, get something running and ship it. If it happens to work, good on you.
One of the biggest advantages the Pi has over everyone else is the community. It's big, it's documented and everyone got their stuff working so you can Google or ask for help.
Just think that in the time the Pi has been around and outclassed, there are probably dozens of "rPi killers" boards that were produced with faster processors, better hardware,, and not a lot more dollars ($5-15). Problem is, they fizzled not because they weren't good, but they were one-shot products. The Pi sold millions, these manufacturers maybe do a run of 10,000 then move on to something new, never again to bother with the design because they needed to use up some spare parts.
It doesn't have to be trigger by motion; that is just a likely scenario when the menu board is updated. It could also upload a new photo every so many minutes/hours... the trick would be to pick an interval that is frequent enough to be up-to-date but not so frequent that they much through their allocated bandwidth for the month from the frequent uploads.
Motion is also likely if someone or something gets in the way between the menu board and the camera. Depending on the location of the menu board it may be common or not.
But even overhead menuboards have the chance someone will have some fun and deliberately trigger it by waving in front of it so the menu is obscured.
One restaurant I know uses facebook and twitter to do their menu updates - when they update the menuboards, they then tweet and post the change as well so their followers can get notified automatically.
Might be a simpler solution and makes the social networking account more "active" and up to date.
You can actually pirate FOSS. Just not in the usual way. Remember, piracy is really copyright infringement, and to infringe copyright means to reject the FOSS license (which puts the code under default All Rights Reserved copyright), then violate that.
In other words, if it's GPL, simply distribute binaries without source code. Or make a change to it, rebuild and then ship the binaries to that. You're technically going against the license, and the license grants you rights above and beyond default copyright, so you are pirating.
Ironically, the chip WAS designed as a set top multimedia box (as was the original BCM2635 - which was used in the Roku 2).
The thing is, you offload the video decoding to the GPU (which is why it has a VideoCore IV, which is ridiculously overpowered compared to the CPU). The ARM processor's job is to feed the beast with data - handle networking, basic GUI, etc.
Now, what you're not doing with it is CPU intensive apps.
This is becoming a problem in lots of commercial software. iPhoto can submit pictures to Facebook in one click, but can I give it an SFTP address? It doesn't support WebDAV, but it supports DropBox!? Applications that come with digital cameras are like this. So are email programs. What the heck happened?
Thinking like a techie and not a common user. The common user doesn't have SFTP. They have DropBox. So an app that lets you save/publish your photos to flickr, Google Photo, Amazon and Dropbox is far more useful than having to type mystersious gobbledegook into a command prompt to set up a server, or horrors, pay for a service (note that most of those services offer a free level of account? How many SFTP sites do that?)
Even better, they just upload the pics and the sites figure out from metadata how to organize it and boom, it's on the web.
Remember, these people want simple - and those services offer it. In fact, if you think about it a bit, those services often have embedding capability.
So if you want to use a commercial solution, you'll have to settle for what COTS provides. If the thing supports DropBox, then link to DropBox already (I'm sure their pro plans support deep linking).
Else just take a simple cheap webcam and do it yourself. A webcam, a rPi and a bit of coding ought to get you what you need easily.
they still teach home economics in 7th grade in NY
Home Ec is probably the one anomalous course at school. It's goal is not academic, it's practical.
Home Ec is to teach people how to run a household - how to cook a basic meal at home, how to do basic house repairs, how to maintain a budget, taxes, debt, how to do laundry, ironing etc. etc. etc.
It's a course on how to live in society. Instead of teaching coding, I'd say home ec should tech the basics of computer use (including how to use basic office applications), how to stay safe online, and dangers of putting your information online.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, the primary consideration is less "privacy" and more "the public can't get access to the equipment". As in you're free to use binoculars and telescopes to look in through the windows because they're something the public can get their hands on and anything seen through it is fair game.
You're not allowed to use a FLIR to see into a building because they were not equipment the public could get access to easily. Though that may change in a few years when consumer level thermal imagers become more easily obtainable.
Likewise using NVGs is restricted to what consumer level gear is available.
Probably because banking regulations get hairy, quickly. Offering credit isn't an easy thing (especially if you want to legally be able to collect the money owed) and there will be plenty of edge cases that Apple needs to handle. Plus, with legislation varying between states, that's a nasty furball.
Sure, Apple could do it, but they have no experience in the area, no way of being able to tell good risk from bad risk, having to deal with pulling credit reports, late payments/bankruptcy/nonpayment, and even tricky ones like overpayment and refunds.
You can do that - call up your credit card provider and they can enter it into their fraud profile on you so if your card gets charged at that company, it triggers a fraud alert.
The problem isn't that though. The trick is different. You see, in the US, Apple offers instant financing through BarclayCard - basically an instant sign up credit card. And that's what happened here - the receptionist at the dental office took the stolen credentials, and then gave it to their Apple store buddies who used it to apply for BarclayCard credit cards. They then used those cards to buy gift cards. Those gift cards were then used to buy Apple products which were the sold for cash (classic money laundering).
So telling your bank wouldn't really have helped because they applied for new credit - this wasn't a case of the receptionist capturing the credit card information you used to pay for the dentist, but using the information in your file to apply for new credit (standard identify theft).
No doubt because Apple's own employees were involved that Apple would be forced to eat some of that (and that it was Apple's own initiative to allow for instant financing). Of course, perhaps Apple should send the victims some free gifts as compensation for potential time lost having to deal with whoever manages BarclayCard and the unexpected bills.
I don't think it's that much speculation.
First off - during your commute, how many people do you see doing something other than driving? I mean, paying attention and driving as if it was the only thing that mattered.
Then look at what everyone else who isn't treating driving as the serious activity it is - what are they doing? Texting, chatting, reading, watching TV/movies, etc. These people seriously do not want to drive - they don't care enough about driving to actually give it their full attention. (In fact, distracted driving is the #1 cause of accidents now, not drunk driving).
You tell me if putting those people who don't really care about driving in cars that do driving for them whether the roads will be safer. You can ignore the distracted driving as the cause of accidents if it helps you make your case.
And it ignores the fact that even in the edge case, damage can be reduced because an autonomous vehicle can react in a fraction of a second - most human drivers take several times between the event, seeing the event, recognizing and processing and deciding on a course of action, and executing the action.
If someone cuts right in front of you, an autonomous vehicle can be at max braking in under a second, while a human would take a couple of seconds if they were fast, to 10 seconds or more if they were taking a selfie. (And yes, I've seen drivers take selfies while driving.).
Generally speaking, this has always been true. A good photographer can take excellent photos with a cellphone or a disposable. While a good camera cannot turn a snapshot into a photo.
The same rules of composition, lighting, framing, etc., apply whether or not you use a dSLR, a point and shoot, or a cellphone camera. While limitations in each may make taking some kinds of photos hard (e.g., low depth of field shots in anything but a dSLR with beautiful bokeh), it just means one has to creatively come up with another way to turn that shot into a good one.
Well, ARM's power consumption has been pretty stable the entire time - about 1mW/MHz.
The reason it's consuming tons of power and you need thermal throttling is because you're starting to pack a lot of MHz on a die.
I mean, say 2.5GHz quad core. That's 2.5W/core at full tilt. With 4 of them, that's 10W! There's no way to get that sort of heat out of the package quickly enough so you need to throttle it down, and well, that much power draw does drain the battery a fair bit.
Want less shitty battery life? Find out why you need 4 2.5GHz cores instead of trying to live with say, 2 1GHz cores. Because the former consumes 10W, while the latter, 2.
Those "shared" patents are FRAND as well. As in those companies decided to trade patent licenses because everyone needed to license them anyhow.
Apple had NO patents in the pool. There is nothing anyone has to license from Apple to make a phone. So Apple didn't have to share anything because there was nothing in their portfolio that was required per the standards.
It's why Motorola, Nokia, etc., were royally pissed at the Nano-SIM standard that Apple proposed. It doesn't matter it was royalty free and all that, It meant that Apple was part of the game. Apple didn't care much about the patent, but the big names did because if Apple was on the outside, they were in a far better bargaining position.
Technical standards committees are basically one part old boy's club (sharing favors and getting as many patents in it as possible), one part clique (can't let anyone new in), and all about the political power plays. And once in a while technical stuff gets hashed out.
Well, that's the business decision that every company makes.
Get your patent in the standard, and you'll be forced to give up some rights to it. In return, since EVERYONE has to license the patent, it's a guaranteed money maker. (Though, you're also just one patent amongst many, but it means you get royalties on a regular basis).
Exclude your patent from the standard, and you'll keep full patent rights. But the standards committees probably will work around your patent, so there's no guaranteed revenue source. You'll have to market and sell license to your patent yourself and convince others to use it (or just hold it back).
That's the choice - you can be forced to license your patent in return for lots of people licensing it, or be a big fish in a small pond while you try to get your patent licensed, or use it to ensure people don't try to replicate your ideas.
Attempting to use FRAND patents in the normal way really breaks the spirit of FRAND and is more of a case of trying to have your cake and eat it too. You're forced to license it, so all means should be tried to achieve licensing first.
Basically, what the DoJ has done is said that the IEEE can as part of its membership rules and participating in various standards committees, ban any member who agreed to have their patents licensed FRAND from pursuing an injunction without going through other avenues of remedy first.
Basically the rules are if your patent is required for a standard, then as part of the windfall you get for this, the patent becomes FRAND licensed. And as a holder, you cannot ask for an injunction on an FRAND license without exhausting other avenues of redress first. Do this and the IEEE can kick you off the technical standards committee and the next standard will not incorporate your patents.
Remember in technical standards committees the goal is to get your patents in as much as possible, even doing backroom deals (I'll scratch your back if you scratch mine) as getting your patent in means everyone has to license from you. it's just in this case, FRAND patents are no longer like regular patents - because they're standards essential, you must try other forms of redress - injunctions are only allowed if the whole process falis.
This was brought on because of Motorola and Samsung who were trying to assert FRAND patents against Microsoft and Apple respectively and to which it was decreed that it's a big violation of the FRAND spirit.
Well, I wouldn't call it harebrained - perhaps that was the only possibility left of getting a not-guilty verdict.
Some people and prosecutors can realize the case they're handling is basically a "gimme" or a sure-win. The evidence is so overwhelming for the prosecution that the guy really IS guilty. So what's a defense attorney to do? He's got to give his client a defense, but he knows deep down it's a lost cause.
So the only way is to see if anyone made a critical error and get off on a technicality. But until that is seen, you need to come up with something so you can see the prosecution's hand.
Sometimes people really are guilty. No amount of lawyering can get around that, other than trying to force a technicality that could get him off. But even if it's completely hopeless, an attorney must give his client the best possible defense no matter how slim the chance of actually winning is.
So if you're on the jury and the defense is presenting something completely oddball, chances are that's the only cards he has to play.
Generally speaking, that is correct - the end game for a completely free market is monopoly.
Though, in the retail sector, I'm fairly certain there's plenty of competition in office supplies. Sure for walk-in business there's Staples and Office Depot, but few people do walk-in to get office supplies (mostly just home businesses). Everyone else orders from a catalog or online, and it doesn't matter if the truck says Staples, Amazon, Costco, Home Depot, Ikea or others. If you need 20 desks, you order 20 desks and a truck comes by with 20 desks. Rarely do people go to a supply store and order 20 desks that way.
Most walk-in traffic for Staples is usually for their print center or to grab emergency supplies - the office is out of paper and you need a ream of 8.5x11 stat. (But even then, those kinds of sundry supplies are carried by lots of stores).
In the B2B world, Staples is not your only choice for office supplies. Maybe if you walk into the store, but most businesses phone or online order their supplies. It's quicker, easier and often cheaper because someone doesn't have to run out to the store at full salary.
Night vision is very important for pilots - because when you're away from the bright lights of a city (say, by flying above it), it gets very dark very fast. And what was one easy landmarks to see become quite difficult - that highway you routinely flew along becomes a thin black line amongst the blackness of the ground surrounding it. If you're lucky, you chose a busy highway so you can see the line of cars.
Cities on charts have outlines that show their approximate light profile because all you can really see is blobs of light.
Oh yeah, navigation lights and beacons of other aircraft in the area aren't that bright, but bright enough to be seen for miles in the blackness of night. Even at 1500 feet over a city the light dropoff is so startling you can see the stars again. (If you've lived in a city all your life, it's quite a change. I was in a dark suburb growing up so I saw stars, but I haven't seen them ever since until I did night flying).
And night vision is so easily destroyed and not easily gained back - it takes 20 minutes to recover. Worst thing is to have to return to the FBO after doing the preflight because the preflight gets your night vision going, but once you enter the FBO, the lights kill it. Also why one must never leave their strobes on upon leaving the runway because that'll kill night vision for everyone on the ramp.
As for brightness dials? They're easy to find since they're knobs located in areas where there usually aren't as many knobs. The problem is not the instruments, but seeing *outside*. Very few landings are made CAT III ILS (full to the ground guidance powerful enough to use the autopilot), so there's always a few hundred feet where you have to navigate visually and land visually.
As for chitchat during critical phases? Your instructor is right - there is what's known as the sterile cockpit rule - during crucial phases of flight, the cockpit goes sterile - no unnecessary chatter related to the task at hand or other distractions during phases like takeoff and landing. It applies not only to big iron, but little insect buzzers as well.
And no, commercial aviation isn't much different - the cockpits are still dark and while the airports are brighter, it's still dark and you have to see the runway in the dark (remember, few airports have a full CAT III ILS so the majority of landings are hand-flown)
It's why a laser flashing into a cockpit is so very dangerous - besides potential eye damage, the bright flash ruins night vision. (Since people generally don't use RED lasers, as the high powered ones are green/blue - red light doesn't destroy night vision much which is why you have red flashlights in the cockpit).
Of course, if you want to be an armchair captain, the correct course of action is aviate, and if you're blinded in a crucial phase like landing, you immediately execute a go-around where you want to put as much air between you and the ground as quickly as possible. Then navigate to try to avoid any obstacles in the path (like a mountain), then tell ATC so they can block off an area so you can circle around a bit to get your night vision back.
Well, they have your credit card number, for a few seconds during setup.
Here's what happens:
You get your phone, and you snap a photo of your credit card. Your phone recognizes the card and number, and forwards that information to Apple Corporate HQ. Apple then uses that information to determine which bank to talk to (because all banks have different ways to implement this step, and why Apple Pay only works with certain banks). Apple forwards that information to the bank. Apple also forwards some hardware information hash to the bank.
Your bank then calls you (or verifies you in some way) to ensure that you're actually registering your card (the bank looks up the information - Apple doesn't have that information after all). If it's approved, the bank sends Apple a token. The token is a virtual credit card where the last 4 digits are identical to the real credit card. That token is what is stored on your device, and the credit card information promptly forgotten as it's no longer necessary.
When you use Apple Pay, you select the card, and then use the fingerprint reader. When the iPhone talks to the payment system, it passes on the token and a hash representing your hardware ID. The payment system sees the token, and passes it onto the bank who verifies the hardware ID against their own database. If it matches, then they lookup the token against their database to find which account to charge.
The credit card is used during initial setup only - after that you're passing around tokens which are unique identifiers for your card, phone, account by the bank. The bank issues the token and generates the mapping of tokens to cardholder accounts.
If your number is stolen, then attempts to use it will fail because the hardware ID is invalid, and the bank sends you a NEW token to replace your old one.
If you lose your phone, you can wipe your phone's secure element which erases keys to access your card information.
Apple Pay is a fancy term for the EMV payment standard - there's no magic in it, and it's just implementing what the payment industry says is how they want to do it. It's why it "just works" in a lot of stores because the standard was done a while ago and implemented.
http://www.macrumors.com/round...
A more detailed analysis is
http://www.tuaw.com/2014/10/02...
(Read it quick because AOL is killing TUAW)
Well, we can use them for HUDs so you can display information while still keeping your eyes on the road.
Integrate them into glasses and you can do a Google Glass style overlays - great for workers who need to access technical documentation and other things while deep inside a complex piece of equipment. Or first responders who can get information when they need it without having to look at equipment (firefighters would love to have a moving map of their location when you're navigating through smoke, as well as thermal imagery to help locate victims, and to do both without looking at a handheld so they can keep situational awareness).
Add controllable transparency and you can use them in "smart windows" that can be used to show the outside or replace it with something else if the weather isn't good.
More like different focuses.
FreeBSD is nice, but it's very server-oriented. Sure you can use it on a desktop through ports, but everything's still basically assuming you're on a server.
SystemD is like PulseAudio, CUPS, and NetworkManager - they're tools to handle the complex desktop use cases that don't exist with servers.
Of course, one thing FreeBSD does have is a general guidance and an avoidance of the latest shiny or political plays, which means a lot of Linux cruftiness is avoided, so stability in that form means things don't change too much.
But, desktop users have a lot of requirements that just cannot be band-aided over like they do in Linux where you have spitwads, gum and duct tape holding together a lot of the system. Sure it works, but it's an extremely fragile system that's just begging for breakage.
Here's some use cases that are extremely common in a desktop, but not at all on a server, and how various packages handle them.
Audio - modern desktops have multiple audio paths - from HDMI to plain old speaker/headphone/line outs. And new ones appear and disappear constantly (say, Bluetooth). And audio needs to be mixed because the user might be watching a YouTube video when the system needs to alert them via a system sound. Or say, the user is listening to music, and then a VoIP call comes in which means muting the audio from the music player and activating the communications audio path (which can be completely different audio paths - the music may play through a speaker path, while the VoIP takes place over a headset using either a separate set of ADCs and DACs, Bluetooth, or whatever). Or perhaps the user is listening to music over their A/V system using HDMI audio. Then they turn off their A/V system losing the audio connection - audio now needs to be transported to a secondary source transparently to the application (can't have apps crashing because the audio device disappeared). Or how about a user opening an audio device for exclusive use (low latency, bit-perfect, whatever), and the system needs to play a sound (VoIP, alert, whatever). If there's no other audio path, it's a too-bad situation. But if there's another set of speakers or audio, why not route that audio that way so the user can get the alert through a secondary audio path?
Networks are just as tricky - you want to connect to many different networks with differing roles - perhaps if you're at home, you bring down the firewall, while if you're on the go, the firewall goes up and maybe the VPN does too. Suddenly media connections are very important too because once you disconnect, you don't know if the next attachment will be to a trusted or untrusted network. And the firewall may need to manage different rules - like perhaps the HTTP server is allowed on all networks - public, private, VPN, whatever, while say Samba should only be accessible on private networks only. Repeat for other applications as necessary.
SystemD is similar - a lot of services these days aren't launched on the system's behalf, but on the user. Right now there are dozens of different ways to have services launch when you log in - every environment provides a different way of doing it and there's no standard, so perhaps if you need a service to launch on Ubuntu when you log in, it won't work on Fedora. That's a huge mess - why not have something that's good at managing processes do it? Sure you have system services that start up on system boot, but there are a lot
Better yet, why bother with email?
I mean, I have a super brilliant idea. The bank creates a website, and you can enter some previously-agreed to credentials, perhaps obtained while you were at the branch setting up your account. For simplicity, I'll call it an "customer ID" and a "password" for lack of a better term.
The customer uses the web site, and logs into the bank and all dealings with the bank are through that website. Perhaps the bank can add features that shows them all their accounts with the bank in a nice list, complete with transaction history. Maybe even go so far as to *gasp*, let them make their own transactions like sending money to other people (perhaps we can all it "paying bills"?), or moving money between accounts. And heck, if there are loans, perhaps moving money can also involve putting money in those loans (call it "paying off the loan"?).
And heck, why not have the bank offer me services like let me apply for a new credit card? Or mortgage? The forms could be simple HTML forms you submit and they can be approved in the same ways that you go into the bank, fill in the paper versions of the form and all that.
I mean, it'll be like dealing with the branch, except online. Like an online ATM. Perhaps I'll patent this "Online ATM" idea. Or "Online Bank Branch".
And you know, if the bank needs my attention, they either call me to come on in, or to use their Online Bank Branch to deal with the matters. Maybe they can even send me an email saying they need my attention and to please visit the Online Bank Branch. Even better, said Online Bank Branch can dangle huge notices saying I need to do things - something the real branches can't do.
Actually there is. There's a reason why the taxi number and driver name are posted on the back seat. If you have a problem, you take it up with your local transit board about it (or livery commission) and file a complaint. Or even with the taxi company itself (whose name is prominently displayed).
Granted, you actually have to file a complaint, but they do generally listen
Sure it's not as simple as a star rating, but they do want to weed out the janky ones who just are never satisfied or those who file complaints because there was a tear on the underside of the seat.
I wonder if we'll get to the point where a driver won't leave a rating until the customer does and vice-versa, to prevent revenge ratings which were a problem on eBay.
Lots of people do. it's called Dancing Pigs (or rabbits) and is probably the biggest security hole in computing today.
We like to complain about Apple's walled garden and such, but such a security model isn't governed from Jobs' ass - it came from deep understanding that humans are vulnerable, and most malware attacks take advantage of that vector. From sending seniors "hey, I'm your nephew, send me $100" scams to "I'm trapped in London, wire me $2000 for a plane ticket" sent to friends.
It doesn't take much to go beyond that - just get the person's trust and you can accomplish a lot. It's a lot more like spear phishing than anything - the user trusts the source and the guard goes down. Hell, I'm sure if you did a survey, most parents would click on an attachment if it appeared to be sent from their children, especially if said child works in IT. Perhaps even your parents will think "well, if he sent it, it must be something I need to do".
This is actually quite important, because YouTube itself can play the audio wrong. Depending on how it plays, you can get sample rate issues - i.e., the audio is 44.1kHz, but YouTube plays it back at 48khz. Not that much of a difference, other than music gets pitched up.
For most people, you won't actually notice, but if you have a better ear (musician, for example) you can hear that the pitch of the note is actually wrong.
Anyhow, a good reason music piracy is down is well, legitimate sources of music are up. I mean, sure you could pirate, but if iTunes sells it for 99 cents, that's just easier. Or you can just use Spotify or Pandora or Beats or whatever other streaming radio thing there is.
It's hard to compete with free, but you can make it convenient, and that matters. And while piracy in other countries is higher, the US represents a disproportionally large part of the pirates so if they're getting their fix, well, they're not pirating.
What about people who have to talk to people using Gmail?
Given its popularity, you can avoid using Google products and still have Google have a significant (50-75%) chunk of your email correspondence.
So no one said you had to buy a rPi. Go buy the Chinese board instead.
What you'll find is probably no shocker. First, you can order the board today, but tomorrow no, the board is completely different and won't work with your software today.
Second, your board is obsolete and no matter how you beg, they will not make more, so you have to move your project to a new board and start over.
Third, documentation? If you're lucky, it's in Chinese. Forget about a community - these guys just produce hardware, get something running and ship it. If it happens to work, good on you.
One of the biggest advantages the Pi has over everyone else is the community. It's big, it's documented and everyone got their stuff working so you can Google or ask for help.
Just think that in the time the Pi has been around and outclassed, there are probably dozens of "rPi killers" boards that were produced with faster processors, better hardware,, and not a lot more dollars ($5-15). Problem is, they fizzled not because they weren't good, but they were one-shot products. The Pi sold millions, these manufacturers maybe do a run of 10,000 then move on to something new, never again to bother with the design because they needed to use up some spare parts.
Motion is also likely if someone or something gets in the way between the menu board and the camera. Depending on the location of the menu board it may be common or not.
But even overhead menuboards have the chance someone will have some fun and deliberately trigger it by waving in front of it so the menu is obscured.
One restaurant I know uses facebook and twitter to do their menu updates - when they update the menuboards, they then tweet and post the change as well so their followers can get notified automatically.
Might be a simpler solution and makes the social networking account more "active" and up to date.
You can actually pirate FOSS. Just not in the usual way. Remember, piracy is really copyright infringement, and to infringe copyright means to reject the FOSS license (which puts the code under default All Rights Reserved copyright), then violate that.
In other words, if it's GPL, simply distribute binaries without source code. Or make a change to it, rebuild and then ship the binaries to that. You're technically going against the license, and the license grants you rights above and beyond default copyright, so you are pirating.
Ironically, the chip WAS designed as a set top multimedia box (as was the original BCM2635 - which was used in the Roku 2).
The thing is, you offload the video decoding to the GPU (which is why it has a VideoCore IV, which is ridiculously overpowered compared to the CPU). The ARM processor's job is to feed the beast with data - handle networking, basic GUI, etc.
Now, what you're not doing with it is CPU intensive apps.
Thinking like a techie and not a common user. The common user doesn't have SFTP. They have DropBox. So an app that lets you save/publish your photos to flickr, Google Photo, Amazon and Dropbox is far more useful than having to type mystersious gobbledegook into a command prompt to set up a server, or horrors, pay for a service (note that most of those services offer a free level of account? How many SFTP sites do that?)
Even better, they just upload the pics and the sites figure out from metadata how to organize it and boom, it's on the web.
Remember, these people want simple - and those services offer it. In fact, if you think about it a bit, those services often have embedding capability.
So if you want to use a commercial solution, you'll have to settle for what COTS provides. If the thing supports DropBox, then link to DropBox already (I'm sure their pro plans support deep linking).
Else just take a simple cheap webcam and do it yourself. A webcam, a rPi and a bit of coding ought to get you what you need easily.
Home Ec is probably the one anomalous course at school. It's goal is not academic, it's practical.
Home Ec is to teach people how to run a household - how to cook a basic meal at home, how to do basic house repairs, how to maintain a budget, taxes, debt, how to do laundry, ironing etc. etc. etc.
It's a course on how to live in society. Instead of teaching coding, I'd say home ec should tech the basics of computer use (including how to use basic office applications), how to stay safe online, and dangers of putting your information online.