Would IPv6 not solve that? OTOH, why would providers go from IPv4 to IPv6 when soon there will be a shortage of numbers and they can charge (even more) extra for those who want a fixed IP with the excuse that they had with dial up.
IPv6 will, ironically, make the situation worse.
Because SIP assumes complete connectivity between hosts, but if you have a firewall in the way, that model breaks. And IPv6 firewalls will probably be the norm, so you'll end up with situations like the days of early NAT gaming - everyone will get on, they'd click "start", and either nothing happens, or a few people connect and the rest get stuck at the "waiting for host" dialog.
At least with NAT, you can generally assume if you have a private IP (or your external IP doesn't match the internal IP) that yes, connectivity is broken and you can display a message prior to actually trying to work. With IPv6 everything can SEEM to work (IP is seen by world? Check. IP is not private IP space? Check), but when it comes time to making or receiving a call, strange things happen. Like it rings, but doesn't connect. Or you can make outgoing calls but not receive incoming ones. Or calls aborting midway through.
And hell, you can be ISPs would do stuff like this - perhaps the first IP they see gets full access, while all other IPs are firewalled "for your safety". Oh, you can pay for additional prefixes, they're happy to sell you that...
Worse yet, you may not even know whose firewall is causing problems.
If enough people understood properly how to command their computer, productivity would would increase by orders of magnitude and our lives would change again. Most of the produced code would be very utilitarian, poorly structured, utterly mundane but incredibly useful.
So why do we treat "using a computer" specially?
Shouldn't we also teach them about say, cars? And we should add in the legal system. Perhaps IP law, since the majority of/.'s seem to be so intelligent about IT things but completely illiterate about basic IP law like the differences between trademarks, copyright and patents (both kinds).
Heck, I'm sure we should add shop skills (plumbing, basic carpentry, basic electrical, safety, power tools, cooking, finance) to the list. Truth is, there are plenty of skills we need that aren't taught - computers being just one of many. Hell, given it's the US, add guns to the list - doesn't matter if you're pro or anti gun control, providing a basic education in gun safety and handling will probably be extremely handy given the amount of rather idiotic gun accidents out there.
There comes a point where it's not really useful to give everyone the specialization because everyone then claims why their specialization wasn't part of the core education program in the end.
I mean, your mechanic doesn't need to know about how to compile a kernel - unless you really WANT to pay your mechanic $200/hr to muck around with his diagnostics machine when he's supposed to be fixing your car. (Today, said mechanic will say his computer is down, and hand it over to IT who will fix it, on the shop's dime, not yours).
Together, the others release dozens, and different companies share different responsibilities. Nice for consumer choice, but not so nice for support, since nobody wants to maintain a software stack nor wrestle with the politics involved in updating so many different devices.
You're off by an order of magnitude.
Samsung, in 2014, released about 3 smartphones per week. Yes, they have over 150 smartphones released in 2014. Tablet wise, I think it was over 1 tablet a week (it was over 50 around October).
It seems a lot of Android manufacturers see Android more as a "fire and forget" style of releases - just get a version of Android, stick it on, sell it, move on.
I mean, supporting 200 brand new Android devices (ignoring 2013 releases and prior)...
Hint, streaming is meant to be streaming. There is no point in downloading data much faster than what your viewing application can use up, per time period. Especially as it's unclear if the user will be watching that stream in 30s anymore. No point maxing out the connection, especially as it might steal needed bandwidth from another connection.
Yeah, but if you have say, just 3 people streaming Netflix, that's easily 15Mbps right there. And perhaps someone wants to surf the web or something - at which point you really do want something like 20-25Mbps just to make sure the streaming doesn't stutter. (Yeah yeah, move to IPv6 with QoS blah blah blah - true, but you can bet ISPs will charge for that service. QoS was put in IPv6 so it could be a chargeable service in the end - want higher priority? Pay up).
And if not 3 Netflix streams, well, there's also online gaming where you want to have a few Mbps free to avoid congestion
I would not be surprised if a frequency component were also necessary, but clearly there will be some V/A threshold you have to cross before you do damage.
Basically what you need to do is breach the dielectric that separates your blood from the outside world - your blood is a rather excellent conductor of electricity thanks to all the ions dissolved in it. however, the insulator, your skin, has a conductance that varies depending on its condition - if it's wet, it conducts a lot better than if it's dry (by several orders of magnitude - easily dropping from the low megaohms to kiloohms). Once the current gets past your skin, it's really a straight shot to your heart which requires very little voltage.
It's why you usually don't get shocked by a 9V battery as the current doesn't get through the skin, but wet skin and you feel the tingle as it stimulates the nerves.
What I've found is that the cheap mouses the click wheel works ok. The MS and Logitech ones, of course.
Got me the middle button gets used most for opening a link in a new tab, and also has it's uses in CAD apps.
I don't know about you, but 3 button mice I find limiting - I invariably get mice with extra buttons to get me the extra functions you need. Instead of zoom mapped to the wheel (which is annoying as hell), I map it to two buttons so I click it when I need it, and map the wheel elsewhere.
And hell, I can map Paste to a button that's less vulnerable to hitting than the middle click when scrolling fast.
If the Winkletwins want to hype it up long enough so that I can dispose of the last of my BTC stash while 1BTC is still over US$200, I'm game.
Having bitcoins kept in a US bank seems to defeat the purpose of bitcoin, but it it helps me with my previous point, then by golly, full speed ahead.
And that's the entire point.
The WInklevoss bought BTC when it was probably $500 or higher - and supposedly they own around 10% of all BTC.
And now that the price crashed from $1300 each to $250 or so, well, damn, they lost a lot of money.
The whole point of the regulated exchange is supposedly to keep the price up and give it more legitimacy - I'm sure they saw that BTC was used for Silk Road and other illicit transactions and when Silk Road got busted, well, the fact its value was propped up by illegal activities hurt them. So they want to transform it into a legitimate business whose value is driven by "legitimate" economic activity over say, criminal activity.
I myself am wondering why whatsapp/facebook hasn't simply sued them for trademark infringement. I mean they're clearly using the whatsapp name in a way that confuses the end user as to who owns the app.
Probably because WhatsApp Plus is distributed outside normal channels (otherwise it would be quickly removed from say, the App Store or Google Play) and is one of those where the developer just doesn't make themselves easily known.
Plus, sometimes it's easier to just cut access to it than to try to launch a lawsuit which costs a lot of money with little to show for it since there will probably be 10 more clones after the lawsuit is over. Just cutting off access is easier and cheaper.
And if only MS had a similar "never break userspace" rule that applied to even the most unbelievably "casual" of software too.
Hell, I broke four apps just going to 64-bit Windows 8 from... 32-bit Windows 8.
If that happens (and Microsoft is one of the best at not breaking userspace), WIndows development would stop overnight.
Most developers are crap - and I'm sure "never break userspcae" is routinely violated by Linux as well, just it breaks little apps that no one knows about and someone either fixes it or codes some other workaround.
Yes, developers are crap who are more apt to take a shortcut "because it works" over doing it the proper way. On Windows, it's easy - if you run a non-English version of Windows, or put it anywhere other than C, you'll find yourself with a "Program Files" folder soon enough because it was hard coded in over using the system APIs to retrieve it. Or you might end up with a C:\Windows even though Windows is installed on D: purely because someone hardcoded a path there.
Plus, there's tons of legacy code out there - a surprisingly large amount of code is still 16-bit (which breaks on 64-bit), usually more bespoke applications used in specialized areas, but hey, if you ever wondered why there's a 32-bit version of Windows despite most processors sold being 64-bit capable...
And to be honest, a LOT of Windows bloat is due to the compatibility - Microsoft codes around applications that took shortcuts. Apple took the opposite tactic - they refuse to support anything but published APIs - if your program broke because you did something "the easy way" then Apple pretty much says "screw you - you took the shortcut, you profited, now you pay". (And yes, new features often broke poorly-written applications. On Windows, this would mean Microsoft wouldn't introduce the feature, or have to work around it).
And yes, moving to 64-bit Windows breaks stuff - remember what I said about hardcoded apps? "Program Files" for 32-bit turns into "Program Files (x86)", breaking all sorts of stuff.
Vista broke practically everything, which was why it was demonized, but mostly because it showed how poorly Windows apps were developed - all those shortcuts meant ground breaking changes like administrator not being enabled all the time broke a lot of apps that required admin just to run.
Yes. Because these tests are pure FUD generation. These "tests" are designed specifically to give high marks to AV kit that has its heuristics engine to produce as many false positives as possible and low marks to AV kit that has a reasonable heuristics engine that looks for realistic threats and doesn't spam user with "this is a potential threat, upgrade for 9.99 now to fix" advertisements.
Nevermind that most heuristics engines will at one point or another detect a standard (Microsoft-signed) required Windows file as a virus and promptly "quarantine" it for you. Which just means Windows will either bluescreen or render your system unusable.
And that's a problem - because now AV is interfering with your computer - and if it isn't a Windows binary that gets hosed, it's a file one of your programs you use.
No, MSE will not catch a 0 day. No antivirus can. So they use heuristics to bridge the time between it's in the wild and when they push an update that will detect it. But there's a tradeoff - too aggressive and there will be a TON of false positives. More conservative (Like MSE) and you'll be more likely to miss a threat, but less likely that you'll clobber a file you really need. And for most people, that's more than acceptable tradeoff.
Especially when you combine it with safe surfing that blocks questionable URLs - available on every browser now (either powered by Google or Microsoft) that prevent you from grabbing questionable files.
Windows Embedded Compact is the new name for Windows CE - it's confusing as hell since it's similar to Windows Embedded (which is based off standard Windows), but the "Compact" (or "Automotive") version is Windows CE.
it was this way since Windows CE 7 which was renamed to Windows Embedded Compact 7. (Now they're at Compact 2013)
Mental note: When establishing a questionably legal site for definitely illegal transactions to be made through, don't keep any logs about it, nor your conversations regarding it.
Problem is, without the logs, no one would believe you!.
And by that, I mean when you eventually come around to wanting to brag about your achievements - without evidence that you actually did it, no one would believe you, and everyone thinks you're just trying to satisfy some ego thing.
Yes, that's how a lot of people get caught - they got away with it, but then their bragging gives them away to authorities.
And yet, it's human nature to want to brag about the achievement. After all, what's the point of doing something "amazing" when you can't brag about it afterwards?
Unless you're blind, or happen to be looking the other way when the drunk in a prius bears down on you. Which is why some sort of fake engine noise will eventually be mandated (if it hasn't been already).
Not really.
Below 30kph or so, yes, engine noise dominates, but at that speed you're moving slow enough that injuries are far lower. And yes, an electric car is spooky quiet at those speeds.
Above 30kph, the majority of noise from a car comes from the tires, and the engine (be it ICE or electric) noise doesn't really figure in, save for those with loud pipes or other noise "enhancements".
Another fun fact: The original VCS games were programmed on a PDP-11 using a cross-assembler (!) and soon enough Atari upgraded to a VAX. When a game was finished they sent program tape to MOS who made the metal mask. The ROMs were pre-processed up to the metal deposition step. Then the final metal pattern was defined by whatever program was being written to ROM. This is one reason how MOS made them so cheaply: they mass produced ROM blanks and then programmed them with a single mask. I talked with an Atari old-timer about the process a couple of years ago. Great stories.
Actually, that's still done today - it's called mask programming and it's what happens if you need a bunch of chips pre-programmed with code. Practically every programmable chip has a mask-programmed variant you can use for mass production - you provide the manufacturer the code and they'll finish off the chip for you.
In fact, this is commonly done even at the ROM stage - when the chips are made, the software for the boot ROM is often not ready yet (it can be a couple of months between tapeout and when the chips actually get fabbed), so when a new SoC is being prototyped, the blocks are all there, except the ROM contents are not programmed yet. When the ROM is ready, a mask step is done to program it - this can be done after the chips are made, too.
Vesa local bus was kind of like AGP in that people mostly used it for graphics cards. PCs back then still had ISA slots for everything else.
Since these couldn't autoconfigure back then you had to mess with IRQs and shit. I hated that after having come from the Amiga. Thank God they fixed that mess.
VLB was an aberration. It basically was a direct link to the 486 processor - it was so heavily tied that the Pentium basically ended it (since it wasn't a 486 and used a new bus).
VLB was fast, but it was basically a stopgap - the 486 was so fast, ISA was so slow (but had a ton of peripherals) that there was no expansion bus technology available (I suppose they could use NuBus, which was TI (and used by Apple), but that was the wrong endian) as PCI was not quite done yet.
The Pentium basically introduced PCI.
AGP was an offshoot of PCI meant to offer higher bandwidth because PCI, despite having 66+MHz and 64 bit extensions, pretty much everything was tied to the 32-bit, 33MHz variant.
AGP appeared to the system as a regular PCI bus when enumerated (it basically WAS PCI, just signalled faster) and lasted until PCI Express came out. Interestingly, we've not exceeded the capabilities of PCIe yet as you can often use fewer lanes and not see a drop in graphics performance.
Chrome does as of November as someone else pointed out, so problem solved. IE11 (gross) supported it only on Windows 8. Firefox appears to not support it.
Of course. This requires the EME (aka DRM) support in the browser. Netflix uses Silverlight because before then, they couldn't use a solution with DRM. Since the W3C created (with much protest) the EME spec, Chrome, Safari and IE implement it. Firefox refuses to out of pure ideology (no DRM, period!),
EME was pushed heavily by Netflix so they could move away from Silverlight, which is no longer supported by Microsoft.
Of course, the alternative would be to app-ify Netflix (which I think they also have on Windows 8), but then people complain about what it leads to - namely apps that really do nothing but show web pages so they want to return back to where everything could be done via a browser.
The reason being that Windows is more than an OS and a collection of predictable platforms. A video on Windows is a video, accessed through the appropriate API. You don't dynamically link to half a dozen libraries, hope they are there, and crash (or demand installation) when it isn't. You install the codec and now everything can deal with it.
This is ultimately the problem with linux. There is no defined platforms anywhere. Software that wants to use anything can't ever guarantee that it will be there. They aren't part of the OS, but rather, part of the users defined installation.
The problem with defined platforms is ego.
I mean, people are rallying against SystemD, yet that's exactly what SystemD is for - to create a unified set of APIs for a lot of basic low level functionality - what was once done through dozens of libraries and shell scripts (meant to handle the dozens of different ways those libraries can be combined uniquely) can be done using a unified set of APIs.
Of course, it gets derided for doing this - since the existing system of lightweight programs glued together using shell scripts is more UNIX-y than a big monolith that helps provide a more generic interface.
I mean, it's almost expected that every app that deals with stuff Linux doesn't do well (Audio, printing, network, system service APIs) has to deal with the variations themselves. You know what, we did do that - back when the OS was called "DOS". Every application had to know about the peculiarities of printing, the peculiarities of sound and all that. Granted, ALSA and all that mean you don't need to know the exact sound card, but you still need to be able to interrogate and pick the right audio route, and heaven forbid that change.
It's why we have stuff like PulseAudio and CUPS - they abstract away the nastiness that is the lower level interface and provide a whole host of services so applications don't need to handle it themselves. (E.g., for audio - you just open and play, and your audio is mixed in with other apps audio. You don't have to worry about audio hardware disappearing - the routing changes underneath you (e.g., Bluetooth headset disconnects) and while audio pauses a tiny bit, it recovers and the app doesn't do a thing (unless it actually needed that hardware opened exclusive).
Ditto media playback - there's no media architecture in Linux to handle file formats, codecs and renderers in a unified fashion. Attempts to quickly break down over "free" codecs and "proprietary" or "patents".
Linux is great for servers that generally don't need many platform services, but on the desktop side the use cases are far more complex and varied that require coordination far more than in a simpler static server environment.
If Google enters the market, their efforts can quickly be matched, leaving no net advantage for Google.
Except being able to factor in your entire history into their actuarial tables.
I mean, if you're into car racing and participate in amateur racing events arranged via forums, then Google can take that into account because they know you visit those sites with regular frequency, and thus may by driving your car in ways a "regular" driver might not (even if it was on the track).
Or perhaps Google sees your children searching on driving schools and such, and knowing your vehicle will be used to learn on, jack up the premium (there's often an inexperienced driver surcharge for those just learning to drive).
Or maybe Google Hangouts notes you love to text and drive...
They tried this in Canada with thermocams. The supreme court hit them so hard on that being a warrantless search that crown attorneys and police services across Canada are still smarting over it. There is precedent, and legal justifications are often carried from other countries on things like this.
Technically, the justification is "can the public get their hands on it and would it be expected to be used". If so, the police can use it - so things like telescopes, binoculars and other optics are perfectly legitimate tools.
Thermal cameras currently are not, but you can expect that to change because consumerization of thermal cameras has happened and they're now $200 items (Seek Thermal sells one for Android and iOS, and FLIR sells one for the iPhone 5/5s, with an upcoming Android and iPhone one later this year). At least to a limited extent.
Radar penetrators, currently are not available to the general public, so they aren't allowed without a warrant.
It's funny that you should mention the number of exposures and reference a 7D (a DSLR, with a mirror that needs to flip up for EVERY SINGLE SHOT!) in comparison with a MILC camera, which has far fewer moving parts.
And yet the flip up mirror has been going strong for many decades now for millions of shots in very rough conditions.
Surprisingly it's one of the more reliable mechanical technologies out there that works with practically zero maintenance despite harsh conditions, being tossed around, vibration, and very small precise mechanical parts.
Most pro photographers probably run many tens of thousands of shots through their cameras every year or so, with each one orchestrating a mirror that flips up and a shutter that rolls across the sensor (mechanical). Granted, there aren't as many gears, springs and other contraptions as of the old unpowered SLRs in the film era since it's all electronically orchestrated, but DSLRs have been proven quite reliable.
AIUI, the Monument Valley stats are incredibly badly done. For example, me buying it, installing it on my phone, tablet, upgrading my phone and installing it there, and so on would count as one purchase and multiple installs, and so a large inaccurate piracy rate.
I am aware that the Linux market is small, but it does have steadily accelerating support from vendors.
Personally, I won't buy it if it doesn't run on Linux (or android depending on the game), as it would be a waste of money. But I'm a fairly small demographic in that respect.
Which is why the installed rate included people installing it multiple times (phone, tablet, etc), family sharing (iOS), and unpaid downloads.
If you take it that the average person installed it three times - say on their phone, tablet and their kid's device, then 3M sales would be 9M installs that are legitimate.
As for Linux support - that probably comes later - the milk money is on Windows and OS X and iOS. Linux probably comes next, and once they figure out the ad model, Android (the only model that works on Android is ad-supported).
Humble Bundle per-platform stats would disagree. Linux users tend to pay the most, followed by OSX users, with Windows users in the rear.
They pay the most per individual. But there aren't many individuals.
It's sort o like the adage where you take a smaller margin on a product but make it up in volume - Windows users may pay less, but given they are 2/3rds or more (likely under-represented) they get the most money from them. Ditto OS X and Linux - they pay more, but there are less of them.
Now, if you charge enough, you can make it up. E.g., iOS - if you create a paid app on iOS, you'll make more money than if you make it free and show ads. However, on Android, if you show ads (and rape and pillage user data) you will make way more money than if you sold it. In fact, if you add it up, selling in-app ads means you can roughly equal or exceed the amount of money you made selling it ad-free on iOS. Of course, you had to rape and pillage your user's data and show them obnoxious ads in the meantime, but hey, Android makes money.
As for Monument Valley, 10M installs and 3M paid is not all piracy - though 2.7M iOS and 300K Android sales seems a little... off. They do admit that a lot of it is multiple installs, so if we assume most users probably got it on their tablet and phone, and maybe a third device for the kids, that's about 9M installs that are legit and legal.
But still, 2.7M people paid for it on iOS, vs. 300K on Android (and of that, about 20% or 60K were FREE from Amazon). That shows you how willing iOS users are to paying for apps. I can't tell you how many are pirated because well, it'll just be a guess. And as any Android fanboy points out, Android outsells iOS 4:1, and in the US, it's around a 3:1 ratio (75:25% marketshare split).
Hence showing that selling apps on Android is a losing proposition if so few people buy it on Android, or why it should be free and with ads (rape and pillage).
Expect they can't sell them. As long as they give them away for free as fan based art, Paramount will tolerate the infringement. Start charging, probably not.
Paramount is awful at that - they actually tried to shut down a bunch of fan sites many years ago because it infringed on their trademarks.
CBS (who owns Paramount and pretty much reserves Paramount for movies) has been far more tolerant and I think actually gave their approval. Not to make money, but at least CBS won't pursue action against them for making this.
Effectively, CBS has blessed this work of fan fiction...
The problem isn't that Joe User is too stupid. The problem is that these crypto systems are a real bitch to use effectively. They can take far too long to set up, and to work through any problems can waste too much time. Even when they're working, they're a pain in the ass to use. It's so bad that even experienced and knowledgeable people who can get them working don't want to bother with using these systems!
The big problem is key management, actually. The encrypted mail systems are mostly well integrated and "just work". E.g., PGP integrates into Outlook quite well - if you receive an encrypted email, it pops up a dialog asking If you want to decrypt it. Sending just means you need to pick to encrypt it and with what key (though that's usually embedded with the contact name, so even that is automatic).
The problem is sending keys - and most users would just blindly well, email them around. Then there's key management because you have to import those keys into your contacts.
And then there's interoperability - PGP works fine within an Exchange environment, but it doesn't seem robust enough that someone using another encryption system would be able to decrypt or encrypt messages. GPG might work for it, but still.
At least that was how it was when I last used it - we never did send it over the internet, just internal email.
the fact that someone uneducated will think uneducated things based on noting a compound's everyday use simply means that uneducated people need to educate themselves
The problem isn't the uneducated, it's the ignorant. And especially the willfully ignorant.
The uneducated can educate themselves. The ignorant cannot, and the willfully ignorant resist attempts at education.
Slashdot Mirror
IPv6 will, ironically, make the situation worse.
Because SIP assumes complete connectivity between hosts, but if you have a firewall in the way, that model breaks. And IPv6 firewalls will probably be the norm, so you'll end up with situations like the days of early NAT gaming - everyone will get on, they'd click "start", and either nothing happens, or a few people connect and the rest get stuck at the "waiting for host" dialog.
At least with NAT, you can generally assume if you have a private IP (or your external IP doesn't match the internal IP) that yes, connectivity is broken and you can display a message prior to actually trying to work. With IPv6 everything can SEEM to work (IP is seen by world? Check. IP is not private IP space? Check), but when it comes time to making or receiving a call, strange things happen. Like it rings, but doesn't connect. Or you can make outgoing calls but not receive incoming ones. Or calls aborting midway through.
And hell, you can be ISPs would do stuff like this - perhaps the first IP they see gets full access, while all other IPs are firewalled "for your safety". Oh, you can pay for additional prefixes, they're happy to sell you that...
Worse yet, you may not even know whose firewall is causing problems.
So why do we treat "using a computer" specially?
Shouldn't we also teach them about say, cars? And we should add in the legal system. Perhaps IP law, since the majority of /.'s seem to be so intelligent about IT things but completely illiterate about basic IP law like the differences between trademarks, copyright and patents (both kinds).
Heck, I'm sure we should add shop skills (plumbing, basic carpentry, basic electrical, safety, power tools, cooking, finance) to the list. Truth is, there are plenty of skills we need that aren't taught - computers being just one of many. Hell, given it's the US, add guns to the list - doesn't matter if you're pro or anti gun control, providing a basic education in gun safety and handling will probably be extremely handy given the amount of rather idiotic gun accidents out there.
There comes a point where it's not really useful to give everyone the specialization because everyone then claims why their specialization wasn't part of the core education program in the end.
I mean, your mechanic doesn't need to know about how to compile a kernel - unless you really WANT to pay your mechanic $200/hr to muck around with his diagnostics machine when he's supposed to be fixing your car. (Today, said mechanic will say his computer is down, and hand it over to IT who will fix it, on the shop's dime, not yours).
You're off by an order of magnitude.
Samsung, in 2014, released about 3 smartphones per week. Yes, they have over 150 smartphones released in 2014. Tablet wise, I think it was over 1 tablet a week (it was over 50 around October).
It seems a lot of Android manufacturers see Android more as a "fire and forget" style of releases - just get a version of Android, stick it on, sell it, move on.
I mean, supporting 200 brand new Android devices (ignoring 2013 releases and prior) ...
Yeah, but if you have say, just 3 people streaming Netflix, that's easily 15Mbps right there. And perhaps someone wants to surf the web or something - at which point you really do want something like 20-25Mbps just to make sure the streaming doesn't stutter. (Yeah yeah, move to IPv6 with QoS blah blah blah - true, but you can bet ISPs will charge for that service. QoS was put in IPv6 so it could be a chargeable service in the end - want higher priority? Pay up).
And if not 3 Netflix streams, well, there's also online gaming where you want to have a few Mbps free to avoid congestion
Basically what you need to do is breach the dielectric that separates your blood from the outside world - your blood is a rather excellent conductor of electricity thanks to all the ions dissolved in it. however, the insulator, your skin, has a conductance that varies depending on its condition - if it's wet, it conducts a lot better than if it's dry (by several orders of magnitude - easily dropping from the low megaohms to kiloohms). Once the current gets past your skin, it's really a straight shot to your heart which requires very little voltage.
It's why you usually don't get shocked by a 9V battery as the current doesn't get through the skin, but wet skin and you feel the tingle as it stimulates the nerves.
I don't know about you, but 3 button mice I find limiting - I invariably get mice with extra buttons to get me the extra functions you need. Instead of zoom mapped to the wheel (which is annoying as hell), I map it to two buttons so I click it when I need it, and map the wheel elsewhere.
And hell, I can map Paste to a button that's less vulnerable to hitting than the middle click when scrolling fast.
And that's the entire point.
The WInklevoss bought BTC when it was probably $500 or higher - and supposedly they own around 10% of all BTC.
And now that the price crashed from $1300 each to $250 or so, well, damn, they lost a lot of money.
The whole point of the regulated exchange is supposedly to keep the price up and give it more legitimacy - I'm sure they saw that BTC was used for Silk Road and other illicit transactions and when Silk Road got busted, well, the fact its value was propped up by illegal activities hurt them. So they want to transform it into a legitimate business whose value is driven by "legitimate" economic activity over say, criminal activity.
Probably because WhatsApp Plus is distributed outside normal channels (otherwise it would be quickly removed from say, the App Store or Google Play) and is one of those where the developer just doesn't make themselves easily known.
Plus, sometimes it's easier to just cut access to it than to try to launch a lawsuit which costs a lot of money with little to show for it since there will probably be 10 more clones after the lawsuit is over. Just cutting off access is easier and cheaper.
If that happens (and Microsoft is one of the best at not breaking userspace), WIndows development would stop overnight.
Most developers are crap - and I'm sure "never break userspcae" is routinely violated by Linux as well, just it breaks little apps that no one knows about and someone either fixes it or codes some other workaround.
Yes, developers are crap who are more apt to take a shortcut "because it works" over doing it the proper way. On Windows, it's easy - if you run a non-English version of Windows, or put it anywhere other than C, you'll find yourself with a "Program Files" folder soon enough because it was hard coded in over using the system APIs to retrieve it. Or you might end up with a C:\Windows even though Windows is installed on D: purely because someone hardcoded a path there.
Plus, there's tons of legacy code out there - a surprisingly large amount of code is still 16-bit (which breaks on 64-bit), usually more bespoke applications used in specialized areas, but hey, if you ever wondered why there's a 32-bit version of Windows despite most processors sold being 64-bit capable...
And to be honest, a LOT of Windows bloat is due to the compatibility - Microsoft codes around applications that took shortcuts. Apple took the opposite tactic - they refuse to support anything but published APIs - if your program broke because you did something "the easy way" then Apple pretty much says "screw you - you took the shortcut, you profited, now you pay". (And yes, new features often broke poorly-written applications. On Windows, this would mean Microsoft wouldn't introduce the feature, or have to work around it).
And yes, moving to 64-bit Windows breaks stuff - remember what I said about hardcoded apps? "Program Files" for 32-bit turns into "Program Files (x86)", breaking all sorts of stuff.
Vista broke practically everything, which was why it was demonized, but mostly because it showed how poorly Windows apps were developed - all those shortcuts meant ground breaking changes like administrator not being enabled all the time broke a lot of apps that required admin just to run.
Nevermind that most heuristics engines will at one point or another detect a standard (Microsoft-signed) required Windows file as a virus and promptly "quarantine" it for you. Which just means Windows will either bluescreen or render your system unusable.
And that's a problem - because now AV is interfering with your computer - and if it isn't a Windows binary that gets hosed, it's a file one of your programs you use.
No, MSE will not catch a 0 day. No antivirus can. So they use heuristics to bridge the time between it's in the wild and when they push an update that will detect it. But there's a tradeoff - too aggressive and there will be a TON of false positives. More conservative (Like MSE) and you'll be more likely to miss a threat, but less likely that you'll clobber a file you really need. And for most people, that's more than acceptable tradeoff.
Especially when you combine it with safe surfing that blocks questionable URLs - available on every browser now (either powered by Google or Microsoft) that prevent you from grabbing questionable files.
Windows CE is still around, actually.
Windows Embedded Compact is the new name for Windows CE - it's confusing as hell since it's similar to Windows Embedded (which is based off standard Windows), but the "Compact" (or "Automotive") version is Windows CE.
it was this way since Windows CE 7 which was renamed to Windows Embedded Compact 7. (Now they're at Compact 2013)
Problem is, without the logs, no one would believe you!.
And by that, I mean when you eventually come around to wanting to brag about your achievements - without evidence that you actually did it, no one would believe you, and everyone thinks you're just trying to satisfy some ego thing.
Yes, that's how a lot of people get caught - they got away with it, but then their bragging gives them away to authorities.
And yet, it's human nature to want to brag about the achievement. After all, what's the point of doing something "amazing" when you can't brag about it afterwards?
Not really.
Below 30kph or so, yes, engine noise dominates, but at that speed you're moving slow enough that injuries are far lower. And yes, an electric car is spooky quiet at those speeds.
Above 30kph, the majority of noise from a car comes from the tires, and the engine (be it ICE or electric) noise doesn't really figure in, save for those with loud pipes or other noise "enhancements".
Actually, that's still done today - it's called mask programming and it's what happens if you need a bunch of chips pre-programmed with code. Practically every programmable chip has a mask-programmed variant you can use for mass production - you provide the manufacturer the code and they'll finish off the chip for you.
In fact, this is commonly done even at the ROM stage - when the chips are made, the software for the boot ROM is often not ready yet (it can be a couple of months between tapeout and when the chips actually get fabbed), so when a new SoC is being prototyped, the blocks are all there, except the ROM contents are not programmed yet. When the ROM is ready, a mask step is done to program it - this can be done after the chips are made, too.
VLB was an aberration. It basically was a direct link to the 486 processor - it was so heavily tied that the Pentium basically ended it (since it wasn't a 486 and used a new bus).
VLB was fast, but it was basically a stopgap - the 486 was so fast, ISA was so slow (but had a ton of peripherals) that there was no expansion bus technology available (I suppose they could use NuBus, which was TI (and used by Apple), but that was the wrong endian) as PCI was not quite done yet.
The Pentium basically introduced PCI.
AGP was an offshoot of PCI meant to offer higher bandwidth because PCI, despite having 66+MHz and 64 bit extensions, pretty much everything was tied to the 32-bit, 33MHz variant.
AGP appeared to the system as a regular PCI bus when enumerated (it basically WAS PCI, just signalled faster) and lasted until PCI Express came out. Interestingly, we've not exceeded the capabilities of PCIe yet as you can often use fewer lanes and not see a drop in graphics performance.
Of course. This requires the EME (aka DRM) support in the browser. Netflix uses Silverlight because before then, they couldn't use a solution with DRM. Since the W3C created (with much protest) the EME spec, Chrome, Safari and IE implement it. Firefox refuses to out of pure ideology (no DRM, period!),
EME was pushed heavily by Netflix so they could move away from Silverlight, which is no longer supported by Microsoft.
Of course, the alternative would be to app-ify Netflix (which I think they also have on Windows 8), but then people complain about what it leads to - namely apps that really do nothing but show web pages so they want to return back to where everything could be done via a browser.
The problem with defined platforms is ego.
I mean, people are rallying against SystemD, yet that's exactly what SystemD is for - to create a unified set of APIs for a lot of basic low level functionality - what was once done through dozens of libraries and shell scripts (meant to handle the dozens of different ways those libraries can be combined uniquely) can be done using a unified set of APIs.
Of course, it gets derided for doing this - since the existing system of lightweight programs glued together using shell scripts is more UNIX-y than a big monolith that helps provide a more generic interface.
I mean, it's almost expected that every app that deals with stuff Linux doesn't do well (Audio, printing, network, system service APIs) has to deal with the variations themselves. You know what, we did do that - back when the OS was called "DOS". Every application had to know about the peculiarities of printing, the peculiarities of sound and all that. Granted, ALSA and all that mean you don't need to know the exact sound card, but you still need to be able to interrogate and pick the right audio route, and heaven forbid that change.
It's why we have stuff like PulseAudio and CUPS - they abstract away the nastiness that is the lower level interface and provide a whole host of services so applications don't need to handle it themselves. (E.g., for audio - you just open and play, and your audio is mixed in with other apps audio. You don't have to worry about audio hardware disappearing - the routing changes underneath you (e.g., Bluetooth headset disconnects) and while audio pauses a tiny bit, it recovers and the app doesn't do a thing (unless it actually needed that hardware opened exclusive).
Ditto media playback - there's no media architecture in Linux to handle file formats, codecs and renderers in a unified fashion. Attempts to quickly break down over "free" codecs and "proprietary" or "patents".
Linux is great for servers that generally don't need many platform services, but on the desktop side the use cases are far more complex and varied that require coordination far more than in a simpler static server environment.
Except being able to factor in your entire history into their actuarial tables.
I mean, if you're into car racing and participate in amateur racing events arranged via forums, then Google can take that into account because they know you visit those sites with regular frequency, and thus may by driving your car in ways a "regular" driver might not (even if it was on the track).
Or perhaps Google sees your children searching on driving schools and such, and knowing your vehicle will be used to learn on, jack up the premium (there's often an inexperienced driver surcharge for those just learning to drive).
Or maybe Google Hangouts notes you love to text and drive...
Technically, the justification is "can the public get their hands on it and would it be expected to be used". If so, the police can use it - so things like telescopes, binoculars and other optics are perfectly legitimate tools.
Thermal cameras currently are not, but you can expect that to change because consumerization of thermal cameras has happened and they're now $200 items (Seek Thermal sells one for Android and iOS, and FLIR sells one for the iPhone 5/5s, with an upcoming Android and iPhone one later this year). At least to a limited extent.
Radar penetrators, currently are not available to the general public, so they aren't allowed without a warrant.
And yet the flip up mirror has been going strong for many decades now for millions of shots in very rough conditions.
Surprisingly it's one of the more reliable mechanical technologies out there that works with practically zero maintenance despite harsh conditions, being tossed around, vibration, and very small precise mechanical parts.
Most pro photographers probably run many tens of thousands of shots through their cameras every year or so, with each one orchestrating a mirror that flips up and a shutter that rolls across the sensor (mechanical). Granted, there aren't as many gears, springs and other contraptions as of the old unpowered SLRs in the film era since it's all electronically orchestrated, but DSLRs have been proven quite reliable.
Which is why the installed rate included people installing it multiple times (phone, tablet, etc), family sharing (iOS), and unpaid downloads.
If you take it that the average person installed it three times - say on their phone, tablet and their kid's device, then 3M sales would be 9M installs that are legitimate.
As for Linux support - that probably comes later - the milk money is on Windows and OS X and iOS. Linux probably comes next, and once they figure out the ad model, Android (the only model that works on Android is ad-supported).
They pay the most per individual. But there aren't many individuals.
It's sort o like the adage where you take a smaller margin on a product but make it up in volume - Windows users may pay less, but given they are 2/3rds or more (likely under-represented) they get the most money from them. Ditto OS X and Linux - they pay more, but there are less of them.
Now, if you charge enough, you can make it up. E.g., iOS - if you create a paid app on iOS, you'll make more money than if you make it free and show ads. However, on Android, if you show ads (and rape and pillage user data) you will make way more money than if you sold it. In fact, if you add it up, selling in-app ads means you can roughly equal or exceed the amount of money you made selling it ad-free on iOS. Of course, you had to rape and pillage your user's data and show them obnoxious ads in the meantime, but hey, Android makes money.
As for Monument Valley, 10M installs and 3M paid is not all piracy - though 2.7M iOS and 300K Android sales seems a little... off. They do admit that a lot of it is multiple installs, so if we assume most users probably got it on their tablet and phone, and maybe a third device for the kids, that's about 9M installs that are legit and legal.
But still, 2.7M people paid for it on iOS, vs. 300K on Android (and of that, about 20% or 60K were FREE from Amazon). That shows you how willing iOS users are to paying for apps. I can't tell you how many are pirated because well, it'll just be a guess. And as any Android fanboy points out, Android outsells iOS 4:1, and in the US, it's around a 3:1 ratio (75:25% marketshare split).
Hence showing that selling apps on Android is a losing proposition if so few people buy it on Android, or why it should be free and with ads (rape and pillage).
Paramount is awful at that - they actually tried to shut down a bunch of fan sites many years ago because it infringed on their trademarks.
CBS (who owns Paramount and pretty much reserves Paramount for movies) has been far more tolerant and I think actually gave their approval. Not to make money, but at least CBS won't pursue action against them for making this.
Effectively, CBS has blessed this work of fan fiction...
The big problem is key management, actually. The encrypted mail systems are mostly well integrated and "just work". E.g., PGP integrates into Outlook quite well - if you receive an encrypted email, it pops up a dialog asking If you want to decrypt it. Sending just means you need to pick to encrypt it and with what key (though that's usually embedded with the contact name, so even that is automatic).
The problem is sending keys - and most users would just blindly well, email them around. Then there's key management because you have to import those keys into your contacts.
And then there's interoperability - PGP works fine within an Exchange environment, but it doesn't seem robust enough that someone using another encryption system would be able to decrypt or encrypt messages. GPG might work for it, but still.
At least that was how it was when I last used it - we never did send it over the internet, just internal email.
The problem isn't the uneducated, it's the ignorant. And especially the willfully ignorant.
The uneducated can educate themselves. The ignorant cannot, and the willfully ignorant resist attempts at education.