But what will be the reaction of the "activists" when these cameras capture indisputable footage of, say, somebody like Michael Brown launching an unprovoked physical attack against a police officer?
Will they actually admit that maybe the thug involved wasn't such a "good boy", and that maybe it's incorrect to claim "but he didn't do anything wrong"?
Will they just repeatedly deny what the footage shows?
The activists will be activists.
HOWEVER, if they repeatedly deny the scenario that the video shows, it discredits THEM, and the general public would regard them as whackos that need a reality check.
And activist video can be shown in context - often times when something happens those who capture it only show the aftermath, and not the entire scenario. Being able to see before and after what activists record is extremely useful.
So yeah, perhaps the video you see on TV shows Brown getting shot. Then the source video the body cam shows what happened before the camera started recording putting things in even more context.
Data sheets now days are not avalable to the public
Datasheets ARE publicly available. However, they're for the actual DRAM ICs themselves, and not of the modules.
There are only a few DRAM manufacturers out there - Samsung, Hynix, Elpida, Micron are among them.
Samsung Computing DRAM (they also have Graphics DRAM and others). Some of their newest chips don't have datasheets yet, but that'll be forthcoming. The older ones in production do, however.
These are all generally available. Since the only real difference between them is a few timing numbers, they're not generally a huge secret - it's all governed by JEDEC standards anyhow.
Memory modules are just collections of these chips so they can be generalized to what you buy in the store for your PC.
Still, if you have a patent, you don't need to sell it. You can license the patent. That what the whole idea was about. So you could make a great smartphone invention, have a patent, and Samsung and Apple would pay you money to use the patent without you having to sell it.
You can't sell a patent. They're not really "owned". (This always comes up, as if/. posters refuse to learn about IP law just like non-tech people refuse to learn about computers. Hrm...).
Look at any patent and you'll see an inventor's list. That's who the patent belongs to. They're not transferrable.
Instead, what IS transferrable is usage rights, aka licensing. And a lot of the time, the use rights are exclusive, because as an inventor, you control who can use it (the monopoly to use the patented invention is the inventor's).
Of course, given a patent takes at least $10,000 to apply for and more if you need to defend and back-and-forth and patent attorneys, what happens is two fold.
First, companies have an "assignment of invention" clause in their employment contracts - which at a minimum says anything you work on during working hours belongs to them. Including anything patented. Or in other words, they get a right to use your invention.
Second, because a company is sponsoring your patent application, well, they make sure they get an exclusive license to your patent.
So the patent's yours but by applying, your company already gets a right to use it, and by taking the company's money, that right becomes exclusive - you exclusively licensed the patent for them to use. And usually, that exclusive license you gave them is non-exclusive to them to re-license those rights to third parties. So as part of the company, they can license your patent to others.
And that's really what gets "bought" and "sold" - the exclusive right to the patent. The original inventors, who have to be real people who worked on the patent (and more than one has been invalidated because inventors were either left off the list, or were because an inventor didn't really "invent" it, but merely worked with the technology) still "own" the patent, but their right to license has been extinguished due to other contractual agreements in place.
On a dev system, or a server, you'll want to remove it. Bet let's not forget the desktop users:)
And that's really the problem with Linux. It's a great server OS - but in the end, as a desktop OS it just stinks because all the developers scream when you try to "complicate" matters using tools like systemd, NetworkManager, PulseAudio which are essential to make a modern desktop OS.
For networking you need to consider the mobile use case - home user is at home, and firewall is set up to allow services so they can stream their music and whatnot all over the network. They move their laptop to a wifi hotspot, and now the network stack should reconfigure itself to the hotspot. But oh, the firewall rules need to resync because the home user isn't at home and is in a public place, so maybe having those services exposed is a bad idea. (In an ideal world, you'd really have NetworkManager tell systemd or init to shut down those esrvices).
That's a common scenario - user moves between trusted and untrusted networks, and something needs to detect what kind of network it is, then manage the firewall, DHCP and other things altogether.
Perhaps if you're lucky, it's switching between Ethernet and WiFi, which means you can statically configure the whole thing, but more often than not, it's on the same interface. Or maybe it's both - a laptop user connected to a public guest network AND a private wired network. Or vice-versa. Or maybe both networks are the same.
Ditto audio - while a server doesn't need audio, a desktop user does, and it has to handle the variety of APIs to access audio, the need to provide for multiple audio routing paths because as audio devices appear and disappear, the preferred routing may change - e.g., switch between onboard speaker+mic to Bluetooth headset for communications WHILE still playing audio (movie or music) through stereo speakers plugged into the line out jack. Then when Bluetooth disappears, mix communications audio (or mute the movie/music) if a call comes in. Audio mixing is important for multiple audio sources - perhaps you have a few YouTube video tabs open and are listening to something else - it's a PITA to stop that just to get audio for YouTube because it needs to release the audio device.
It's amazing how, despite Linux being an advanced multi-tasking OS, a lot of things are still stuck in the single-tasking world that developers think is all you need. Maybe a decade ago, but modern day PCs are so much more capable.
Between TOR and Bitcoin, you would think these things were designed by security services like the NSA or GCHQ. TOR is slow, onerous, and never provided reliable anonymity. If anything, the low network throughput was part of the design to slow the dissemination of large files like government documents and child pornography.
Technically, TOR was designed by the US Navy. Not quite the NSA, but still, government designed.
And the DS really are for exit nodes - taking the servers is the last thing I 'd do. I'd rather run a bunch of exit nodes then force the DS to route traffic over them since he who controls exit nodes has the power to spy, modify and do lots of other things with traffic.
Because you know sooner or later someone's going to log into their Google, Amazon, Facebook or other thing like their bank and completely de-anonymize themselves.
But this specific tactic doesn't make sense. Too much incriminating evidence about Sony's own underhanded practices has been released by the hackers. Too many of Sony's own people have been put at risk because of this. Sony might be evil, and they might be stupid, but they are not this spiteful.
Perhaps a marketing manager for Sony decided to exploit the hack as a marketing maneuver? They got hacked, well, why not capitalize on it?
The PR on this turd is incredible - you simply cannot buy this amount of free publicity. With even POTUS calling on its release, it doesn't matter anymore.
Once the hack news dies down, release the movie and make up some excuse saying the FBI let it through or something, starting hype round #2.
Sometimes you just have a situation ripe for the picking.
There is no "national firewall." You may be thinking of China. Or more likely not thinking at all. It's fascinating how people will invent or repeat the most badly-informed (I'm too polite to say stupidest) things about Cuba and think they're intelligent.
Well, a large number of countries have some form of censorship or surveillance system for the internet. A completely free internet is available to few people.
So there may not be any firewall now, but that doesn't prevent them from implementing it later.
And when you do let children use a laser you own, make sure you supervise them closely.
I have a great t-shirt from Meredith Instruments that reads "DANGER! LASER RADIATION! Do not expose beam to remaining eye."
Sadly, most of the arrests have been people in the age of majority - perhaps they had the maturity of children, but they aren't children. Plus, given how expensive they are (several hundred bucks), it generally isn't a children's toy.
As for those claiming that it's not a problem because no one's lost a life yet - really? Aviation already is built upon the blood of many people, some of whom lost their lives over something as stupid as a light bulb.
And no, it may not be a direct cause, but it may be the last link of a chain of events that leads to an accident. Every mishap has been a chain - if any one of those things were different, it wouldn't have happened. Perhaps the pilot is in bad weather already trying hard to find the runway and then a flash comes across the cockpit. He blinks, it goes away, and he continues, but what he thinks is the runway is a after glow spot (similar to how a flashbulb causes temporary spots) and boom, crashes the airplane into a building along the glidepath.
Since I don't know your specific situation, I could be completely misinterpreting what you mean. But it seems you have 0% "figure out the problem".
Math isn't a subject that has to be learned the way foreign language or geography has to be learned. If you don't have something described to you in a book, then you absolutely need another reference to learn most subjects (such as a TA, Lecture, or Internet).
But with math you never need a reference for anything but definitions, and most definitions should be obvious anyway. There is always a first person to solve a math problem, and he had no references.
Like I said, I could be completely misreading your situation, but from what you wrote, it sounds like if there isn't a template for how to solve every single problem type that you give up. If all you know how to do is follow methods and change numbers around here and there, then you aren't learning math.
The greatest instruction anyone can give a person who pursues math is simply to ask a question that they can solve if they try. Many of us who study math seriously love nothing more than to be given a problem that's just barely out of reach.
That and Physics is the same way.
It's probably why those subjects are "hard" because they require creativity and inspiration to actually do - it's problem solving at its simplest level and it's what those in the engineering fields thrive on.
Anyhow, if you're struck trying to do math problems, you have to realize that they all follow the same pattern. After the subject is introduced, the first few problems will be solved by direct application of the lesson. Then the next few will be ones applying the current lesson and previous lessons. It all accumulates until the final set of problems involves a bunch of skills from the text, from your past math education, and so on.
And if you're struggling, the goal is not do just the required problems, but to start at the beginning of the problem set.and do them all. Yes, it's beyond the assignment, but you have to realize that the assignment is just the tip of the iceberg - a good prof already tells you that the problem set they assign is hard, and to really do it, a good student needs to do the entire set.
Same goes for physics problems. The first few questions directly apply equations and formulas from the chapter. Then the next ones apply several concepts together until you get to the mega one that pulls in multiple methods. And many even have multiple ways of tackling the problem that are correct. (Previous problems will lead y ou down each path thent he final one lets you decide which one you use). On an exam, that's a lifesaver because it lets you try both ways and if you don't get the same answer, you messed up.
The goal is to realize that the text is giving you the tools, the probme is to string those tools together. It's like programming or engineering.
And sometimes the most satisfying problems are the ones that look like they're impossible,but when you start realizing what you have, where you need to go, and little brain power and then AHA!
Hell, one trick I do is you write down everything you know that was given in the problem. Then figure out what you need to answer, and figure out what gets you there. And draw pictures, schematics, whatever to illustrate those factors you know, what you don't, and the pieces you do have. And the pieces that are implied
This malware relies on weakness in wetware rather than software. No general-purpose operating system can save you from PEBKAC issues, at most partially mitigate them. Unix-style execute bit rather than Windows' extensions reduces the number of vulnerable idiots by like 2-3 orders of magnitude, but you can bet that if the webpage kindly provides instructions, a good number of marks will still manage to get infected.
It's really just another form of Dancing Pigs social engineering attack. You give the user a plausible reason for downloading and installing software, and you'll find users go out of t heir way to install it.
Doesn't matter the OS. And it can be anything - be it porn, a "private porn browser" or other such tool and any OS is vulnerable. (Yes, "private porn browser" - download now and browse your porn in privacy and even your wife won't find out...).
There has always been a small percentage of aristocrats in society who do not have to work because of their amassed wealth. Looking at how they spent their time is probably a decent indicator of how most of the population will spend their time 50-100 years from now. My guess is most people will put far more effort into their hobbies, and many of those hobbies will turn into part time jobs. All basic and even most non-basic needs will be covered by social welfare programs paid for by publicly owned mostly-automated industries. People will only work because they want to, and the very few undesirable jobs that can't be automated will pay excessively well.
At least that is the best possible outcome. Their are plenty of dystopian possibilities as well.
AI replacing jobs is fine - as long as they're getting rid of grunt work jobs people hate doing and replacing them with higher quality, higher paying jobs that are more challenging.
Crap work jobs are the kind that offer no form of mental or physical stimulation or physical challenges that generally embody "good work". Physically demanding jobs like oil rig workers, (crab) fisherman, etc., appeal to few folks who really do enjoy the physical punishment and pain for a challenge they can do with their hands, while more creative industries like technology and culture appeal to those who wish to use their mental powers.
Crap jobs AI can probably take over would be stuff like janitorial work, simple assembly line style work where there is no physical challenge other than repetitive-strain injury and barely any mental stimulation.
As for the outcomes, unfortunately, the masses who toil will be the ones out of work and homeless while the rich buy up the land. Money is power, and power is not something that an AI really replaces. (It's actually those in power that will use AI to replace jobs to save on labor costs. The former employee is now jobless and has less money and thus power than when they were employed).
That's not to say it isn't impossible to have a place where humans are able to do work for the betterment of humanity than just toil around, but it needs to be a carefully designed and planned environment.
With your current background, you could get a job in technical writing. Every firm that does engineering needs people like you who:
* Understand the subject matter * Can write about it readably
Exactly. An English major already has a leg up provided they can communicate in writing. And the more engineering classes you can take related to the field your company works in, your writing's only going to improve as you're able to understand the engineers better and write fairly decent documentation.
Heck, get a job in communications with a company that does STEM work you like - sure you'll write PR and all that in the beginning, but that's the point - skills like communications are VERY valuable, and if you can better yourself by understanding more about what the company does by taking classes in the field, you can only go up from writing marketing copy to documentation, both internal and external.
If you can augment it to interfacing with customers, you're instantly a manager - able to take vague notions of what customers want and translating them into nice neat requirements that the engineering team can understand.
Practical arts skills like languages are typically undervalued everywhere, but are extremely useful. Businesses need to communicate, both internally and externally so you've already got positions you can slot yourself into. Just find a company doing the STEM things you like and try to fit yourself in.
Anti-trust concerns usually do benefit the consumer in the short term. And as the article points out, the jury specifically wrote that the features have an immediate benefit to the consumer.
Usually anti-trust problems are not immediately bad for the consumer. In the short term the consumer sees a lower price, easier access, and other conveniences.
In the long term the market ends up with monopolies and oligopolies, a loss of vibrancy, a slowdown in innovation, less desire to follow expensive advances, and worse customer experiences. Think of your local telco and cable companies as prime examples.
Or in this case, rendered utterly irrelevant.
Because iTunes sells unprotected music. Just like Amazon and many other music stores. iTunes is still #1, but their market share is sliding.
The iPods are on life-support - they don't make Apple much money anymore but Apple keeps them around because there's still a tiny demand for them.
And streaming services have basically taken over music sales - sales from iTunes and other stores is far lower nowadays while streaming services like Pandora and others are rising.
Whatever harm iTunes did, seems to have resulted in a far more vibrant marketplace now than it was years ago.
When you say pencil, I'm pretty sure you mean "graphite". A lovely and useful substance, to be sure, but not especially close to graphene.
Actually, graphite is merely disorganized graphene - the layers of graphene in graphite are in general layers (which let you lay down a line fairly easily), but they're not particularly big nor particularly long - it's really a disorganized heap of graphene molded together. When you write with a pencil, the line is composed of a lot of little pieces of graphene.
Heck, one of the first production methods involved regular tape and pencils - the pencil was rubbed onto paper and tape applied to the spot which lifts off the graphene.
Language also embeds within it history. And history is important for many reasons (many of which are related to "if you don't study it, you'll repeat it").
Europe's an interesting study - you have the Barbaric English, the Germanic Germans, the Romantic French/Spanish/Italians, and so forth. All of which reflect the interesting history and empires of Europe. (Romantic - sure we like to think of the French as good at love, and that may be the origins of the word "romantic" in English, yet it refers to the more practical Roman Empire roots which is why they're quite similar today, despite millennia of independent evolution).
Heck, the modern day is shaped by culture too - internet memes manage to worm their way into our language. The rise of smartphones brings about the rise of the use of the word "selfie" (despite cameraphones being popular prior to the smartphone, and many often had mirrors to enable selfie taking, the word itself pretty much arose post-iPhone).
Language is culture. If you want to learn a language without culture, you need to go for an artificial one. Learn Klingon. Or Esperanto.
Even in the Internet age language is evolving to accommodate new aspects of internet culture that crop up. To claim it all as empty and vapid really denies the fact that languages evolve because of the culture of the day.
It takes about 15 years of steady progress to get from "shitty ______ car" to "I'd consider ______ cars these days"
The Korean cars are very acceptable in quality, and the price difference between them and the Japanese of similar models is almost enough to make the switch.
For a manufacturer perhaps. For a consumer who got bitten by buying a "sh*tty car" well, it can take far longer to never.
I know back in the 80s when Hyundai first went into cars and introduced the POS Pony to North America. A car that would only start if you managed to twiddle the radio knob, the phase of the moon was right, it was sunny outside and you blinked the headlights 3 times. And maybe even honked the horn.
Oh and yes, sunny day required. If there was a hint of moisture, it would stall.
These days though, Korean cars aren't too shabby - they took a lot of design cues (and designers) from Europe, a few engineers from Japan and end up producing decent looking and performing cars with quite high quality.
Eminent domain those house and get some more lanes in.
Probably better to put a new highway in off to one side or another, considering it's LA go with both.
Actually, LA is the #1 example of trying to out-build congestion. And traffic engineers have observed and pretty much concluded that traffic expands to fill all lanes. Build another lane and it's full and congested in relatively short order.
So no, trying to build more lanes of traffic just leads to ever worse traffic in the end as it expands to fill the new space up. The goal instead is to try to promote more efficient use of the road - a whole city block of (single occupant) cars can be cleared up by one bus carrying the same number of people.
Very forward looking behavior from apple. You're going to need 64 bit to use more than 2GB of ram without major pain (32 bit addressing is a bitch and workarounds are slow) By the time the rest of the industry is going to be faced with the inevitable transition apple will already have years of experience with 64bit in their mobile platform.
Actually, Apple didn't do it for memory, they did it because AArch64 is a more efficient architecture. I.e., it's a lot faster. ARMv8 over ARMv7 running 32-bit code is only around 10-20% faster. But run the same code in 64-bit mode and it screams.
It's how people got the "2x faster" figures on the A7 SoC - in 64-bit mode things are way faster on the A7 than if you ran it in 32 bit mode.
Android will get similar speedups once it's fully 64-bit...
Except that Interac has been doing realtime debit transactions for many years, across all Canadian banks, both at point of sale and at ATMs. It's good news if the US is moving in this direction, because it is an excellent system, but it would be a stretch to call it the bank account of the future when it has existed for years.
The thing is, in most places in the world, Canada included, there aren't that many banks, credit unions and other financial institutions. The number is small enough that they all can rapidly agree on new standards and proposals and all that. Heck, the vast majority of banking in Canada is done by the "big three" banks.
In the US, that doesn't hold - there are literally tens of thousands of banks and credit unions and other financial institutions. If you ever wondered why US cheques don't seem to be taken at a lot of places ("money orders" only or the sort of thing), well,that's why - getting it all sorted out is a mess.
So a problem is just getting all of them to talk to one another and cooperate. And some of these are literally some old lady sitting around with a ledger whose only excitement is having to connect the computer to the phone line and downloading the day's transactions.
And given how independent-minded Americans are, there's probably a ton of those kind of banks who are basically run by 2-3 people.
Given the chemistry of chocolate, conching and termpering take place at VERY specific temperatures or you get poor results.
Notice how hot the middle east is? Well, it's so hot that chocolate just doesn't conch or temper at all without cooling, so if you keep chocolate outside, it gets nasty.
So yeah, they don't have good chocolate at all.
(While the actual temperatures are closely guarded, tempering is usually done around 31.5C, while conching times and temperatures are proprietary trade secrets for every company)
You ain't telling me nothing because I have a customer who has all the early Kiss albums on the very first CD releases and he came to me complaining that "These new CDs don't sound right, I think my PC is messed up" but when I threw an MP3 rip of Strutter from his first run CDs in Audacity? There was peaks, valleys, actual HEADROOM on the recording. Took the exact same song from the exact same album from his recent box set? it was just a fucking wall, literally it was just slammed to the max from the first note to the last and sounded like shit.
I have a compilation CD that was obviously from various masters. There was one track on there that was notable in Audacity - because while all the other tracks were squiggly with peaks, valleys and stuff, this one song was a solid blob on the timeline; And the CD was normalized, so the solid blob didn't touch more than 70% or so.
Was such an interesting sight - you had songs and then you had this solid blob in the middle of it.
For drugs, the drug (chemical) itself is not patentable. The process used to make the drug IS patentable. That's what's actually patented.
You see, part of the problem with making chemicals is the process you use. You want a process that uses little energy (energy costs money), has high yields (every chemical reaction has an equilibrium point and for some processes, it means your desired product is only 10% of the entire thing at the end), etc. etc. etc.
So when they tweak the process to produce slightly modified versions of the drug, that can generate a new patent because the patent describes exactly how to produce that drug - start with raw materials A, B, C,... Z, then mix A and B and heat,... etc.
In fact, it's possible for a generic drug manufacturer to come up with a different way of making the drug before the patents expire.
Android and Apple's own OSX are proof that this is not a death sentence to the company.
So, your example is to show that only Samsung is really making profits (HTC and the rest are struggling), and only by carpetbombing the market with hundreds of phones (seriously - Samsung has released 2 new smartphones per week in 2014, and 1 tablet per week).
And your other example is in a market that's declining (Mac sales are declining to stable, but far far less profitable than iOS).
Yeah, it may not be a death knell, but do we need to bring up the "Apple is dying" meme again? Your examples where companies are struggling to exist or product lines that have significantly diminished sales volume doesn't actually provide any backing to your statement. In fact, one could say that other than Samsung, Android isn't a moneymaker, and OS X shows a slow gradual fall.
GIven most of the data is what's reported by a browser, why don't browsers filter the data?
Especially if "Do Not Track" is set to on - why don't they limit the data to send back?
Fonts - Microsoft released 6 fonts for the web over a decade ago - just report those 6 across all platforms and maybe a few standard system ones (you can get this from the User-Agent anyways). Make it whitelist of fonts.
Sure, some data is gathered through plugins, but I thought many are now click-to-run so you can't get that data unless you specifically run those plugins.
Is there a reason why browsers like Firefox return everything?
Slashdot Mirror
The activists will be activists.
HOWEVER, if they repeatedly deny the scenario that the video shows, it discredits THEM, and the general public would regard them as whackos that need a reality check.
And activist video can be shown in context - often times when something happens those who capture it only show the aftermath, and not the entire scenario. Being able to see before and after what activists record is extremely useful.
So yeah, perhaps the video you see on TV shows Brown getting shot. Then the source video the body cam shows what happened before the camera started recording putting things in even more context.
Datasheets ARE publicly available. However, they're for the actual DRAM ICs themselves, and not of the modules.
There are only a few DRAM manufacturers out there - Samsung, Hynix, Elpida, Micron are among them.
Samsung Computing DRAM (they also have Graphics DRAM and others). Some of their newest chips don't have datasheets yet, but that'll be forthcoming. The older ones in production do, however.
Hynix
Micron (and Elpida).
These are all generally available. Since the only real difference between them is a few timing numbers, they're not generally a huge secret - it's all governed by JEDEC standards anyhow.
Memory modules are just collections of these chips so they can be generalized to what you buy in the store for your PC.
You can't sell a patent. They're not really "owned". (This always comes up, as if /. posters refuse to learn about IP law just like non-tech people refuse to learn about computers. Hrm...).
Look at any patent and you'll see an inventor's list. That's who the patent belongs to. They're not transferrable.
Instead, what IS transferrable is usage rights, aka licensing. And a lot of the time, the use rights are exclusive, because as an inventor, you control who can use it (the monopoly to use the patented invention is the inventor's).
Of course, given a patent takes at least $10,000 to apply for and more if you need to defend and back-and-forth and patent attorneys, what happens is two fold.
First, companies have an "assignment of invention" clause in their employment contracts - which at a minimum says anything you work on during working hours belongs to them. Including anything patented. Or in other words, they get a right to use your invention.
Second, because a company is sponsoring your patent application, well, they make sure they get an exclusive license to your patent.
So the patent's yours but by applying, your company already gets a right to use it, and by taking the company's money, that right becomes exclusive - you exclusively licensed the patent for them to use. And usually, that exclusive license you gave them is non-exclusive to them to re-license those rights to third parties. So as part of the company, they can license your patent to others.
And that's really what gets "bought" and "sold" - the exclusive right to the patent. The original inventors, who have to be real people who worked on the patent (and more than one has been invalidated because inventors were either left off the list, or were because an inventor didn't really "invent" it, but merely worked with the technology) still "own" the patent, but their right to license has been extinguished due to other contractual agreements in place.
And that's really the problem with Linux. It's a great server OS - but in the end, as a desktop OS it just stinks because all the developers scream when you try to "complicate" matters using tools like systemd, NetworkManager, PulseAudio which are essential to make a modern desktop OS.
For networking you need to consider the mobile use case - home user is at home, and firewall is set up to allow services so they can stream their music and whatnot all over the network. They move their laptop to a wifi hotspot, and now the network stack should reconfigure itself to the hotspot. But oh, the firewall rules need to resync because the home user isn't at home and is in a public place, so maybe having those services exposed is a bad idea. (In an ideal world, you'd really have NetworkManager tell systemd or init to shut down those esrvices).
That's a common scenario - user moves between trusted and untrusted networks, and something needs to detect what kind of network it is, then manage the firewall, DHCP and other things altogether.
Perhaps if you're lucky, it's switching between Ethernet and WiFi, which means you can statically configure the whole thing, but more often than not, it's on the same interface. Or maybe it's both - a laptop user connected to a public guest network AND a private wired network. Or vice-versa. Or maybe both networks are the same.
Ditto audio - while a server doesn't need audio, a desktop user does, and it has to handle the variety of APIs to access audio, the need to provide for multiple audio routing paths because as audio devices appear and disappear, the preferred routing may change - e.g., switch between onboard speaker+mic to Bluetooth headset for communications WHILE still playing audio (movie or music) through stereo speakers plugged into the line out jack. Then when Bluetooth disappears, mix communications audio (or mute the movie/music) if a call comes in. Audio mixing is important for multiple audio sources - perhaps you have a few YouTube video tabs open and are listening to something else - it's a PITA to stop that just to get audio for YouTube because it needs to release the audio device.
It's amazing how, despite Linux being an advanced multi-tasking OS, a lot of things are still stuck in the single-tasking world that developers think is all you need. Maybe a decade ago, but modern day PCs are so much more capable.
Technically, TOR was designed by the US Navy. Not quite the NSA, but still, government designed.
And the DS really are for exit nodes - taking the servers is the last thing I 'd do. I'd rather run a bunch of exit nodes then force the DS to route traffic over them since he who controls exit nodes has the power to spy, modify and do lots of other things with traffic.
Because you know sooner or later someone's going to log into their Google, Amazon, Facebook or other thing like their bank and completely de-anonymize themselves.
Perhaps a marketing manager for Sony decided to exploit the hack as a marketing maneuver? They got hacked, well, why not capitalize on it?
The PR on this turd is incredible - you simply cannot buy this amount of free publicity. With even POTUS calling on its release, it doesn't matter anymore.
Once the hack news dies down, release the movie and make up some excuse saying the FBI let it through or something, starting hype round #2.
Sometimes you just have a situation ripe for the picking.
Well, a large number of countries have some form of censorship or surveillance system for the internet. A completely free internet is available to few people.
So there may not be any firewall now, but that doesn't prevent them from implementing it later.
Sadly, most of the arrests have been people in the age of majority - perhaps they had the maturity of children, but they aren't children. Plus, given how expensive they are (several hundred bucks), it generally isn't a children's toy.
As for those claiming that it's not a problem because no one's lost a life yet - really? Aviation already is built upon the blood of many people, some of whom lost their lives over something as stupid as a light bulb.
And no, it may not be a direct cause, but it may be the last link of a chain of events that leads to an accident. Every mishap has been a chain - if any one of those things were different, it wouldn't have happened. Perhaps the pilot is in bad weather already trying hard to find the runway and then a flash comes across the cockpit. He blinks, it goes away, and he continues, but what he thinks is the runway is a after glow spot (similar to how a flashbulb causes temporary spots) and boom, crashes the airplane into a building along the glidepath.
And perhaps someone you know is on that plane.
That and Physics is the same way.
It's probably why those subjects are "hard" because they require creativity and inspiration to actually do - it's problem solving at its simplest level and it's what those in the engineering fields thrive on.
Anyhow, if you're struck trying to do math problems, you have to realize that they all follow the same pattern. After the subject is introduced, the first few problems will be solved by direct application of the lesson. Then the next few will be ones applying the current lesson and previous lessons. It all accumulates until the final set of problems involves a bunch of skills from the text, from your past math education, and so on.
And if you're struggling, the goal is not do just the required problems, but to start at the beginning of the problem set.and do them all. Yes, it's beyond the assignment, but you have to realize that the assignment is just the tip of the iceberg - a good prof already tells you that the problem set they assign is hard, and to really do it, a good student needs to do the entire set.
Same goes for physics problems. The first few questions directly apply equations and formulas from the chapter. Then the next ones apply several concepts together until you get to the mega one that pulls in multiple methods. And many even have multiple ways of tackling the problem that are correct. (Previous problems will lead y ou down each path thent he final one lets you decide which one you use). On an exam, that's a lifesaver because it lets you try both ways and if you don't get the same answer, you messed up.
The goal is to realize that the text is giving you the tools, the probme is to string those tools together. It's like programming or engineering.
And sometimes the most satisfying problems are the ones that look like they're impossible,but when you start realizing what you have, where you need to go, and little brain power and then AHA!
Hell, one trick I do is you write down everything you know that was given in the problem. Then figure out what you need to answer, and figure out what gets you there. And draw pictures, schematics, whatever to illustrate those factors you know, what you don't, and the pieces you do have. And the pieces that are implied
It's really just another form of Dancing Pigs social engineering attack. You give the user a plausible reason for downloading and installing software, and you'll find users go out of t heir way to install it.
Doesn't matter the OS. And it can be anything - be it porn, a "private porn browser" or other such tool and any OS is vulnerable. (Yes, "private porn browser" - download now and browse your porn in privacy and even your wife won't find out...).
AI replacing jobs is fine - as long as they're getting rid of grunt work jobs people hate doing and replacing them with higher quality, higher paying jobs that are more challenging.
Crap work jobs are the kind that offer no form of mental or physical stimulation or physical challenges that generally embody "good work". Physically demanding jobs like oil rig workers, (crab) fisherman, etc., appeal to few folks who really do enjoy the physical punishment and pain for a challenge they can do with their hands, while more creative industries like technology and culture appeal to those who wish to use their mental powers.
Crap jobs AI can probably take over would be stuff like janitorial work, simple assembly line style work where there is no physical challenge other than repetitive-strain injury and barely any mental stimulation.
As for the outcomes, unfortunately, the masses who toil will be the ones out of work and homeless while the rich buy up the land. Money is power, and power is not something that an AI really replaces. (It's actually those in power that will use AI to replace jobs to save on labor costs. The former employee is now jobless and has less money and thus power than when they were employed).
That's not to say it isn't impossible to have a place where humans are able to do work for the betterment of humanity than just toil around, but it needs to be a carefully designed and planned environment.
See Marshall Brain's Manna.
Exactly. An English major already has a leg up provided they can communicate in writing. And the more engineering classes you can take related to the field your company works in, your writing's only going to improve as you're able to understand the engineers better and write fairly decent documentation.
Heck, get a job in communications with a company that does STEM work you like - sure you'll write PR and all that in the beginning, but that's the point - skills like communications are VERY valuable, and if you can better yourself by understanding more about what the company does by taking classes in the field, you can only go up from writing marketing copy to documentation, both internal and external.
If you can augment it to interfacing with customers, you're instantly a manager - able to take vague notions of what customers want and translating them into nice neat requirements that the engineering team can understand.
Practical arts skills like languages are typically undervalued everywhere, but are extremely useful. Businesses need to communicate, both internally and externally so you've already got positions you can slot yourself into. Just find a company doing the STEM things you like and try to fit yourself in.
Or in this case, rendered utterly irrelevant.
Because iTunes sells unprotected music. Just like Amazon and many other music stores. iTunes is still #1, but their market share is sliding.
The iPods are on life-support - they don't make Apple much money anymore but Apple keeps them around because there's still a tiny demand for them.
And streaming services have basically taken over music sales - sales from iTunes and other stores is far lower nowadays while streaming services like Pandora and others are rising.
Whatever harm iTunes did, seems to have resulted in a far more vibrant marketplace now than it was years ago.
Actually, graphite is merely disorganized graphene - the layers of graphene in graphite are in general layers (which let you lay down a line fairly easily), but they're not particularly big nor particularly long - it's really a disorganized heap of graphene molded together. When you write with a pencil, the line is composed of a lot of little pieces of graphene.
Heck, one of the first production methods involved regular tape and pencils - the pencil was rubbed onto paper and tape applied to the spot which lifts off the graphene.
Language also embeds within it history. And history is important for many reasons (many of which are related to "if you don't study it, you'll repeat it").
Europe's an interesting study - you have the Barbaric English, the Germanic Germans, the Romantic French/Spanish/Italians, and so forth. All of which reflect the interesting history and empires of Europe. (Romantic - sure we like to think of the French as good at love, and that may be the origins of the word "romantic" in English, yet it refers to the more practical Roman Empire roots which is why they're quite similar today, despite millennia of independent evolution).
Heck, the modern day is shaped by culture too - internet memes manage to worm their way into our language. The rise of smartphones brings about the rise of the use of the word "selfie" (despite cameraphones being popular prior to the smartphone, and many often had mirrors to enable selfie taking, the word itself pretty much arose post-iPhone).
Language is culture. If you want to learn a language without culture, you need to go for an artificial one. Learn Klingon. Or Esperanto.
Even in the Internet age language is evolving to accommodate new aspects of internet culture that crop up. To claim it all as empty and vapid really denies the fact that languages evolve because of the culture of the day.
For a manufacturer perhaps. For a consumer who got bitten by buying a "sh*tty car" well, it can take far longer to never.
I know back in the 80s when Hyundai first went into cars and introduced the POS Pony to North America. A car that would only start if you managed to twiddle the radio knob, the phase of the moon was right, it was sunny outside and you blinked the headlights 3 times. And maybe even honked the horn.
Oh and yes, sunny day required. If there was a hint of moisture, it would stall.
These days though, Korean cars aren't too shabby - they took a lot of design cues (and designers) from Europe, a few engineers from Japan and end up producing decent looking and performing cars with quite high quality.
Actually, LA is the #1 example of trying to out-build congestion. And traffic engineers have observed and pretty much concluded that traffic expands to fill all lanes. Build another lane and it's full and congested in relatively short order.
So no, trying to build more lanes of traffic just leads to ever worse traffic in the end as it expands to fill the new space up. The goal instead is to try to promote more efficient use of the road - a whole city block of (single occupant) cars can be cleared up by one bus carrying the same number of people.
Actually, Apple didn't do it for memory, they did it because AArch64 is a more efficient architecture. I.e., it's a lot faster. ARMv8 over ARMv7 running 32-bit code is only around 10-20% faster. But run the same code in 64-bit mode and it screams.
It's how people got the "2x faster" figures on the A7 SoC - in 64-bit mode things are way faster on the A7 than if you ran it in 32 bit mode.
Android will get similar speedups once it's fully 64-bit...
Actually, Samsung owns a fab in Texas that makes Apple SoCs - and that's all it does.
And that's been the case for a few years now, even through the Samsung-Apple patent spat.
It's a complex relationship, to the say the least -
The thing is, in most places in the world, Canada included, there aren't that many banks, credit unions and other financial institutions. The number is small enough that they all can rapidly agree on new standards and proposals and all that. Heck, the vast majority of banking in Canada is done by the "big three" banks.
In the US, that doesn't hold - there are literally tens of thousands of banks and credit unions and other financial institutions. If you ever wondered why US cheques don't seem to be taken at a lot of places ("money orders" only or the sort of thing), well ,that's why - getting it all sorted out is a mess.
So a problem is just getting all of them to talk to one another and cooperate. And some of these are literally some old lady sitting around with a ledger whose only excitement is having to connect the computer to the phone line and downloading the day's transactions.
And given how independent-minded Americans are, there's probably a ton of those kind of banks who are basically run by 2-3 people.
Given the chemistry of chocolate, conching and termpering take place at VERY specific temperatures or you get poor results.
Notice how hot the middle east is? Well, it's so hot that chocolate just doesn't conch or temper at all without cooling, so if you keep chocolate outside, it gets nasty.
So yeah, they don't have good chocolate at all.
(While the actual temperatures are closely guarded, tempering is usually done around 31.5C, while conching times and temperatures are proprietary trade secrets for every company)
I have a compilation CD that was obviously from various masters. There was one track on there that was notable in Audacity - because while all the other tracks were squiggly with peaks, valleys and stuff, this one song was a solid blob on the timeline; And the CD was normalized, so the solid blob didn't touch more than 70% or so.
Was such an interesting sight - you had songs and then you had this solid blob in the middle of it.
You're not understanding how patents work.
For drugs, the drug (chemical) itself is not patentable. The process used to make the drug IS patentable. That's what's actually patented.
You see, part of the problem with making chemicals is the process you use. You want a process that uses little energy (energy costs money), has high yields (every chemical reaction has an equilibrium point and for some processes, it means your desired product is only 10% of the entire thing at the end), etc. etc. etc.
So when they tweak the process to produce slightly modified versions of the drug, that can generate a new patent because the patent describes exactly how to produce that drug - start with raw materials A, B, C, ... Z, then mix A and B and heat, ... etc.
In fact, it's possible for a generic drug manufacturer to come up with a different way of making the drug before the patents expire.
So, your example is to show that only Samsung is really making profits (HTC and the rest are struggling), and only by carpetbombing the market with hundreds of phones (seriously - Samsung has released 2 new smartphones per week in 2014, and 1 tablet per week).
And your other example is in a market that's declining (Mac sales are declining to stable, but far far less profitable than iOS).
Yeah, it may not be a death knell, but do we need to bring up the "Apple is dying" meme again? Your examples where companies are struggling to exist or product lines that have significantly diminished sales volume doesn't actually provide any backing to your statement. In fact, one could say that other than Samsung, Android isn't a moneymaker, and OS X shows a slow gradual fall.
GIven most of the data is what's reported by a browser, why don't browsers filter the data?
Especially if "Do Not Track" is set to on - why don't they limit the data to send back?
Fonts - Microsoft released 6 fonts for the web over a decade ago - just report those 6 across all platforms and maybe a few standard system ones (you can get this from the User-Agent anyways). Make it whitelist of fonts.
Sure, some data is gathered through plugins, but I thought many are now click-to-run so you can't get that data unless you specifically run those plugins.
Is there a reason why browsers like Firefox return everything?