When recycling started big time here in NZ we had open recycling crates that were great, everyone could see what was in the bin, not so good for privacy [you drink too much wine]. Later they changed them to larger lidded wheelie bins and then the recycling content was degraded significantly as no-one could see the crap that was being put in there. No doubt China didn't appreciate the hugely lowered quality of recycling material that they were getting.
What people have found was the old sorted recycling bins didn't work - people did participate, but only to a minor degree. Something like it was only really capturing 20% of available recyclable materials - the stuff people really knew they could recycle. The rules of what went in which bin or bag was just complex enough that unless you knew, it would go into the trash because it was just too complex.
In fact, for a time, the plastic recycling was limited to a few numbers - and you had to know what the item plastic number was and what was supported. This turned out to be horrendously complex, that they now just say the item type - e.g., plastic water bottles, yogurt cups, etc. Enough so that other than a few items (e.g., plastic bags), almost anything plastic can go in.
Revolutions in machine vision and learning made it possible to do "single stream" recycling, where you just put it all in a single bin and let the machines figure it out. It turns out participation and recovery rates dramatically rise when this happens, so even though the quality is lower, the amount recovered is greater.
And really things like paper degrade very quickly, so even degraded, it can be composted - recycling of paper is far less important than capturing plastics which last far longer in the environment (years and decades) and cause all sorts of issues (pollution - when they break up into microplastics and get swallowed by animals, and the great plastic patches of the world simply accelerate this process.) So it's better to capture plastic.
Glass? That's almost too easy to recycle, But also glass is non-economical to recycle... used glass just doesn't sell for much.
With privacy addressing, which almost everything IPv6 uses, it's hard to probe for devices.
It's not something to rely on, and 1x1 pixel images will be used to get the victims IP from phishing emails, but even if IPv6 routers do allow inbound connections by default (mine doesn't) it won't be an instant disaster ( NAT can be bridged if you can get the victim to start the connection)
Who cares about probing for devices - with IPv6, it means every device is now trackable all over web. Without cookies, super cookies, or anything. It's almost too easy to track someone using IPv6, given that their IP address will basically stay the same. Add a cookie, and you can track people even when their IP address changes. Isn't this Google or Amazon or Facebook's ultimate dream?
Tracking users on IPv4 requires more work, because their IP is meaningless - with NAT, who knows how many people are behind it. And if you're someone like Google or Facebook, you can have easily 1-5 people you need to individually track behind 1 IP address, making IP addresses useless for tracking other than "You may know these people".
But with IPv6, it's so much easier - everyone's got their own address, and other than perhaps a shared PC (do they exist?) every IP address will basically be for one person only, so you'll have maybe 1-3 devices (IP addresses) belonging to 1 person - phone, tablet, computer. Once you know what those IP addresses are, that person's internet usage is much easier to track.
Oh, they can still do the "You may know X" thing by assuming most households would have a/64 and looking at the prefix, but now they can individually identify a person by IP address makes tracking so much easier.
And the RIAA and copyright cops would love it too - now an IP address can lead to a single device, so much easier to get warrants out for single devices that can be positively identified. And forensic capture can then identify the individual user and party responsible for "copyright infringement damages". No longer can people rely on the "one IP address cannot identify individuals" defense anymore, when for most devices, it positively can. Or the whole "someone hacked my WiFi".
It's almost as if someone will have to make a box that does IPv6 NAT just to restore a modicum of privacy, or at least, destroy any notion that a single IPv6 address can identify a single device.
Guess what? Guns help prevent crime more than they cause it. And we're not talking about indirect deterrence here where knowing a populace is armed keeps potential criminals scared. We're only talking about direct defensive uses of firearms.
So obviously the CDC did not conduct the research, because they're not allowed to. They're allowed to contract it out for no money, which basically means really self-interested researchers (i.e., industry) gets to write an opinion piece about it.
Your article is dated to 2013, and the CDC has not conducted any gun violence research since 1996 (Dickey Amendment).
And all my article states is the AMA is lobbying for its appeal since 2016, because one really cannot make any sort of judgements without proper research. Of course, the NRA opposes this, almost as if they're worried about the real truth, that it might be the next cigarettes, or leaded gasoline, or climate change, or something. Or it might be because their whole set of mottoes end up being lies...
watching the channel obviously. Space travel is dangerous and maims the body with radiation.
Plus requires a significant time investment. It's not like you can hop up to the ISS to catch a view of the Earth from the cupola and then hop back a few hours later. (The ISS orbits every 90 minutes).
No, right now visits to the ISS require months of training, a few million dollars and at least 2 weeks up there.
Can't just do it on a whim or even just take a day off work to visit.
[Pinky finger to corner of mouth] Only $1 Beeelllyon to sell out national security and do away with trade sanctions.
Not really that much in today's markets.
No, it only costed China $500M in a Trump hotel. That $1B is a public figure for "punishment". But probably will go into the Chinese government coffers to repay that investment.
That's it.
Meanwhile, Canadian steel and aluminium are the greater national security threat. Because war of 1812.
This has actually been measured for real (but at much larger scale) with GPS satellites (which orbit at a much higher altitude and much farther away from Earth's grativy well's center, compared to the head in your example) : They are basically glorified orbital atomic clocks, and once you factor in relativity, taking into account both speed and gravity, you can explain the observed drift over time with a convincing precision.
One should also note that GPS is one of the few things in the world we use daily that requires compensating for both special AND general relativity at the same time. The satellites are in motion relative to us, leading to special relativity compensation, and the satellites are high enough up that gravity is a factor, so they too need a general relativity compensation.
And the GPS designers were smart enough to realize this from the get-go and order appropriate atomic clocks that compensated for the drift.
And the drift is relatively big - if you did not compensate, after a day, you'd be a mile off. That's how precise everything is. And the compensation happens all the time - part of the GPS data includes almanac data, and the USAF (operators the ground portion) are constantly measuring and adjusting the drifts of each satellite to keep every one on time.
And it all fits in a tiny little chip cost only a buck or so that does all the fancy computations.
If I were on a tight schedule or in a hurry, I'd be driving my OWN car where I am in full control of the situation, you know?
And if you tried that, you'd just get caught in traffic. Not because everyone else also drove (many events everyone says to take public transit, which works fairly well), but because there are just so many people walking everywhere traffic just doesn't move.
Personally, I walk out of the area first to catch transit - because the events are located downtown, the stations are near and few people ever bother to make a 5 minute walk to another station further up. As a bonus, you get a seat because the crowds use the later stations.
Require real caller ID. It's not like the phone company doesn't know who to bill.
Except it won't work. One reason for spoofing the number is simple - many PBX systems at an office have lines that are dynamically assigned - if you call out, the PBX picks a free line and connects your call to it. Those lines will have numbers associated with them, but you can't call them because they're not valid DID or hunting line numbers. So the PBX tells the phone company to spoof either the DID number or the main phone number. (Likewise, when a DID or main line call comes in, the phone company picks a line and tells the PBX which number it's for).
No, what you REALLY want is phone companies to do the same thing most ISPs do now - source IP verification. As in the spoofed number they get must be associated with the group of phone lines it's coming from - so an office can hand out spoofed numbers properly, but they can only hand out numbers they actually own.
The only problem now is VoIP providers who rightfully have to spoof numbers to indicate who is really calling - again, they buy a huge clump of lines and those numbers are inappropriate for the calling party. And the problem is the database of valid phone numbers from those VoIP providers can be rather big to do a number verification. (Plus, it's just as easy for robocallers to sign up, wear out the number, abandon the account and sign up again). What may help is if the phone company could put like a "VoIP: Provider: Name" to the caller ID, so you'd get "VoIP: Vonage: John Smith"
Any company who requires normal application software to be installed with admin rights is run by morons
No, it's perfectly reasonable to require installation to require admin rights. I mean, you can't install Linux applications without admin rights eitehr.
It's required to put files in user-protected locations, like/bin or c:\Program Files\ so users don't go accidentally mucking up installations.
If a user can install stuff to system wide locations without admin, they can easily replace said system wide stuff as well, an that's generally a bad thing. After all, you don't want users replacing/bin/ls or/bin/sh on you without admin, do you?
Any law which has a deadline so far in advance that no one who votes on it will be around to see it come to fruition is, pretty much by definition, "feel good legislation". ie: horseshit.
And how long do you propose it takes?
It's a long road to carbon neutrality, especially if you want to do it yourself without crippling your economy. You can cheat and buy carbon credits, but again, see the part about crippling the economy.
The only alternative is you do it immediately, which given how deeply fossil fuels are embedded in our day to day lives makes it almost impossible, or never.
So you have to wean yourself off fossil fuels, and that takes time to find alternatives. (Hey, surfboards! Oh wait, those use a lot of fossil fuel based raw materials).
Fossil fuels have powered a huge amount of the world, it's why the world population more than tripled in the 20th century and present (from 2B near the end of the 19th century to 7B now). Getting rid of it will take a lot of time. It's not just cars, but basically every product has some sort of fossil fuel base. You can't get there by switching to electric cars (who still have materials made from fossil fuel plastics), you still need planes and trucks and other things, including asphalt.
Name changes used to work, but these days they tend to backfire. Journalists will still call them Monsanto (now rebranded Bayer due to bad publicity).
All changing your name like that does is publicly admit that your reputation is impossible to salvage and you are trying to be sneaky. It's not like in the old days where such things could get by unnoticed.
Actually, journalists have to use the current name, so it's actually more like "Bayer (formerly Monsanto) has just announced new lawsuits against farmers".
This kind of pollutes the parent name a bit more, come to think of it.
We all have smartphones already. Their maps are constantly up to date. Why would I want to use outdated maps in my vehicle? The importance of the vehicle's entertainment system is lessening (is that a word?). Phones and tablets have overtaken the pricey navigation and DVD systems.
Go through along tunnel, with exits, using your phone. Once it loses the sat connection it doesn't know where it is. Your car's nav system can use information from the car to keep track of it's location on the map, and tell you where to exit. I often chuckle at the stories of Uber riders going way out of their way because the driver's phone lost signal in the tunnel, and didn't know where to get off.
Or you lose data connection. I was surprised when I was using Google Maps for navigation that you cannot navigate when your data connection goes away. It may have a cached navigation plan if you managed to start navigation prior to losing the network connection, but it's stuck after that. Works fine for brief interruptions, but if you have to turn data off, not so good.
And yes, this was WITH offline maps.
So yes, it's nice to actually have backup systems just in case.
And why might you lose data connection? Well, travel is a big one. Depending on your carrier, you might have no problems with data roaming, or you might get dinged a lot of money when you do.
In this cloud connected world, an offline mapping system is useful. Unless you want to burden yourself with paper maps, a car GPS can serve as an adequate backup for most cases.
Do app developers have to pay Apple to gain access to CarPlay?
I'm guessing that it's not merely a question of making your app meet CarPlay UI standards and meeting some "distraction free" criteria.
Or is it one of those cases where Apple has some weird opaque standard tied to internal strategies and you never have any way of knowing how to get CarPlay enabled?
I think at first it was limited to a few developers - there were already a few apps using CarPlay so I presume it's just another framework you can use.
However, CarPlay interactions are limited - Apple's design philosophy for CarPlay is you do not interact with it (because using a touchscreen is hard, triply so if the car is in motion) so everything needs to be controllable via voice.
(This is different than Android Auto which allows developers to have touch screen usage).
Presumably third party navigation apps have to have some sort of voice entry system
This isn't exactly Apple's first time considering entry into the advertising business. Apple also tried to buy AdMob in 2010 but they got outbid by Google.
And Google only bought them because Apple had iAd.
As in, the DoJ only allowed Google to buy AdMob because Apple's iAd was seen as a viable competitor.
I wouldn't hesitate to think the only reason Apple kept iAd along for as long as it did was Google was paying Apple to keep it alive as part of the DoJ terms for acquisition. Because after the first year, iAd was basically dead - no one was using it other than a few developers (Apple got desperate and started enticing developers to use iAd for marketing).
iAd was never popular with advertisers, because Apple only gave them viewership numbers - Apple consistently refused to give ad purchasers details on who viewed their ads.
Look at it this way. If you violate the licensing terms of a commercial product, that 3rd party vendor will be all over your ass with lawsuits. It's hard, but you comply because that's business.
The simple reason why a lot of companies are lax with GPL/FOSS compliance is because it's easier to get away with it. Either that, or they're flying a bit too much from the seat of their pants (typical Silicon Valley mindset).
How come when it comes to movies and music, it's "free the content!" and "movie industry makes too much money" or "copyright is too long" and "piracy is the way to go!".
But when a GPL violation occurs, which is a bog-standard copyright violation, aka piracy, it's never about "the content should be free!" or "the evil content industry"? (You can't really violate the GPL - you can not agree to follow it, but it means instead of the GPL,. you're back to All Rights Reserved copyright, and thus, a "GPL Violation" is really a copyright violation because you didn't agree to the GPL, so instead you've agreed to your default rights under copyright law which you violated).
Somehow, if it's OK when it's other people's content, but when it's your content, it's "hands off!".
I suspect it's in part because Apple got caught artificially slowing down older devices (and frankly, I think a number of Android vendors did too given how a number of my devices have become inexplicably unusably slow over time even if I uninstall all or reset to factory). Now that that practice has been bred out through consumer uproar, people are probably realising they don't actually need a phone every 2 years because most are good for 4 - 5 years for 99% of the population. It was only ever the process of artificially crippling devices that forced people to upgrade.
Or not, since iPhones still throttle down. They're just more open about it.
And you can say Android should do the same - given how many seem to boot loop because they try to boot up and fail because the battery can't provide enough power. The Nexus 6p is famous for it, with a community hack fixing boot loops by disabling the high performance cores.
Or in other words, the Android community deliberately cripples the performance of the phone (using the low power cores and telling the kernel to not switch to high performance cores) in order to fix a common problem in older phones. They can't boot up because the kernel will try to boot the higher power cores, they get busy and the battery can't supply enough power and the phone resets.
And I know plenty of people who say "30% on their battery is basically 0% - once it hits 30%, the phone will shut off". Again, the battery cannot supply the instantaneous power required, and the voltage dips. (The impedance of lithium secondary batteries goes up as it discharges because the ions have to migrate through more material to continue the reaction).
Apple slows the processor down (on some phones - other phones with the same model are fine - it depends on your usage after all) so it can guarantee your phone works. Slow or not, if it means a working phone or a phone that lasts until 0%, people generally will want that.
And no, a slow phone does not mean someone will upgrade - performance is not everything. Some people are happy with slow phones (see all the cheap Android phones they give away). Usually what triggers an upgrade is some other parameter - OS is too old, battery does not last as long, etc. And battery not lasting as long is a general impetus to upgrade. Apple slowing down the phone making the battery last longer ironically means more people generally will not upgrade their phones (at least until it gets shortened so much even slowing down the phone is inadequate).
Yes it fucking did. Flash/HTML4/CSS2 was strictly superior tech stack to HTML5/CSS3/JS. It handled cross-domain security better. It handled browser isolation better. It was a better programming language. It had fewer super-tracking features.
It may be technically better, but the implementation was clearly worse.
Because there were constant security issues, basically weekly. Update, update and update, and Adobe was completely inept at it, because even "installing fresh" still installed old vulnerable versions. Eventually, they gave up simply due to cost reasons.
And super tracking used flash extensively - the "super cookie" exploit where a website could set an non-removable cookie used flash. You could delete every cookie on your system but miss one and they would re-appear. And the way to manage Flash cookies was extremely lame. There was no need to do super tracking because flash ensured your cookies stayed with you. Or better yet, even violating the cookie policies of the browser.
I'd say things are better off now, simply because we're not relying on a single company to update their plugin. Heck, Adobe was genuinely slow enough that 0-days will be up, forcing the security release, and timelines were often at least a week away. for a fix. (And remember, Adobe has no incentive to fix Flash player issues, since it was something it had to give away).
Even better, when driving with the hands at 10 o'clock and 2 o'clock on the wheel, they are easily within your field of view
If you have a modern car it's actually 9 and 3 now. 10 and 2 is considered dangerous. And no resting your thumbs in the wheel. The reason for that is if the wheel twists, it can break your thumb.
Anyhow, the lady was clearly distracted - she was stopped at a GREEN light, fiddling with her watch. That is clearly the definition of distracted - the light turns green, and you're still fiddling with the phone and not actually moving.
Even worse, the guy behind you might honk, and if you blindly go forward, you might either get T-boned from a red light runner, a left turner might be crossing because you're stopped for whatever reason and thus holding back traffic, or maybe even a jaywalker starts crossing.
Yes, if you're stopped at a green, you create an incredibly dangerous situation. Other drivers simply don't know what's wrong and cause traffic chaos.
And yes, I've seen it happen way too many times - light turns green, car doesn't move and you're left with a huge WTF - do you turn because they're not moving? Plus, we all know the frustration of having waited through a long light, and the guy in front doesn't move until the light is about to turn yellow.
They started a campaign to FUND the future launching (if there are not manufacturing hiccups).
Nevermind it's also Indiegogo, home of scams and frauds. I've seen way too many Kickstarter campaigns appear months afterwards on Indiegogo (oddly, they generally are the successful ones). But they are not real - they were scam campaigns with "flexible funding" ensuring the scammers get the money.
Sometimes Indiegogo will remove the listings. Often times not.
Even when this campaign is over you can bet an "Atarii" will set it up again to scam people thinking it's part of the official campaign.
Plus, if you're international, Indiegogo takes money now, and if it fails, refunds money later. Problem is, anyone who does this internationally knows you will lose money on refunds - the exchange rate spread is easily 10% or more.
I'm sure there are scam campaigns on Kickstarter, but I always hear about them more on Indiegogo. And by scams, I mean not campaigns that try and fail, or work through it and fail (i.e., people who do and fail), I mean campaigns set up simply to take your money and run with no intention of actually doing anything.
If your work leads to burn-out then you're in an incredibly shit job for a company that doesn't care much about you at all, and no protections for your own mental health. Oh wait, American right?
Or maybe it's just reality - it's leading to mental breakdowns because what once took a few hours a week now requires you to work on it full time. So what was once "i'll work 2 hours this week and slap together a video and make my $10,000" is now "I have to work 40 hours a week to put together 5 videos to make $1000".
And yes, some of the big YouTubers make a LOT of money - Logan Paul before his little mistake was easily pulling in $100k a month. (He lived in a rented building costing $20k a month). The other top talent were regularly pulling in $100k+ annually.
I think they've experienced the drying up of their gold rush - they have to compete with hundreds of other YouTube creators who can produce very compelling content, but because they aren't as well established, pull in chump change. It doesn't help when half the people say "you need to make passive income, and YouTube is a great way to do it."
And I think they're in the wrong business if "it's too hard" - all the popular YouTube creators I watch don't produce more than a few videos a week - maybe only 1 a week, tops. Shows up in my feed just fine (and I'm not even subscribed to them!). No doubt, they aren't making "big bank" but I think they're more along the "comfortable bank" - not going to get filthy rich, but like every other wage slave out there, they make a decent living. And they work full time on their videos - producing,editing, filming and cutting a high quality presentation takes time.
One of them went through their day - starting at 8am to go through emails, then at 10am to deal with shipments, 11am through 4pm is "doing stuff" - working on something, then filming parts of it, editing it until about 5pm and then doing domestic chores and such until bedtime. It would take many days to do an episode because he cut out the boring bits, but not a slave day. And he goes out on vacations and conventions and all that.
They're not making big money. But they're making enough to live comfortably, and plow some of that money into keeping production values high (equipment, items to feature, etc).
Another personality I watched had a mental breakdown a few years ago. But you see the postings and you figure out why - the guy was practically putting up new videos daily. Then he stopped for a few months, then came on and posted what happened, and since then, he's switched to a more comfortable schedule.
I suspect the real reason is simple - GREED. You're a "creator", you make a few videos, you get a few bucks. You do this on and off, and then YouTube sends you a larger check. You then figure out you make a few more, and the checks get bigger and bigger now you're working 24/7 making videos because you want to get those huge checks. Perhaps this is at a time when you never held a real full time job (ever notice how young all those "personalities" are?) so greed takes over, you're working to make big bank, and naturally you break down.
The personalities I watched worked full time prior to becoming YouTube personalities, and thus while addictive, they know what they're comfortable with and thus know when to knock it off. It's a job, not a random "make money at home!" thing. It doesn't FEEL like a job at first, but in reality, it's work
Don't try to aim for big bank,because you know who else burns out early? Kids with ambitions to enter pro sports who work and work and work to the exclusion of all else. Chances are, you won't get in. Chill, realize that you won't get filthy stinking rich, and work at it. Or get some perspective, take a time out, work a regular job for a while, the get back into it with a new perspective on what you're really doing.
Somewhere around here I still have my old Pentax K1000 âoeauto nothingâ film camera. I keep telling myself I should pull it out and shoot some film... havenâ(TM)t actually done it yet, though.
That's your deep realization that shooting film is an expensive pain in the arse unless you are really passionate about shooting film. We did it that way because we had to and because there weren't any better options at the time. Getting good at photography back in the day was an almost ludicrously expensive proposition so you had to be passionate about it. If you weren't the sort of person who though it was a great idea to put a dark room in your house, chances are you weren't that passionate about film cameras to begin with. I know I couldn't afford to do it when I was younger. It just cost too much and the feedback loop for learning was far too slow.
Yes, it was expensive if you took dozens of images only to keep one or two of them. But in places and times where you can take time to take a photo, you generally took your time to compose your shot and have something decent the first try. Digital cameras have only been with us for just under 20 years, we've been taking photos as pure amateurs with decent results for far longer. Even the holiday snaps everyone takes were popular. And you know what? They generally came out OK!
It's not hard, it's not expensive, but you were cognizant of what you took. Heck, kids often have cheap cameras and they too took photos, and few were bankrupted.
Of course, we also weren't taking photos every 3 seconds - people took time and figured out what photo they would take first rather than scattershot take a million photos and (not) deal with it when you got home. It also meant most people weren't glued to their camera screens trying to capture everything - they looked first, then figured if it would make a good photo before raising the camera to the eye.
Because you don't get to see the results instantly, so it forces you to slow down and think about what you are doing, and get it right in the camera.
It's why I use ed to make programs. Because you don't get to see the results instantly, so it forces you to slow down and think about what you are doing, and get it right in the file.
It does, actually. Back in the day when you had to submit a job to the computer, then pick up the result hours later, syntax errors were rare - nothing worse than submitting your deck of cards, only to have an error printout from the computer because you made a typo. And with debug-run cycles so long (if you were a student, you were lucky to get one run per day), you simulated as much as you could so it would run on the second or third try.
These days, you write Hello World and some people can spend the next 10 compiler runs fixing syntax errors...
Sometimes there's just a huge rush to put code on the screen people don't stop and think what they're doing, just writing line after line after line...
âAfter you download Pigeon, it'll prompt you to allow location services multiple times.â
How does that work in the subway?
Because a phone doesn't rely solely on GPS? Localion services on phones can rely on 4 different types of signals to triangulate position - 2 are GNSS based - GPS and GLOSNASS (and some are having Galileo support too). The other two are WiFi and cellular.
Both Apple and Google use WiFi for triangulation where GNSS signals are absent, like indoors and underground. Apple devices generally cache it so even lack of a signal still allows for navigation (this was the cause of "Apple is tracking me!!!!" thing a few years ago when that cache file was discovered). This requires a network connection to get the navigation data of course, and it can be precise enough that even non-GPS equipped devices tethered to the Internet can do navigation.
The last method is cellular, which basically tries to examine nearby cell towers to get location, the same way it works for WiFi. Less accurate, but generally good in places where WiFi may be spotty or in less urban areas.
Nope. VLOGGING brings narcissism to a whole new level! Because Facebook just wasn't enough.
Ding ding ding ding! We have a winner!
YouTube is being used as a video diary. The fact that it does monetization is often the cherry on top. Facebook? They don't pay you jack squat But make a mindless YouTube video about crap and you can rake in real money.
Do it particularly well and you might not even need a job because YouTube can pay you better than any job you'd ever get.
Face it, teenage angst is one thing. Getting teenage angst to pay you some money? Well damn. And yes, YouTube is filled with tons of that dreck.
Still I can't imagine buying a new film camera at this point. I've got a Canonet Rangefinder for daily use, my 4x5 for arty stuff and there's so much on the used market that new gear simply isn't attractive.
That's a huge appeal of film cameras - they're so unwanted that a top end film camera from a couple of decades ago can be had super cheap as everyone migrated to digital. You can find an immense amount of pro level gear without spending a whole lot of money.
Maybe that's where the hipster thing starts - because all the old good stuff is so unwanted people are dumping it
One amazing thing about 35mm film specifically is how much dynamic range it has - you don't "shoot HDR" because the film IS HDR. Enough so you can often pull it a few stops either way without blowing out details. (If you only have ISO 100 film and need ISO 400 film? Shoot the ISO 100 film as if it was ISO400 film and you'll be fine as long as you remember you underexposed it 2 stops. But it can take it just fine). It's why you can make 35mm film cameras down to the "disposable" side of random aperture, random shutter and still have users end up with decent photos - 35mm film just did not care if you under or overexposed it - it was able to still capture a photo. You may have to adjust the exposure during development, but you can recover images even with thee shittiest of cameras.
Slashdot Mirror
What people have found was the old sorted recycling bins didn't work - people did participate, but only to a minor degree. Something like it was only really capturing 20% of available recyclable materials - the stuff people really knew they could recycle. The rules of what went in which bin or bag was just complex enough that unless you knew, it would go into the trash because it was just too complex.
In fact, for a time, the plastic recycling was limited to a few numbers - and you had to know what the item plastic number was and what was supported. This turned out to be horrendously complex, that they now just say the item type - e.g., plastic water bottles, yogurt cups, etc. Enough so that other than a few items (e.g., plastic bags), almost anything plastic can go in.
Revolutions in machine vision and learning made it possible to do "single stream" recycling, where you just put it all in a single bin and let the machines figure it out. It turns out participation and recovery rates dramatically rise when this happens, so even though the quality is lower, the amount recovered is greater.
And really things like paper degrade very quickly, so even degraded, it can be composted - recycling of paper is far less important than capturing plastics which last far longer in the environment (years and decades) and cause all sorts of issues (pollution - when they break up into microplastics and get swallowed by animals, and the great plastic patches of the world simply accelerate this process.) So it's better to capture plastic.
Glass? That's almost too easy to recycle, But also glass is non-economical to recycle... used glass just doesn't sell for much.
Who cares about probing for devices - with IPv6, it means every device is now trackable all over web. Without cookies, super cookies, or anything. It's almost too easy to track someone using IPv6, given that their IP address will basically stay the same. Add a cookie, and you can track people even when their IP address changes. Isn't this Google or Amazon or Facebook's ultimate dream?
Tracking users on IPv4 requires more work, because their IP is meaningless - with NAT, who knows how many people are behind it. And if you're someone like Google or Facebook, you can have easily 1-5 people you need to individually track behind 1 IP address, making IP addresses useless for tracking other than "You may know these people".
But with IPv6, it's so much easier - everyone's got their own address, and other than perhaps a shared PC (do they exist?) every IP address will basically be for one person only, so you'll have maybe 1-3 devices (IP addresses) belonging to 1 person - phone, tablet, computer. Once you know what those IP addresses are, that person's internet usage is much easier to track.
Oh, they can still do the "You may know X" thing by assuming most households would have a /64 and looking at the prefix, but now they can individually identify a person by IP address makes tracking so much easier.
And the RIAA and copyright cops would love it too - now an IP address can lead to a single device, so much easier to get warrants out for single devices that can be positively identified. And forensic capture can then identify the individual user and party responsible for "copyright infringement damages". No longer can people rely on the "one IP address cannot identify individuals" defense anymore, when for most devices, it positively can. Or the whole "someone hacked my WiFi".
It's almost as if someone will have to make a box that does IPv6 NAT just to restore a modicum of privacy, or at least, destroy any notion that a single IPv6 address can identify a single device.
Funny, because for over 20 years, the CDC was prohibited from studying gun violence. Yes, the NRA has bought legislation that prevents any money the CDC gets from going into gun violence research.
So obviously the CDC did not conduct the research, because they're not allowed to. They're allowed to contract it out for no money, which basically means really self-interested researchers (i.e., industry) gets to write an opinion piece about it.
Your article is dated to 2013, and the CDC has not conducted any gun violence research since 1996 (Dickey Amendment).
And all my article states is the AMA is lobbying for its appeal since 2016, because one really cannot make any sort of judgements without proper research. Of course, the NRA opposes this, almost as if they're worried about the real truth, that it might be the next cigarettes, or leaded gasoline, or climate change, or something. Or it might be because their whole set of mottoes end up being lies...
Plus requires a significant time investment. It's not like you can hop up to the ISS to catch a view of the Earth from the cupola and then hop back a few hours later. (The ISS orbits every 90 minutes).
No, right now visits to the ISS require months of training, a few million dollars and at least 2 weeks up there.
Can't just do it on a whim or even just take a day off work to visit.
No, it only costed China $500M in a Trump hotel. That $1B is a public figure for "punishment". But probably will go into the Chinese government coffers to repay that investment.
That's it.
Meanwhile, Canadian steel and aluminium are the greater national security threat. Because war of 1812.
One should also note that GPS is one of the few things in the world we use daily that requires compensating for both special AND general relativity at the same time. The satellites are in motion relative to us, leading to special relativity compensation, and the satellites are high enough up that gravity is a factor, so they too need a general relativity compensation.
And the GPS designers were smart enough to realize this from the get-go and order appropriate atomic clocks that compensated for the drift.
And the drift is relatively big - if you did not compensate, after a day, you'd be a mile off. That's how precise everything is. And the compensation happens all the time - part of the GPS data includes almanac data, and the USAF (operators the ground portion) are constantly measuring and adjusting the drifts of each satellite to keep every one on time.
And it all fits in a tiny little chip cost only a buck or so that does all the fancy computations.
And if you tried that, you'd just get caught in traffic. Not because everyone else also drove (many events everyone says to take public transit, which works fairly well), but because there are just so many people walking everywhere traffic just doesn't move.
Personally, I walk out of the area first to catch transit - because the events are located downtown, the stations are near and few people ever bother to make a 5 minute walk to another station further up. As a bonus, you get a seat because the crowds use the later stations.
Shark Week's coming soon!
Azure vs. the Great White
Can Megalodon do Office365?
Teaching Sharks to Surf (the Internet)
Except it won't work. One reason for spoofing the number is simple - many PBX systems at an office have lines that are dynamically assigned - if you call out, the PBX picks a free line and connects your call to it. Those lines will have numbers associated with them, but you can't call them because they're not valid DID or hunting line numbers. So the PBX tells the phone company to spoof either the DID number or the main phone number. (Likewise, when a DID or main line call comes in, the phone company picks a line and tells the PBX which number it's for).
No, what you REALLY want is phone companies to do the same thing most ISPs do now - source IP verification. As in the spoofed number they get must be associated with the group of phone lines it's coming from - so an office can hand out spoofed numbers properly, but they can only hand out numbers they actually own.
The only problem now is VoIP providers who rightfully have to spoof numbers to indicate who is really calling - again, they buy a huge clump of lines and those numbers are inappropriate for the calling party. And the problem is the database of valid phone numbers from those VoIP providers can be rather big to do a number verification. (Plus, it's just as easy for robocallers to sign up, wear out the number, abandon the account and sign up again). What may help is if the phone company could put like a "VoIP: Provider: Name" to the caller ID, so you'd get "VoIP: Vonage: John Smith"
No, it's perfectly reasonable to require installation to require admin rights. I mean, you can't install Linux applications without admin rights eitehr.
It's required to put files in user-protected locations, like /bin or c:\Program Files\ so users don't go accidentally mucking up installations.
If a user can install stuff to system wide locations without admin, they can easily replace said system wide stuff as well, an that's generally a bad thing. After all, you don't want users replacing /bin/ls or /bin/sh on you without admin, do you?
And how long do you propose it takes?
It's a long road to carbon neutrality, especially if you want to do it yourself without crippling your economy. You can cheat and buy carbon credits, but again, see the part about crippling the economy.
The only alternative is you do it immediately, which given how deeply fossil fuels are embedded in our day to day lives makes it almost impossible, or never.
So you have to wean yourself off fossil fuels, and that takes time to find alternatives. (Hey, surfboards! Oh wait, those use a lot of fossil fuel based raw materials).
Fossil fuels have powered a huge amount of the world, it's why the world population more than tripled in the 20th century and present (from 2B near the end of the 19th century to 7B now). Getting rid of it will take a lot of time. It's not just cars, but basically every product has some sort of fossil fuel base. You can't get there by switching to electric cars (who still have materials made from fossil fuel plastics), you still need planes and trucks and other things, including asphalt.
Actually, journalists have to use the current name, so it's actually more like "Bayer (formerly Monsanto) has just announced new lawsuits against farmers".
This kind of pollutes the parent name a bit more, come to think of it.
Or you lose data connection. I was surprised when I was using Google Maps for navigation that you cannot navigate when your data connection goes away. It may have a cached navigation plan if you managed to start navigation prior to losing the network connection, but it's stuck after that. Works fine for brief interruptions, but if you have to turn data off, not so good.
And yes, this was WITH offline maps.
So yes, it's nice to actually have backup systems just in case.
And why might you lose data connection? Well, travel is a big one. Depending on your carrier, you might have no problems with data roaming, or you might get dinged a lot of money when you do.
In this cloud connected world, an offline mapping system is useful. Unless you want to burden yourself with paper maps, a car GPS can serve as an adequate backup for most cases.
I think at first it was limited to a few developers - there were already a few apps using CarPlay so I presume it's just another framework you can use.
However, CarPlay interactions are limited - Apple's design philosophy for CarPlay is you do not interact with it (because using a touchscreen is hard, triply so if the car is in motion) so everything needs to be controllable via voice.
(This is different than Android Auto which allows developers to have touch screen usage).
Presumably third party navigation apps have to have some sort of voice entry system
And Google only bought them because Apple had iAd.
As in, the DoJ only allowed Google to buy AdMob because Apple's iAd was seen as a viable competitor.
I wouldn't hesitate to think the only reason Apple kept iAd along for as long as it did was Google was paying Apple to keep it alive as part of the DoJ terms for acquisition. Because after the first year, iAd was basically dead - no one was using it other than a few developers (Apple got desperate and started enticing developers to use iAd for marketing).
iAd was never popular with advertisers, because Apple only gave them viewership numbers - Apple consistently refused to give ad purchasers details on who viewed their ads.
How come when it comes to movies and music, it's "free the content!" and "movie industry makes too much money" or "copyright is too long" and "piracy is the way to go!".
But when a GPL violation occurs, which is a bog-standard copyright violation, aka piracy, it's never about "the content should be free!" or "the evil content industry"? (You can't really violate the GPL - you can not agree to follow it, but it means instead of the GPL,. you're back to All Rights Reserved copyright, and thus, a "GPL Violation" is really a copyright violation because you didn't agree to the GPL, so instead you've agreed to your default rights under copyright law which you violated).
Somehow, if it's OK when it's other people's content, but when it's your content, it's "hands off!".
Or not, since iPhones still throttle down. They're just more open about it.
And you can say Android should do the same - given how many seem to boot loop because they try to boot up and fail because the battery can't provide enough power. The Nexus 6p is famous for it, with a community hack fixing boot loops by disabling the high performance cores.
Or in other words, the Android community deliberately cripples the performance of the phone (using the low power cores and telling the kernel to not switch to high performance cores) in order to fix a common problem in older phones. They can't boot up because the kernel will try to boot the higher power cores, they get busy and the battery can't supply enough power and the phone resets.
And I know plenty of people who say "30% on their battery is basically 0% - once it hits 30%, the phone will shut off". Again, the battery cannot supply the instantaneous power required, and the voltage dips. (The impedance of lithium secondary batteries goes up as it discharges because the ions have to migrate through more material to continue the reaction).
Apple slows the processor down (on some phones - other phones with the same model are fine - it depends on your usage after all) so it can guarantee your phone works. Slow or not, if it means a working phone or a phone that lasts until 0%, people generally will want that.
And no, a slow phone does not mean someone will upgrade - performance is not everything. Some people are happy with slow phones (see all the cheap Android phones they give away). Usually what triggers an upgrade is some other parameter - OS is too old, battery does not last as long, etc. And battery not lasting as long is a general impetus to upgrade. Apple slowing down the phone making the battery last longer ironically means more people generally will not upgrade their phones (at least until it gets shortened so much even slowing down the phone is inadequate).
It may be technically better, but the implementation was clearly worse.
Because there were constant security issues, basically weekly. Update, update and update, and Adobe was completely inept at it, because even "installing fresh" still installed old vulnerable versions. Eventually, they gave up simply due to cost reasons.
And super tracking used flash extensively - the "super cookie" exploit where a website could set an non-removable cookie used flash. You could delete every cookie on your system but miss one and they would re-appear. And the way to manage Flash cookies was extremely lame. There was no need to do super tracking because flash ensured your cookies stayed with you. Or better yet, even violating the cookie policies of the browser.
I'd say things are better off now, simply because we're not relying on a single company to update their plugin. Heck, Adobe was genuinely slow enough that 0-days will be up, forcing the security release, and timelines were often at least a week away. for a fix. (And remember, Adobe has no incentive to fix Flash player issues, since it was something it had to give away).
If you have a modern car it's actually 9 and 3 now. 10 and 2 is considered dangerous. And no resting your thumbs in the wheel. The reason for that is if the wheel twists, it can break your thumb.
Anyhow, the lady was clearly distracted - she was stopped at a GREEN light, fiddling with her watch. That is clearly the definition of distracted - the light turns green, and you're still fiddling with the phone and not actually moving.
Even worse, the guy behind you might honk, and if you blindly go forward, you might either get T-boned from a red light runner, a left turner might be crossing because you're stopped for whatever reason and thus holding back traffic, or maybe even a jaywalker starts crossing.
Yes, if you're stopped at a green, you create an incredibly dangerous situation. Other drivers simply don't know what's wrong and cause traffic chaos.
And yes, I've seen it happen way too many times - light turns green, car doesn't move and you're left with a huge WTF - do you turn because they're not moving? Plus, we all know the frustration of having waited through a long light, and the guy in front doesn't move until the light is about to turn yellow.
Nevermind it's also Indiegogo, home of scams and frauds. I've seen way too many Kickstarter campaigns appear months afterwards on Indiegogo (oddly, they generally are the successful ones). But they are not real - they were scam campaigns with "flexible funding" ensuring the scammers get the money.
Sometimes Indiegogo will remove the listings. Often times not.
Even when this campaign is over you can bet an "Atarii" will set it up again to scam people thinking it's part of the official campaign.
Plus, if you're international, Indiegogo takes money now, and if it fails, refunds money later. Problem is, anyone who does this internationally knows you will lose money on refunds - the exchange rate spread is easily 10% or more.
I'm sure there are scam campaigns on Kickstarter, but I always hear about them more on Indiegogo. And by scams, I mean not campaigns that try and fail, or work through it and fail (i.e., people who do and fail), I mean campaigns set up simply to take your money and run with no intention of actually doing anything.
Or maybe it's just reality - it's leading to mental breakdowns because what once took a few hours a week now requires you to work on it full time. So what was once "i'll work 2 hours this week and slap together a video and make my $10,000" is now "I have to work 40 hours a week to put together 5 videos to make $1000".
And yes, some of the big YouTubers make a LOT of money - Logan Paul before his little mistake was easily pulling in $100k a month. (He lived in a rented building costing $20k a month). The other top talent were regularly pulling in $100k+ annually.
I think they've experienced the drying up of their gold rush - they have to compete with hundreds of other YouTube creators who can produce very compelling content, but because they aren't as well established, pull in chump change. It doesn't help when half the people say "you need to make passive income, and YouTube is a great way to do it."
And I think they're in the wrong business if "it's too hard" - all the popular YouTube creators I watch don't produce more than a few videos a week - maybe only 1 a week, tops. Shows up in my feed just fine (and I'm not even subscribed to them!). No doubt, they aren't making "big bank" but I think they're more along the "comfortable bank" - not going to get filthy rich, but like every other wage slave out there, they make a decent living. And they work full time on their videos - producing ,editing, filming and cutting a high quality presentation takes time.
One of them went through their day - starting at 8am to go through emails, then at 10am to deal with shipments, 11am through 4pm is "doing stuff" - working on something, then filming parts of it, editing it until about 5pm and then doing domestic chores and such until bedtime. It would take many days to do an episode because he cut out the boring bits, but not a slave day. And he goes out on vacations and conventions and all that.
They're not making big money. But they're making enough to live comfortably, and plow some of that money into keeping production values high (equipment, items to feature, etc).
Another personality I watched had a mental breakdown a few years ago. But you see the postings and you figure out why - the guy was practically putting up new videos daily. Then he stopped for a few months, then came on and posted what happened, and since then, he's switched to a more comfortable schedule.
I suspect the real reason is simple - GREED. You're a "creator", you make a few videos, you get a few bucks. You do this on and off, and then YouTube sends you a larger check. You then figure out you make a few more, and the checks get bigger and bigger now you're working 24/7 making videos because you want to get those huge checks. Perhaps this is at a time when you never held a real full time job (ever notice how young all those "personalities" are?) so greed takes over, you're working to make big bank, and naturally you break down.
The personalities I watched worked full time prior to becoming YouTube personalities, and thus while addictive, they know what they're comfortable with and thus know when to knock it off. It's a job, not a random "make money at home!" thing. It doesn't FEEL like a job at first, but in reality, it's work
Don't try to aim for big bank,because you know who else burns out early? Kids with ambitions to enter pro sports who work and work and work to the exclusion of all else. Chances are, you won't get in. Chill, realize that you won't get filthy stinking rich, and work at it. Or get some perspective, take a time out, work a regular job for a while, the get back into it with a new perspective on what you're really doing.
As for YouTube and their
Yes, it was expensive if you took dozens of images only to keep one or two of them. But in places and times where you can take time to take a photo, you generally took your time to compose your shot and have something decent the first try. Digital cameras have only been with us for just under 20 years, we've been taking photos as pure amateurs with decent results for far longer. Even the holiday snaps everyone takes were popular. And you know what? They generally came out OK!
It's not hard, it's not expensive, but you were cognizant of what you took. Heck, kids often have cheap cameras and they too took photos, and few were bankrupted.
Of course, we also weren't taking photos every 3 seconds - people took time and figured out what photo they would take first rather than scattershot take a million photos and (not) deal with it when you got home. It also meant most people weren't glued to their camera screens trying to capture everything - they looked first, then figured if it would make a good photo before raising the camera to the eye.
It does, actually. Back in the day when you had to submit a job to the computer, then pick up the result hours later, syntax errors were rare - nothing worse than submitting your deck of cards, only to have an error printout from the computer because you made a typo. And with debug-run cycles so long (if you were a student, you were lucky to get one run per day), you simulated as much as you could so it would run on the second or third try.
These days, you write Hello World and some people can spend the next 10 compiler runs fixing syntax errors...
Sometimes there's just a huge rush to put code on the screen people don't stop and think what they're doing, just writing line after line after line...
Because a phone doesn't rely solely on GPS? Localion services on phones can rely on 4 different types of signals to triangulate position - 2 are GNSS based - GPS and GLOSNASS (and some are having Galileo support too). The other two are WiFi and cellular.
Both Apple and Google use WiFi for triangulation where GNSS signals are absent, like indoors and underground. Apple devices generally cache it so even lack of a signal still allows for navigation (this was the cause of "Apple is tracking me!!!!" thing a few years ago when that cache file was discovered). This requires a network connection to get the navigation data of course, and it can be precise enough that even non-GPS equipped devices tethered to the Internet can do navigation.
The last method is cellular, which basically tries to examine nearby cell towers to get location, the same way it works for WiFi. Less accurate, but generally good in places where WiFi may be spotty or in less urban areas.
Ding ding ding ding! We have a winner!
YouTube is being used as a video diary. The fact that it does monetization is often the cherry on top. Facebook? They don't pay you jack squat But make a mindless YouTube video about crap and you can rake in real money.
Do it particularly well and you might not even need a job because YouTube can pay you better than any job you'd ever get.
Face it, teenage angst is one thing. Getting teenage angst to pay you some money? Well damn. And yes, YouTube is filled with tons of that dreck.
That's a huge appeal of film cameras - they're so unwanted that a top end film camera from a couple of decades ago can be had super cheap as everyone migrated to digital. You can find an immense amount of pro level gear without spending a whole lot of money.
Maybe that's where the hipster thing starts - because all the old good stuff is so unwanted people are dumping it
One amazing thing about 35mm film specifically is how much dynamic range it has - you don't "shoot HDR" because the film IS HDR. Enough so you can often pull it a few stops either way without blowing out details. (If you only have ISO 100 film and need ISO 400 film? Shoot the ISO 100 film as if it was ISO400 film and you'll be fine as long as you remember you underexposed it 2 stops. But it can take it just fine). It's why you can make 35mm film cameras down to the "disposable" side of random aperture, random shutter and still have users end up with decent photos - 35mm film just did not care if you under or overexposed it - it was able to still capture a photo. You may have to adjust the exposure during development, but you can recover images even with thee shittiest of cameras.