Can anyone ever tell me of a documentary you had to pay to see? How is this news?
Except for ones shown on TV, practically all documentaries are pay to watch. Most of them debut during a film festival (you pay to see it in a theatre), but then often are then available for purchase on disc, online streaming, or digital purchase through the many online stores.
Some of them make it to Netflix, eventually (years later), but there are a ton of independent documentaries out there. The other problem is unless there's a lot of interest, it's not even available to pirate.
cards are back in stock and the major source of demand for GPU mining, Ethereum & it's offshoots, are about to get ASICs that are about 5x faster than a GPU for less power (still 200 days to the break even point). Prices'll go back down to normal as more ASICs hit the market.
There are more cryptocurrencies out there that all those GPUs can be put to work with. Like Monero (ASIC version is a fork), litecoin and ripple. Those are commonly known ones too, so as Ethereum miners move to ASICs, those GPU rigs will mine something else.
Why would technology backing chat need any access to payment information?
The problem was the chat software was hacked. So when you try to check out and enter your payment information, that little box that pops up asking if you need support then snarfs the data from the web page.
Basically, all these companies use a SaaS package from a company who was breached. That breach caused the software used to get the ability to steal information. It's less about Best Buy et al. storing the payment information, and more of a rogue script in a SaaS package they use grabbing the data in flight.
There's probably way more companies who are going to find out they were customers of [24]7 as well.
If they would have used FreeBSD or NetBSD, it has no such requirements to share modified versions.Plus it has great networking and packet filtering.
But most companies would rather try to save some money and effort doing things the wrong way. Violating software licenses along the way, hoping they won't get caught. In the long run that strategy is most costly.
The problem is, most SoCs run Linux. The problem is SoC vendors really only support Linux. Getting one to support BSD is quite iffy - if they've even heard of it at all.
And unfortunately, it's impossible to port it yourself - modern SoCs are so complex and poorly documented that one really cannot port it over without a lot of help from the SoC vendor. Even getting register lists from some of them is like pulling teeth.
How is the Beta going to be Long Term Support? It is a contradiction in terms. I know 18.04 once released it will be flagged as a Long Term Support product. But being that it currently beta. This particular version isn't expected to be supported.
18.04 LTS is undergoing beta testing - in case anything is seriously bad before it's finally released. It's not the beta itself that is LTS, it's the final product. You're beta testing what will be 18.04 LTS.
Though, it seems kind of late, I mean, it's April already and they're not at release candidates? Might as well call it 18.05LTS or 18.06LTS...
It is a fallacy to say that just because they have data on you already that you might as well just give them more data by using their service. The more you use them, the more they violate your privacy. It's about risk mitigation. If you care about privacy, don't use them.
Who says anything about using the service? If you don't have an account, their shadow profile data on you is marked as "public". Open an account, and you can set all that profile data from public to private.
That's all I use facebook for. Other than the odd acquaintance I have that remains as the only way I know of contacting them.
My friend list is only about 20 people I actually know. I have work friends stuck in my "approve these invitations" queue for years. And the only reason I log in is because I get tagged in something so I have to log in and untag myself from the photo.
Granted, Facebook bugs you if you don't log in constantly, but that's easily filtered out and deleted.
And yes, I block facebook javascript always except for the few times a year I log in to reset the privacy settings.
Actually this is something far harder to do with Bitcoin than some tiny no-name currency no one has ever heard of. Hell Bitcoin couldn't even agree on a fork for technical reasons designed to save the currency, do you think such an agreement needed is a possibility because someone gets hacked and wants to roll back the blockchain?
And yet, Bitcoin forked. It's why we have Bitcoin (BTC) and Bitcoin Cash (BCH). And everyone was basically saying to move your money out of CoinBase (which will not handle the fork and stick with BTC) so your wallets will "double" and you will get 1 BCH for ever BTC because the blockchain will officially fork.
And this was because no one could agree on larger blocks or segregated witnesses (segwit).
Granted, BCH isn't worth as much, but free money is still free money.
You are. unrar's source is licensed under either a BSD-like license, or the GPL, your choice.
Or... neither?
Looking at the official UnRAR source code (from https://www.rarlab.com/rar_add... ), the license.txt is really a BSD-ish style license. No GPL at all. Basically you can use it to handle RAR archives, as long as you don't use it to reverse-engineer RAR compression. No warranty, blah blah blah, but you're free to included it in anything to handle RAR archives.
sn't bulk emailing something that's relatively easy to bolt a UI on the front for and sell as a service? Why is MailChimp such a powerhouse for this?
Bulk emailing is easy to do technically. But socially, it's very hard.
First off, there are dozens of spam laws throughout the world, and at the very least, the unsubscribe links must work. Companies like MailChimp, Vertical Response and others automatically handle unsubscription for you - if a user clicks the link, they will remove it.
They also handle things like double opt-in, and some offer the ability to ask the user after a year or so if they wish to remain on the list.
It's not the SMTP part that's hard, it's the whole "mailing list maintenance" that's hard. And the companies do respond to email providers whose users do not want to receive the mail anymore - often times if you click "This is spam", a notification is sent back to the company to remove you from future mailings (i.e., they will unsubscribe you).
There's also the side services - the whole "If you can't read this email, click here" where they open a new web page with the email in question (including customizations, if needed).
These companies are few because it's hard to navigate the whole legal waters - and yes, they are trying to stay on the legal side of everything, including keeping up with spam law changes and navigating around filters and blocks. And they offer value-added services (like the web-page versions of email), and analytical information like how many emails were sent, how many were technically failed (bad address, address blocked, full, etc), how many clicked the unsubscribe link, how many didn't make it through a block or filter, how many were reported, etc.
In addition, I wouldn't be surprised if those companies worked hand in hand with all the big providers to whitelist their servers, in exchange for having enhanced handling (i.e., if a user complains, those will get forwarded to removal from the list).
And yes, I've always threatened to click the unsubscribe link on the company emails - the marketing ones that get sent out (and CC'd internally). I know it would work automatically since by law the email company has to remove that address from the list.
I doubt they're going to go away, but anything to get people to distrust and use it less is a positive thing for all of us.
The cure could be worse than the disease. If people leave Facebook and end up going to one of a dozen new social network companies, forcing everyone to have to sign up for a half-dozen other services, most who will be even less trustworthy.
Nevermind how many of them will go to Weibo and the like.
Just make sure you brace for the new wave of malware to spread... a lot of these "new" social networks aren't very clean either and are full of malware spreading ads and "click heres" that everyone clicks on.
It just isn't worth it to build a Hackintosh simply to run a Swift compiler on.
Wow, since when does Ubuntu only run on Mac? I know people are worried that the Windows Subsystem for Linux would kill Linux, but I'm impressed Apple managed to do it quietly without anyone noticing, requiring a Mac to run Linux.
Last I checked, any modern PC can run Linux and thus, Ubuntu and I'm sure various flavors thereof. It even says they mention Ubuntu as that's what they tested on - likely other distributions of Linux work as well.
Non sequitur. If Ecuador just wanted to show Assange the door, they wouldn't have just granted him citizenship.
They didn't just do that; they followed it up with a request to the UK to grant their new citizen diplomatic status so he could leave the embassy. It was denied, but nice try.
That was probably the reason they give him citizenship. I guess some government official said "Let's give him citizenship and then ask the UK if they would extend diplomatic status on him" without actually thinking that the UK government would deny the request.
It was worth a shot, I suppose, but now they have a bigger mess on their hands.
Honestly, who cares and why is this a big deal? If a site helped me find something I was looking for, why shouldn't they get a little kickback from the seller.
Nothing wrong with it, just something that should be disclosed, that's all.
If you see a video of someone shilling a new product, you sort of want to know if they're being paid for it (either directly or indirectly via say, those links). Mostly because what they say can be influenced by whether or not they're being paid to say it.
It isn't unusual for companies to buy off a bunch of YouTube "influencers" to go and pitch something, but it's generally in bad form if those same YouTube personalities didn't reveal that they were paid to make that video.
Basically, it borderlines telling when a video is really an ad, and if it's something the poster truly and honestly believes. The more ethical companies pay for videos, but basically just want it about some topic and leave the creative control and final results to the person posting. Others actually will pay to have them say specific lines.
Not surprisingly, celebrity channels are often pitching dozens of products a day. Now those are often tagged with "#ad" and such to indicate that no, the celebrity is not actually posting something original, just endorsing a product.
Banks in general are risk-averse, and student loans are pulling at all the red flags that any lender would use to signal a risky loan.
Things like: * No credit history (they're coming out of high school and few probably got a credit card to build up a credit history) * A big loan (6 figure sum!) * No assets to speak of (teens, again) * No assets to speak of even after purchase (i.e., you're not buying an asset with the loan) * No steady employment * Delayed payback
Knowing all that, would you loan someone $100,000+? Even a mortgage means the bank has something to secure the loan.
It's why the government has to tilt things so it isn't so risky on banks - such as non-dischargable, guarantees on repayment, etc.
Banks aren't stupid. Student loans are structured the way they are because no financial institution is stupid enough to make such loans unassisted.
I can think of several reasons why. * Kids might be recording a video about something (say, a performance. Or maybe they're doing a video report) * Kids might want to take a photo of something for a report. * It may be important to talk to people via Skype or other video platform
Cameras aren't unusual anymore, and today's kids are growing up in a multi-media type environment. Hell, when I was in school, I had do stuff like that too, except instead of having a camera everywhere, you had to either borrow the schools' video equipment, or use your own or hope someone in your group had a camcorder. Yes, we had to submit projects in VHS. The lucky people had an edit station. The rest of us made do with jump-cut edits where we filmed one scene, stopped, prepared the next scene in order, filmed that, etc. This was for school. The best editing we had was the ability to hit Stop and Record on the destination VCR on transferring the camcorder tape to VHS.
And yes, we also had the opportunity to "talk with experts" via phone and video conferencing.
How do you know? Just because Apple says that doesn't mean they can sneakly do it. Do we believe them?
Because there's a good reason for Apple to not have it?
As in, law enforcement?
There are two ways to not give law enforcement something. One, is to simply not have it. The other, is to say it is not available to them for some reason.
The former is easy to defend - if you don't keep logs, then really, you cannot produce them when asked to. Granted, you may be forced to keep records after the fact if you have access to the data (e.g., you may not log log IP addresses, but you can be forced to simply because that information is given to you). But if you're not given that information, you can't even log it. So Apple does not back up in iCloud stuff like your passwords and all that, either (because that's a nice juicy target for law enforcement). It doesn't pass through Apple's servers at all - so even if law enforcement started tapping every bit, it's your iOS device that simply excludes the password database when backing up. (You can back up your passwords, by doing local iTunes encrypted backup, where they're stored encrypted on your local PC).
The alternative is to have to legally defend why you're not handing over the data, like what Microsoft did by saying the data is not inside the US. This is based on legal procedure, because the data exists, and you have it, but you're arguing there's a reason why you cannot hand it over. I find these arguments less "permanent" since there may be a case where not handing over the data might put you in the position of having to defend your position against public opinion. (Imagine trying to withhold a terrorist's account data just because he stored it outside of the country).
Apple has long learned it's far better to simply not have the data touch its servers at all and thus be unavailable to law enforcement, than to hold onto it and to have to defend why you're not handing it over.
It's also why Apple's privacy policies haven't really allowed them to share data within Apple. Google's privacy policy has expanded the data sharing to not just through Google, but to every Alphabet company as well. So your YouTube viewing data, once only for YouTube, can be mined by the most popular online ad networks as well.
Finally, what can Apple do with that data? If they have it, what are they going to use it for? Apple barely has an advertising business (really meant to allow Google to buy AdMob). So what would Apple do with all that information they aren't selling?
The system Vancouver (BC) uses allows for perfectly anonymous usage, with prepaid cards, as well as convenience modes where you can tie that card to a ID.
You buy a card from a retailer (there are several) for $6. From there, you can head to a fare machine and put money on it, or buy a pass. You can pay by cash, credit card or debit card, but the former is preferable if you wish to remain anonymous.
If you want convenience, you can create an account, and tie that card to yourself. Which means you can have the card "auto refill" itself by buying a new pass automatically so you don't have to line up to use the machine every month. Or if someone steals your pass, you can transfer the passes on the stolen card to your new card.
You can also buy paper passes at the one-way-trip rate (a bit more expensive).
Basically, you pick your level of anonymity and convenience you want - you can buy a pass and use cash to top it up and it'll work just fine. The transit company gets their tracking information but cannot tie it to anyone except through cameras. Or you can get it so you never have to wait in line to buy passes ever again and give them an ID and credit card.
The cards are tied to a central system so balance faking is somewhat hard - you can't erase and rewrite them - the next you scan it through will rewrite it with what the central database tells it you have.
(They are standard NFC. And later one, they're adding Apple Pay/Android Pay/Credit Card scanning at the gate, so if you really didn't want to wait at the machine, you can tap your credit card to get billed the one way trip rate. Because of this they're warning people to not tap their wallets on the machines in case it grabs the credit card instead of the passes.
And most of the situations described in the reference article describe poorly framed problems. I understand that it is supposed to be a jokey, light, non-serious, read. However it illustrates the problem with people asking the wrong question, or making incorrect assumptions.
Many years ago the multi-billion $$$$ utility company I was working for had a team from [ name removed to protect the stupid ] a well-known consultancy outfit. One of their conclusions was that some of our servers were running with too much idle time - under utilised in their opinion. All they had done was collect %idle data from sar (Unix systems from Sun, IBM and HP). and their junior idiot looked at that and decided it was a "problem"
When I was asked about this by the CIO and the "consultants", my response was that I could easily increase the utilitisation figure to whatever the CIO desired, or that the consultants recommended - how high would he like it to be? Since he knew me, and saw the smile, he saw the trap. I explained that "idle" time and user response time were tightly linked: that reducing one would increase the other. This was news to the "consultants" once I explained the maths and Queuing Theory behind it.
Or more like AI simply did the real human thing and figured out the weakness in the measurement system in use and exploited it.
In other words, the AI simply did what a human would eventually figure out and do - cheat the system.
All the examples in there are basically how the AI figured out a way of cheating the calculations, something humans would figure out as well.
And the reason we have to cheat is often the "measurement" item cannot be measured. One popular goal setting thing in use is "SMART" (specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, time-bound), but there are a lot of things that can translate into that easily. For example, productivity. Since time immemorial, people have wanted a way to measure programmer productivity, and the most obvious measurement was well, lines of code. Which did nothing but bloat the codebase up with needless lines of code. Then people tried bug counts ("I'm going to write myself a new Ferrari"' from Dilbert). And to this end, there's no way to measure "productivity" than by a proxy measure (proxy measure is something me can measure that hopefully relates to the actual quantity we wish we could measure directly), we implement those measurements. But then people find shortcuts - ways to increase the thing the proxy measures, but without increasing actual expended effort.
Take another example - say my goal is to make my blog more popular. Well, how do I measure popularity? Visitors per month? Comments per month? A little sensational click-bait bit of fake news will boost both numbers easily enough. But did I accomplish the goal, or did I simply game the system?
All AI has done is exposed these limitations in our proxy measurements and simply exploited them. In short, AI simply figured out the limitations of the system and exploited them.
I love these little boxes, but what happens is that they go in the closet and then a year or two later they come out and they use some semi-proprietary DIN plug pin-out and you've lost the power adapter.
I keep the boxes, then when I put it in storage, I put the adapter and the device back in its original box. That way I also have all the little fiddly bits that it came with too that everyone loses.
Or, if it's something I've used for years and tossed the box, I leave the power connected, and then wrap the device with the power cord so the wall wart and device are automatically matched up.
Forget the Lidar, or lack of (they were testing cameras?). Forget the dude (heh, the first 12 hours thought he was a she. That's gotta hurt).
Had I been driving that car, full alert, I would have killed that chick. I'd have felt bad, even knowing it was her fault. But the fact is, this dumbass walked in front of a fast moving car, at night, when she had no illumination, and the car had headlights. Her best hope of survival was a 100% functioning self driving car, anything less and she's dead.
II've nearly had the same thing happen to me. And you have to realize that while the eye has better dynamic range, a black blob is still a black blob. Your brain will take at least 5-10 seconds to actually process that blob as "something to be avoided".
We have the problem up here in Canada, people love to dress all gothy in winter, with their super dark black coats, black shoes, black scarves, etc. You don't see anything - you see a ghost.
Add in the usual fact that people are tired and not performing at 100%, and it's a wonder more pedestrians aren't killed. And completely black cyclists are a nightmare, for they almost always are breaking the rules - cycling down the wrong way, etc. Couple that with no reflectors and lights (mandatory for bikes, gee I wonder why) and they are fast moving black blobs.
40 mph is 17 meters per second. Tests have shown it can take anywhere from 5-8 seconds for object recognition to take place, which is anywhere from 85 meters to 136 meters. Unless you have eagle eye vision, your high beams on and are fully alert, no human will react fast enough. And that's object recognition - you have to add in processing time to come up with a solution (slow down, change lanes), and then actually perform the action. So you're looking at probably 150-200m before the reaction starts, and then the car has to actually do that - slow down (braking distance) etc.
I have real doubts an average human would react better. And that doesn't include fatigue from working all day, testing while driving (think of it this way - the Uber driver looked down - maybe she was texting - your eyes are off the road for over 10 seconds in most cases, and she only looked up because she heard the crunch).
The bigger question everyone wants to know is, why wasn't the lidar working. That would've been the only piece of equipment that would've saved her life, being able to detect the obstruction well ahead that the car can slow down and change lanes or stop. (At least object detection takes hundreds of milliseconds in an autonomous car,).
I think the problem is, the government is letting shootings slide. I mean, earlier this week was another one, much smaller but still, it happened.
When there was a democrat in the house, he could say grand things, knowing that Congress would never approve it. But at least He Was Doing Something About It. He managed to work both sides quite well - make the big evil Republicans the reason he can't pass anything, and at the same time, gun owners were nervous, so every time they'd buy more guns, simulating the economy more.
Now that the entire government is republican controlled, there is no more excuse. Trump can't say he can't do anything about it because Congress won't let him, and everyone knows he loves his executive orders and he's famous for his Get Things Done attitude.
Problem is, he didn't. He made some noise about it, and let it peter it. Then it happened again. And people are at their breaking point. Businesses see that, they realize that it isn't business as usual and they need to Do Something to appeal to the silent majority who do want some form of dun control. (I believe the stats have it around 75% or more. It seems less, but the NRA has a whole pile of money they spend buying politicians and in fact, if one wavers in their support, all that money suddenly goes to their opponent.
The political climate has shifted, and businesses are simply stepping into the vacuum, realizing that while the NRA business is nice, it's not actually necessary, and they get a nice PR boost from being seen as Doing Something.
As long as mass shootings keep continuing to happen (and there's no indication it's going to stop), this is going to get worse. As long as the guy in the White House does everything else other than be seen doing something about the issue, companies are going to reconsider their support. The irony is, the NRA may have one the battle (Trump does nothing), but they might lose the war (popular opinion turns against gun owners, even being brandished as idiots of a barbaric age).
As long as kids are dying in the streets, no amount of tariffs or trade wars matter.
But more than that it's every day Americans who are going to be paying for it. 20-30% more on every electronic device, gadget, previously untariffed good that was imported, all to do what? Temporarily prop up industries / companies here in the US that won't significantly change their employment levels, capital investment in manufacturing, or supply chains in time until these tariffs are lifted?
Why would they? That's the whole point of protectionism - "wahhh! I can't compete with competitor! protect me uncle sam!" "Here you go, tafiffs on competitor's product"
That said, some level of tariffs are fine if the reason local industry is noncompetitive is because of factors like environmental standards and such.
Too much though, and all you're doing is propping up inefficient industry who has no reason to be made more efficient.
The big thing that will happen though is prices will rise on practically everything - tariffs are kind of a industry picking solution - you protect one industry, but cause downstream industries to be greatly affected because now they have to pay the extra costs
It says right in the summary: "In both cases, a successful firmware update is the proof that your device has never been compromised."
That's what the marketing copy says. But the hack allows the guy to fake the update so it passes the check, so he can add his own code to the firmware update.
In addition, relying on an update to prove correctness doesn't do didly squat. I can create a "open" version that isn't signed and will run anything, and thus can take a signed firmware update just fine. It's just I don't verify the keys at all. So yes, firmware updates.
Slashdot Mirror
Except for ones shown on TV, practically all documentaries are pay to watch. Most of them debut during a film festival (you pay to see it in a theatre), but then often are then available for purchase on disc, online streaming, or digital purchase through the many online stores.
Some of them make it to Netflix, eventually (years later), but there are a ton of independent documentaries out there. The other problem is unless there's a lot of interest, it's not even available to pirate.
There are more cryptocurrencies out there that all those GPUs can be put to work with. Like Monero (ASIC version is a fork), litecoin and ripple. Those are commonly known ones too, so as Ethereum miners move to ASICs, those GPU rigs will mine something else.
The problem was the chat software was hacked. So when you try to check out and enter your payment information, that little box that pops up asking if you need support then snarfs the data from the web page.
Basically, all these companies use a SaaS package from a company who was breached. That breach caused the software used to get the ability to steal information. It's less about Best Buy et al. storing the payment information, and more of a rogue script in a SaaS package they use grabbing the data in flight.
There's probably way more companies who are going to find out they were customers of [24]7 as well.
The problem is, most SoCs run Linux. The problem is SoC vendors really only support Linux. Getting one to support BSD is quite iffy - if they've even heard of it at all.
And unfortunately, it's impossible to port it yourself - modern SoCs are so complex and poorly documented that one really cannot port it over without a lot of help from the SoC vendor. Even getting register lists from some of them is like pulling teeth.
18.04 LTS is undergoing beta testing - in case anything is seriously bad before it's finally released. It's not the beta itself that is LTS, it's the final product. You're beta testing what will be 18.04 LTS.
Though, it seems kind of late, I mean, it's April already and they're not at release candidates? Might as well call it 18.05LTS or 18.06LTS...
Who says anything about using the service? If you don't have an account, their shadow profile data on you is marked as "public". Open an account, and you can set all that profile data from public to private.
That's all I use facebook for. Other than the odd acquaintance I have that remains as the only way I know of contacting them.
My friend list is only about 20 people I actually know. I have work friends stuck in my "approve these invitations" queue for years. And the only reason I log in is because I get tagged in something so I have to log in and untag myself from the photo.
Granted, Facebook bugs you if you don't log in constantly, but that's easily filtered out and deleted.
And yes, I block facebook javascript always except for the few times a year I log in to reset the privacy settings.
And yet, Bitcoin forked. It's why we have Bitcoin (BTC) and Bitcoin Cash (BCH). And everyone was basically saying to move your money out of CoinBase (which will not handle the fork and stick with BTC) so your wallets will "double" and you will get 1 BCH for ever BTC because the blockchain will officially fork.
And this was because no one could agree on larger blocks or segregated witnesses (segwit).
Granted, BCH isn't worth as much, but free money is still free money.
Or... neither?
Looking at the official UnRAR source code (from https://www.rarlab.com/rar_add... ), the license.txt is really a BSD-ish style license. No GPL at all. Basically you can use it to handle RAR archives, as long as you don't use it to reverse-engineer RAR compression. No warranty, blah blah blah, but you're free to included it in anything to handle RAR archives.
It's Easter. It's the clash of the religious versus the pranksters. After all, Easter is one of those holy days in Christianity.
Easter hasn't fallen on April 1 since 1956, and it will again in 2029 and 2040, after which it won't until 2108.
Bulk emailing is easy to do technically. But socially, it's very hard.
First off, there are dozens of spam laws throughout the world, and at the very least, the unsubscribe links must work. Companies like MailChimp, Vertical Response and others automatically handle unsubscription for you - if a user clicks the link, they will remove it.
They also handle things like double opt-in, and some offer the ability to ask the user after a year or so if they wish to remain on the list.
It's not the SMTP part that's hard, it's the whole "mailing list maintenance" that's hard. And the companies do respond to email providers whose users do not want to receive the mail anymore - often times if you click "This is spam", a notification is sent back to the company to remove you from future mailings (i.e., they will unsubscribe you).
There's also the side services - the whole "If you can't read this email, click here" where they open a new web page with the email in question (including customizations, if needed).
These companies are few because it's hard to navigate the whole legal waters - and yes, they are trying to stay on the legal side of everything, including keeping up with spam law changes and navigating around filters and blocks. And they offer value-added services (like the web-page versions of email), and analytical information like how many emails were sent, how many were technically failed (bad address, address blocked, full, etc), how many clicked the unsubscribe link, how many didn't make it through a block or filter, how many were reported, etc.
In addition, I wouldn't be surprised if those companies worked hand in hand with all the big providers to whitelist their servers, in exchange for having enhanced handling (i.e., if a user complains, those will get forwarded to removal from the list).
And yes, I've always threatened to click the unsubscribe link on the company emails - the marketing ones that get sent out (and CC'd internally). I know it would work automatically since by law the email company has to remove that address from the list.
The cure could be worse than the disease. If people leave Facebook and end up going to one of a dozen new social network companies, forcing everyone to have to sign up for a half-dozen other services, most who will be even less trustworthy.
Nevermind how many of them will go to Weibo and the like.
Just make sure you brace for the new wave of malware to spread... a lot of these "new" social networks aren't very clean either and are full of malware spreading ads and "click heres" that everyone clicks on.
Wow, since when does Ubuntu only run on Mac? I know people are worried that the Windows Subsystem for Linux would kill Linux, but I'm impressed Apple managed to do it quietly without anyone noticing, requiring a Mac to run Linux.
Last I checked, any modern PC can run Linux and thus, Ubuntu and I'm sure various flavors thereof. It even says they mention Ubuntu as that's what they tested on - likely other distributions of Linux work as well.
They aren't even .deb files, they're tarballs.
That was probably the reason they give him citizenship. I guess some government official said "Let's give him citizenship and then ask the UK if they would extend diplomatic status on him" without actually thinking that the UK government would deny the request.
It was worth a shot, I suppose, but now they have a bigger mess on their hands.
Nothing wrong with it, just something that should be disclosed, that's all.
If you see a video of someone shilling a new product, you sort of want to know if they're being paid for it (either directly or indirectly via say, those links). Mostly because what they say can be influenced by whether or not they're being paid to say it.
It isn't unusual for companies to buy off a bunch of YouTube "influencers" to go and pitch something, but it's generally in bad form if those same YouTube personalities didn't reveal that they were paid to make that video.
Basically, it borderlines telling when a video is really an ad, and if it's something the poster truly and honestly believes. The more ethical companies pay for videos, but basically just want it about some topic and leave the creative control and final results to the person posting. Others actually will pay to have them say specific lines.
Not surprisingly, celebrity channels are often pitching dozens of products a day. Now those are often tagged with "#ad" and such to indicate that no, the celebrity is not actually posting something original, just endorsing a product.
Banks in general are risk-averse, and student loans are pulling at all the red flags that any lender would use to signal a risky loan.
Things like:
* No credit history (they're coming out of high school and few probably got a credit card to build up a credit history)
* A big loan (6 figure sum!)
* No assets to speak of (teens, again)
* No assets to speak of even after purchase (i.e., you're not buying an asset with the loan)
* No steady employment
* Delayed payback
Knowing all that, would you loan someone $100,000+? Even a mortgage means the bank has something to secure the loan.
It's why the government has to tilt things so it isn't so risky on banks - such as non-dischargable, guarantees on repayment, etc.
Banks aren't stupid. Student loans are structured the way they are because no financial institution is stupid enough to make such loans unassisted.
Because of multimedia?
I can think of several reasons why.
* Kids might be recording a video about something (say, a performance. Or maybe they're doing a video report)
* Kids might want to take a photo of something for a report.
* It may be important to talk to people via Skype or other video platform
Cameras aren't unusual anymore, and today's kids are growing up in a multi-media type environment. Hell, when I was in school, I had do stuff like that too, except instead of having a camera everywhere, you had to either borrow the schools' video equipment, or use your own or hope someone in your group had a camcorder. Yes, we had to submit projects in VHS. The lucky people had an edit station. The rest of us made do with jump-cut edits where we filmed one scene, stopped, prepared the next scene in order, filmed that, etc. This was for school. The best editing we had was the ability to hit Stop and Record on the destination VCR on transferring the camcorder tape to VHS.
And yes, we also had the opportunity to "talk with experts" via phone and video conferencing.
Because there's a good reason for Apple to not have it?
As in, law enforcement?
There are two ways to not give law enforcement something. One, is to simply not have it. The other, is to say it is not available to them for some reason.
The former is easy to defend - if you don't keep logs, then really, you cannot produce them when asked to. Granted, you may be forced to keep records after the fact if you have access to the data (e.g., you may not log log IP addresses, but you can be forced to simply because that information is given to you). But if you're not given that information, you can't even log it. So Apple does not back up in iCloud stuff like your passwords and all that, either (because that's a nice juicy target for law enforcement). It doesn't pass through Apple's servers at all - so even if law enforcement started tapping every bit, it's your iOS device that simply excludes the password database when backing up. (You can back up your passwords, by doing local iTunes encrypted backup, where they're stored encrypted on your local PC).
The alternative is to have to legally defend why you're not handing over the data, like what Microsoft did by saying the data is not inside the US. This is based on legal procedure, because the data exists, and you have it, but you're arguing there's a reason why you cannot hand it over. I find these arguments less "permanent" since there may be a case where not handing over the data might put you in the position of having to defend your position against public opinion. (Imagine trying to withhold a terrorist's account data just because he stored it outside of the country).
Apple has long learned it's far better to simply not have the data touch its servers at all and thus be unavailable to law enforcement, than to hold onto it and to have to defend why you're not handing it over.
It's also why Apple's privacy policies haven't really allowed them to share data within Apple. Google's privacy policy has expanded the data sharing to not just through Google, but to every Alphabet company as well. So your YouTube viewing data, once only for YouTube, can be mined by the most popular online ad networks as well.
Finally, what can Apple do with that data? If they have it, what are they going to use it for? Apple barely has an advertising business (really meant to allow Google to buy AdMob). So what would Apple do with all that information they aren't selling?
The system Vancouver (BC) uses allows for perfectly anonymous usage, with prepaid cards, as well as convenience modes where you can tie that card to a ID.
You buy a card from a retailer (there are several) for $6. From there, you can head to a fare machine and put money on it, or buy a pass. You can pay by cash, credit card or debit card, but the former is preferable if you wish to remain anonymous.
If you want convenience, you can create an account, and tie that card to yourself. Which means you can have the card "auto refill" itself by buying a new pass automatically so you don't have to line up to use the machine every month. Or if someone steals your pass, you can transfer the passes on the stolen card to your new card.
You can also buy paper passes at the one-way-trip rate (a bit more expensive).
Basically, you pick your level of anonymity and convenience you want - you can buy a pass and use cash to top it up and it'll work just fine. The transit company gets their tracking information but cannot tie it to anyone except through cameras. Or you can get it so you never have to wait in line to buy passes ever again and give them an ID and credit card.
The cards are tied to a central system so balance faking is somewhat hard - you can't erase and rewrite them - the next you scan it through will rewrite it with what the central database tells it you have.
(They are standard NFC. And later one, they're adding Apple Pay/Android Pay/Credit Card scanning at the gate, so if you really didn't want to wait at the machine, you can tap your credit card to get billed the one way trip rate. Because of this they're warning people to not tap their wallets on the machines in case it grabs the credit card instead of the passes.
Or more like AI simply did the real human thing and figured out the weakness in the measurement system in use and exploited it.
In other words, the AI simply did what a human would eventually figure out and do - cheat the system.
All the examples in there are basically how the AI figured out a way of cheating the calculations, something humans would figure out as well.
And the reason we have to cheat is often the "measurement" item cannot be measured. One popular goal setting thing in use is "SMART" (specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, time-bound), but there are a lot of things that can translate into that easily. For example, productivity. Since time immemorial, people have wanted a way to measure programmer productivity, and the most obvious measurement was well, lines of code. Which did nothing but bloat the codebase up with needless lines of code. Then people tried bug counts ("I'm going to write myself a new Ferrari"' from Dilbert). And to this end, there's no way to measure "productivity" than by a proxy measure (proxy measure is something me can measure that hopefully relates to the actual quantity we wish we could measure directly), we implement those measurements. But then people find shortcuts - ways to increase the thing the proxy measures, but without increasing actual expended effort.
Take another example - say my goal is to make my blog more popular. Well, how do I measure popularity? Visitors per month? Comments per month? A little sensational click-bait bit of fake news will boost both numbers easily enough. But did I accomplish the goal, or did I simply game the system?
All AI has done is exposed these limitations in our proxy measurements and simply exploited them. In short, AI simply figured out the limitations of the system and exploited them.
I keep the boxes, then when I put it in storage, I put the adapter and the device back in its original box. That way I also have all the little fiddly bits that it came with too that everyone loses.
Or, if it's something I've used for years and tossed the box, I leave the power connected, and then wrap the device with the power cord so the wall wart and device are automatically matched up.
And a lot of places have 35-hour workweeks, especially in government. So that brings it down even more.
35 hour workweek is 7 hours a day. 37.5 hour workweek is 7.5 hours a day, for those wondering.
II've nearly had the same thing happen to me. And you have to realize that while the eye has better dynamic range, a black blob is still a black blob. Your brain will take at least 5-10 seconds to actually process that blob as "something to be avoided".
We have the problem up here in Canada, people love to dress all gothy in winter, with their super dark black coats, black shoes, black scarves, etc. You don't see anything - you see a ghost.
Add in the usual fact that people are tired and not performing at 100%, and it's a wonder more pedestrians aren't killed. And completely black cyclists are a nightmare, for they almost always are breaking the rules - cycling down the wrong way, etc. Couple that with no reflectors and lights (mandatory for bikes, gee I wonder why) and they are fast moving black blobs.
40 mph is 17 meters per second. Tests have shown it can take anywhere from 5-8 seconds for object recognition to take place, which is anywhere from 85 meters to 136 meters. Unless you have eagle eye vision, your high beams on and are fully alert, no human will react fast enough. And that's object recognition - you have to add in processing time to come up with a solution (slow down, change lanes), and then actually perform the action. So you're looking at probably 150-200m before the reaction starts, and then the car has to actually do that - slow down (braking distance) etc.
I have real doubts an average human would react better. And that doesn't include fatigue from working all day, testing while driving (think of it this way - the Uber driver looked down - maybe she was texting - your eyes are off the road for over 10 seconds in most cases, and she only looked up because she heard the crunch).
The bigger question everyone wants to know is, why wasn't the lidar working. That would've been the only piece of equipment that would've saved her life, being able to detect the obstruction well ahead that the car can slow down and change lanes or stop. (At least object detection takes hundreds of milliseconds in an autonomous car,).
I think the problem is, the government is letting shootings slide. I mean, earlier this week was another one, much smaller but still, it happened.
When there was a democrat in the house, he could say grand things, knowing that Congress would never approve it. But at least He Was Doing Something About It. He managed to work both sides quite well - make the big evil Republicans the reason he can't pass anything, and at the same time, gun owners were nervous, so every time they'd buy more guns, simulating the economy more.
Now that the entire government is republican controlled, there is no more excuse. Trump can't say he can't do anything about it because Congress won't let him, and everyone knows he loves his executive orders and he's famous for his Get Things Done attitude.
Problem is, he didn't. He made some noise about it, and let it peter it. Then it happened again. And people are at their breaking point. Businesses see that, they realize that it isn't business as usual and they need to Do Something to appeal to the silent majority who do want some form of dun control. (I believe the stats have it around 75% or more. It seems less, but the NRA has a whole pile of money they spend buying politicians and in fact, if one wavers in their support, all that money suddenly goes to their opponent.
The political climate has shifted, and businesses are simply stepping into the vacuum, realizing that while the NRA business is nice, it's not actually necessary, and they get a nice PR boost from being seen as Doing Something.
As long as mass shootings keep continuing to happen (and there's no indication it's going to stop), this is going to get worse. As long as the guy in the White House does everything else other than be seen doing something about the issue, companies are going to reconsider their support. The irony is, the NRA may have one the battle (Trump does nothing), but they might lose the war (popular opinion turns against gun owners, even being brandished as idiots of a barbaric age).
As long as kids are dying in the streets, no amount of tariffs or trade wars matter.
Why would they? That's the whole point of protectionism - "wahhh! I can't compete with competitor! protect me uncle sam!" "Here you go, tafiffs on competitor's product"
That said, some level of tariffs are fine if the reason local industry is noncompetitive is because of factors like environmental standards and such.
Too much though, and all you're doing is propping up inefficient industry who has no reason to be made more efficient.
The big thing that will happen though is prices will rise on practically everything - tariffs are kind of a industry picking solution - you protect one industry, but cause downstream industries to be greatly affected because now they have to pay the extra costs
That's what the marketing copy says. But the hack allows the guy to fake the update so it passes the check, so he can add his own code to the firmware update.
In addition, relying on an update to prove correctness doesn't do didly squat. I can create a "open" version that isn't signed and will run anything, and thus can take a signed firmware update just fine. It's just I don't verify the keys at all. So yes, firmware updates.