But I'd heard that this year's vaccines had mostly missed the mark. It'd probably be more effective this year to wash your hands often, don't shake hands (I know, it's antisocial), and keep your hands away from your face.. or my face.
Each vaccine typically has about 3-5 strains of deactivated flu viruses (virii?) in it, and since production starts before fall, the manufacturers have to check with the CDC and others for their estimates on what strains will likely to be especially virulent. (A strain is of the form HxNy, where X is from 1-5 and y from 1-8, I believe, and refers to the two major proteins on the capsule, there are many substrains because there are more proteins on the capsule too, but those are the big ones that generally dictate what kind of flu it is).
So it's generally a guess. Sometimes you get lucky and the active flu strains are what you vaccinated for. Other times, you miss and the big ones aren't covered. Either way though, you can still be hit with a flu strain that is different from what everyone else gets (aren't you special?).
The best ways is to basically not touch wounds or mucus membrane surfaces - eyes, nose and such with your hands, and wash with soap and water (more than adequate - antibacterials do not work on viruses) often. Shaking hands can be replaced by fist-bumps (much more sanitary) if everyone is casual enough, though the elbow bump is for the more adventurous. Just wash your hands afterwards.
I used to get sick a lot, then I realized it was because I rubbed my eyes, and if I just washed my hands before doing it, I cut down my infection rate significantly. (This is including colds and minor infections too). Rubbing eyes is the best way to transfer viruses from your hands into your body where it infects you.
Paper jams don't happen in a high speed press because they are long and the paper rarely has to be bent. The jams happen because of bends - from incompatible paper (like stickers and whatnot) to simply the paper not making it around. So a large printing press, or even a high speed photocopier work because the paper feeds in from one end and it stays flat through the entire process until it shoots out the other end. Double sided printing is handled by two print engines, so it prints the top side and the bottom side separately. Paper stays flat throughout and you can print at thousands of pages per minute without a single jam.
But people don't have the 20 feet of space needed for a flat paper path, or if you cut down the speed a lot, you can have paper follow a more winding path, with the advantage that it takes up a heck of a lot less space. But at the same time, the bends mean an edge can catch when it bends around and boom, a jam. Most printers will have an S shaped paper path - paper feeds in on one side (or front), travels to the other side getting printed, then bends into the output tray. Heaven help you if you have the duplexer that bends the paper again and feeds it through all over again.
The bending significantly slows down the path since you can't take the bends too fast or the paper will just jam up on you.
And yes, a machine able to copy thousands of sheets a minute is very impressive to watch. Any large school or institution will have them - it's the only way you can make 1000 copies in a reasonable amount of time.1000 double sided copies, and often with a finisher to collate and staple. And they can run on the nastiest cheapest paper as I believe they don't even have rollers - a vacuum system sucks the paper to the belt so the only thing that touches it is the drum. End result of a bad sheet will be crumpled and nasty, but come out of the system and not caught and jammed. Because at 1000 pages a minute, you can't run for 2 seconds before jamming. (2 seconds is 32 pages).
Why would any gaming company chose to support Linux when gamers have shown to be more than happy* to run Windows / stuff around with Wine to play their games.
*And by more than happy I mean they whine less about running Windows for games than the do about something in Linux not being 100% perfect.
Exactly. They exist to sell hardware to people willing to pay for overpriced stuff (i.e., gamers, the new audiophool). Practically all of them run Windows and knows nothing else, and they probably get their sales from people who see their boxes at Best Buy, go "ooh shiny" and whip out their credit card.
Serving Linux might work if there's a sufficient business case for them to well, sell more hardware, but if the community does what it usually does and says just buy a Model M and be done with it for keyboards or buy a cheaper mouse rather than buying the overpriced stuff, well, that's something they'd rather do without.
That's the problem - the article was about an engineer doing an engineering solution, but the company didn't get the part where it would benefit them. Yadda yadda yadda software does this, blah blah blah. Nowhere does it say "Your hardware is awesome, and there a huge untapped market if you would sell it to Linux users but we need Linux software".
Most of it is pure business decisions - if you can make a cogent case that Linux would help them sell more of their stuff, enough to outweigh the risks and costs, then they'll do it.
I don't remember the last time I saw a handwritten prescription. Every doctor I've been to in recent memory prints it out and signs it.
Depends on the doctor, it seems. Some have a prescription pad and use it (and honestly, I've been able to read what it says - it's a quarter-letter sheet, the doctor's name is preprinted, so there's a lot of space for the doctor to write in very big block letters the prescription. We're talking inch-high block printing (I haven't seen cursive in a long time).
My other prescriptions were printed onto regular letter paper and signed by the doctor.
I'm guessing the latter is more common now because the doctor has to enter our medication in a province-wide prescription database (called PharmaNet), so every drug ever prescribed to you is listed (to make sure you're not overprescribed, or to watch out for drug interactions). And since they're entering that information anyways, it's only a small stretch to have the software actually print out the prescription as it's entered in the database - single entry kills two birds with one stone and thus, efficient. I know this because even my dentist asks me if I'm still on the medication (they too need to know in case their drugs cause effects)
Reading this article will give you a good feel for how dependent restaurants are on beer/liquor sales to stay afloat.
Delivery of food with no high-margin drinks wrecks that model. In a world where you can order any combination of items alone, each item has to be priced reasonably.
Funny how it doesn't apply in Canada, because the liquor laws are much tougher that few restaurants are licensed to serve. Basically, every licensed restaurant must have every server trained in alcohol handling (can't serve too much, and heaven help you if you serve a minor), and the courts have ruled that "hosts" are liable - if a drunk patron leaves and kills/injures someone, the restaurant or bar serving them is actually liable for damages as well.
So yes, there are licensed establishments, but most restaurants aren't licensed and thus can only serve non-alcoholic drinks (water, pop, etc).
And it turns out most restaurants don't bother screwing you over with drinks - sure maybe $1.50 for a pop is a bit pricey, but it's not so over the top (and the water's always free).
We don't have wildly expensive food prices either - in fact, apparently Vancouver is one of the cheapest places to eat out - just because there is so much competition.
The only places that really do overcharge are "fine dining" establishments, but those were already expensive from the get-go.
So delivery services are really an extension of the takeout model - and given some restaurants do nothing but takeout, they seem to do OK. The profits from drink sales really should be used to pay for services if you eat in - servers, dish washers, etc, but takeout doesn't incur any of that.
I see this hurting those specialty destination restaurants that make dining "an experience" by hoity-toity celebrity chefs and big names where you might drop $200 for a meal. The more run of the mill places serving the general public for lunch downtown and all that (i.e., lunch for $10-15 max), aren't going to suffer much, if at all - given takeout is a big part of their sales.
Apple's overarching policy is to discourage recycling at all costs. They even mandate recycling companies to destroy perfectly fine iPhones Macbooks.
Yes, because you know what's worse than shredding a working computer or phone?
Having said phone end up on eBay with data intact. And with working units sold for scrap, some unscrupulous employee, or the company management might do just that - if Apple sends them a working unit to recycle, it may end up on eBay.
And really, in this day and age of people stealing laptops for their data, thousands and millions of people's personal information being stolen (Equifax, anyone?), that you'll want to let a potential data leak happen.
So Apple will mandate that the machines they send out for recycling actually end up with the data destroyed as well. The danger of data leaking out is far greater than chip level recycling that Apple mandating it be destroyed by shredding is a good thing. Far too many companies woiuld rather just hand it off to a third party company and next thing you know, another Equifax happened because that machine was from a hospital and contained tons of patient records.
Sure, you can mandate that hard drives and SSDs are wiped before reselling used, but I'm sure you'll find plenty of "wiped and erased HDD/SSD" on eBay now with user data on them. Or available with a quick un-format utility. Or just a quick scan. (SSDs can be quickly erased with the ATA_SECURE_ERASE command, but how many people do that versus "format c:"?).
Because crap happens - people get lazy, people think they can format their drives and sell it on eBay as erased. Apple doesn't want to risk that, so it mandates companies literally destroy the media. Unfortunately, there's no way around it, either - if you allow the media to be saved, you allow for the chance of data being leaked because of sheer human laziness.
There are plenty of game publishers out there. Heck, there's a thriving indie scene as well (Kickstarter funded, but a lot of them make it to retail).
Asmodee is, however, one of the larger publishers now, but it appears like Hasbro and other companies to keep their holdings as separate identities. Z-Man, for example, still publishes under Z-Man - there aren't many games that publish directly under Asmodee.
And your FLGS will be happy to show you plenty of publishers that aren't part of the Asmodee empire. Rio Grande, Czech Games Edition, CMON (Cool Mini Or Not).
Then there's indies like Stonemeier Games, Renegade (who has a huge catalog as well), IDW, etc. And more popping up daily. Interestingly, if you've managed to break through the barriers (which aren't high), going from Kickstarter to retail isn't all that hard. My FLGS gets in a lot of games merely on recommendations, and the only big one is getting a distributorship so the store can order it in.
And now this intern has ruined life for all other interns in the company - past, present, and future. I'm sure all of the current interns have gotten a "leak like this guy and we'll ruin you" speech by now, and I bet web crawlers are already trained on past employees and interns looking for a hint of anything similar. Future interns will have to sign away even more of their rights, be locked down even harder, and feel like a prisoner while they're working. Thanks, asshole, for ruining the intern experience for everyone.
I think you're understating the seriousness. I think companies everywhere are re-evaluating their interns. After all, Apple is well known to have security down pat - defense in depth, layered security, and that's just the physical side (you have secure rooms within secure rooms...).
And Apple had a breach. Every company is probably looking over their security and their interns because if it happened at Apple, there's no telling it couldn't happen to them. Even worse, if you interned at Apple, you may find yourself at the end of the distrust stick - if you leaked out Apple's stuff, who's to say you won't leak out our stuff?
Heck, if Apple finds out which intern did it, they're pretty much out of the tech industry. No company will want to touch someone who deliberately leaks their company's secrets. Get branded as someone who violates NDA, become an untouchable. And Apple doesn't even need to press heavy charges - given the age of the code, the damage will likely be minimal, so even if Apple asked for a token $1, the fact that the person violated NDAs is the far greater punishment.
That's what we started with, with static linked libraries, so if that was the Hole Grail then dynamic libs should have never been invented.
Dynamic linked libraries are still better, even as snaps, because you can still update the library in a snap. Static link libraries make it impossible.
You also get the advantage of if libfoo is vulnerable, you can find all isntances of libfoo through the snaps as well. You can't if it's a static library because libfoo will be embedded inside the binary which is much more difficult ot analyze.
So no, even in snaps a dynamic library is better for many reasons.
The main reason for snaps is because it turns out a lot of libraries are not as compatible as you'd like. Between versions of libraries, things change and binary compatibility between libraries isn't maintained. So just because you linked against version 1.0.0 of libfoo, doesn't mean it will work against version 1.0.1. And non-trivial programs start using more and more libraries, you start running into a lot of issues because of library mismatches. Yes, lots of bugs get exposed.
If you want to see what happens, take a look at glibc and all the contortions it goes through in order to remain binary compatible - it's why other C libraries often get away with less because they're embedded and thus every program is re-linked against a specific version, while glibc is designed to be internally compatible.
It ends up a huge mess, and if you want to release your program for various Linux distributions, well, no Linux distribution uses the same version of libraries as other distributions, so you end up having to re-build and re-link your program against every distribution. And if you don't, you'll get strange errors that no one can find - the author (who didn't build it) sees it works fine, while the user (using another distribution's version) has an issue caused by library binary incompatibility.
Effectively, dynamic libraries are good, but we also end up with a program where we need dozens of installed versions of a library because dozens of programs need a specific version. Linux has reached the point where DLL Hell exists.
Honestly, I think the a la-carte model is significantly better even if it is more expensive. It leads to better quality entertainment. Before streaming started to take off we had 900 channels of bottom-of-the-barrel-reality TV - now we have dozens of quality sci-fi and fantasy shows. Look at StarTrek Discovery as a prime example: it was utter shit, and if cable were the only option it would either stay on the air continuing as normal or taken as a sign that people just don't want sci-fi, so we'd get 100 new reality TV shows in the wake. Instead, it got sent back to the production studio during the middle of the first season, to be repaired or never seen again. The quality of TV has gone up dramatically in the past few years - I probably pay $200-$300/mo in streaming bills and would gladly pay $400-$600 if the amount of high-quality content doubled, beats the Hell out of $130/mo for cable filled with nothing but sports and reality TV.
No, a la carte leads to LESS quality television and MORE appeal to the masses.
Think of it this way - that specialty channel that exists only because it's bundled with with some major channels attracts a few eyeballs, but since it's been subsidized by everyone else buying the main channel, it can concentrate on the programming the few eyeballs it has wants. It doesn't need to get more eyeballs - it's coming along. (It's not like they cost that much - the wholesale price of all of DIscovery or History is really only about a buck per subscriber per month, and the main channel of either costs just over a quarter of that.).
But with the a la carte option, that specialy subchannel now needs eyeballs because the few subscribers it does get isn't enough for the programming it offers. The only way it can survive is to get more eyeballs and the only way to do that is to get more programming that appeals to the masses. This means more crap coming out because the programming the old eyeballs wants has to be replaced with the programming the masses of eyeballs want so they keep their money.
It also leads to main channel programming moving to the subchannels to help them get exposure and subscriptions. So top rated programming, instead of being on just the main channel may move to the specialty channels just so they can attract more eyeballs (and you'll pay for 3-4 channels instead of just 1).
The only reason you're seeing more quality programming now is because more quality programming is being produced. Netflix doesn't care about eyeballs, it cares about subscribers, so all it needs to do is produce programming that its subscribers want. And funny thing is, I can watch a lot of "Netflix exclusive" programming without Netflix - a lot of specialty channels syndicate Netflix programming.
And the only reason a lot more quality programming is being produced is cord cutting - the people who cord cut are the kind of people who aren't the masses who the majority of programming appeals to. It also turns out they're likely to be higher end subscribers, and well, Internet revenues just aren't what they are for cable. (Remember when I said History and Discoveyr really only cost around $1.50 each for everything? Well, that $1.50/month/subscriber can be tied into 5 different channel bundles so the cost to the consumer is around $30/month. TV is highly profitable, Internet, not so much.
Plus, getting rid of ESPN really helps ($12/month'/subscriber or more. You can buy Discovery and History 4 times each for just ESPN).
It has no way to easily be converted to proof-of-stake in the future, once enough mining has been completed
Bitcoin is proof of work, and will remain so. New bitcoin production will end one day, but mining will not - the miners will switch from creating bitcoins to locking the blockchain.
Where do you think the transaction fees go? They don't disappear - they simply go to the miners who lock the block in, and more is made now on transaction fees than on making new bitcoin. It's how the network is supposed to operate - after all the bitcoin is mined, you get paid in transaction fees. The more you pay, the more likely you're going to be in the current blockchain block.
It isn't even an issue of money either. Let's Encrypt offers free certificates so I don't want to hear that it is a time and money issue.
It's a reputation issue. Given Let's Encrypt has issued over 14,000 paypal phishing certificates, one would think you should revoke Let's Encrypt certificates. After all, if Symantec, Comodo or others issued those, we'd be calling for blood.
The only reason we aren't is because Let's Encrypt has big names like EFF and Mozilla behind them. But all the scammers are basically dragging them through the mud - are your EFF donations being used to scam poor old ladies out of their money? Is scamming people really the goal of EFF and Mozilla?
Heck, it's actually kind of funny because a new exploit opened up on sites using Let's Encrypt, because they have a well-known directory that's being used to hide cryptocurrency miners and other things, too.
Maybe if there was a way to grade the quality of a certificate - Let's Encrypt can be made low, sites that charge with a real valid billing address (i.e., used a credit card, as opposed to bitcoin) can be higher rated because there is accountability down the line - including down to a real name and address.
But wouldn't it make more sense for the cab driver to use a computer to find the best route? The computer can know much more about the current traffic conditions and provide a much better route. The cab driver has to be smart enough to know when the computer is making a really bad error, but for the most part, the computer will probably come up with a really good result. You might end up with cab drivers who are better at being drivers or who are more courteous to the public rather than picking only people who can memorize a map of the city.
It's like requiring that programmers do all their coding in assembly, because in a few edge cases they can get a better result, while ignoring all the errors they will make in the majority of cases.
And the computer can make a goof. Worse yet, if you don't know, you can blindly trust the computer and have no clue when it fails. And it fails often, given the number of people who end up in the ocean or on some strange forest road because they were blindly following their GPS box and not thinking. You know, things like "why is it asking me to go off the end of this pier?" or "if I turn here, there's that body of water?" or even "This road looks much too small for my vehicle, or why am I on an strange unpaved road and why am I in a forest..?".
But it doesn't appear to be direct action from the advertisers pulling the ads...it is YouTube doing a blanket decision "no ads at all for your channel" type thing or a lot of genres, that till now no one really had a problem with...
Because YouTube has no advertisers for those genres at all. It's basically saying that if you're going to make a video about that (and you're free to - YouTube will continue to host those videos for free), they just can't pay you anything for it.
YouTube lost a lot of advertisers last year, and I'm pretty sure they're clinging to the few that remain, but that means there are categories of videos that no advertiser is touching. YouTube is simply stating the facts - if you make those videos, don't expect remuneration for it.
And there's nothing wrong with it - YouTube is hosting those videos and channels still on their dime because no advertiser wants to pay for it. If YouTube instead took down those channels, then there's a real problem. It just means content creators have to source their own funding, or produce it as a hobby.
So why the hell are cellphone batteries dying so much faster? Are they higher density for more initial capacity, at the cost of quicker wear and reduction of capacity? Because if you can lose over 20% of an iPhone battery in two years, that's a pretty stark difference to my laptop.
Because simply, your laptop has more batteries.
Cellphones have one cell, and are often used from full to dead on a daily basis, which is a very hard operating regimen, and basically all the wear happens on that one cell.
Laptops rarely are operated like that - most sit on the charger all day, and maybe autonomous for a couple of hours, where it may undergo a slight discharge from 100% to say, 60%, then put back on charge. This imposes very little wear on the battery, and even then, laptops use multiple cells, so the wear generally gets distributed over more cells.
Think of it this way - a Tesla uses the same kind of cells, and basically you expect to get about 10 years of life out of it before it hits around 80% capacity or so. That's because there are thousands of cells and each is carefully managed by the onboard computer. Then after that, you can take those cells and put them in a battery pack and run a house off of them, even at their reduced capacity, they can run a house pretty well. That's because the load a house brings on a battery will be much less than a car, so you may get another 10 years out of those cells before they drop to 40% or so (and you probably won't notice the capacity drop if the battery gets you through the night before the solar array on your roof recharges them)..
Battery ageing is determined by how hard you run the loads - how fast and nasty you are at charging them - something cellphones do quite aggressively because you can have peak loads of amps coming out and fast chargers don't help that get you to 80% in half an hour. A laptop is used far more gently comparatively speaking, at least since the load is spread out, and the charge current is spread out as well, so the batteries are treated much more gently.
Electric cars even more so, despite ludicrous mode, the actual load imposed on one individual battery is probably more like it loafing around, and then retirement as a house battery is like pampering it in old age.
Not as much as Google or Amazon. Because all the reviews are saying how limited Siri is. And Siri is limited because Apple is holding it back. Siri is limited to simple on-device commands that are handled locally without cloud involvement, or when using the cloud, very limited engagements.
Apple's privacy policies are tough, and compartmentalized. The Siri team is blocked for requests to other user data not already given to Siri - as in they can ask, but they won't be able to get at it. Doesn't matter that Apple has that information, if the privacy policy says Siri cannot get at it, that data simply doesn't exist.
Why do you think Google/Alphabet harmonized data sharing so your data is shared freely by everyone at Alphabet? Because having access to all that data makes Google's assistant much better. Google Assistant knows you better, and can answer you better. Siri is basically limited to simple interactions only. The reviews show that while Siri listens well, it does not respond as well
Heck, knowing Apple, Siri probably is afraid to hit the cloud server and tries to do as much as possible on device. Less data Apple has is less data to give to the government, and is much easier to simply say "that is information we do not have because the devices never send it to us" than to have to fight the courts because you do have it, but because of reason X, the government can't get it. (See Microsoft's fight at not having to turn over cloud data stored in another country.). Better to not have that information and have the FBI bitching and whining about Apple not collecting that information than the FBI bitching and whining that Apple is deliberately obstructing justice by not turning over the data. Because eventually some event will happen that tugs at heart strings so much, everyone will just go and demand you release the information.
Anyhow, I'll wait for the HomePod version 2. The revision that Apple will do and will add audio input jacks to. It is classical Apple after all - release something that does a narrow thing very well, but has limitations, then revise it to have the missing features people want put back in. I'm sure a lot of this is simply in making sure the technology used is robust and works well.
And you know some third party will probably make a wireless adapter that takes audio in and plays it through the HomePod, too.
You won't get much meat off a marmokreb. The work to meat ratio is pretty low.
After cooking (in the boil)... Twist it in half to separate the tail from the body (thorax). Hold the tail to your mouth, suck and squeeze the tail. Repeat for body. Discard rest.
They also can be mechanically separated, as you can buy crawfish tail meat by the pound. Which go great as a substitute for lobster in many dishes and makes a very fine crawfish roll. They are related to lobsters, after all.
Also, they're nice and sustainable so what everyone needs to do is just munch away.
phone/SMS thing is supposed to be only one factor in a multi-factor ID system.
Nope, it's not. NIST has officially delisted SMS and phone numbers as a valid factor - they note that you cannot control phone numbers and a phone number does not necessarily lead to the phone in question.
And given the known vulnerabilities in SS7, it's entirely possible to take over a part of the phone network temporarily (especially cellular networks, which use SS7).
Thus, SMS is no longer valid as a mechanism for multi-factor ID - it's too vulnerable. It's part of the reason why everyone has moved to authentication apps.
I thought the iPhone only had about a 1/3 market share in the US. Hardly MicrosoftÃ(TM)s 95+% they had in the heyday of Windows and the browser wars. Come to think of it, how how does Apple Music become the biggest service when itÃ(TM)s only available on a minority of devices?
So why is Apple blocking the Free WebM format? How to play Free videos on iPhone? That is probably the last reason why YouTube still have to provide also the mp4/H.264/5 crap variant for all their videos.
WebM isn't free. Google has admitted to it and is paying the license fees for the patents it uses. That's why Google is preferring people use h.264 instead It's also why all the big players have stopped bothering with it - if they're going to pay h.264 license fees for something that is worse than h.264, they're just going to stick with h.264.
h.265 is another matter altogether and no one knows what is going to be supported by anyone anymore, especially with AV1 just finishing standardization But AV1 just finished, so nothing really supports it and hardware decoders take a year or two to appear..
I think the problem is, if you buy crypto on credit, it's basically a cash advance. You're buying another currency. Even if that weren't the case, its overly easy to buy crypto on credit and sell it for cash seconds later. It would be so easy to max out a credit card and run off with the cash, which I'm guessing is their main motivation.
Well, the solution is to treat it as a cash advance. Which is perfectly legal - some transactions are treated as cash advances rather than a standard credit transaction.
I think the real issue is simply of risk - cryptocurrencies are too high risk, and there's no way the credit providers are going to lend (with protection) on such a high risk product. Paypal already did this - if you use Paypal to pay for a cryptocurrency transaction, Paypal says you lose all protections provided, so you cannot dispute the transaction later.
This can be important, especially with the likes of Bitcoin where a transaction can take weeks - consumer buys bitcoin, doesn't understand he won't get it immediately, then does a chargeback. Credit card investigates and by the time it's done the transaction completes and all that stuff. Or because of the way it fluctuates, that $100 in bitcoin they bought turned into $50 when they actually got it and they want that money back.
Since credit cards can't arbitrarily remove your right to chargeback or question any transaction you made, the only thing they can do is reduce their risk by removing risky merchants. This is done all the time in the real world, though usually it's the merchant who can't get the account.
That's why the banks are letting debit transactions through - since it's your cash, you have no right to charge back, and you can complain, but you most likely won't get your money back if the currency dips between when you buy it and when you actually get it.
Likely what happened is because of the plummeting value of bitcoin, people who bought it on credit are demanding chargebacks to try to recoup their losses. Paypal had to change their policy because of it, and I'm guessing credit lenders are doing the same - chargebacks are for protection against lame merchants, not hedges against price drops.
Thankfully not often, but perhaps 3 or 4 times in the past year or so, and never prior to that, I've had "no service available" where I know I should otherwise have. Doing a complete power cycle seems to make the problem go away each time, but it's damn annoying.
This is likely a software problem and not a hardware problem. The software running on the modem is highly complex and there can be exception states that lock up the modem processor. Or lock up the DSP on the modem.
We found a reliable way to crash the modem stack on a lot of devices a few years ago - it turns out the commuter train entering a tunnel causes enough strange signal oddities that the DSP and modem processor weirds out and often crash. Alas, a carrier decided to add in hardware to provide a cell signal inside the tunnel, so that technique doesn't work anymore.
The modem software is quite complex with quite a few threads, state machines and other things. It doesn't take much to have a memory leak, or interesting signal conditions that cause the software to enter exception states in just the right way to expose bugs.
Better yet, remember the whole Burger King What is a Whopper thing?
It sounds like a perfect opportunity to continue your ad for another 30 seconds, crap on the next guy's ad, and save yourself $5M by taking only 1 30 second ad spot instead of 2.
I'm wondering how many times ads will intentionally trigger Alexa/Google/Siri during these times. Hell, maybe you can get them all to dial 911 at the same time and do a massive DDoS of the emergency system.
They've demonetized many of the channels I like to watch...such a hunting, camping, home repair, etc.
It's stupid and random. If they have an algorithm doing this the programmer is a moron. If people are doing it, they are morons. if it's a mix, then it's the Perfect Storm of Morons.
Won't belong before the only channels unaffected by their stupidity are the Cute Cat channels and that won't last after the Animal Rights assholes get done with them.
You have to realize that to "monetize" a video, there has to be an ad for it. And maybe just over a year ago, that wasn't a problem - there were lots of advertisers.
The big problem is YouTube's advertisers are running thin. When thanks to the opinions of a certain president, certain views started getting rather high visibility, and the press surrounding those videos suddenly caused a lot of advertisers to wake up and take notice - their ads were playing on those videos.
You have to realize an advertiser is a thin skinned human with a bankroll, and the only way to get them to release that bankroll is to stay on the straight and narrow. So a LOT of big name advertisers pulled their ad contracts from YouTube the first time it happened. It happened again a month later, and even more advertisers pulled out.
So basically of what's left, YouTube has to ensure that they don't get up and leave as well. So producing a video that harms the YouTube community may be demonetized because it has the potential of losing advertisers.
And that's what matters. If you want money, you need ads. Advertisers are thin skinned and if you're not on the straight and narrow on what values they promote, they will refuse to put an ad on your video and thus, your video does not get monetized because there's no one to pay for it.
Unfortunately, a lot of outdoorsy type videos fall under this - guns are especially hard thanks to all the mass shootings, so advertisers really hate associating their product with something that could cause another Las Vegas.
The gravy train has basically come to a halt. At least YouTube still keeps the video up - and until someone wants to advertise on those kinds of videos, they can't be monetized.
And no, the alternatives will have to face exactly the same problem - Steem and DTube, short of charging people money to view the videos, will have to rely on the same kinds of advertisers that YouTube goes after. Well, they could go after the crapware advertisers, you know, the ones that will advertise on any site regardless of content, mostly because the ads are deceptive, illegal, and will be the kind that install 10 kinds of malware on your computer. They're the ones you find on torrent sites and other questionable content sites.
Slashdot Mirror
Each vaccine typically has about 3-5 strains of deactivated flu viruses (virii?) in it, and since production starts before fall, the manufacturers have to check with the CDC and others for their estimates on what strains will likely to be especially virulent. (A strain is of the form HxNy, where X is from 1-5 and y from 1-8, I believe, and refers to the two major proteins on the capsule, there are many substrains because there are more proteins on the capsule too, but those are the big ones that generally dictate what kind of flu it is).
So it's generally a guess. Sometimes you get lucky and the active flu strains are what you vaccinated for. Other times, you miss and the big ones aren't covered. Either way though, you can still be hit with a flu strain that is different from what everyone else gets (aren't you special?).
The best ways is to basically not touch wounds or mucus membrane surfaces - eyes, nose and such with your hands, and wash with soap and water (more than adequate - antibacterials do not work on viruses) often. Shaking hands can be replaced by fist-bumps (much more sanitary) if everyone is casual enough, though the elbow bump is for the more adventurous. Just wash your hands afterwards.
I used to get sick a lot, then I realized it was because I rubbed my eyes, and if I just washed my hands before doing it, I cut down my infection rate significantly. (This is including colds and minor infections too). Rubbing eyes is the best way to transfer viruses from your hands into your body where it infects you.
Pretty much.
Paper jams don't happen in a high speed press because they are long and the paper rarely has to be bent. The jams happen because of bends - from incompatible paper (like stickers and whatnot) to simply the paper not making it around. So a large printing press, or even a high speed photocopier work because the paper feeds in from one end and it stays flat through the entire process until it shoots out the other end. Double sided printing is handled by two print engines, so it prints the top side and the bottom side separately. Paper stays flat throughout and you can print at thousands of pages per minute without a single jam.
But people don't have the 20 feet of space needed for a flat paper path, or if you cut down the speed a lot, you can have paper follow a more winding path, with the advantage that it takes up a heck of a lot less space. But at the same time, the bends mean an edge can catch when it bends around and boom, a jam. Most printers will have an S shaped paper path - paper feeds in on one side (or front), travels to the other side getting printed, then bends into the output tray. Heaven help you if you have the duplexer that bends the paper again and feeds it through all over again.
The bending significantly slows down the path since you can't take the bends too fast or the paper will just jam up on you.
And yes, a machine able to copy thousands of sheets a minute is very impressive to watch. Any large school or institution will have them - it's the only way you can make 1000 copies in a reasonable amount of time.1000 double sided copies, and often with a finisher to collate and staple. And they can run on the nastiest cheapest paper as I believe they don't even have rollers - a vacuum system sucks the paper to the belt so the only thing that touches it is the drum. End result of a bad sheet will be crumpled and nasty, but come out of the system and not caught and jammed. Because at 1000 pages a minute, you can't run for 2 seconds before jamming. (2 seconds is 32 pages).
Exactly. They exist to sell hardware to people willing to pay for overpriced stuff (i.e., gamers, the new audiophool). Practically all of them run Windows and knows nothing else, and they probably get their sales from people who see their boxes at Best Buy, go "ooh shiny" and whip out their credit card.
Serving Linux might work if there's a sufficient business case for them to well, sell more hardware, but if the community does what it usually does and says just buy a Model M and be done with it for keyboards or buy a cheaper mouse rather than buying the overpriced stuff, well, that's something they'd rather do without.
That's the problem - the article was about an engineer doing an engineering solution, but the company didn't get the part where it would benefit them. Yadda yadda yadda software does this, blah blah blah. Nowhere does it say "Your hardware is awesome, and there a huge untapped market if you would sell it to Linux users but we need Linux software".
Most of it is pure business decisions - if you can make a cogent case that Linux would help them sell more of their stuff, enough to outweigh the risks and costs, then they'll do it.
Depends on the doctor, it seems. Some have a prescription pad and use it (and honestly, I've been able to read what it says - it's a quarter-letter sheet, the doctor's name is preprinted, so there's a lot of space for the doctor to write in very big block letters the prescription. We're talking inch-high block printing (I haven't seen cursive in a long time).
My other prescriptions were printed onto regular letter paper and signed by the doctor.
I'm guessing the latter is more common now because the doctor has to enter our medication in a province-wide prescription database (called PharmaNet), so every drug ever prescribed to you is listed (to make sure you're not overprescribed, or to watch out for drug interactions). And since they're entering that information anyways, it's only a small stretch to have the software actually print out the prescription as it's entered in the database - single entry kills two birds with one stone and thus, efficient. I know this because even my dentist asks me if I'm still on the medication (they too need to know in case their drugs cause effects)
Funny how it doesn't apply in Canada, because the liquor laws are much tougher that few restaurants are licensed to serve. Basically, every licensed restaurant must have every server trained in alcohol handling (can't serve too much, and heaven help you if you serve a minor), and the courts have ruled that "hosts" are liable - if a drunk patron leaves and kills/injures someone, the restaurant or bar serving them is actually liable for damages as well.
So yes, there are licensed establishments, but most restaurants aren't licensed and thus can only serve non-alcoholic drinks (water, pop, etc).
And it turns out most restaurants don't bother screwing you over with drinks - sure maybe $1.50 for a pop is a bit pricey, but it's not so over the top (and the water's always free).
We don't have wildly expensive food prices either - in fact, apparently Vancouver is one of the cheapest places to eat out - just because there is so much competition.
The only places that really do overcharge are "fine dining" establishments, but those were already expensive from the get-go.
So delivery services are really an extension of the takeout model - and given some restaurants do nothing but takeout, they seem to do OK. The profits from drink sales really should be used to pay for services if you eat in - servers, dish washers, etc, but takeout doesn't incur any of that.
I see this hurting those specialty destination restaurants that make dining "an experience" by hoity-toity celebrity chefs and big names where you might drop $200 for a meal. The more run of the mill places serving the general public for lunch downtown and all that (i.e., lunch for $10-15 max), aren't going to suffer much, if at all - given takeout is a big part of their sales.
Yes, because you know what's worse than shredding a working computer or phone?
Having said phone end up on eBay with data intact. And with working units sold for scrap, some unscrupulous employee, or the company management might do just that - if Apple sends them a working unit to recycle, it may end up on eBay.
And really, in this day and age of people stealing laptops for their data, thousands and millions of people's personal information being stolen (Equifax, anyone?), that you'll want to let a potential data leak happen.
So Apple will mandate that the machines they send out for recycling actually end up with the data destroyed as well. The danger of data leaking out is far greater than chip level recycling that Apple mandating it be destroyed by shredding is a good thing. Far too many companies woiuld rather just hand it off to a third party company and next thing you know, another Equifax happened because that machine was from a hospital and contained tons of patient records.
Sure, you can mandate that hard drives and SSDs are wiped before reselling used, but I'm sure you'll find plenty of "wiped and erased HDD/SSD" on eBay now with user data on them. Or available with a quick un-format utility. Or just a quick scan. (SSDs can be quickly erased with the ATA_SECURE_ERASE command, but how many people do that versus "format c:"?).
Because crap happens - people get lazy, people think they can format their drives and sell it on eBay as erased. Apple doesn't want to risk that, so it mandates companies literally destroy the media. Unfortunately, there's no way around it, either - if you allow the media to be saved, you allow for the chance of data being leaked because of sheer human laziness.
There are plenty of game publishers out there. Heck, there's a thriving indie scene as well (Kickstarter funded, but a lot of them make it to retail).
Asmodee is, however, one of the larger publishers now, but it appears like Hasbro and other companies to keep their holdings as separate identities. Z-Man, for example, still publishes under Z-Man - there aren't many games that publish directly under Asmodee.
And your FLGS will be happy to show you plenty of publishers that aren't part of the Asmodee empire. Rio Grande, Czech Games Edition, CMON (Cool Mini Or Not).
Then there's indies like Stonemeier Games, Renegade (who has a huge catalog as well), IDW, etc. And more popping up daily. Interestingly, if you've managed to break through the barriers (which aren't high), going from Kickstarter to retail isn't all that hard. My FLGS gets in a lot of games merely on recommendations, and the only big one is getting a distributorship so the store can order it in.
I think you're understating the seriousness. I think companies everywhere are re-evaluating their interns. After all, Apple is well known to have security down pat - defense in depth, layered security, and that's just the physical side (you have secure rooms within secure rooms...).
And Apple had a breach. Every company is probably looking over their security and their interns because if it happened at Apple, there's no telling it couldn't happen to them. Even worse, if you interned at Apple, you may find yourself at the end of the distrust stick - if you leaked out Apple's stuff, who's to say you won't leak out our stuff?
Heck, if Apple finds out which intern did it, they're pretty much out of the tech industry. No company will want to touch someone who deliberately leaks their company's secrets. Get branded as someone who violates NDA, become an untouchable. And Apple doesn't even need to press heavy charges - given the age of the code, the damage will likely be minimal, so even if Apple asked for a token $1, the fact that the person violated NDAs is the far greater punishment.
Dynamic linked libraries are still better, even as snaps, because you can still update the library in a snap. Static link libraries make it impossible.
You also get the advantage of if libfoo is vulnerable, you can find all isntances of libfoo through the snaps as well. You can't if it's a static library because libfoo will be embedded inside the binary which is much more difficult ot analyze.
So no, even in snaps a dynamic library is better for many reasons.
The main reason for snaps is because it turns out a lot of libraries are not as compatible as you'd like. Between versions of libraries, things change and binary compatibility between libraries isn't maintained. So just because you linked against version 1.0.0 of libfoo, doesn't mean it will work against version 1.0.1. And non-trivial programs start using more and more libraries, you start running into a lot of issues because of library mismatches. Yes, lots of bugs get exposed.
If you want to see what happens, take a look at glibc and all the contortions it goes through in order to remain binary compatible - it's why other C libraries often get away with less because they're embedded and thus every program is re-linked against a specific version, while glibc is designed to be internally compatible.
It ends up a huge mess, and if you want to release your program for various Linux distributions, well, no Linux distribution uses the same version of libraries as other distributions, so you end up having to re-build and re-link your program against every distribution. And if you don't, you'll get strange errors that no one can find - the author (who didn't build it) sees it works fine, while the user (using another distribution's version) has an issue caused by library binary incompatibility.
Effectively, dynamic libraries are good, but we also end up with a program where we need dozens of installed versions of a library because dozens of programs need a specific version. Linux has reached the point where DLL Hell exists.
No, a la carte leads to LESS quality television and MORE appeal to the masses.
Think of it this way - that specialty channel that exists only because it's bundled with with some major channels attracts a few eyeballs, but since it's been subsidized by everyone else buying the main channel, it can concentrate on the programming the few eyeballs it has wants. It doesn't need to get more eyeballs - it's coming along. (It's not like they cost that much - the wholesale price of all of DIscovery or History is really only about a buck per subscriber per month, and the main channel of either costs just over a quarter of that.).
But with the a la carte option, that specialy subchannel now needs eyeballs because the few subscribers it does get isn't enough for the programming it offers. The only way it can survive is to get more eyeballs and the only way to do that is to get more programming that appeals to the masses. This means more crap coming out because the programming the old eyeballs wants has to be replaced with the programming the masses of eyeballs want so they keep their money.
It also leads to main channel programming moving to the subchannels to help them get exposure and subscriptions. So top rated programming, instead of being on just the main channel may move to the specialty channels just so they can attract more eyeballs (and you'll pay for 3-4 channels instead of just 1).
The only reason you're seeing more quality programming now is because more quality programming is being produced. Netflix doesn't care about eyeballs, it cares about subscribers, so all it needs to do is produce programming that its subscribers want. And funny thing is, I can watch a lot of "Netflix exclusive" programming without Netflix - a lot of specialty channels syndicate Netflix programming.
And the only reason a lot more quality programming is being produced is cord cutting - the people who cord cut are the kind of people who aren't the masses who the majority of programming appeals to. It also turns out they're likely to be higher end subscribers, and well, Internet revenues just aren't what they are for cable. (Remember when I said History and Discoveyr really only cost around $1.50 each for everything? Well, that $1.50/month/subscriber can be tied into 5 different channel bundles so the cost to the consumer is around $30/month. TV is highly profitable, Internet, not so much.
Plus, getting rid of ESPN really helps ($12/month'/subscriber or more. You can buy Discovery and History 4 times each for just ESPN).
Bitcoin is proof of work, and will remain so. New bitcoin production will end one day, but mining will not - the miners will switch from creating bitcoins to locking the blockchain.
Where do you think the transaction fees go? They don't disappear - they simply go to the miners who lock the block in, and more is made now on transaction fees than on making new bitcoin. It's how the network is supposed to operate - after all the bitcoin is mined, you get paid in transaction fees. The more you pay, the more likely you're going to be in the current blockchain block.
It's a reputation issue. Given Let's Encrypt has issued over 14,000 paypal phishing certificates, one would think you should revoke Let's Encrypt certificates. After all, if Symantec, Comodo or others issued those, we'd be calling for blood.
The only reason we aren't is because Let's Encrypt has big names like EFF and Mozilla behind them. But all the scammers are basically dragging them through the mud - are your EFF donations being used to scam poor old ladies out of their money? Is scamming people really the goal of EFF and Mozilla?
Heck, it's actually kind of funny because a new exploit opened up on sites using Let's Encrypt, because they have a well-known directory that's being used to hide cryptocurrency miners and other things, too.
Maybe if there was a way to grade the quality of a certificate - Let's Encrypt can be made low, sites that charge with a real valid billing address (i.e., used a credit card, as opposed to bitcoin) can be higher rated because there is accountability down the line - including down to a real name and address.
And the computer can make a goof. Worse yet, if you don't know, you can blindly trust the computer and have no clue when it fails. And it fails often, given the number of people who end up in the ocean or on some strange forest road because they were blindly following their GPS box and not thinking. You know, things like "why is it asking me to go off the end of this pier?" or "if I turn here, there's that body of water?" or even "This road looks much too small for my vehicle, or why am I on an strange unpaved road and why am I in a forest..?".
And yes, it has killed people
Because YouTube has no advertisers for those genres at all. It's basically saying that if you're going to make a video about that (and you're free to - YouTube will continue to host those videos for free), they just can't pay you anything for it.
YouTube lost a lot of advertisers last year, and I'm pretty sure they're clinging to the few that remain, but that means there are categories of videos that no advertiser is touching. YouTube is simply stating the facts - if you make those videos, don't expect remuneration for it.
And there's nothing wrong with it - YouTube is hosting those videos and channels still on their dime because no advertiser wants to pay for it. If YouTube instead took down those channels, then there's a real problem. It just means content creators have to source their own funding, or produce it as a hobby.
Because simply, your laptop has more batteries.
Cellphones have one cell, and are often used from full to dead on a daily basis, which is a very hard operating regimen, and basically all the wear happens on that one cell.
Laptops rarely are operated like that - most sit on the charger all day, and maybe autonomous for a couple of hours, where it may undergo a slight discharge from 100% to say, 60%, then put back on charge. This imposes very little wear on the battery, and even then, laptops use multiple cells, so the wear generally gets distributed over more cells.
Think of it this way - a Tesla uses the same kind of cells, and basically you expect to get about 10 years of life out of it before it hits around 80% capacity or so. That's because there are thousands of cells and each is carefully managed by the onboard computer. Then after that, you can take those cells and put them in a battery pack and run a house off of them, even at their reduced capacity, they can run a house pretty well. That's because the load a house brings on a battery will be much less than a car, so you may get another 10 years out of those cells before they drop to 40% or so (and you probably won't notice the capacity drop if the battery gets you through the night before the solar array on your roof recharges them)..
Battery ageing is determined by how hard you run the loads - how fast and nasty you are at charging them - something cellphones do quite aggressively because you can have peak loads of amps coming out and fast chargers don't help that get you to 80% in half an hour. A laptop is used far more gently comparatively speaking, at least since the load is spread out, and the charge current is spread out as well, so the batteries are treated much more gently.
Electric cars even more so, despite ludicrous mode, the actual load imposed on one individual battery is probably more like it loafing around, and then retirement as a house battery is like pampering it in old age.
Not as much as Google or Amazon. Because all the reviews are saying how limited Siri is. And Siri is limited because Apple is holding it back. Siri is limited to simple on-device commands that are handled locally without cloud involvement, or when using the cloud, very limited engagements.
Apple's privacy policies are tough, and compartmentalized. The Siri team is blocked for requests to other user data not already given to Siri - as in they can ask, but they won't be able to get at it. Doesn't matter that Apple has that information, if the privacy policy says Siri cannot get at it, that data simply doesn't exist.
Why do you think Google/Alphabet harmonized data sharing so your data is shared freely by everyone at Alphabet? Because having access to all that data makes Google's assistant much better. Google Assistant knows you better, and can answer you better. Siri is basically limited to simple interactions only. The reviews show that while Siri listens well, it does not respond as well
Heck, knowing Apple, Siri probably is afraid to hit the cloud server and tries to do as much as possible on device. Less data Apple has is less data to give to the government, and is much easier to simply say "that is information we do not have because the devices never send it to us" than to have to fight the courts because you do have it, but because of reason X, the government can't get it. (See Microsoft's fight at not having to turn over cloud data stored in another country.). Better to not have that information and have the FBI bitching and whining about Apple not collecting that information than the FBI bitching and whining that Apple is deliberately obstructing justice by not turning over the data. Because eventually some event will happen that tugs at heart strings so much, everyone will just go and demand you release the information.
Anyhow, I'll wait for the HomePod version 2. The revision that Apple will do and will add audio input jacks to. It is classical Apple after all - release something that does a narrow thing very well, but has limitations, then revise it to have the missing features people want put back in. I'm sure a lot of this is simply in making sure the technology used is robust and works well.
And you know some third party will probably make a wireless adapter that takes audio in and plays it through the HomePod, too.
After cooking (in the boil)...
Twist it in half to separate the tail from the body (thorax). Hold the tail to your mouth, suck and squeeze the tail. Repeat for body. Discard rest.
They also can be mechanically separated, as you can buy crawfish tail meat by the pound. Which go great as a substitute for lobster in many dishes and makes a very fine crawfish roll. They are related to lobsters, after all.
Also, they're nice and sustainable so what everyone needs to do is just munch away.
Nope, it's not. NIST has officially delisted SMS and phone numbers as a valid factor - they note that you cannot control phone numbers and a phone number does not necessarily lead to the phone in question.
And given the known vulnerabilities in SS7, it's entirely possible to take over a part of the phone network temporarily (especially cellular networks, which use SS7).
Thus, SMS is no longer valid as a mechanism for multi-factor ID - it's too vulnerable. It's part of the reason why everyone has moved to authentication apps.
That's because Google has officially stopped supporting Android 4.4. The last monthly security update that supported Android 4.4 was September 2017.
October 2017 deprecated Android 5.0 security updates. Android 5.1 remains supported for now.
Android 4.4 and 5.0 security updates can be backported, but that's it. Google does not support those versions of Android anymore.
So yes, those old Androids are slowly being deprecated.
It's only preinstalled on a minority of devices.
It is available for the most popular mobile OS too.
WebM isn't free. Google has admitted to it and is paying the license fees for the patents it uses. That's why Google is preferring people use h.264 instead It's also why all the big players have stopped bothering with it - if they're going to pay h.264 license fees for something that is worse than h.264, they're just going to stick with h.264.
h.265 is another matter altogether and no one knows what is going to be supported by anyone anymore, especially with AV1 just finishing standardization But AV1 just finished, so nothing really supports it and hardware decoders take a year or two to appear..
Well, the solution is to treat it as a cash advance. Which is perfectly legal - some transactions are treated as cash advances rather than a standard credit transaction.
I think the real issue is simply of risk - cryptocurrencies are too high risk, and there's no way the credit providers are going to lend (with protection) on such a high risk product. Paypal already did this - if you use Paypal to pay for a cryptocurrency transaction, Paypal says you lose all protections provided, so you cannot dispute the transaction later.
This can be important, especially with the likes of Bitcoin where a transaction can take weeks - consumer buys bitcoin, doesn't understand he won't get it immediately, then does a chargeback. Credit card investigates and by the time it's done the transaction completes and all that stuff. Or because of the way it fluctuates, that $100 in bitcoin they bought turned into $50 when they actually got it and they want that money back.
Since credit cards can't arbitrarily remove your right to chargeback or question any transaction you made, the only thing they can do is reduce their risk by removing risky merchants. This is done all the time in the real world, though usually it's the merchant who can't get the account.
That's why the banks are letting debit transactions through - since it's your cash, you have no right to charge back, and you can complain, but you most likely won't get your money back if the currency dips between when you buy it and when you actually get it.
Likely what happened is because of the plummeting value of bitcoin, people who bought it on credit are demanding chargebacks to try to recoup their losses. Paypal had to change their policy because of it, and I'm guessing credit lenders are doing the same - chargebacks are for protection against lame merchants, not hedges against price drops.
This is likely a software problem and not a hardware problem. The software running on the modem is highly complex and there can be exception states that lock up the modem processor. Or lock up the DSP on the modem.
We found a reliable way to crash the modem stack on a lot of devices a few years ago - it turns out the commuter train entering a tunnel causes enough strange signal oddities that the DSP and modem processor weirds out and often crash. Alas, a carrier decided to add in hardware to provide a cell signal inside the tunnel, so that technique doesn't work anymore.
The modem software is quite complex with quite a few threads, state machines and other things. It doesn't take much to have a memory leak, or interesting signal conditions that cause the software to enter exception states in just the right way to expose bugs.
Better yet, remember the whole Burger King What is a Whopper thing?
It sounds like a perfect opportunity to continue your ad for another 30 seconds, crap on the next guy's ad, and save yourself $5M by taking only 1 30 second ad spot instead of 2.
I'm wondering how many times ads will intentionally trigger Alexa/Google/Siri during these times. Hell, maybe you can get them all to dial 911 at the same time and do a massive DDoS of the emergency system.
You have to realize that to "monetize" a video, there has to be an ad for it. And maybe just over a year ago, that wasn't a problem - there were lots of advertisers.
The big problem is YouTube's advertisers are running thin. When thanks to the opinions of a certain president, certain views started getting rather high visibility, and the press surrounding those videos suddenly caused a lot of advertisers to wake up and take notice - their ads were playing on those videos.
You have to realize an advertiser is a thin skinned human with a bankroll, and the only way to get them to release that bankroll is to stay on the straight and narrow. So a LOT of big name advertisers pulled their ad contracts from YouTube the first time it happened. It happened again a month later, and even more advertisers pulled out.
So basically of what's left, YouTube has to ensure that they don't get up and leave as well. So producing a video that harms the YouTube community may be demonetized because it has the potential of losing advertisers.
And that's what matters. If you want money, you need ads. Advertisers are thin skinned and if you're not on the straight and narrow on what values they promote, they will refuse to put an ad on your video and thus, your video does not get monetized because there's no one to pay for it.
Unfortunately, a lot of outdoorsy type videos fall under this - guns are especially hard thanks to all the mass shootings, so advertisers really hate associating their product with something that could cause another Las Vegas.
The gravy train has basically come to a halt. At least YouTube still keeps the video up - and until someone wants to advertise on those kinds of videos, they can't be monetized.
And no, the alternatives will have to face exactly the same problem - Steem and DTube, short of charging people money to view the videos, will have to rely on the same kinds of advertisers that YouTube goes after. Well, they could go after the crapware advertisers, you know, the ones that will advertise on any site regardless of content, mostly because the ads are deceptive, illegal, and will be the kind that install 10 kinds of malware on your computer. They're the ones you find on torrent sites and other questionable content sites.