Not only that, but if it's really that irreplaceable, packaging properly helps.
First off, there should be more than one address label. You'd be surprised how often the one outside the box falls off. The postal service in most first world countries is generally quite good, and will open packages on the hopes that there's something with an address inside.
If it's something that's individually wrapped (like those games should be in case the box gets soaked with water), and they're rare, it doesn't hurt to stick an address label inside the bag as well. Boxes may appear tough, but pass them through the machines and they can very well explode or tear and have their contents spill out. This ensures that as pieces are found they can be forwarded on.
Or at the very least, have a slip of paper inside having an address.
Lack of postage is never a reason to never deliver - if necessary, they'll just collect it, but for postal mail, unless it's customs or other fee, postage itself is prepaid and cancelled by the sender.
I've actually had a parcel delayed 6 weeks, because for some reason, it was shipped from the US to Brazil (!!!). Brazil post then found the misdelivered package and sent it back up to USPS who then sent it to Canada. I found a nice letter inside it saying it was from Brazil and what I could make out was "return to origin country" for re-sorting.
Ah that pesky 5th amendment (along with the 4th) and the limits it puts on law enforcement. Finally a judge that seems to understand the constitution.
Not really.
The issue is similar to using a Stingray or IMSI catcher - besides getting "the crook", you're getting a bunch of innocent people who are simply bycatch.
The judge simply knows you cannot force a bunch of innocent people to become suspects simply because they were present near the location. So whether it's unlocking their phones with fingerprints, or using a Stingray/IMSI catcher indiscriminately, most of the people will be innocent and steps must be taken to protect their information and activities.
Although intriguing and saddening that they've unlocked the iPhone 6 (but not 6s?).
What's more intriguing is that, why are Android phones so easy to break?! And why is it we never hear from Google/Microsoft wanting to protect its users against government surveillance, unlike Apple.... I guess everyone is aware that Google is a corporate spying empire, and yet there are people here who still argue against Apple and advocate for Android spyware?
Would you advocate GMail/Hangouts over Signal/Telegram/WhatsApp ?
The interesting thing is how few details there are about how they did it. I mean, why the 6/6s and not the 6+? Given for the unlock requires physical access to the phone, it's probably something they've physically accessed.
And unfortunately, Androids are much easier to hack - back when Apple was fighting the FBI, there was over 600 iPhones needing unlocking. The number of Android phones? Only 20 or so.
First, most Android phones do not encrypt storage by default. iPhones have encrypted it by default since the 3GS (it's why a "clear everything" on an iPhone 2G/3G takes hours, while it's only seconds on models after that - the new way is to just toss the encryption key and regenerate a new key, so it takes seconds and not hours (and doesn't wear down the flash)). So one trick is to remove the eMMC chip and read it out directly. Even today most phones are still not encrypted.
Second, Android App security is good. Android itself, though, is full of security holes making it easy to break in. It doesn't help that OEMs generally screw up and make the machines even more vulnerable. And many security vulnerabilities aren't fixed because of various reasons.
Android's security is slowly improving, but ti's still pretty bad.
But as a more practical matter anyway, 10 tries of different people's fingerprints, and the phone will be wiped regardless... so there's a limit to how useful the technique would've been to begin with.
No.
On iOS, you get 3 tries to use the fingerprint reader. If you fail, it reverts to the backup security method (PIN, etc). You cannot use the fingerprint reader until the phone is successfully unlocked via this backup method.
It might be a good idea to change art hosting providers then... I'm sure every artist has given deviantArt a (non-exclusive0 icense to commercially display and use the artwork shown on the site, which means Wix can use that. And chances are, they'll let customers use some of that artwork on their website, both as a hook and a retainer (because the art can only be used on Wix hosted websites without obtaining a license).
And only Wix has access to unique artwork that only Wix customers can use, so it's more attractive to join Wix.
Meanwhile, everyone who posted art on the site sees their work ripped off and used on customer's web sites.
Because really, however bad the news was, 20 years ago you'd be waiting for the nightly news to find out about it. Several decades before that, you'd be waiting for the following day's newspaper. Now, we're getting constant updates, and those updates may be causing a device in your pocket to vibrate and make noise every time something new comes out. We know that checking all of those notifications is addictive, and not checking causes stress. However, constantly feeling the need to check also causes stress. (human nature)
It's the reason we have the term "FOMO", or Fear of Missing Out. By not being attached to our phones 24/7 we fear we're going to miss big news about something (... almost always trivial in the big scheme of things).
If you hate that term, get used to it - it's a root of the term for the phobia, and as a medical diagnosis.
Taking the MD5 and the SHA1 of something isn't significantly more secure than just taking the SHA1 of said something. This was demonstrated in 2004 here: http://link.springer.com/chapt... This was then further elaborated and improved upon here: http://eprint.iacr.org/2008/07... So, don't concatenate hashes kids. It doesn't do what you think it does. Using a proper hash from the start is the only safe way to do things. Even if nobody has figured out how to do it yet the math conclusively shows that breaking SHA1+MD5 is not significantly harder than just breaking SHA1. This is why TLS 1.1 and earlier need to go away.
That's for concatenated hashes. As in, you hash the two hashes to form one number, usually by XOR'ing the numbers together. Which can be shown to increase the solution space considerably.
What I've been curious about, is if you maintain two hashes separately.
You have blob X here, with SHA-1 of S(X) and MD5 M(X). Can you find a blob Y with both a SHA-1 of S(X) and MD5 of M(X)?
It's easy to see if you XOR S(X) and M(X) you make it much easier - but what if we kept them separate, so the SHA-1 AND MD5 has to match. (With concatenation, you don't have to match, the final result has to match, but individually inside you have to find a S(Y)+M(Y) that equals S(X)+M(X), and not S(Y)==S(X) AND M(Y)==M(X).
The only concatenation that wouldn't be easier is if you literally concatenated the bytes together - so 128 bits of MD5 followed by 160 bits of SHA-1 to form a 288 bit MD5/SHA-1 hash that enforces the property that the two hashes individually MUST match simultaneously.
Besides, we already have all the technology we need to keep our data private. It's just that current law won't *allow* us to keep it private. As such, the *laws* need fixing, not the technology.
No amount of technology can keep public information private. And no amount of "privacy controls" will make public information private. (See a pattern?).
In fact, "social networks" and "privacy" are an oxymoron. There is no such thing as "privacy controls". "Privacy Controls" are marketspeak for "encouraging marks to over-share". Yes, Facebook and everyone has done their research - people will share more if they get the illusion their data is protected.
In the end, everything you post on a third party website, is public. Thanks to people screen shotting, re-posting, etc, anything you post is public. Even if it's a party for selected individuals, the people you didn't invite will find out anyways.
The only "technology" to keep our data private is to... keep it private.
Not that I agree with the border proection asking for passwords. But that's a legal issue that can really only be dealt with legally.
Are there regulations and procedures to prove that it's safe? There were a number of one and two person entries into the DARPA grand challenge.
It's not a terribly difficult problem to get to work 99.5% of the time, but with lives at risk most people aren't too happy with that number. The airline industry has a failure rate of 1 in 10^-13 deaths per passenger mile or something like that.
They weren't even regulations. The government was halds-off the entire thing. They were merely inquiry questions meant to help facilitate the discussion on safe automated driving. The authorities asked because well, they were curious how this system would respond. It was the same set of questions that got Uber's cars out of San Francisco.
It was questions like how would the backup driver system operate in case someone needs to take over, or how to prevent the system from being misused (given the system only worked in a few car models, they were wondering how the hardware would limit itself to those models).
Basically it posed a few questions on how the system would handle safety issues. The NHTSA doesn't care how the system works, what the core technology behind it is, etc. Just a few open-ended questions.
Basically check out any app that's advertised on prime time. A prime-time TV 30-second ad slot costs around half of the quarter million (on average - TV prime time slots are usually around $100-150k).
Hell, weren't there a few that advertised during the superbowl ($5M/slot)?
Yes. When it was revealed like 95% of the recalled phones have been returned, the FAA removed the ban seeing that most of the phones are gone, and the few remaining ones were to commit digital suicide by refusing to charge the battery anymore.
Do you drive 20 miles to go pick up a $3 jug of milk? Probably not, but if you have a larger list, it may be worthwhile to drive to a more distant store. Most add-on items are similar. Under $10 (most under $5). It is just not feasible to ship that for free by it self. The handling costs and even the deeply discounted shipping costs Amazon recieves would eat mor than the profit on an item that small.
It is not that hard to add items like that to your cart or a wishlist, then buy them all at once or on a larger order. All it takes is a little planning. Otherwise, local stores are good for impulse buys.
Does amazon not let you do the pre-order trick?
Pre-order something - preferably something far out in the future (or no specified release date). Then add all those items to your cart. Check out. Once you get all the addons, cancel the preorder.
Heck, I've done the "order something that will no longer be available" or "order something already cancelled" which works as well. Given Nintendo recently cancelled a lot of Wii U stuff, there's a lot ow Wii U games that are NEVER coming out. Order those and you'll get your addon items without paying for something extra.
Too bad the German government isn't as vigilant against the far more serious threat of the invasion of third world criminals.
While Egypt may be close to third world status now, I'm sure Saudi Arabia and UAE are far from it. I mean, those three countries alone have created many known terrorists. Even the French bombing was an Egyptian national in Saudi Arabia who got a travel visa from Dubai. Perhaps we should increase the "muslim blockage" to include countries known to harbour terrorists? But no, UAE, Saudi Arabia and Egypt have very important US business interests.
Money Trumps Terrorism.
Even ISIL isn't stupid enough to send middle eastern people to North America - they just recruit locals to do their bidding. (Maybe consider banning Americans from travelling to Turkey and other countries in the region as well, for good measure. They may be recruiting local US born citizens as sleeper agents).
I presently have a vehicle with driving 'assists' and it's an effing nightmare when they trigger. There should be only one driver at the wheel thank you.
That would be an improvement over the current situation where there is less than one driver per vehicle.
Between people yakking on their phones, texting or using apps on their phones, driving is the last priority for them.
I don't know if you can use registered mail for parcels originating in Germany.
But the real fuckup is that it was sent via DHL. It got fucked in the handover from DHL to USPS (the delivery agent) somewhere in New Jersey.
Registered airmail with Deutsche Post, if even possible, would've cost a fortune. But then the box was worth a fortune, so...
You can send registered mail between most countries these days - many first world ones participate in a worldwide tracking system so you can actually track a package through borders. With other countries, you get a proof of delivery.
And what do you think the "D" in DHL stands for? Yes, DHL is headquartered in Germany, and in every continent outside of North America, is considered to be a top-tier delivery service. FedEx and UPS are considered second rate services.
Anyhow, if you're wrapping stuff for delivery, the postal service is quite good given the volume. (USPS handles more mail in 3 days than FedEx in a year, and in 7 days they beat UPS). It's exceptionally good if you package stuff properly.
And by properly, you have to anticipate the address label falling off. If this happens, they will open the box to see if maybe there's something with an address inside (a packing list inside the box, and not just in a packet on the outside is a good idea, but only if you include both the sender and recipient addresses on it.
If it's particularly valuable, and composed of a lot of pieces, it wouldn't hurt to individually wrap and address each item. doesn't have to be fancy - inserting each cartridge in a plastic self-sealing bag with an address inside the bag works just fine. In case the box gets totally ripped apart because of machinery or handling and all the parts fall out, each one is individually labelled and can be forwarded on.
"We're committed to providing a better ads experience for users online. As part of that, we've decided to stop supporting 30-second unskippable ads as of 2018 and focus instead on formats that work well for both users and advertisers,"
I'd like to know why they do not implement this right away. It cannot be because they do not know what works well well for both users and advertisers now.
Because of contractual obligations.
People have already bought the ad time and if they haven't shown yet, may still be in production. Should YouTube feel like getting rid of the ad spots, the advertisers might pack up and leave especially if they cannot get compensation for the money spent producting the ad that would not show.
So Google simply looked at the calendar and either no one's bought any ad space for 2018, or it's sufficiently far out that cancelling is not a big deal since the ads would likely only be in the concept stages and thus cheap to adapt to their new advertising format.
The guy in question didn't make any arguments about legal privacy protections. He instead made arguments about legal *copyright* protections. He remained the copyright owner, notwithstanding uploading it or broadcasting it. He argued that, as copyright holder, he can deny ABC and other networks from redistributing his video. This in general is a valid legal copyright claim. But ABC argued that it was a news story of public significance, and so when they broadcast a clip of it, that fell under fair use. This is a valid legal exception to copyright, which is why they won.
ABC argued it was a newsworthy story AND that it was fair use - they only showed a 45 second clip of the full video (which was a few hours long, I believe).
There's no test for whether a clip is "sufficiently short", but 45 seconds out of a few hours is generally considered an acceptable length snippet under fair use.
Had ABC broadcast the whole thing, yes, they'd be in violation of copyright (there's no fair use protection for that). But they created a snippet around a newsworthy event - the story itself is copyright ABC, and the video to complement it is considered fair use.
AM bands have wavelengths from around 300m-600m, so forget using the headphone wire - you'll need some sort of tuned resonant loop / ferrite rod or similar for even half decent reception. That means more weight, extra power consumption, increased cost and added circuit complexity (you really can't just smash AM with a DSP hammer the way you can FM) for a feature that would (probably) get even less use than the FM receiver.
That's why you just don't see AM receivers in phones.
It's not hard. Most AM receivers actually have a tiny ferrite rod that the antenna is wound around. And it gives a pretty good signal.
No, the real reason is that AM reception is influenced by all the electronic bits inside the phone - it does require a higher-than-average amount of shielding if you want to not overwhelm the AM receiver with noise generated by the phone's own electronics. So manufacturers don't want it because face it, the shielding is crap and the reception will be terrible because the phone's electronics generate too much noise.
The way they write this makes it sound like nearly all phones have an FM chip/capability already built-in, which I believe is actually quite far from the truth. Its only a few specific models.
Well, the chips to do it tend to be everywhere - WiFi and Bluetooth chips tend to be triple duty with FM radio thrown in because it isn't hard to add.
The real issue is whether or not it's actually hooked up - usually they aren't. So the phone may have the hardware for it, but not actually be wired up.
The real question is why? I hardly ever listen to FM radio (AM I do a lot). If it was a popular feature, it would be in every phone as a feature. But most people are either streaming or listening to their music.
Finally, given the present administration, what's going on? I don't think it's done out of the goodness of their hearts to give consumers a feature that's sorely lacking.
He may be honest, but he's also wrong. Yes, of course "real work" needs to be done to turn ideas into reality, but those ideas are at least as important as the work themselves. "Real work" in service of bad ideas is entirely wasted, and there are plenty of Silicon Valley companies turning out useless apps and software products that won't go anywhere that talented people have spent a lot of time making.
No, ideas are a dime a dozen. You probably come up with a dozen ideas every hour, from the mundane to fantasy.
Execution is key. An idea is just that, abstract. It doesn't mean anything, and millions of individuals will have that same idea. Most of the time, we don't work on the idea - either we realize it's fantasy and thus not worth looking into, or it's pointless, or the ROI is bad. But in the end, the idea doesn't matter. It's the execution of taking that idea and turning it into reality that's important.
And yes, some ideas are totally bad. But behind every useless app was an idea that seemed good, and heck, enough people believed in it to actually bring it to fruition. Now, it could be an incredibly bad idea to begin with, but someone had the resources and means to get it done. Or it could be a good idea executed too early before the market was ready for it (look at streaming music - back a decade and a half, "renting music" was considered a ludicrous idea, now it's a billion dollar industry). Or suffer from poor marketing.
And finally, what seems like a bad idea now might've seemed like a good one at the time.
You really don't know the value of an idea until you try it out.
Are people actually going to risk being detained at the airport for hours or being put in jail just to attend an Apple Conference. This is not snark. I am really interested if these kind of things held in the US are still viable. I expect to see more North American international conferences held in Canada. I know that most people attending the conference will be light skinned, but still...
Here's the problem. These big events are planned out at least a year or more in advance. You can't just go up and book a convention center with a month's notice. And something like E3, CES, WWDC, Android I/O are generally booked a year or more in advance. So at least for 2017, you're screwed, and some bigger conventions like E3 and CES are screwed in 2018 as well,
Now the convention holders are probably planning for alternate sites and even then it takes time to find and book. Apple and others may very well have to consider booking outside the US, or hold multiple events. (WWDC is very popular and tickets are by lottery system. Even then, all the lottery spots are taken within the hour).
Considering the current political climate, if I was holding a convention, I would consider a non-US location. I might keep the US one on because I'm still on the hook for it (but try to minimize things - maybe instead of using the whole space, use only half) while looking for an alternate location.
And yes, Canada would love the billions of dollars of economic spinoff something like E3 and CES generates (hotel rooms, meals, transportation, you can probably see over a billion dollars of economic activity generated).
Unless they allow the disablement of the biometric shit, and allow good old fashioned passwords....I'm not buying it.
Touch ID has always been optional. You're not forced to use it (in fact, you can't enable it without enabling some other more secure authentication first - even a 4 digit PIN is considered more secure).
I would expect iOS 11 to have a new feature to disable Touch ID quickly - not only after reboot, 48 hours or 3 failed attempts (requiring use of the alternate authentication system) so if the police are forcing people to unlock their phones with fingerprints, you can temporarily disable it. Perhaps if you double-click the power button for example which will disable Touch ID until a successful login (using the more secure methods).
So if they come around and ask people to unlock their phones, you can double-click the power and Touch ID is disabled for unlocking purposes until the phone gets unlocked via the alternate means.
Slashdot Mirror
Not only that, but if it's really that irreplaceable, packaging properly helps.
First off, there should be more than one address label. You'd be surprised how often the one outside the box falls off. The postal service in most first world countries is generally quite good, and will open packages on the hopes that there's something with an address inside.
If it's something that's individually wrapped (like those games should be in case the box gets soaked with water), and they're rare, it doesn't hurt to stick an address label inside the bag as well. Boxes may appear tough, but pass them through the machines and they can very well explode or tear and have their contents spill out. This ensures that as pieces are found they can be forwarded on.
Or at the very least, have a slip of paper inside having an address.
Lack of postage is never a reason to never deliver - if necessary, they'll just collect it, but for postal mail, unless it's customs or other fee, postage itself is prepaid and cancelled by the sender.
I've actually had a parcel delayed 6 weeks, because for some reason, it was shipped from the US to Brazil (!!!). Brazil post then found the misdelivered package and sent it back up to USPS who then sent it to Canada. I found a nice letter inside it saying it was from Brazil and what I could make out was "return to origin country" for re-sorting.
Hangouts? Allo? Duo?
Are they getting this same feature?
It's getting confusing with Google now with them spawning, killing or changing a messaging client so often....
Not really.
The issue is similar to using a Stingray or IMSI catcher - besides getting "the crook", you're getting a bunch of innocent people who are simply bycatch.
The judge simply knows you cannot force a bunch of innocent people to become suspects simply because they were present near the location. So whether it's unlocking their phones with fingerprints, or using a Stingray/IMSI catcher indiscriminately, most of the people will be innocent and steps must be taken to protect their information and activities.
The interesting thing is how few details there are about how they did it. I mean, why the 6/6s and not the 6+? Given for the unlock requires physical access to the phone, it's probably something they've physically accessed.
And unfortunately, Androids are much easier to hack - back when Apple was fighting the FBI, there was over 600 iPhones needing unlocking. The number of Android phones? Only 20 or so.
First, most Android phones do not encrypt storage by default. iPhones have encrypted it by default since the 3GS (it's why a "clear everything" on an iPhone 2G/3G takes hours, while it's only seconds on models after that - the new way is to just toss the encryption key and regenerate a new key, so it takes seconds and not hours (and doesn't wear down the flash)). So one trick is to remove the eMMC chip and read it out directly. Even today most phones are still not encrypted.
Second, Android App security is good. Android itself, though, is full of security holes making it easy to break in. It doesn't help that OEMs generally screw up and make the machines even more vulnerable. And many security vulnerabilities aren't fixed because of various reasons.
Android's security is slowly improving, but ti's still pretty bad.
No.
On iOS, you get 3 tries to use the fingerprint reader. If you fail, it reverts to the backup security method (PIN, etc). You cannot use the fingerprint reader until the phone is successfully unlocked via this backup method.
It might be a good idea to change art hosting providers then... I'm sure every artist has given deviantArt a (non-exclusive0 icense to commercially display and use the artwork shown on the site, which means Wix can use that. And chances are, they'll let customers use some of that artwork on their website, both as a hook and a retainer (because the art can only be used on Wix hosted websites without obtaining a license).
And only Wix has access to unique artwork that only Wix customers can use, so it's more attractive to join Wix.
Meanwhile, everyone who posted art on the site sees their work ripped off and used on customer's web sites.
It's the reason we have the term "FOMO", or Fear of Missing Out. By not being attached to our phones 24/7 we fear we're going to miss big news about something (... almost always trivial in the big scheme of things).
If you hate that term, get used to it - it's a root of the term for the phobia, and as a medical diagnosis.
That's for concatenated hashes. As in, you hash the two hashes to form one number, usually by XOR'ing the numbers together. Which can be shown to increase the solution space considerably.
What I've been curious about, is if you maintain two hashes separately.
You have blob X here, with SHA-1 of S(X) and MD5 M(X). Can you find a blob Y with both a SHA-1 of S(X) and MD5 of M(X)?
It's easy to see if you XOR S(X) and M(X) you make it much easier - but what if we kept them separate, so the SHA-1 AND MD5 has to match. (With concatenation, you don't have to match, the final result has to match, but individually inside you have to find a S(Y)+M(Y) that equals S(X)+M(X), and not S(Y)==S(X) AND M(Y)==M(X).
The only concatenation that wouldn't be easier is if you literally concatenated the bytes together - so 128 bits of MD5 followed by 160 bits of SHA-1 to form a 288 bit MD5/SHA-1 hash that enforces the property that the two hashes individually MUST match simultaneously.
No amount of technology can keep public information private. And no amount of "privacy controls" will make public information private. (See a pattern?).
In fact, "social networks" and "privacy" are an oxymoron. There is no such thing as "privacy controls". "Privacy Controls" are marketspeak for "encouraging marks to over-share". Yes, Facebook and everyone has done their research - people will share more if they get the illusion their data is protected.
In the end, everything you post on a third party website, is public. Thanks to people screen shotting, re-posting, etc, anything you post is public. Even if it's a party for selected individuals, the people you didn't invite will find out anyways.
The only "technology" to keep our data private is to ... keep it private.
Not that I agree with the border proection asking for passwords. But that's a legal issue that can really only be dealt with legally.
They weren't even regulations. The government was halds-off the entire thing. They were merely inquiry questions meant to help facilitate the discussion on safe automated driving. The authorities asked because well, they were curious how this system would respond. It was the same set of questions that got Uber's cars out of San Francisco.
It was questions like how would the backup driver system operate in case someone needs to take over, or how to prevent the system from being misused (given the system only worked in a few car models, they were wondering how the hardware would limit itself to those models).
Basically it posed a few questions on how the system would handle safety issues. The NHTSA doesn't care how the system works, what the core technology behind it is, etc. Just a few open-ended questions.
You missed a bunch.
Basically check out any app that's advertised on prime time. A prime-time TV 30-second ad slot costs around half of the quarter million (on average - TV prime time slots are usually around $100-150k).
Hell, weren't there a few that advertised during the superbowl ($5M/slot)?
Yes. When it was revealed like 95% of the recalled phones have been returned, the FAA removed the ban seeing that most of the phones are gone, and the few remaining ones were to commit digital suicide by refusing to charge the battery anymore.
I think that's what we'll start seeing on posts.
You can tag a post and then put on a simple "Pay me now" button so people can read your plea for money and simply get it by clicking a link.
It's one of those things you really wonder why it hasn't happened before. It's one of those its so obvious now it's done things.
Soon you'll have dozens of posts in your news feed "My car broke down and it'll cost $2000 to fix it! [Send Money]" and other woe-is-me stories...
Does amazon not let you do the pre-order trick?
Pre-order something - preferably something far out in the future (or no specified release date). Then add all those items to your cart. Check out. Once you get all the addons, cancel the preorder.
Heck, I've done the "order something that will no longer be available" or "order something already cancelled" which works as well. Given Nintendo recently cancelled a lot of Wii U stuff, there's a lot ow Wii U games that are NEVER coming out. Order those and you'll get your addon items without paying for something extra.
While Egypt may be close to third world status now, I'm sure Saudi Arabia and UAE are far from it. I mean, those three countries alone have created many known terrorists. Even the French bombing was an Egyptian national in Saudi Arabia who got a travel visa from Dubai. Perhaps we should increase the "muslim blockage" to include countries known to harbour terrorists? But no, UAE, Saudi Arabia and Egypt have very important US business interests.
Money Trumps Terrorism.
Even ISIL isn't stupid enough to send middle eastern people to North America - they just recruit locals to do their bidding. (Maybe consider banning Americans from travelling to Turkey and other countries in the region as well, for good measure. They may be recruiting local US born citizens as sleeper agents).
That would be an improvement over the current situation where there is less than one driver per vehicle.
Between people yakking on their phones, texting or using apps on their phones, driving is the last priority for them.
You can send registered mail between most countries these days - many first world ones participate in a worldwide tracking system so you can actually track a package through borders. With other countries, you get a proof of delivery.
And what do you think the "D" in DHL stands for? Yes, DHL is headquartered in Germany, and in every continent outside of North America, is considered to be a top-tier delivery service. FedEx and UPS are considered second rate services.
Anyhow, if you're wrapping stuff for delivery, the postal service is quite good given the volume. (USPS handles more mail in 3 days than FedEx in a year, and in 7 days they beat UPS). It's exceptionally good if you package stuff properly.
And by properly, you have to anticipate the address label falling off. If this happens, they will open the box to see if maybe there's something with an address inside (a packing list inside the box, and not just in a packet on the outside is a good idea, but only if you include both the sender and recipient addresses on it.
If it's particularly valuable, and composed of a lot of pieces, it wouldn't hurt to individually wrap and address each item. doesn't have to be fancy - inserting each cartridge in a plastic self-sealing bag with an address inside the bag works just fine. In case the box gets totally ripped apart because of machinery or handling and all the parts fall out, each one is individually labelled and can be forwarded on.
Because of contractual obligations.
People have already bought the ad time and if they haven't shown yet, may still be in production. Should YouTube feel like getting rid of the ad spots, the advertisers might pack up and leave especially if they cannot get compensation for the money spent producting the ad that would not show.
So Google simply looked at the calendar and either no one's bought any ad space for 2018, or it's sufficiently far out that cancelling is not a big deal since the ads would likely only be in the concept stages and thus cheap to adapt to their new advertising format.
ABC argued it was a newsworthy story AND that it was fair use - they only showed a 45 second clip of the full video (which was a few hours long, I believe).
There's no test for whether a clip is "sufficiently short", but 45 seconds out of a few hours is generally considered an acceptable length snippet under fair use.
Had ABC broadcast the whole thing, yes, they'd be in violation of copyright (there's no fair use protection for that). But they created a snippet around a newsworthy event - the story itself is copyright ABC, and the video to complement it is considered fair use.
It's not hard. Most AM receivers actually have a tiny ferrite rod that the antenna is wound around. And it gives a pretty good signal.
No, the real reason is that AM reception is influenced by all the electronic bits inside the phone - it does require a higher-than-average amount of shielding if you want to not overwhelm the AM receiver with noise generated by the phone's own electronics. So manufacturers don't want it because face it, the shielding is crap and the reception will be terrible because the phone's electronics generate too much noise.
Well, the chips to do it tend to be everywhere - WiFi and Bluetooth chips tend to be triple duty with FM radio thrown in because it isn't hard to add.
The real issue is whether or not it's actually hooked up - usually they aren't. So the phone may have the hardware for it, but not actually be wired up.
The real question is why? I hardly ever listen to FM radio (AM I do a lot). If it was a popular feature, it would be in every phone as a feature. But most people are either streaming or listening to their music.
Finally, given the present administration, what's going on? I don't think it's done out of the goodness of their hearts to give consumers a feature that's sorely lacking.
No, ideas are a dime a dozen. You probably come up with a dozen ideas every hour, from the mundane to fantasy.
Execution is key. An idea is just that, abstract. It doesn't mean anything, and millions of individuals will have that same idea. Most of the time, we don't work on the idea - either we realize it's fantasy and thus not worth looking into, or it's pointless, or the ROI is bad. But in the end, the idea doesn't matter. It's the execution of taking that idea and turning it into reality that's important.
And yes, some ideas are totally bad. But behind every useless app was an idea that seemed good, and heck, enough people believed in it to actually bring it to fruition. Now, it could be an incredibly bad idea to begin with, but someone had the resources and means to get it done. Or it could be a good idea executed too early before the market was ready for it (look at streaming music - back a decade and a half, "renting music" was considered a ludicrous idea, now it's a billion dollar industry). Or suffer from poor marketing.
And finally, what seems like a bad idea now might've seemed like a good one at the time.
You really don't know the value of an idea until you try it out.
Here's the problem. These big events are planned out at least a year or more in advance. You can't just go up and book a convention center with a month's notice. And something like E3, CES, WWDC, Android I/O are generally booked a year or more in advance. So at least for 2017, you're screwed, and some bigger conventions like E3 and CES are screwed in 2018 as well,
Now the convention holders are probably planning for alternate sites and even then it takes time to find and book. Apple and others may very well have to consider booking outside the US, or hold multiple events. (WWDC is very popular and tickets are by lottery system. Even then, all the lottery spots are taken within the hour).
Considering the current political climate, if I was holding a convention, I would consider a non-US location. I might keep the US one on because I'm still on the hook for it (but try to minimize things - maybe instead of using the whole space, use only half) while looking for an alternate location.
And yes, Canada would love the billions of dollars of economic spinoff something like E3 and CES generates (hotel rooms, meals, transportation, you can probably see over a billion dollars of economic activity generated).
Touch ID has always been optional. You're not forced to use it (in fact, you can't enable it without enabling some other more secure authentication first - even a 4 digit PIN is considered more secure).
I would expect iOS 11 to have a new feature to disable Touch ID quickly - not only after reboot, 48 hours or 3 failed attempts (requiring use of the alternate authentication system) so if the police are forcing people to unlock their phones with fingerprints, you can temporarily disable it. Perhaps if you double-click the power button for example which will disable Touch ID until a successful login (using the more secure methods).
So if they come around and ask people to unlock their phones, you can double-click the power and Touch ID is disabled for unlocking purposes until the phone gets unlocked via the alternate means.
The Nexus 6P is made by Huawei. While Sprint no longer carries it, I'm sure you probably can find it as a free phone somewhere.