For home use, who cares? Within +/- 5 minutes is more than good enough for everyday life.
For business use, the cost of a master/slave clock arrangement is peanuts if it actually matters (e.g. stock markets etc.).
For everything in between solutions will be expensive or homebrew.
There's a company in France and the UK: Bodet. They make their own GPS/radio controlled master clocks that can then send a signal over a licenced frequency across huge sites (30 acres+) to their client clocks.
They also have PoE based clocks and even speaker systems timed to the same signal. I promise you, they are not cheap.
Short of using a GPS module's output tied to some device displaying the time, that you make yourself, you're going to be hard-pushed to find a cheap system.
I speak as someone who runs two NTP pool servers, has all my gadgets at home and in work synchronised to GPS or NTP, and even has MSF-controlled clocks, watches and bedside alarm clocks (Daylight saving? Don't have to do a thing).
If you're out of the time signal range in your region, you're looking at GPS or NTP, and both require basically a computer somewhere (RPi or GPS modules on an Arduino, for example) doing the work, and a display of some kind (driving a traditional mechanical clock, or an LCD).
It might allow you to spread the heat or avoid direct water transfer but you still have to move that heat somewhere. You're not REDUCING the heat, are you? It's still producing the same amount of heat and you're still needing to get rid of it.
At the end of the day, whatever fancy technique you use, there's still going to be a large bit of aluminium somewhere, and probably a cheap fan blowing over it. If not, then you're into things more complicated, fragile or liquid than you want them to be.
The only other cooling technology I've seen was a heat-pipe cooled PSU that I still have. No moving parts at all, just clever design, and natural air-flow. But things like that aren't scaling and can't be used on more heat-generating parts (do PSU's really generate that much heat?).
No matter how you look at it, whether you water-cool or whatever, you still need a big piece of metal with huge surface area being cooled somehow to actually "get rid" of the heat. Everything else is just a matter of the efficiency or difficulty of how you get the heat to that point.
With consumer items like laptops and desktop PC's, you're not going to change anything. And bigger things like cars, planes, etc. don't really have a problem - localised heating might be problematic but space isn't at such a premium that you can't solve it with "normal" techniques and a huge heatsink (i.e. the bodywork).
However, I still don't get why all laptops / tablets don't just have a large metal base inside their plastics to just spread the heat over everything, so you don't get one burned thigh and one cold thigh.
Or... get to 0.22 per 100,000 by just banning them.
The UK rate is just that... no hypothesis, guesswork, or estimation. It's 0.22.
And this is the 20th anniversary of Dunblane, possibly our largest "school shooting" ever. It happened. Kids died. We banned a lot of private ownership. It hasn't happened since.
Stop pissing about guessing, and work out what other countries DID and had WORK.
Replace Muslim/Islam with Vegetarian/Vegetarianism to see why.
Some vegetarians gathered at the local supermarket and killed someone? Raped someone? Shit, all vegetarians need to be arrested / exterminated, no? Fucking idiot.
You have a correlation (the terrorists in this case are claiming to follow Islam), not a causation (Islam did not make them terrorists - there are MILLIONS of Islamic people who are not terrorist that you want to conveniently ignore, like there are millions of vegetarians who didn't shove cucumbers up people's arses in protest)..
Not even that, the correlation is tenuous. I'm British. We're far from new to terrorism, on either side of the coin. Fuck, we spent most of the 80's/90's being bombed to oblivion by the IRA.
The IRA? Formed, if you dig deep enough, because of two main groups in opposition to each other, colloquially assigned as "Catholics" and "Protestants". Are Catholics bombers? Are Protestants? Like with the vegetarians - some but not all, and they aren't bombers because they are protestant, they are bombers who happen to ALSO BE lumped into a religious group (somewhat unfairly, in fact, and Ireland was divided and referred to for many years by such religious groupings rather than, say, those who opposed British rule and those who didn't).
The last bomber I saw on the news was a car driver. Are car drivers all bombers? Or was this bomber just happening to be a car driver? Or... maybe.. if you want to discredit some group you become a bomber and SAY you part of their organisation. Is there an "Islamist Club" membership card or do we just have the words of some passer-by interviewed for the news story.
Take your fucking blinkered, DANGEROUS, racist, religionist and ignorant views, and the implications and accusations that you put with them and go sit with the fucking dunce in the corner.
What's dangerous is anyone's RELIGION being more important than how they deal with people. Christians - if you generalise over history - forcibly colonised most of the world to "convert" people. It's the conversion that's the problem, not the particular religion they choose to convert you to.
I've heard of backup companies who don't take proper backups. The servers go, they lose all their customer's data, no returns.
This isn't a shock. Quite often the very people who you "have to consult" in order to appease your boss are the very snakeoil salesman that have no clue about what they're doing beyond talking themselves up.
I had a guy tell my boss that our website "was insecure, expired certificates, etc.". Turns out he was plugging our domain.com into some online checker but didn't notice that our website is actually www.domain.com. Our bare domain, therefore, of course wasn't encrypted or any such nonsense and had no need to be - it was just a landing page that HTTP redirected you to the proper domain (and, to be honest, 99% of the website has no need for a secure certificate either, as none of it is private or confidential - it's a website - and the CMS for it is accessed an entirely different way).
And the expired cert? Actually a fallback "localhost" cert returned by Apache if you specifically request a non-existent https subdomain like "https://domain.com" (which doesn't exist as a website, and only gets a response because it resolves to the same IP as www.domain.com which has the secure port open).
But he plugged it into the checker, so everyone must be able to get into our systems right?! What are we going to do about it?!
The very people who run these services HAVE NO CLUE what they are doing. Like the people that my employer keeps trying to get me to take training courses from, or the apprenticeship company that one of my colleagues has to spend 9 weeks training at.
He said last time he went that their "network" was a bunch of unlicensed workstations ("Just ignore that notice"), with no security, all the same passwords (so he was able to remote into the instructor's PC, etc.), admin-level accounts, all clients connected direct to the Internet with no filter or firewall, and that they thought he was "hacking" because he was remoted into his own home server after finishing their coursework and doing some research of his own. Another told him off for upgrading the version of server because his remote session was to a more modern version.
These were the people TEACHING HIM (supposedly) how to set up domains, manage a network, implement group policy, etc. etc. etc. And they'd not heard of virtualisation, proper imaging techniques (they have "rollback" on their clients but pretty much they are just used by class after class and rebuilt when necessary, hence why they are unlicensed as there's no KMS server, or even a proper image). And they were teaching him on Server 2008... his home server has 2016, and we're using 2012R2 in the workplace.
Basically, he's going there to tick a box to say that "someone other than my boss" thinks he can do the basics, not to actually learn anything. Unfortunately that "someone other" are obviously bog-useless at what they do, or they wouldn't be working at such a company - they'd have got themselves a job managing real servers somewhere.
That's pretty much what's happened here. Get a consultant in to audit things and say you're up-to-scratch. But who audits the auditor? No-one? Pointless then. And they can't even apply the principles that they are judging YOU on to their own internal systems.
You don't own your own roof. The roof is inadequate. Your location on the globe is inadequate. The tax-breaks and subsidies are taken away from you because there is no cheap alternative and everyone jumps onto solar?
"Rates will never increase" is a dubious assertion too, maybe if you have a direct system but not if you're counting anything like pushing back to the grid (negative bill would suggest that).
And not everyone has the ability to do one massive outlay now to save energy for the next 10 years (if the gear lasts that long and you get totally free servicing and replacements in the cost of your system throughout that time - what if the company goes bankrupt, maybe because they relied on subsidies or didn't account for product returns, or they just get priced out of the market?).
It's honestly not as simple as "get solar".
Hell, in my country, solar is just laughed at. An installation capable of running an ordinary house costs more than a house extension or a brand new car, and only "saves" while it's being subsidised.
And just the extra legal cost of who technically owns it if you move house has caused people an awful lot of people to have a lot of unexpected bills (you're leasing? Then you sell the house? And the next guy doesn't agree with the transfer of that lease? Now you have an unsaleable house, or have to buy out the lease, or legal costs to argue the toss, and you can't really remove the system in the meantime, and mortgage companies don't want to touch it as you've effectively rented out your roof to the solar company).
Nothing is that clear-cut when it comes to that amount of money in a system.
Plus replacement of the whole system at the expiry date of the service warranty (no, "expected life" is no good - if it's not warrantied you're still going to have to find the money to replace it while you fight that in court at great expense).
What if, one of the guys working at Apple is able to get his hands on that "one-serial" version? Is that guy security checked? Is he a spy?
That such a version even exists is a risk. Whereas if all the Apple firmwares issued, to anyone, are just consumer, technical, etc. firmwares that don't allow arbitrary bypass of security restrictions, it's much harder to make happen.
And how difficult would it be for, same, some enterprising country to get their hands on this "one-serial" firmware and hack either the serial is applies to AND/OR the serial on the hardware they want to get into?
It's not public escape and the guys on the firmware hacking forums that this guy would care about. That kind of thing could already be going on anyway. It's that Apple are providing firmwares capable of device compromise to anyone who asks in any of their legal locations. Like China. If the FBI succeed in the US, what's to stop the appropriate equivalent Chinese agency succeeding in China (where it would be done much more quietly and probably without any safeguards at all?). Nothing.
Short of Apple literally having to pull out of China if they are forced to do it, they would have to comply with the laws there too, by their court's interpretation, whether the device was originally bought in the US, the EU or anywhere else, if if a similar case comes up and the highest Chinese legal authority decrees they want this, and Apple has already provided the facility to the FBI, it's almost impossible to deny them it short of pulling out of sales in that country entirely. And that would hurt Apple and, by proxy, the American export economy.
This guy is making some sense, at least. He's not even trying to pretend that the courts aren't within their right in this instance, what he's saying is that it's a much bigger issue than just resolving one legal dispute, and will affect the security and export of US electronics worldwide.
It's got nothing to do with "how many times we give in", but "that we gave in the first time", which is a sad and oft-repeated lament where law is concerned. Apple aren't even saying they COULDN'T do this... they are saying they SHOULDN'T.
It would destroy exports, user confidence, and provide a tool that - with almost zero effort - could be applied elsewhere. And, please bear in mind - evidence submitted in a court can be requested, inspected, queried and argued over by the other side too.
In the same way that the firmware of breathalysers and all kinds of other devices are legally forced open in many jurisdictions (because you are putting people behind bars based on the assertions that the software is making, and thus the software has to be able to be inspected by an appropriate professional analyst if the defendant makes a fuss about it, in order to dis/prove their case), providing this firmware to the FBI may well pave the way to providing it to the defendant's lawyers, legal team, analysts, courtroom, etc.
It's not joe-public hacking the firmware on their iPad that anyone cares about. It's creating a tool that you then can't "uncreate" and may well be able to be applied to everything from some kiosk-like visitor-log device in the White House to the kid's tablet in Downing Street, and then advertising that the tool exists to any court in the world that might demand it.
Though I hate Apple with an absolute, physical, lividness, this is actually a big case with much more impact for Apple, the US electronics economy and the global IT economy, plus the national security of almost every country, than just "who might bypass your passcode when they can put a hacked firmware on your iPad when you leave it unattended in a bar".
It doesn't even need to "escape". If Apple get summonsed to provide this same tool by a Chinese court, or an EU one, they will have to comply or fight the same fight. If they could point at the US and say "No, look, we argued this over there, we're not going to do it", it holds much more precedent than "We caved to the FBI, but we don't like your court system over here so we won't do the same for you."
"the hacker group who made Sony PlayStation 4"? Really?
Might want to check that.
And I can't find this interesting, when it's basically a way to run Linux on something that we know could run it, whose predecessors have run it, and which is deliberately made not to run it for no real valid reason.
It's not even like a PS4 is cheaper than a laptop or whatever nowadays.
That's what all the other emulators are for. And quite a few of them exist, even MAME spin-offs designed for nothing more than performance, ease of setup, and game compatibility.
I don't know where you've been looking, but they are everywhere. It's like complaining that Debian is too "pure" when there are a million spin-off distros based on it that aren't, and some of them more popular than the original.
MAME have always stated that their aim is preservation and accuracy of emulation of old games. Not for you to have a quick blast on a ROM that you're not technically licensed for anyway. There are other MAME-based things for that, many of them with "MAME" in the title, even.
It's like complaining that some museum scanned in their ancient texts at far too high a resolution that you can't comfortably read them on your Kindle. Their aim was never for you to do that, but for the original texts to be preserved in as much detail as possible.
As it is "just an emulator", like DOSBox or any similarly-created programs, and doesn't bundle ROMs itself (nor condone misuse of licensed ROMs or unlicensed ROMs at all), having that be the blocker to their inclusion in mass-market products like Linux or, indeed, things like Steam games created by the original companies (e.g. Atari, etc.), it does seem to be a sensible move.
"apt-get install mame" should be possible. It doesn't do anything, or allow anything, that "apt-get install dosbox" didn't.
And now that it basically includes MESS (which emulates ZX Spectrums, old PC's, and the like), there's even more reason that people might well just want to install it.
It's a good move. I have to say that I'm surprised they managed it, given the number of contributors who would have had to agree, but I'm glad they did.
Bitcoin wallets aren't cracked. Unless you're an idiot and chose a Bitcoin wallet that's easily guessable (like choosing a password of password). The default Bitcoin wallets are just fine and cryptographically secure.
The Tor network may have been "attacked". But short of having 50% of nodes under your control, you can't guarantee anything and the best attack is still a timing / correlation attack by monitoring both ends of a transaction (so presumably you don't NEED to know anything more than that anyway, if you've got that far) that pretty much NOTHING can stop.
Stop getting your tech news from overblown headlines and look into... the tech. If Bitcoin wallets were "cracked", there would be billions of dollars lost overnight. That's not what happened. A handful of people deliberately choosing to use the equivalent of "123456" for a Bitcoin wallet key may have lost their money. That's it. And people using certain monitored elements of Tor where they are giving away their own IP, or the service they connect to is giving away it's IP, allowing silly attacks due to poor configurations (nothing can stop the stupid) may have given away more information than they knew.
Otherwise, the sensible users of the systems using them what they were designed for have carried on completely unhindered. The systems both worked, as designed.
Why would you follow a robot, compared to going back the way you came (so long as that looks safe)?
People en masse are stupid. Especially when it comes to fire and panic. Honestly, disconnect your emotions, follow the rules, think it through.
I work in schools and I speak as the person who's ALWAYS first out on the sound of a fire alarm, but never has to run. It was a running joke in some schools that I must have known when the drills were happening, until a real fire happened and I was still there first.
Fire drills are commonplace and run like clockwork because of the amount of practice we do. 400 kids, some as young as three, out of a school and to a safe area in under 2 minutes is NOT to be sniffed at. I've seen it done. And usually because I'm sitting there waiting for everyone else. A couple more minutes later, either everyone is accounted for or we have a list of names of who should have signed out or who is missing.
I even knew an old headmaster who used to block off corridors (with cardboard cut-out "fires"), introduce smoke to the halls, or even - with TONS of pre-planning involved in case something DID go wrong and there was a simultaneous REAL fire - telling a kid to "go to the bathroom" just before the fire alarm was pulled in order to see if anyone noticed they were missing. That sort of thing keeps you on your toes and keeps you alert as to WHY we do these things, and to think about what you're doing rather than blithely follow the marked route, and the impact only comes when you're all safely outside and someone says "Where is X?" and you see the panic spread in the teacher's faces.
In fact, the only time I've ever NOT been first out the door is when I was personally supervising a group of kids. As they were my responsibility, we did it exactly by the book.
They lined up by the classroom door. They were headcounted. We walked down the corridor and lined up outside the room that provided the emergency exit route (yes, I checked the room). They were headcounted as they went through.
We walked THROUGH a full class of children that hadn't even STOOD UP by that point, to the emergency exit. They were headcounted as they left and I ensured separation so I didn't accidentally count one of the other class (who were supervised by their own adult who I had to gee up to get a move on).
We got outside, we walked to the assembly point, they were headcounted again. By that time, ONE other class managed to get there before me. Nobody ran. Nobody screamed. Nobody panicked. Nobody could have got lost along the way. Someone in fact HUNG AROUND INSIDE LOOKING FOR ME, knowing that I had some of their children and didn't think I would have had the presence of mind to evacuate them myself. And, yes, I checked the other class got out.
But why you'd just blindly follow some robot, even one announcing that you were to follow it? No thanks. Unless you are life-saving equipment grade hardware that physically cannot go wrong or lead us into a fire, I'll go the way I want to go, thanks. And that means the way I know. And that means, in an unfamiliar situation, the way the signage tells me or the way I came in unless there's a specific reason not to.
"Revisiting Table 3, we see that this perception is correct when it comes to SLC drives and their RBER, as they are orders of magnitude lower than for MLC and eMLC drives. However, Tables 2 and 5 show that SLC drives do not perform better for those measures of reliability that matter most in practice: SLC drives donâ(TM)t have lower repair or replacement rates, and donâ(TM)t typically have lower rates of non-transparent errors"
SLC have less errors, but they affect real-world usage (i.e. non-correctable) only as much as MLC errors do. So technically MLC have MORE errors but are just as useful as replacement rates at the same. Presumably more error correction.
In same cases, analogue photography is easier to fake than the skills needed for photoshopping, and just as difficult to analyse and debunk, if not more.
If you see something, take a photo. The pre-planning necessary to submit a modified form of that photo without the original being present or seized is so huge as to make anything other than deliberate set up impossible.
Your photos - digital or analogue - are prima facie evidence in most courts. Same for CCTV, and so on. And the penalties for deliberately crafting false evidence are incredibly severe to prevent any suggestion of misuse.
But that a Polaroid is in any way fighting for freedom is ludicrous. But yet everyone already carries a phone with greater resolution, colour accuracy, etc. And the fact that "random member of public X" has the same photo as "random member of public Y" means much more than anything to do with the devices they used to do so.
And when the legal department come sweeping in to make sure the large mergers were done correctly and the company is compliant and looking for someone's head if it's not.... they will walk past the janitor who will simply go into "Not my job" mode.
I'm far from management, but even I wouldn't want 1% of some of those kinds of responsibilities, even if they can be abused or "overlooked" for quite a long period of time.
Because when the courts come looking for the person responsible, they aren't going to care about the janitor. He doesn't get paid enough to worry about things like that. The CEO's etc do.
Physically-demanded work is not to be underestimated or overlooked, but just because you're not breaking your back and putting yourself into healthcare before you retire, it doesn't mean you don't work hard for a living.
It's the de-facto replacement for stupendously limiting and expensive text and picture messages, which outside of contracts can run into thousands per Mb of actual data.
All with an app that cost 69p per year, free for the first year, and has just recently been made free forever.
It's like loading up MSN Messenger on your phone so you don't have to send a text. It just so happens to have made a brand name for itself in the process.
If telcos didn't charge ridiculous amounts for picture messages - especially from abroad - their business model would be dead overnight. It basically uses your data connection to do what the telcos should have been doing all along, but would rather sting you.
Personally, I don't want Apple - or indeed any other third party, but certainly not Apple - to have any kind of say over my encrypted data and/or access to it.
I get that the device is under their control. They can unlock it. They can force updates to it. They can - legally or not - do all these things.
But if you placed encrypted data on the phone, encrypted with a secure key, and decrypted only when you provide the key and/or passphrase, then why does Apple have any say, control, or ability over your encrypted data.
The people actually doing damage using encryption technologies must have a brain of some kind, and they know this. Even a truecrypt- or similar type container is secure from anything Apple or the FBI might want to do after the event. So long as they can't actively monitor you enter the key, they can't get into that data. That's where the dangerous people will be entering their data they don't want you to have, and there's nothing that anyone can really do about it.
The stuff contained on a phone? What's going to be in there? A browsing, location and call history available from the telco's anyway? And a memo and a couple of photos. Sure they *could* be incriminating, but that's not where the real dangerous stuff will be held.
Honestly, this is overbearing requirements to catch the low-hanging fruit. Instead of doing the jobs that spies and such agencies SHOULD be doing.
Exactly the example I used, where systems with working SysVInit style scripts were pushed onto systemd if they wanted to stay supported and - in some cases - broke (because an upgrade to systemd, certainly, is not always as perfect and painless as made out, especially if you're using a lot of custom init scripts). Which is basically upstart all over again.
A google for "systemd broke" will turn up a lot of hits where people's computers stopped booting or not bringing up services even upgrading between versions or package upgrades, let alone trying to go from init scripts to systemd in one hit.
Now the OS upgrade wasn't "forced" as much, but technically you didn't have to agree to the Windows 10 one either. It still required manual intervention to actually happen.
I'm more concerned with tablets - Windows tablets with 16GB of storage are trying to download and update to Windows 10, which is just ludicrous as often you have NO way back on such devices.
But, then, I've seen the same on cheap Android tablets that get updates that brick them too.
Stop making out the MS are doing something that nobody else is here. Even the Macs you mentioned have stuffed people and I've witnessed OS X and iOS upgrades that then stick because the machine wasn't actually supported (iPad 2's, which became like stunned sloths, for instance).
If you want to show difference, provide control to the user. You can still publish all the junk updates you want, but people then get a "No thanks" button and - unless you're fecking Apple - a "Don't remind me again" checkbox too.
When did you download Mint? Hope it wasn't in the middle of their website compromise!
However, that's just me being petty. Linux is fine as a desktop. Windows is fine as a desktop. The thing that ruins either is removing control from the user (e.g. forced Windows Updates on one platform, things like systemd / window manager "upgrades" on the other with no easy way back).
With virtualisation and web-based services, the OS barely matters any more. This is part of the reason that MS are suffering - they can't tie you into their application format, or even their browser, and neither can they stop you running Windows only where necessary for compatibility and in isolated VM's.
Look at Chromebooks - the browser is the OS nowadays. And any service supplier that doesn't realise that is going to be ousted as soon as their competitors do. Hell, with Node.js, emscripten, etc. you can run traditional programs in the browser almost as if they were native (go have a look at the emscripten example 3D games on their website).
The tie-downs for my uses are actually hardware-based. Where you have to have a USB dongle, or a Smartcard reader (e.g. banking, etc.) in order to do a task. Though USB passthrough exists, it ties you to particular computers and locations, and it also means that it's harder to setup and maintain.
I can't move our banking software because it relies on a USB smartcard that ties itself to the machine's Windows installation.
But, pretty much, if I was in charge of a company in my industry or any of the others that I could conceivably work in, I could easily justify and manage without any particular OS or proprietary software at all. There's not much nowadays that relies on such things, and those that do seem very limiting and old-fashioned.
Hell, a few years back, there was a boiler in the place I worked - a serious thing that covered a huge site from one location. The software was the most locked-down thing I've ever seen. But I was still able to virtualise it by tricking the installers into thinking the machine they were in front of was just a physical machine. They installed all the software, set it up, activated and registered the MAC interfaces, etc. And when they were gone, I took the VM image they'd actually been working on and moved it to the servers, and turned the workstation back into just-another-client.
I've had to deal with quite a few manufacturers who just don't like you VM'ing things but can't justify exactly why. For at least three of them, I've tricked them like that or just virtualised it and then fixed the software. The manufacturers who get my custom easier are those who go "Oh, yes, well we have an image for VMWare or HyperV if you want one, we just don't advertise it".
Hell, the firewall where I work is actually a VM nowadays, and our VM's are 40:60 Linux and Windows. Even then, it's usually only because we separate by task and are licensed on Server Datacenter (so we can run unlimited VM copies of Windows on them), so we're running many more copies of Windows than strictly necessary. If costs changed, we could easily go 90:10.
Slashdot Mirror
For home use, who cares? Within +/- 5 minutes is more than good enough for everyday life.
For business use, the cost of a master/slave clock arrangement is peanuts if it actually matters (e.g. stock markets etc.).
For everything in between solutions will be expensive or homebrew.
There's a company in France and the UK: Bodet. They make their own GPS/radio controlled master clocks that can then send a signal over a licenced frequency across huge sites (30 acres+) to their client clocks.
They also have PoE based clocks and even speaker systems timed to the same signal. I promise you, they are not cheap.
Short of using a GPS module's output tied to some device displaying the time, that you make yourself, you're going to be hard-pushed to find a cheap system.
I speak as someone who runs two NTP pool servers, has all my gadgets at home and in work synchronised to GPS or NTP, and even has MSF-controlled clocks, watches and bedside alarm clocks (Daylight saving? Don't have to do a thing).
If you're out of the time signal range in your region, you're looking at GPS or NTP, and both require basically a computer somewhere (RPi or GPS modules on an Arduino, for example) doing the work, and a display of some kind (driving a traditional mechanical clock, or an LCD).
It's only Pi day if you don't understand precedence of unit size.
Small / Larger / Largest
DD/MM/YYYY
or Large / Smaller / Smallest
YYYY/MM/DD
None of them make a nice "Pi Day" number.
Unless you're considering the 31/4/1592 or 3141/5/9.
MM/DD/YYYY is just stupid.
It might allow you to spread the heat or avoid direct water transfer but you still have to move that heat somewhere. You're not REDUCING the heat, are you? It's still producing the same amount of heat and you're still needing to get rid of it.
At the end of the day, whatever fancy technique you use, there's still going to be a large bit of aluminium somewhere, and probably a cheap fan blowing over it. If not, then you're into things more complicated, fragile or liquid than you want them to be.
The only other cooling technology I've seen was a heat-pipe cooled PSU that I still have. No moving parts at all, just clever design, and natural air-flow. But things like that aren't scaling and can't be used on more heat-generating parts (do PSU's really generate that much heat?).
No matter how you look at it, whether you water-cool or whatever, you still need a big piece of metal with huge surface area being cooled somehow to actually "get rid" of the heat. Everything else is just a matter of the efficiency or difficulty of how you get the heat to that point.
With consumer items like laptops and desktop PC's, you're not going to change anything. And bigger things like cars, planes, etc. don't really have a problem - localised heating might be problematic but space isn't at such a premium that you can't solve it with "normal" techniques and a huge heatsink (i.e. the bodywork).
However, I still don't get why all laptops / tablets don't just have a large metal base inside their plastics to just spread the heat over everything, so you don't get one burned thigh and one cold thigh.
Whoosh.
Or... get to 0.22 per 100,000 by just banning them.
The UK rate is just that... no hypothesis, guesswork, or estimation. It's 0.22.
And this is the 20th anniversary of Dunblane, possibly our largest "school shooting" ever. It happened. Kids died. We banned a lot of private ownership. It hasn't happened since.
Stop pissing about guessing, and work out what other countries DID and had WORK.
Even out of our 0.22, 0.16 is suicide.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
You're a cock.
Replace Muslim/Islam with Vegetarian/Vegetarianism to see why.
Some vegetarians gathered at the local supermarket and killed someone? Raped someone? Shit, all vegetarians need to be arrested / exterminated, no? Fucking idiot.
You have a correlation (the terrorists in this case are claiming to follow Islam), not a causation (Islam did not make them terrorists - there are MILLIONS of Islamic people who are not terrorist that you want to conveniently ignore, like there are millions of vegetarians who didn't shove cucumbers up people's arses in protest)..
Not even that, the correlation is tenuous. I'm British. We're far from new to terrorism, on either side of the coin. Fuck, we spent most of the 80's/90's being bombed to oblivion by the IRA.
The IRA? Formed, if you dig deep enough, because of two main groups in opposition to each other, colloquially assigned as "Catholics" and "Protestants". Are Catholics bombers? Are Protestants? Like with the vegetarians - some but not all, and they aren't bombers because they are protestant, they are bombers who happen to ALSO BE lumped into a religious group (somewhat unfairly, in fact, and Ireland was divided and referred to for many years by such religious groupings rather than, say, those who opposed British rule and those who didn't).
The last bomber I saw on the news was a car driver. Are car drivers all bombers? Or was this bomber just happening to be a car driver? Or... maybe.. if you want to discredit some group you become a bomber and SAY you part of their organisation. Is there an "Islamist Club" membership card or do we just have the words of some passer-by interviewed for the news story.
Take your fucking blinkered, DANGEROUS, racist, religionist and ignorant views, and the implications and accusations that you put with them and go sit with the fucking dunce in the corner.
What's dangerous is anyone's RELIGION being more important than how they deal with people. Christians - if you generalise over history - forcibly colonised most of the world to "convert" people. It's the conversion that's the problem, not the particular religion they choose to convert you to.
Stop being a cock.
I've heard of backup companies who don't take proper backups. The servers go, they lose all their customer's data, no returns.
This isn't a shock. Quite often the very people who you "have to consult" in order to appease your boss are the very snakeoil salesman that have no clue about what they're doing beyond talking themselves up.
I had a guy tell my boss that our website "was insecure, expired certificates, etc.". Turns out he was plugging our domain.com into some online checker but didn't notice that our website is actually www.domain.com. Our bare domain, therefore, of course wasn't encrypted or any such nonsense and had no need to be - it was just a landing page that HTTP redirected you to the proper domain (and, to be honest, 99% of the website has no need for a secure certificate either, as none of it is private or confidential - it's a website - and the CMS for it is accessed an entirely different way).
And the expired cert? Actually a fallback "localhost" cert returned by Apache if you specifically request a non-existent https subdomain like "https://domain.com" (which doesn't exist as a website, and only gets a response because it resolves to the same IP as www.domain.com which has the secure port open).
But he plugged it into the checker, so everyone must be able to get into our systems right?! What are we going to do about it?!
The very people who run these services HAVE NO CLUE what they are doing. Like the people that my employer keeps trying to get me to take training courses from, or the apprenticeship company that one of my colleagues has to spend 9 weeks training at.
He said last time he went that their "network" was a bunch of unlicensed workstations ("Just ignore that notice"), with no security, all the same passwords (so he was able to remote into the instructor's PC, etc.), admin-level accounts, all clients connected direct to the Internet with no filter or firewall, and that they thought he was "hacking" because he was remoted into his own home server after finishing their coursework and doing some research of his own. Another told him off for upgrading the version of server because his remote session was to a more modern version.
These were the people TEACHING HIM (supposedly) how to set up domains, manage a network, implement group policy, etc. etc. etc. And they'd not heard of virtualisation, proper imaging techniques (they have "rollback" on their clients but pretty much they are just used by class after class and rebuilt when necessary, hence why they are unlicensed as there's no KMS server, or even a proper image). And they were teaching him on Server 2008... his home server has 2016, and we're using 2012R2 in the workplace.
Basically, he's going there to tick a box to say that "someone other than my boss" thinks he can do the basics, not to actually learn anything. Unfortunately that "someone other" are obviously bog-useless at what they do, or they wouldn't be working at such a company - they'd have got themselves a job managing real servers somewhere.
That's pretty much what's happened here. Get a consultant in to audit things and say you're up-to-scratch. But who audits the auditor? No-one? Pointless then. And they can't even apply the principles that they are judging YOU on to their own internal systems.
I hope they lose every customer they had.
What if:
You don't own your own roof.
The roof is inadequate.
Your location on the globe is inadequate.
The tax-breaks and subsidies are taken away from you because there is no cheap alternative and everyone jumps onto solar?
"Rates will never increase" is a dubious assertion too, maybe if you have a direct system but not if you're counting anything like pushing back to the grid (negative bill would suggest that).
And not everyone has the ability to do one massive outlay now to save energy for the next 10 years (if the gear lasts that long and you get totally free servicing and replacements in the cost of your system throughout that time - what if the company goes bankrupt, maybe because they relied on subsidies or didn't account for product returns, or they just get priced out of the market?).
It's honestly not as simple as "get solar".
Hell, in my country, solar is just laughed at. An installation capable of running an ordinary house costs more than a house extension or a brand new car, and only "saves" while it's being subsidised.
And just the extra legal cost of who technically owns it if you move house has caused people an awful lot of people to have a lot of unexpected bills (you're leasing? Then you sell the house? And the next guy doesn't agree with the transfer of that lease? Now you have an unsaleable house, or have to buy out the lease, or legal costs to argue the toss, and you can't really remove the system in the meantime, and mortgage companies don't want to touch it as you've effectively rented out your roof to the solar company).
Nothing is that clear-cut when it comes to that amount of money in a system.
Plus replacement of the whole system at the expiry date of the service warranty (no, "expected life" is no good - if it's not warrantied you're still going to have to find the money to replace it while you fight that in court at great expense).
"The Game".
See? They've already lost.
The question is not "what if it escapes".
What if, one of the guys working at Apple is able to get his hands on that "one-serial" version? Is that guy security checked? Is he a spy?
That such a version even exists is a risk. Whereas if all the Apple firmwares issued, to anyone, are just consumer, technical, etc. firmwares that don't allow arbitrary bypass of security restrictions, it's much harder to make happen.
And how difficult would it be for, same, some enterprising country to get their hands on this "one-serial" firmware and hack either the serial is applies to AND/OR the serial on the hardware they want to get into?
It's not public escape and the guys on the firmware hacking forums that this guy would care about. That kind of thing could already be going on anyway. It's that Apple are providing firmwares capable of device compromise to anyone who asks in any of their legal locations. Like China. If the FBI succeed in the US, what's to stop the appropriate equivalent Chinese agency succeeding in China (where it would be done much more quietly and probably without any safeguards at all?). Nothing.
Short of Apple literally having to pull out of China if they are forced to do it, they would have to comply with the laws there too, by their court's interpretation, whether the device was originally bought in the US, the EU or anywhere else, if if a similar case comes up and the highest Chinese legal authority decrees they want this, and Apple has already provided the facility to the FBI, it's almost impossible to deny them it short of pulling out of sales in that country entirely. And that would hurt Apple and, by proxy, the American export economy.
This guy is making some sense, at least. He's not even trying to pretend that the courts aren't within their right in this instance, what he's saying is that it's a much bigger issue than just resolving one legal dispute, and will affect the security and export of US electronics worldwide.
It's got nothing to do with "how many times we give in", but "that we gave in the first time", which is a sad and oft-repeated lament where law is concerned. Apple aren't even saying they COULDN'T do this... they are saying they SHOULDN'T.
It would destroy exports, user confidence, and provide a tool that - with almost zero effort - could be applied elsewhere. And, please bear in mind - evidence submitted in a court can be requested, inspected, queried and argued over by the other side too.
In the same way that the firmware of breathalysers and all kinds of other devices are legally forced open in many jurisdictions (because you are putting people behind bars based on the assertions that the software is making, and thus the software has to be able to be inspected by an appropriate professional analyst if the defendant makes a fuss about it, in order to dis/prove their case), providing this firmware to the FBI may well pave the way to providing it to the defendant's lawyers, legal team, analysts, courtroom, etc.
It's not joe-public hacking the firmware on their iPad that anyone cares about. It's creating a tool that you then can't "uncreate" and may well be able to be applied to everything from some kiosk-like visitor-log device in the White House to the kid's tablet in Downing Street, and then advertising that the tool exists to any court in the world that might demand it.
Though I hate Apple with an absolute, physical, lividness, this is actually a big case with much more impact for Apple, the US electronics economy and the global IT economy, plus the national security of almost every country, than just "who might bypass your passcode when they can put a hacked firmware on your iPad when you leave it unattended in a bar".
It doesn't even need to "escape". If Apple get summonsed to provide this same tool by a Chinese court, or an EU one, they will have to comply or fight the same fight. If they could point at the US and say "No, look, we argued this over there, we're not going to do it", it holds much more precedent than "We caved to the FBI, but we don't like your court system over here so we won't do the same for you."
"the hacker group who made Sony PlayStation 4"? Really?
Might want to check that.
And I can't find this interesting, when it's basically a way to run Linux on something that we know could run it, whose predecessors have run it, and which is deliberately made not to run it for no real valid reason.
It's not even like a PS4 is cheaper than a laptop or whatever nowadays.
That's what all the other emulators are for. And quite a few of them exist, even MAME spin-offs designed for nothing more than performance, ease of setup, and game compatibility.
I don't know where you've been looking, but they are everywhere. It's like complaining that Debian is too "pure" when there are a million spin-off distros based on it that aren't, and some of them more popular than the original.
MAME have always stated that their aim is preservation and accuracy of emulation of old games. Not for you to have a quick blast on a ROM that you're not technically licensed for anyway. There are other MAME-based things for that, many of them with "MAME" in the title, even.
It's like complaining that some museum scanned in their ancient texts at far too high a resolution that you can't comfortably read them on your Kindle. Their aim was never for you to do that, but for the original texts to be preserved in as much detail as possible.
As it is "just an emulator", like DOSBox or any similarly-created programs, and doesn't bundle ROMs itself (nor condone misuse of licensed ROMs or unlicensed ROMs at all), having that be the blocker to their inclusion in mass-market products like Linux or, indeed, things like Steam games created by the original companies (e.g. Atari, etc.), it does seem to be a sensible move.
"apt-get install mame" should be possible. It doesn't do anything, or allow anything, that "apt-get install dosbox" didn't.
And now that it basically includes MESS (which emulates ZX Spectrums, old PC's, and the like), there's even more reason that people might well just want to install it.
It's a good move. I have to say that I'm surprised they managed it, given the number of contributors who would have had to agree, but I'm glad they did.
The 1 -> 2Mb upgrade on my first PC cost more than that.
Bitcoin wallets aren't cracked. Unless you're an idiot and chose a Bitcoin wallet that's easily guessable (like choosing a password of password). The default Bitcoin wallets are just fine and cryptographically secure.
The Tor network may have been "attacked". But short of having 50% of nodes under your control, you can't guarantee anything and the best attack is still a timing / correlation attack by monitoring both ends of a transaction (so presumably you don't NEED to know anything more than that anyway, if you've got that far) that pretty much NOTHING can stop.
Stop getting your tech news from overblown headlines and look into... the tech. If Bitcoin wallets were "cracked", there would be billions of dollars lost overnight. That's not what happened. A handful of people deliberately choosing to use the equivalent of "123456" for a Bitcoin wallet key may have lost their money. That's it. And people using certain monitored elements of Tor where they are giving away their own IP, or the service they connect to is giving away it's IP, allowing silly attacks due to poor configurations (nothing can stop the stupid) may have given away more information than they knew.
Otherwise, the sensible users of the systems using them what they were designed for have carried on completely unhindered. The systems both worked, as designed.
Why would you follow a robot, compared to going back the way you came (so long as that looks safe)?
People en masse are stupid. Especially when it comes to fire and panic. Honestly, disconnect your emotions, follow the rules, think it through.
I work in schools and I speak as the person who's ALWAYS first out on the sound of a fire alarm, but never has to run. It was a running joke in some schools that I must have known when the drills were happening, until a real fire happened and I was still there first.
Fire drills are commonplace and run like clockwork because of the amount of practice we do. 400 kids, some as young as three, out of a school and to a safe area in under 2 minutes is NOT to be sniffed at. I've seen it done. And usually because I'm sitting there waiting for everyone else. A couple more minutes later, either everyone is accounted for or we have a list of names of who should have signed out or who is missing.
I even knew an old headmaster who used to block off corridors (with cardboard cut-out "fires"), introduce smoke to the halls, or even - with TONS of pre-planning involved in case something DID go wrong and there was a simultaneous REAL fire - telling a kid to "go to the bathroom" just before the fire alarm was pulled in order to see if anyone noticed they were missing. That sort of thing keeps you on your toes and keeps you alert as to WHY we do these things, and to think about what you're doing rather than blithely follow the marked route, and the impact only comes when you're all safely outside and someone says "Where is X?" and you see the panic spread in the teacher's faces.
In fact, the only time I've ever NOT been first out the door is when I was personally supervising a group of kids. As they were my responsibility, we did it exactly by the book.
They lined up by the classroom door. They were headcounted. We walked down the corridor and lined up outside the room that provided the emergency exit route (yes, I checked the room). They were headcounted as they went through.
We walked THROUGH a full class of children that hadn't even STOOD UP by that point, to the emergency exit. They were headcounted as they left and I ensured separation so I didn't accidentally count one of the other class (who were supervised by their own adult who I had to gee up to get a move on).
We got outside, we walked to the assembly point, they were headcounted again. By that time, ONE other class managed to get there before me. Nobody ran. Nobody screamed. Nobody panicked. Nobody could have got lost along the way. Someone in fact HUNG AROUND INSIDE LOOKING FOR ME, knowing that I had some of their children and didn't think I would have had the presence of mind to evacuate them myself. And, yes, I checked the other class got out.
But why you'd just blindly follow some robot, even one announcing that you were to follow it? No thanks. Unless you are life-saving equipment grade hardware that physically cannot go wrong or lead us into a fire, I'll go the way I want to go, thanks. And that means the way I know. And that means, in an unfamiliar situation, the way the signage tells me or the way I came in unless there's a specific reason not to.
Yup:
To quote the report:
"Revisiting Table 3, we see that this perception is correct
when it comes to SLC drives and their RBER, as they
are orders of magnitude lower than for MLC and eMLC
drives. However, Tables 2 and 5 show that SLC drives do
not perform better for those measures of reliability that
matter most in practice: SLC drives donâ(TM)t have lower repair
or replacement rates, and donâ(TM)t typically have lower
rates of non-transparent errors"
SLC have less errors, but they affect real-world usage (i.e. non-correctable) only as much as MLC errors do. So technically MLC have MORE errors but are just as useful as replacement rates at the same. Presumably more error correction.
Never was true, never would be true.
In same cases, analogue photography is easier to fake than the skills needed for photoshopping, and just as difficult to analyse and debunk, if not more.
If you see something, take a photo. The pre-planning necessary to submit a modified form of that photo without the original being present or seized is so huge as to make anything other than deliberate set up impossible.
Your photos - digital or analogue - are prima facie evidence in most courts. Same for CCTV, and so on. And the penalties for deliberately crafting false evidence are incredibly severe to prevent any suggestion of misuse.
But that a Polaroid is in any way fighting for freedom is ludicrous. But yet everyone already carries a phone with greater resolution, colour accuracy, etc. And the fact that "random member of public X" has the same photo as "random member of public Y" means much more than anything to do with the devices they used to do so.
And when the legal department come sweeping in to make sure the large mergers were done correctly and the company is compliant and looking for someone's head if it's not.... they will walk past the janitor who will simply go into "Not my job" mode.
I'm far from management, but even I wouldn't want 1% of some of those kinds of responsibilities, even if they can be abused or "overlooked" for quite a long period of time.
Because when the courts come looking for the person responsible, they aren't going to care about the janitor. He doesn't get paid enough to worry about things like that. The CEO's etc do.
Physically-demanded work is not to be underestimated or overlooked, but just because you're not breaking your back and putting yourself into healthcare before you retire, it doesn't mean you don't work hard for a living.
Not quite.
It's the de-facto replacement for stupendously limiting and expensive text and picture messages, which outside of contracts can run into thousands per Mb of actual data.
All with an app that cost 69p per year, free for the first year, and has just recently been made free forever.
It's like loading up MSN Messenger on your phone so you don't have to send a text. It just so happens to have made a brand name for itself in the process.
If telcos didn't charge ridiculous amounts for picture messages - especially from abroad - their business model would be dead overnight. It basically uses your data connection to do what the telcos should have been doing all along, but would rather sting you.
Personally, I don't want Apple - or indeed any other third party, but certainly not Apple - to have any kind of say over my encrypted data and/or access to it.
I get that the device is under their control. They can unlock it. They can force updates to it. They can - legally or not - do all these things.
But if you placed encrypted data on the phone, encrypted with a secure key, and decrypted only when you provide the key and/or passphrase, then why does Apple have any say, control, or ability over your encrypted data.
The people actually doing damage using encryption technologies must have a brain of some kind, and they know this. Even a truecrypt- or similar type container is secure from anything Apple or the FBI might want to do after the event. So long as they can't actively monitor you enter the key, they can't get into that data. That's where the dangerous people will be entering their data they don't want you to have, and there's nothing that anyone can really do about it.
The stuff contained on a phone? What's going to be in there? A browsing, location and call history available from the telco's anyway? And a memo and a couple of photos. Sure they *could* be incriminating, but that's not where the real dangerous stuff will be held.
Honestly, this is overbearing requirements to catch the low-hanging fruit. Instead of doing the jobs that spies and such agencies SHOULD be doing.
Er...
Exactly the example I used, where systems with working SysVInit style scripts were pushed onto systemd if they wanted to stay supported and - in some cases - broke (because an upgrade to systemd, certainly, is not always as perfect and painless as made out, especially if you're using a lot of custom init scripts). Which is basically upstart all over again.
A google for "systemd broke" will turn up a lot of hits where people's computers stopped booting or not bringing up services even upgrading between versions or package upgrades, let alone trying to go from init scripts to systemd in one hit.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
Now the OS upgrade wasn't "forced" as much, but technically you didn't have to agree to the Windows 10 one either. It still required manual intervention to actually happen.
I'm more concerned with tablets - Windows tablets with 16GB of storage are trying to download and update to Windows 10, which is just ludicrous as often you have NO way back on such devices.
But, then, I've seen the same on cheap Android tablets that get updates that brick them too.
Stop making out the MS are doing something that nobody else is here. Even the Macs you mentioned have stuffed people and I've witnessed OS X and iOS upgrades that then stick because the machine wasn't actually supported (iPad 2's, which became like stunned sloths, for instance).
If you want to show difference, provide control to the user. You can still publish all the junk updates you want, but people then get a "No thanks" button and - unless you're fecking Apple - a "Don't remind me again" checkbox too.
When did you download Mint? Hope it wasn't in the middle of their website compromise!
However, that's just me being petty. Linux is fine as a desktop. Windows is fine as a desktop. The thing that ruins either is removing control from the user (e.g. forced Windows Updates on one platform, things like systemd / window manager "upgrades" on the other with no easy way back).
With virtualisation and web-based services, the OS barely matters any more. This is part of the reason that MS are suffering - they can't tie you into their application format, or even their browser, and neither can they stop you running Windows only where necessary for compatibility and in isolated VM's.
Look at Chromebooks - the browser is the OS nowadays. And any service supplier that doesn't realise that is going to be ousted as soon as their competitors do. Hell, with Node.js, emscripten, etc. you can run traditional programs in the browser almost as if they were native (go have a look at the emscripten example 3D games on their website).
The tie-downs for my uses are actually hardware-based. Where you have to have a USB dongle, or a Smartcard reader (e.g. banking, etc.) in order to do a task. Though USB passthrough exists, it ties you to particular computers and locations, and it also means that it's harder to setup and maintain.
I can't move our banking software because it relies on a USB smartcard that ties itself to the machine's Windows installation.
But, pretty much, if I was in charge of a company in my industry or any of the others that I could conceivably work in, I could easily justify and manage without any particular OS or proprietary software at all. There's not much nowadays that relies on such things, and those that do seem very limiting and old-fashioned.
Hell, a few years back, there was a boiler in the place I worked - a serious thing that covered a huge site from one location. The software was the most locked-down thing I've ever seen. But I was still able to virtualise it by tricking the installers into thinking the machine they were in front of was just a physical machine. They installed all the software, set it up, activated and registered the MAC interfaces, etc. And when they were gone, I took the VM image they'd actually been working on and moved it to the servers, and turned the workstation back into just-another-client.
I've had to deal with quite a few manufacturers who just don't like you VM'ing things but can't justify exactly why. For at least three of them, I've tricked them like that or just virtualised it and then fixed the software. The manufacturers who get my custom easier are those who go "Oh, yes, well we have an image for VMWare or HyperV if you want one, we just don't advertise it".
Hell, the firewall where I work is actually a VM nowadays, and our VM's are 40:60 Linux and Windows. Even then, it's usually only because we separate by task and are licensed on Server Datacenter (so we can run unlimited VM copies of Windows on them), so we're running many more copies of Windows than strictly necessary. If costs changed, we could easily go 90:10.