You are literally arguing for a system which reduces to under $2/hour in pay in the modern economy. This makes you corrupt or it makes you overly naive and idealist, either way it makes you an idiot.
It's up to the user to decide what is and isn't safe to install on their machine. That part was put in place specifically because Firefox blocked "unapproved" AdBlockers (all the ones not sending telemetry back themselves or who blocked Firefox partner sites.)
Actually, it runs any addon - it was designed that way so the Firefox team couldn't control a whitelist of approved addons. The security holes patched are literally on their site.
It might be worthwhile for you to re-read the comment. If you still can't follow along and understand the context in which it was written, please refer to this comment.
It is amazingly unlikely that someone will happen to want items from the same places as you on the same day as you and live on your route from there to your home while using some shitty app that you happen to use.
I'm confused, is your argument is that they shouldn't not do the job because nobody is forcing them to do the job or that you agree with them striking?
This is just Firefox trying to be a source of telemetry. Waterfox is based on Firefox, but removes all the telemetry, sponsored ads, etc plus a bunch of security holes the Firefox team isn't addressing.
This is marketing dribble from some guy at some company, neither of which are relevant. This is the kind of blogspamvertisement I'd expect in my inbox after a sales/marketing-oriented PM got a bug up their ass to research something outside their realm of expertise, not on/.
Nope, it's legitimate harassment and the phone company won't reveal the number when you call unless the request is made after filing a police report and the police are the ones to make the request. It's the only means possible to apply pressure to phone companies to deal with people abusing the service you pay for and is the appropriate legal recourse.
You seem to have misread the comment. The issue in the past has been the actual process of making them in 3D (as opposed to heat, as the person I responded to had suggested.) I never said you couldn't stack a bunch of 2D chips manufactured separately (or in parallel, "separately" meaning "not a monolithic tower.")
Heat is only an issue when you are pressing the chips beyond the natural resonance of their topological structures - as most CPUs and GPUs do to attain higher throughput. When driven at resonance it takes practically no wattage to drive a chip - they could run on static if you built them well enough. CPUs and GPUs are basically space heaters which do some calculations, the calculation part isn't what causes heat but the part where you run them way faster than the hardware wants to run, the part where your tolerances are so wide that you need to overpower the noise of surrounding traces, and the part where you want to get in and out of the chip. Internally to the chip you could conceivably run the things on ambient heat (not that we know how to engineer quite that well.)
Personally the big one I'm looking forward to is single-element chips, not necessarily because they will be of great use, but just because they'd be freaking cool. Aluminum for instance has p-type, n-type, insulating, and conductive crystal morphologies, all of which can be generated by the different cooling rates from a molten phase along with the peak temp while molten. Using something akin to an SLS 3D printer you could conceivably print a complete CPU out of solid Aluminum (theoretically, tuning the printer would be a fucker, it would take forever to print due to different cooling times in different voxels, and it might not actually be possible since you're likely going to get intermittent crystal morphologies with undesirable traits at the interfaces of two desirable ones.) Also, I might be thinking of Silicon instead of Aluminum, it's been years since looking into it.
This was thought of a long time ago and experimented with, but the real problem with it was heat.
No, it wasn't. You can run them at lower power and therefore generate less heat. The issue is that lithographic techniques don't let you get more than a few layers thick before the negative f-theta lenses employed are out of focus. You end up needing nano-positioning stages along the Z-axis, which as a matter of necessity means you need nano-positioning stages along at least 3 corners of a wafer, and along the X/Y (separate from the galvanometers or nanoactuated mirrors behind the negative f-theta lens) in order to keep the wafer aligned in the plane projected by the negative f-theta lens (just forget about doing this stuff with masks without using similarly complex alignment methods on both the wafer and the mask holder.)
The real 'breakthrough' and 'innovation' is being down to the 10nm scale, and other lower-power options, enabling silicon to run cooler yet at faster speeds.
No, it isn't. Scaling down allows you to run at lower power for higher frequencies, but you could just as easily reduce the frequency of the chip to spend less power. You end up getting less out of it, but not in terms of FLOPS/Watt - it's just that we focus on the FLOPS aspect more than the Wattage. Scaling along the Z axis has been the issue for a long time, you just can't do it with things in the nanometer range without absurdly complex chip fabrication equipment and effectively building 1 chip at a time (with a lithographic mask you can make hundreds or thousands of ICs at the same time because the Z axis changes relatively little across the X and Y axis, but when you're talking about building a little tower suddenly you have to deal with a host of changes.) To use the building analogy: you can tilt a 1-story building 5, even 15 degrees, and still drop a rock above a room to land on the roof of that room without knowing anything beyond the X and Y coordinate of the room relative to the floorplan - if you try the same thing on the 40th floor of a skyscraper tilted at even 1 degree you aren't going to be anywhere near it, you'll just hit an exterior wall several stories down.
Just because it can be made with off the shelf parts doesn't mean it is simple to make, or within the realm of anyone but the intellectual elite. To make an autonomous bug-sized drone swarm capable of poisoning people you would have to know how to program for swarm dynamics, how to fit some super-advanced image recognition into the package (i.e. spotting someone's skin instead of landing and shooting your load on a table,) and the production capability to make a bunch of them. It would take a highly competent nerd with mastery of chemistry, biology, robotics, and programming half a decade doing nothing else to put this into practice, and frankly nerds don't kill people.
Private numbers are the ones which piss me off. There's no reason someone should be able to call my cellphone without me seeing their number, I always file a police report for harassment when it happens.
it never stopped. He said he doesnâ(TM)t see it, but he wouldnâ(TM)t since Iâ(TM)m sure he has someone screen his mail.
Ignoring the broken unicode indicating you are an irredeemable Apple user, you are somewhat correct, he actually has 3 secretaries dedicated to reading his email (at least as of 2008, my knowledge may be a bit dated on the matter.)
Why? If someone doesn't understand security they write shit code, which leads to shit products, which leads to loss of money. In turn people who do understand security (a necessarily smaller proportion of the population, who happen to be much smarter) demand a higher degree of compensation. This is one of the few areas where society is rewarding intellect, don't fuck it up by conveying even more tools from the intellectual superior to their plebeian counterparts - you're advocating for reverse evolution.
Slashdot Mirror
You are literally arguing for a system which reduces to under $2/hour in pay in the modern economy. This makes you corrupt or it makes you overly naive and idealist, either way it makes you an idiot.
Only Apple users are pretentious enough to use non-English characters on the American internet.
You are attempting to defend the indefensible and it can't be done, this makes you an idiot.
It's up to the user to decide what is and isn't safe to install on their machine. That part was put in place specifically because Firefox blocked "unapproved" AdBlockers (all the ones not sending telemetry back themselves or who blocked Firefox partner sites.)
Actually, it runs any addon - it was designed that way so the Firefox team couldn't control a whitelist of approved addons. The security holes patched are literally on their site.
Chromium is garbage, it freezes up on page loads for 1-2 minutes every time you hit a website.
Making under $40 for nearly 20 hours of work isn't "being your own boss," it's "getting scammed."
It might be worthwhile for you to re-read the comment. If you still can't follow along and understand the context in which it was written, please refer to this comment.
Wow, in a rush to show off your 'intelligence' you managed to make a complete ass of yourself
Nope, I was actually just trying to call you a fucking retard in the nicest way possible. Seems it wasn't quite direct enough, fucking retard.
It is amazingly unlikely that someone will happen to want items from the same places as you on the same day as you and live on your route from there to your home while using some shitty app that you happen to use.
I'm confused, is your argument is that they shouldn't not do the job because nobody is forcing them to do the job or that you agree with them striking?
Wonder what would be the work around for the trackers and advertisers.
Dying and going to Hell is about the best option they have available.
This is just Firefox trying to be a source of telemetry. Waterfox is based on Firefox, but removes all the telemetry, sponsored ads, etc plus a bunch of security holes the Firefox team isn't addressing.
How does it feel to fail at even the most inane of tasks?
This is marketing dribble from some guy at some company, neither of which are relevant. This is the kind of blogspamvertisement I'd expect in my inbox after a sales/marketing-oriented PM got a bug up their ass to research something outside their realm of expertise, not on /.
Nope, it's legitimate harassment and the phone company won't reveal the number when you call unless the request is made after filing a police report and the police are the ones to make the request. It's the only means possible to apply pressure to phone companies to deal with people abusing the service you pay for and is the appropriate legal recourse.
You seem to have misread the comment. The issue in the past has been the actual process of making them in 3D (as opposed to heat, as the person I responded to had suggested.) I never said you couldn't stack a bunch of 2D chips manufactured separately (or in parallel, "separately" meaning "not a monolithic tower.")
Heat is only an issue when you are pressing the chips beyond the natural resonance of their topological structures - as most CPUs and GPUs do to attain higher throughput. When driven at resonance it takes practically no wattage to drive a chip - they could run on static if you built them well enough. CPUs and GPUs are basically space heaters which do some calculations, the calculation part isn't what causes heat but the part where you run them way faster than the hardware wants to run, the part where your tolerances are so wide that you need to overpower the noise of surrounding traces, and the part where you want to get in and out of the chip. Internally to the chip you could conceivably run the things on ambient heat (not that we know how to engineer quite that well.)
Personally the big one I'm looking forward to is single-element chips, not necessarily because they will be of great use, but just because they'd be freaking cool. Aluminum for instance has p-type, n-type, insulating, and conductive crystal morphologies, all of which can be generated by the different cooling rates from a molten phase along with the peak temp while molten. Using something akin to an SLS 3D printer you could conceivably print a complete CPU out of solid Aluminum (theoretically, tuning the printer would be a fucker, it would take forever to print due to different cooling times in different voxels, and it might not actually be possible since you're likely going to get intermittent crystal morphologies with undesirable traits at the interfaces of two desirable ones.) Also, I might be thinking of Silicon instead of Aluminum, it's been years since looking into it.
This was thought of a long time ago and experimented with, but the real problem with it was heat.
No, it wasn't. You can run them at lower power and therefore generate less heat. The issue is that lithographic techniques don't let you get more than a few layers thick before the negative f-theta lenses employed are out of focus. You end up needing nano-positioning stages along the Z-axis, which as a matter of necessity means you need nano-positioning stages along at least 3 corners of a wafer, and along the X/Y (separate from the galvanometers or nanoactuated mirrors behind the negative f-theta lens) in order to keep the wafer aligned in the plane projected by the negative f-theta lens (just forget about doing this stuff with masks without using similarly complex alignment methods on both the wafer and the mask holder.)
The real 'breakthrough' and 'innovation' is being down to the 10nm scale, and other lower-power options, enabling silicon to run cooler yet at faster speeds.
No, it isn't. Scaling down allows you to run at lower power for higher frequencies, but you could just as easily reduce the frequency of the chip to spend less power. You end up getting less out of it, but not in terms of FLOPS/Watt - it's just that we focus on the FLOPS aspect more than the Wattage. Scaling along the Z axis has been the issue for a long time, you just can't do it with things in the nanometer range without absurdly complex chip fabrication equipment and effectively building 1 chip at a time (with a lithographic mask you can make hundreds or thousands of ICs at the same time because the Z axis changes relatively little across the X and Y axis, but when you're talking about building a little tower suddenly you have to deal with a host of changes.) To use the building analogy: you can tilt a 1-story building 5, even 15 degrees, and still drop a rock above a room to land on the roof of that room without knowing anything beyond the X and Y coordinate of the room relative to the floorplan - if you try the same thing on the 40th floor of a skyscraper tilted at even 1 degree you aren't going to be anywhere near it, you'll just hit an exterior wall several stories down.
Just because it can be made with off the shelf parts doesn't mean it is simple to make, or within the realm of anyone but the intellectual elite. To make an autonomous bug-sized drone swarm capable of poisoning people you would have to know how to program for swarm dynamics, how to fit some super-advanced image recognition into the package (i.e. spotting someone's skin instead of landing and shooting your load on a table,) and the production capability to make a bunch of them. It would take a highly competent nerd with mastery of chemistry, biology, robotics, and programming half a decade doing nothing else to put this into practice, and frankly nerds don't kill people.
Bug-sized drones aren't exactly large enough for a payload other than chemical or biological, both of which are already outlawed globally in war.
Private numbers are the ones which piss me off. There's no reason someone should be able to call my cellphone without me seeing their number, I always file a police report for harassment when it happens.
it never stopped. He said he doesnâ(TM)t see it, but he wouldnâ(TM)t since Iâ(TM)m sure he has someone screen his mail.
Ignoring the broken unicode indicating you are an irredeemable Apple user, you are somewhat correct, he actually has 3 secretaries dedicated to reading his email (at least as of 2008, my knowledge may be a bit dated on the matter.)
Why? If someone doesn't understand security they write shit code, which leads to shit products, which leads to loss of money. In turn people who do understand security (a necessarily smaller proportion of the population, who happen to be much smarter) demand a higher degree of compensation. This is one of the few areas where society is rewarding intellect, don't fuck it up by conveying even more tools from the intellectual superior to their plebeian counterparts - you're advocating for reverse evolution.