So playing devil's advocate here: They could have modified the design, burying the extra traces in interior layers. After approval and the initial production run would you go poking around the boards being shipped out that closely to notice some small extra vias that had been masked over? Would you pull a board apart to view the inner layers if there were no problems? We aren't talking about a rogue employee here but a state sponsored program so you would expect it to have the engineering capability to modify a board design in a way as to not interfere with it's normal functionality. If they compromised the PCB manufacturer and assembly partner they could slip it in any time they wanted to.
Now I'm not saying I'm buying this story. The very specific, very adamant denials from Amazon isn't the type of denial you would normally expect in a situation like this if they coudln't talk. But it is possible.
This test was a test of the cell providers equipment. No one forced anyone to turn their phones on during the test. You are also glossing over the fact that radio and TV were far more ubiquitous in the past before the internet and streaming. A president would have a captive audience of almost every household during US prime time when TV shows could get cancelled for having viewer numbers higher than the major networks get in total in a broadcast week these days. Nearly everyone in the nation would be watching TV or, before that, listening to the radio in the evenings. And stations have no discretion in airing these alerts. Heck for the past, what, 4 decades or so they didn't even have a choice, the system installed is automated.
Really? Bush and Obama both used the national presidential alert system to send political messages? Are you sure it wasn't just the CIA beaming then directly to your brain from their satellite?
They already have that. There are three levels of alerts. Amber alert (for missing kids), Emergency Alerts, and Presidential Alerts (I think Android splits the emergency alerts into two sub categories). The Amber alerts and emergency alerts are targetable, while the presidential alerts are nation wide. You can also turn off the amber and emergency alerts, but not the presidential alerts (without hacked firmware).
If the president is able to use this at his discretion, without supervision, we all need to prepare ourselves for a whole lot of pain. That orange buffoon won't be able to resist the urge to constantly inundate all cell phone users with an endless stream of what he deems "important information" but is really just a constant spouting of nonsense.
You realize this is a test of an existing system, right? The alerts have been around on radio and TV going back to before most of us were born and on cell phones since 2013.
This is basically for nuclear war or incoming asteroid end-of-the-world type of events that affect a large swath of the country and that may not propagate via news coverage fast enough for people to prepare. No president has ever used it. Even on 9/11 they chose not to use it as they felt news coverage was sufficient. It's been around for a long time with TV and radio. They added it to cell service back in 2013 (by law passed in 2006).
Remember when in 2006 the law was updated every was certain Bush would use to spam their cellphones with unblockable political spam? Then when cell companies started turning on the feature, how Obama was certain to use it for political spam?
Someone has to write it, edit it, translate it, print it, pack it, ship it, unpack it, put it in the box that has to be enlarged to allow it to fit, ship it again, and for what? 90% of consumers won't even read it. It will go straight into a bin (a recycling bin if lucky, most likely just into landfill trash). So not including it is a cost savings and environmental savings. Think about it this way, in Q1 2018 there were 383,503,900 smartphones sold worldwide. If each one came with a 200 page manual, that's 38,350,390,000 pages (100 double side printed pages per manual) of paper essentially wasted. Now let's assume it's about A6 size paper. That's around 1.41g per sheet, so 54,074,050 kg of paper, not including covers. All for just 3 months worth of phones. Now extrapolate that out for a decade. And that's just for phones.
A better solution would be to include a manual on the device (for phones and laptops). You would at least save the cost of producing and shipping the physical manuals. Even so if you really need it, you can usually find setup and service manuals for laptops on the vendor website. Phones, well... There's always the For Dummies books.
Yea this isn't about speeding, it about building a database of vehicles traveling certain routes repeatedly. The signs are just a ploy to disguise the cameras, and at the same time allow them to be mobile so their locations can't be mapped out in advance and avoided. They are looking for a way to hone in on drug couriers. Of course in the end that won't be all it's used for. But it's not like anything like this has ever had unintended consequences, right? RIGHT?
That would be a logical extension of this, but like I said, it's not settled law yet. There are conflicting rulings across the US and it hasn't made it the supreme court yet.
As for turning off the biometics, on iphones with a touch ID you can hit the side button 5 times or just hold it and then power off the phone. On the face ID models, you hold the side button and up-volume for 2 seconds until the turn off/emergency call screen shows up, or power off the phone (but you are already at the screen to do that anyway). This will force the phone to ask for your pin/password for the next unlock. On all models if you haven't unlocked in a certain time (I think it's 24 hours now) it requires the pin/password to unlock. I guess Apple could code it to use a facial expression but I can see that being a bit weird and lots of false positives. Best to just disable the phone as soon as you think you will make contact with law enforcement.
I don't see the difference myself. Either they should be allowed to force you to unlock the phone or they should not be allowed to force you to unlock the phone. The method of lock shouldn't matter.
The difference is one requires you to divulge knowledge, the others don't. Your face and fingerprints are not protected, as shown by the fact that police can use photos and fingerprints without your consent as evidence in court. The reasoning around passwords is that it would require the person to testify against themselves. It's a tenuous argument and hasn't been fully tested legally.
Can anyone explain why the stock is down 10% since the announcement?
Because buying implies spending money which implies increased debt and lower EPS. It doesn't mean the purchase is a bad decision, it's not unusual at all for the purchaser's stocks to dip on a buyout.
I used to love it back in the day. Traveling out in the middle of no where and being able to get a station I like to listen to was awesome. Today? Today I can stream or load my phone up with more music than I could listen to in a month. And the non-music content? I though having news stations would be nice. Holy crap I never realized watching them on TV how many commercials they run. On SiriusXM with their repetitive commercials it's painfully obvious their commercial load is over 30 minutes per hour.
It's probably a good thing they are buying a streaming service. I can't see the satellite service being profitable for much longer (if it even is now). They have to be bleeding subscribers.
No, you can use Outlook 2019 to access O365, it's only Office 2016 that will be unable to connect after 10/13/2020 (end of mainstream support for 2016). Outlook 2019 will work until Q4 2024.
The February announcement wasn't really clear on that, I'll admit. They made it sound like all perpetual license versions would be barred. Either way, it looks like they backed down on that on September 1, moving the date for 2016 to October 2023.
However they have not walked back the ESED date for 2019. It's still the same date (10/14/2025).
So when MS announced the extended support dates for 2019, they cut 3 years off of it and this version goes completely EOL the same day as 2016 on-prem does. In addition they will begin to restrict cloud services (like 365 hosted exchange) access to 365 versions soon.
Yea but according to the Verge tech Youtubers aren't journalists so reaching out to them would have been sinking too low for their journalistic integrity.
Yes, they got some, and they used it as an excuse to dismiss all criticism of the video. Even after pulling the video the host blamed everyone include "a bunch of angry nerds" and never admitted his complete fuckup of a build guide.
Yep, complete INSTAFAIL. Paid online completely destroyed Sony and Microsoft in the console market. Literally no one plays on their consoles anymore because of it.
The same Verge that posted, defended, and, eventually, took down this How to build a PC video while complaining that the critics were all just a bunch of racists? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jciJ39djxC4
Yea, pardon me if I really don't trust their judgement.
Slashdot Mirror
So playing devil's advocate here: They could have modified the design, burying the extra traces in interior layers. After approval and the initial production run would you go poking around the boards being shipped out that closely to notice some small extra vias that had been masked over? Would you pull a board apart to view the inner layers if there were no problems? We aren't talking about a rogue employee here but a state sponsored program so you would expect it to have the engineering capability to modify a board design in a way as to not interfere with it's normal functionality. If they compromised the PCB manufacturer and assembly partner they could slip it in any time they wanted to.
Now I'm not saying I'm buying this story. The very specific, very adamant denials from Amazon isn't the type of denial you would normally expect in a situation like this if they coudln't talk. But it is possible.
This test was a test of the cell providers equipment. No one forced anyone to turn their phones on during the test. You are also glossing over the fact that radio and TV were far more ubiquitous in the past before the internet and streaming. A president would have a captive audience of almost every household during US prime time when TV shows could get cancelled for having viewer numbers higher than the major networks get in total in a broadcast week these days. Nearly everyone in the nation would be watching TV or, before that, listening to the radio in the evenings. And stations have no discretion in airing these alerts. Heck for the past, what, 4 decades or so they didn't even have a choice, the system installed is automated.
No, and you don't either. Because they DID.
Really? Bush and Obama both used the national presidential alert system to send political messages? Are you sure it wasn't just the CIA beaming then directly to your brain from their satellite?
I'd like to know where you could get a wrench for $5
https://www.harborfreight.com/8-inch-steel-adjustable-wrench-67150.html
They already have that. There are three levels of alerts. Amber alert (for missing kids), Emergency Alerts, and Presidential Alerts (I think Android splits the emergency alerts into two sub categories). The Amber alerts and emergency alerts are targetable, while the presidential alerts are nation wide. You can also turn off the amber and emergency alerts, but not the presidential alerts (without hacked firmware).
You might want to start here
If the president is able to use this at his discretion, without supervision, we all need to prepare ourselves for a whole lot of pain. That orange buffoon won't be able to resist the urge to constantly inundate all cell phone users with an endless stream of what he deems "important information" but is really just a constant spouting of nonsense.
You realize this is a test of an existing system, right? The alerts have been around on radio and TV going back to before most of us were born and on cell phones since 2013.
This is basically for nuclear war or incoming asteroid end-of-the-world type of events that affect a large swath of the country and that may not propagate via news coverage fast enough for people to prepare. No president has ever used it. Even on 9/11 they chose not to use it as they felt news coverage was sufficient. It's been around for a long time with TV and radio. They added it to cell service back in 2013 (by law passed in 2006).
Remember when in 2006 the law was updated every was certain Bush would use to spam their cellphones with unblockable political spam? Then when cell companies started turning on the feature, how Obama was certain to use it for political spam?
/. Keep the dream alive!
Don't disappoint me
Someone has to write it, edit it, translate it, print it, pack it, ship it, unpack it, put it in the box that has to be enlarged to allow it to fit, ship it again, and for what? 90% of consumers won't even read it. It will go straight into a bin (a recycling bin if lucky, most likely just into landfill trash). So not including it is a cost savings and environmental savings. Think about it this way, in Q1 2018 there were 383,503,900 smartphones sold worldwide. If each one came with a 200 page manual, that's 38,350,390,000 pages (100 double side printed pages per manual) of paper essentially wasted. Now let's assume it's about A6 size paper. That's around 1.41g per sheet, so 54,074,050 kg of paper, not including covers. All for just 3 months worth of phones. Now extrapolate that out for a decade. And that's just for phones.
A better solution would be to include a manual on the device (for phones and laptops). You would at least save the cost of producing and shipping the physical manuals. Even so if you really need it, you can usually find setup and service manuals for laptops on the vendor website. Phones, well... There's always the For Dummies books.
Yea this isn't about speeding, it about building a database of vehicles traveling certain routes repeatedly. The signs are just a ploy to disguise the cameras, and at the same time allow them to be mobile so their locations can't be mapped out in advance and avoided. They are looking for a way to hone in on drug couriers. Of course in the end that won't be all it's used for. But it's not like anything like this has ever had unintended consequences, right? RIGHT?
That would be a logical extension of this, but like I said, it's not settled law yet. There are conflicting rulings across the US and it hasn't made it the supreme court yet.
As for turning off the biometics, on iphones with a touch ID you can hit the side button 5 times or just hold it and then power off the phone. On the face ID models, you hold the side button and up-volume for 2 seconds until the turn off/emergency call screen shows up, or power off the phone (but you are already at the screen to do that anyway). This will force the phone to ask for your pin/password for the next unlock. On all models if you haven't unlocked in a certain time (I think it's 24 hours now) it requires the pin/password to unlock. I guess Apple could code it to use a facial expression but I can see that being a bit weird and lots of false positives. Best to just disable the phone as soon as you think you will make contact with law enforcement.
I'd argue that, from a purely effort-based point of view, the $5 wrench is indeed easier.
I don't see the difference myself. Either they should be allowed to force you to unlock the phone or they should not be allowed to force you to unlock the phone. The method of lock shouldn't matter.
The difference is one requires you to divulge knowledge, the others don't. Your face and fingerprints are not protected, as shown by the fact that police can use photos and fingerprints without your consent as evidence in court. The reasoning around passwords is that it would require the person to testify against themselves. It's a tenuous argument and hasn't been fully tested legally.
They we shouldn't store modern physics above Antarctica! Who's bright idea was it to put it there in the first place?
Can anyone explain why the stock is down 10% since the announcement?
Because buying implies spending money which implies increased debt and lower EPS. It doesn't mean the purchase is a bad decision, it's not unusual at all for the purchaser's stocks to dip on a buyout.
I used to love it back in the day. Traveling out in the middle of no where and being able to get a station I like to listen to was awesome. Today? Today I can stream or load my phone up with more music than I could listen to in a month. And the non-music content? I though having news stations would be nice. Holy crap I never realized watching them on TV how many commercials they run. On SiriusXM with their repetitive commercials it's painfully obvious their commercial load is over 30 minutes per hour.
It's probably a good thing they are buying a streaming service. I can't see the satellite service being profitable for much longer (if it even is now). They have to be bleeding subscribers.
No, you can use Outlook 2019 to access O365, it's only Office 2016 that will be unable to connect after 10/13/2020 (end of mainstream support for 2016). Outlook 2019 will work until Q4 2024.
The February announcement wasn't really clear on that, I'll admit. They made it sound like all perpetual license versions would be barred. Either way, it looks like they backed down on that on September 1, moving the date for 2016 to October 2023.
However they have not walked back the ESED date for 2019. It's still the same date (10/14/2025).
So when MS announced the extended support dates for 2019, they cut 3 years off of it and this version goes completely EOL the same day as 2016 on-prem does. In addition they will begin to restrict cloud services (like 365 hosted exchange) access to 365 versions soon.
Yea but according to the Verge tech Youtubers aren't journalists so reaching out to them would have been sinking too low for their journalistic integrity.
Newegg hasn't been the same since they got bought out a couple years ago. Shame really.
Yes, they got some, and they used it as an excuse to dismiss all criticism of the video. Even after pulling the video the host blamed everyone include "a bunch of angry nerds" and never admitted his complete fuckup of a build guide.
Yep, complete INSTAFAIL. Paid online completely destroyed Sony and Microsoft in the console market. Literally no one plays on their consoles anymore because of it.
The same Verge that posted, defended, and, eventually, took down this How to build a PC video while complaining that the critics were all just a bunch of racists? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jciJ39djxC4
Yea, pardon me if I really don't trust their judgement.
A well paid workforce is more resistant to bribery. Not impervious, of course, but a least somewhat resistant.
So, you think we need to pay our politicians MORE MONEY?