Apathy is already a contagion that has spread. No one care how much data google and facebook have on them. And they shrug shoulders when it falls into hands of unknown shadowy theives. And they even feel to unmotivated to quit google or facebook when that happens.
Were all waiting for the shoe to drop and it never does. But we do see signs of things like voter manipulation or lots of hard to quantify privacy intrusions. Nothing you can really put a finger on. To hard to investigate.
Hey that sounds like the perfect rationale for regulation of an industry by a central watchdog.
First you are right, conspicuous consumption like a Ferrari is a status symbol of the wealthy. The Iphone can be that too of course but that would not really account for it's ubiquity. Instead the greater your income the more you are aware that time/money substitutions. The greater you pay rate the more it makes sense to Rather than use your own time to do something you purchase a product that does it. With iphones there's no big surprises and they work well and if they don't apple has great service centers and there's even lots of other people who can service it too, parts are widely available, and whatever problem you have is probably been seen before since there's a wide userbase. So it's a wise choice if you prefer no hassles in your life.
Consider that almost nothing else in your life gets handles 50 times a day or engages your attention in so many ways. a 700 phone is $1 per day over 2 years . $1 per day for a hassle free phone ithat uses a lot of your time is a no-brainier. Besides that you probably have a $90 a month cell bill which means the cost of the phone is only 25% of the cost of cellular communications for you, so not a big factor. Incrementally, it's even less since you probably were going to get at least $350 phone.
One the otherhand if you earn minimum wage, you probably don't have that big cell bill, and if you have a cell it's going to be a cheap one.
So iphones make sense not as a status symbol (is it a status symbol if everyone around you also has one?) but as the right tool for the lifestyle of the upper income brackets. thus same correlation but different logical path
We used to think the first uses of Time Travel would be to go back and kill Hitler's grandma or something but now I think we see that it's to go back and post hitsongs to youtube under your own username. Likewise people will write articles about articles that will be written in the future.
So now we have the first evidence of time travel.
Time travel will be used to play pranks on people in the past. For example, in the future we will discover that the late steven hawking was really a time traveler. How do we know this, well recall he threw a party for time travelers and guess who was the only person who showed up? Steven Hawking.
The "article" is vacuous. Shorter than even a typical USA today article. Have attention spans reached that low now in the age of smart phones? No article longer than the mean time between twitter update beeps to nudge your attention away.
Anyhow the claim of the article is because foreign based internet systems do poorly in the chinese market that Chinese people buy home domestic systems. Presumably the reverse it true. I'm not tempeted to buy a TenCent or baidu based smart speaker for my home in the USA.
To say this means Amazon is collapsing because they don't share in a particular market says nothing about how their market share of their target market is doing. It's like saying all other languages besides cantonese and mandarin are failing because more people speak those two. They have the largest and fastest growing market share of deployed languages.
So if the reason they are downranked is because they belong to some class, can I improve my search for these sites by putting the name of that class in the key word search.
If so then downranking should also result in concentration making an appropriately worded search actually produce better results.
Perhaps they could even make it an exclusive category
Face book is freaking enormous. What the hell do all these people do if not security design and security inspection? Pass a law making them liable. Screw it if it puts them out of bussiness.
Alexa actually knows more about you than your doctor. She sees how you live, your sleep cycles, food you order, the vocabulary you use, and how much excersize you get. So the idea she could also notice changes and diagnose things isn't crazy. Just add something like the apple watch to monitor pulse, blood oxygen, temperature, perspiration, and heart rythms. And a scales.
THis really isn't that complicated. It's not that words have two meaning but there are different cases. In many languages there is a dative suffix for words taking a supporting roll. I threw the ball out the window. case endings can cleanly separate subject (I), direct object (ball) and participating clause object (window). IN english we lack a dative suffix on most words. So we have helper words and word orders to tell us which are the dative.
In the case of all the examples give, "with" here is just saying the object named participated. "fork, meatball, Buddy". It doesn't say how it participated. That is completely not the content of the sentence.
the point I'm making is that the sentence scans identically. It's not ambiguous. It's exact. It's entirely possible that I ground up my buddy to make meatballs out of him and that I actually like eating small forks. That information is not intended to be present. It would come from external context. The senstence is not ambiguous.
If it's part of the cost it's part of the cost. They advertise costs that are bfore Fees. People get this when it's taxes and 911 fees but fees that GO to ATT are B.S. deception.
I did not say it was good. I'm saying as an electrical engineer it really is a breakthrough in concept that have gone unaddressed. It's a whole new direction of physical acoustic principles that are now available. Will it be a success? I certainly haven't bought one!
When they announced the homepod (then delayed it) I though, "oh brother, they are so far behind in the personal blue tooth speaker market".
Boy was I wrong. Homepod is the biggest advance in audio reproduction technology is 50 years.
Seriously, all other consumer grade speakers are stereos that don't properly account for room geometry, the fact that sound disperses differently depending on frequency, nor do they have compensation of non-linear effect.
uop until the homepod every bit of effort was in making speakers that were more phase linear and could maintain that across large amplidude difference and frequency mixes. that is they were pefecting the transducers. But that does nothing to actually reproduce the holographic nature of a real sound field. emitting sound from 2 points can never ever reproduce the 3-sound field. It fails to account for the different dispersion of different frequencies. On top of that room reflections and absorptions modulate the sound field in frequency dependent ways that are un acounted for.
The homepood is far from done but it's self monitoring phased array can accounbt for this, and it's computational processing can dynamically adjust to non-linearitys and produce soundfields more structured than a steropair can-- all from a single can.
it will only get better but this is the watershed moment when audio replication technology for consumers changed.
I have no idea what they are planning. They already have Beats headphones so why they want to re-invent that makes no sense. On the otherhand perhaps they are going to introduce directional sound fields into headphones (they wont be the first, but chances are their audio processing technology will be more sophisticated).
I would bet they will make them so that when you tilt your head or face different directions the sound field changes so that it's like you are turning in a real sound field. Great for video games. Machine gun fire would stay in the right spatial position no matter which way you turn. You could tell the difference between a helicopter flying over in front of you or behind you.
The only reason they disabled it was because it was a case where the processor defect was known before they activated it. How many other processor or OS defects do we now know about? If it had been activated and then we discovered the security issues the platform had would they deactivate it later and break all of the web services already deployed?
The idea of the Browser as the Desktop is a good one. While there's the obvious inefficiency of an added layer, it seems to be better than other ways of remote application serving. In theory.
The problem is that for peak efficeincy all of the past solutions have pierced the veil of the browser and drilled down close to the OS metal.
ActiveX, Flash, Java all are pretty much dead because they have proven that security can't be achieved ever. It's just a momentary state before someone discovers the next security hole.
Someone could say, well were smarter now so we'll design a model in which security is the first class citizen. Well call in WebASM.
Now we have proof that WebASM has a security hole.
The comeback argument is "hey, that's not a security hole in WebASM, it's a security hole in the processor that WebASM runs on." But if you think about it, that's true of every other security hole. Every other security hole, say java, generally got privledge escalation by using the OS to overwrite some critical config, or accessing files or memory that should not have been accessible had the OS been configured to keep it sandboxed.
So this proves that WebASM is just another log on the ActiveX, Flash, Java fire of failed acceleration technologies for remote application services.
I do note that the key problem does seem to come out of the "acceleration" part of it. While javascript and Html5 have their issues, it seems like most of those issues happen at the browser containment layer not at the OS/metal layer. Thus I speculate the security model has much more chance of working for these than the accelerated ones that bypass the browser layer.
But that's just the thing. All this "well this time we'll design it to be secure" always fails because no one, not me or not you, really can be sure of the things were saying. This is why I'm pointing to history rather than trying to prove it can't be done by some logical argument. I'm talking out my ass but at least I have history on my side.
My basic feeling on security is that until people actually start using the sandboxes the dtrace OS designers have built into OSX and Linux, that everything else is just bunch of fingers in the dike. I simply don't understand why these sandboxes see such little use. Once they are used then adding on more layers in the security model on top of that onion layer makes more sense to me.
What they are saying is not that gaming leads to addiction but rather some addicable people make gaming their addiction.
This is unquestionably true.
You can say the same thing about cleaning your ears with a Q-tip or sucking on a lollypop.
People who use drugs are not neccessarily addicts. People who abuse drugs often are addicts.
And so we need a category to describe, Q-tip fixation, drug addiction, and gaming addiction.
Unwanted compulsive behaviour is also different than compulsive behaviour. If it's unwanted but not under control it is a problem and so they classify it as such.
Well I agree. But I think people do think these current compliance systems are failing to alert security prior to school shootings. So there may be an unsolved problem they do address. But you are right that in general "think of the children" is the resort of people looking for a justification for some intrusion into our lives. And of course there is a the slippery slope. If it's okay there then it creates incentives for companies to push to use it elsewhere.
Putting camera's up in public makes no sense unless you are planning to spy on and inventory people's comings and goings. People like to be semi-anonymous in their outings.
But in a school, if you are supposed to be there, then your identity is known exactly and for good reasons. You are a Student or a parent or teacher or staff.
SO there's no anonymity issue.
And since the school is responsible for keep track of students (attendance sheets, hall passes, fences are all about limiting people's whereabouts and egress.)
It makes total sense for them to have both cameras and face recognition.
On the otherhand the one thing I don't like is the feeling I'm being watched and not trusted. So I also dont really like kids feeling they are being watched all the time by cameras.
But of all places to put cameras, schools do make sense.
We should seize on this analogy. The problem isnt that facebook has your data, it is that you don't have anything that belongs to facebook to trade back for it. When you breakup IRL you also have to return each other's shit stored at your respective apartments. Meet in the ihop parking lot and move her hairbrush, potpouri, photos of her, and Duran Duran CDs to her trunk, and take back your shirts, varsity jacket, and your dog's extra bowl/mat/food. But she conveniently forgets to return your Starbucks coffee mugs. That's like Facebook hanging onto some of your data but at least you get most of it away from her.
Slashdot Mirror
What happens if the Rust compiler decides to sell all your private information? Or at least some linked in library does.
Apathy is already a contagion that has spread. No one care how much data google and facebook have on them. And they shrug shoulders when it falls into hands of unknown shadowy theives. And they even feel to unmotivated to quit google or facebook when that happens.
Were all waiting for the shoe to drop and it never does. But we do see signs of things like voter manipulation or lots of hard to quantify privacy intrusions. Nothing you can really put a finger on. To hard to investigate.
Hey that sounds like the perfect rationale for regulation of an industry by a central watchdog.
installing update. Windows 10 will now reboot.......... Licence manager error, please call Tech support during bussiness hours. Thank you.
First you are right, conspicuous consumption like a Ferrari is a status symbol of the wealthy. The Iphone can be that too of course but that would not really account for it's ubiquity. Instead the greater your income the more you are aware that time/money substitutions. The greater you pay rate the more it makes sense to Rather than use your own time to do something you purchase a product that does it. With iphones there's no big surprises and they work well and if they don't apple has great service centers and there's even lots of other people who can service it too, parts are widely available, and whatever problem you have is probably been seen before since there's a wide userbase. So it's a wise choice if you prefer no hassles in your life.
Consider that almost nothing else in your life gets handles 50 times a day or engages your attention in so many ways. a 700 phone is $1 per day over 2 years . $1 per day for a hassle free phone ithat uses a lot of your time is a no-brainier. Besides that you probably have a $90 a month cell bill which means the cost of the phone is only 25% of the cost of cellular communications for you, so not a big factor. Incrementally, it's even less since you probably were going to get at least $350 phone.
One the otherhand if you earn minimum wage, you probably don't have that big cell bill, and if you have a cell it's going to be a cheap one.
So iphones make sense not as a status symbol (is it a status symbol if everyone around you also has one?) but as the right tool for the lifestyle of the upper income brackets.
thus same correlation but different logical path
We used to think the first uses of Time Travel would be to go back and kill Hitler's grandma or something but now I think we see that it's to go back and post hitsongs to youtube under your own username. Likewise people will write articles about articles that will be written in the future.
So now we have the first evidence of time travel.
Time travel will be used to play pranks on people in the past. For example, in the future we will discover that the late steven hawking was really a time traveler. How do we know this, well recall he threw a party for time travelers and guess who was the only person who showed up? Steven Hawking.
message posted from my iphoneMLXVII
this is funny
The "article" is vacuous. Shorter than even a typical USA today article. Have attention spans reached that low now in the age of smart phones? No article longer than the mean time between twitter update beeps to nudge your attention away.
Anyhow the claim of the article is because foreign based internet systems do poorly in the chinese market that Chinese people buy home domestic systems.
Presumably the reverse it true. I'm not tempeted to buy a TenCent or baidu based smart speaker for my home in the USA.
To say this means Amazon is collapsing because they don't share in a particular market says nothing about how their market share of their target market is doing. It's like saying all other languages besides cantonese and mandarin are failing because more people speak those two. They have the largest and fastest growing market share of deployed languages.
Seems like it could become a thing for there to be contests to trigger a false positive.
So if the reason they are downranked is because they belong to some class, can I improve my search for these sites by putting the name of that class in the key word search.
If so then downranking should also result in concentration making an appropriately worded search actually produce better results.
Perhaps they could even make it an exclusive category
Pirate: Game of Thrones
Face book is freaking enormous. What the hell do all these people do if not security design and security inspection? Pass a law making them liable. Screw it if it puts them out of bussiness.
Alexa actually knows more about you than your doctor. She sees how you live, your sleep cycles, food you order, the vocabulary you use, and how much excersize you get. So the idea she could also notice changes and diagnose things isn't crazy. Just add something like the apple watch to monitor pulse, blood oxygen, temperature, perspiration, and heart rythms. And a scales.
Doh! you are right. Been too long for me since Latin class.
THis really isn't that complicated. It's not that words have two meaning but there are different cases. In many languages there is a dative suffix for words taking a supporting roll. I threw the ball out the window. case endings can cleanly separate subject (I), direct object (ball) and participating clause object (window). IN english we lack a dative suffix on most words. So we have helper words and word orders to tell us which are the dative.
In the case of all the examples give, "with" here is just saying the object named participated. "fork, meatball, Buddy". It doesn't say how it participated. That is completely not the content of the sentence.
the point I'm making is that the sentence scans identically. It's not ambiguous. It's exact. It's entirely possible that I ground up my buddy to make meatballs out of him and that I actually like eating small forks. That information is not intended to be present. It would come from external context. The senstence is not ambiguous.
If it's part of the cost it's part of the cost. They advertise costs that are bfore Fees. People get this when it's taxes and 911 fees but fees that GO to ATT are B.S. deception.
why not advertise free service*
* plus $64/mo content delivery fee.
Single microphone equalization is not remotely the same thing as spatial sound shaping.
I did not say it was good. I'm saying as an electrical engineer it really is a breakthrough in concept that have gone unaddressed. It's a whole new direction of physical acoustic principles that are now available. Will it be a success? I certainly haven't bought one!
When they announced the homepod (then delayed it) I though, "oh brother, they are so far behind in the personal blue tooth speaker market".
Boy was I wrong. Homepod is the biggest advance in audio reproduction technology is 50 years.
Seriously, all other consumer grade speakers are stereos that don't properly account for room geometry, the fact that sound disperses differently depending on frequency, nor do they have compensation of non-linear effect.
uop until the homepod every bit of effort was in making speakers that were more phase linear and could maintain that across large amplidude difference and frequency mixes. that is they were pefecting the transducers. But that does nothing to actually reproduce the holographic nature of a real sound field. emitting sound from 2 points can never ever reproduce the 3-sound field. It fails to account for the different dispersion of different frequencies. On top of that room reflections and absorptions modulate the sound field in frequency dependent ways that are un acounted for.
The homepood is far from done but it's self monitoring phased array can accounbt for this, and it's computational processing can dynamically adjust to non-linearitys and produce soundfields more structured than a steropair can-- all from a single can.
it will only get better but this is the watershed moment when audio replication technology for consumers changed.
I have no idea what they are planning. They already have Beats headphones so why they want to re-invent that makes no sense. On the otherhand perhaps they are going to introduce directional sound fields into headphones (they wont be the first, but chances are their audio processing technology will be more sophisticated).
I would bet they will make them so that when you tilt your head or face different directions the sound field changes so that it's like you are turning in a real sound field. Great for video games. Machine gun fire would stay in the right spatial position no matter which way you turn. You could tell the difference between a helicopter flying over in front of you or behind you.
The only reason they disabled it was because it was a case where the processor defect was known before they activated it. How many other processor or OS defects do we now know about? If it had been activated and then we discovered the security issues the platform had would they deactivate it later and break all of the web services already deployed?
your answer is weak in this regard.
The idea of the Browser as the Desktop is a good one. While there's the obvious inefficiency of an added layer, it seems to be better than other ways of remote application serving. In theory.
The problem is that for peak efficeincy all of the past solutions have pierced the veil of the browser and drilled down close to the OS metal.
ActiveX, Flash, Java all are pretty much dead because they have proven that security can't be achieved ever. It's just a momentary state before someone discovers the next security hole.
Someone could say, well were smarter now so we'll design a model in which security is the first class citizen. Well call in WebASM.
Now we have proof that WebASM has a security hole.
The comeback argument is "hey, that's not a security hole in WebASM, it's a security hole in the processor that WebASM runs on." But if you think about it, that's true of every other security hole. Every other security hole, say java, generally got privledge escalation by using the OS to overwrite some critical config, or accessing files or memory that should not have been accessible had the OS been configured to keep it sandboxed.
So this proves that WebASM is just another log on the ActiveX, Flash, Java fire of failed acceleration technologies for remote application services.
I do note that the key problem does seem to come out of the "acceleration" part of it. While javascript and Html5 have their issues, it seems like most of those issues happen at the browser containment layer not at the OS/metal layer. Thus I speculate the security model has much more chance of working for these than the accelerated ones that bypass the browser layer.
But that's just the thing. All this "well this time we'll design it to be secure" always fails because no one, not me or not you, really can be sure of the things were saying. This is why I'm pointing to history rather than trying to prove it can't be done by some logical argument. I'm talking out my ass but at least I have history on my side.
My basic feeling on security is that until people actually start using the sandboxes the dtrace OS designers have built into OSX and Linux, that everything else is just bunch of fingers in the dike. I simply don't understand why these sandboxes see such little use. Once they are used then adding on more layers in the security model on top of that onion layer makes more sense to me.
What they are saying is not that gaming leads to addiction but rather some addicable people make gaming their addiction.
This is unquestionably true.
You can say the same thing about cleaning your ears with a Q-tip or sucking on a lollypop.
People who use drugs are not neccessarily addicts. People who abuse drugs often are addicts.
And so we need a category to describe, Q-tip fixation, drug addiction, and gaming addiction.
Unwanted compulsive behaviour is also different than compulsive behaviour. If it's unwanted but not under control it is a problem and so they classify it as such.
okay everybody can calm down now.
The more a compression algorithm can compress one file, there has to be another file that it actually makes larger. Entropy is a bitch.
Well I agree. But I think people do think these current compliance systems are failing to alert security prior to school shootings. So there may be an unsolved problem they do address. But you are right that in general "think of the children" is the resort of people looking for a justification for some intrusion into our lives. And of course there is a the slippery slope. If it's okay there then it creates incentives for companies to push to use it elsewhere.
Putting camera's up in public makes no sense unless you are planning to spy on and inventory people's comings and goings. People like to be semi-anonymous in their outings.
But in a school, if you are supposed to be there, then your identity is known exactly and for good reasons. You are a Student or a parent or teacher or staff.
SO there's no anonymity issue.
And since the school is responsible for keep track of students (attendance sheets, hall passes, fences are all about limiting people's whereabouts and egress.)
It makes total sense for them to have both cameras and face recognition.
On the otherhand the one thing I don't like is the feeling I'm being watched and not trusted. So I also dont really like kids feeling they are being watched all the time by cameras.
But of all places to put cameras, schools do make sense.
We should seize on this analogy. The problem isnt that facebook has your data, it is that you don't have anything that belongs to facebook to trade back for it. When you breakup IRL you also have to return each other's shit stored at your respective apartments. Meet in the ihop parking lot and move her hairbrush, potpouri, photos of her, and Duran Duran CDs to her trunk, and take back your shirts, varsity jacket, and your dog's extra bowl/mat/food. But she conveniently forgets to return your Starbucks coffee mugs. That's like Facebook hanging onto some of your data but at least you get most of it away from her.
how does one tell the difference between Ego and Smug?
Ego drives the Audi and Smug drives the Prius
list your own below....