ATSC 3.0 will be delivered over-the-air, just like 1.0. The difference is the signal is based on "internet protocol" for reasons that make it easy for any device (tablet, phone) to receive the signals.
Also, ATSC 3.0 is designed for two-way communication. What is interesting is how they plan on doing this.
Turns out there may be plans to have what is called a "Dedicated Return Channel" (DRC), which is a separate frequency that the TV uses to transmit data to the broadcast station. DRC can be read about here: https://www.atsc.org/candidate...
If this turns out to be true, it's essentially a "free" over-the-air quasi internet connection controlled and limited by the broadcast station. This is a pretty significant detail.
I remember one day buying a computer from Best Buy and while I was paying for it the employee proceeded to open the brand new box saying he was about to install some anti-virus software. I don't know if it was Kaspersky, but I said something along the lines of "Hell no" and put an end to that.
So nowadays antivirus software has moved on from not doing anything useful to spying on you while not doing anything useful.
After attempting to read through the 100 million lines of article I gave up around the point where they started talking about writing flowcharts to represent code. But they did mention this was connected to a Kickstarter project called Light Table (which apparently somehow inspired Apple's Swift??). So I watched the kickstarter video ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?... ) and the kickstarter page ( https://www.kickstarter.com/pr... ) and I still don't have a clue what it is, what is new about it, or how it makes programming unnecessary. Are we supposed to be spending writing tools that write programs instead of writing programs? Aren't we already doing that?
Maybe someone with an entire day of their time can read the article and decipher what it is they are talking about.
It sounds to me more like they are making code harder than it actually is.
Thanks for the detailed response! I am aware the point of an ad is to route the traffic differently in the name of the Benjamins. I used the word "directly" to describe the search result and not the ad, though who really knows. In the end, I'm not thinking much of any of this in practice. Just what is the quickest way to get to the web site I'm thinking about. Honestly, I trust google enough to believe that either click wouldn't end in me buying bitcoins to pay the Russians to recover my stash of golden retriever puppy pics that got held in ransom.
When you search for a company or website on google there is an advertisement for it right above the search result taking you directly to the web site you were looking for. I always click on the search result because clicking on an ad is just weird to me, even though they both likely take me to the same spot. But what is the point of buying an ad like this if they are already trying to get to your site in the first place? Why convince someone to do something they are already doing? Are they afraid another company is going to buy the search ad and someone is going to randomly click on another website instead of the one they were specifically looking for?
I'd agree with you when it comes to Sling TV. It's just like a mini cable company without responsibility to maintain any delivery infrastructure. The website seems deliberately confusing (like cable companies). It's not immediately clear what you're getting and what it costs. The best I can decipher, it first seems that it's $45/month for most of the channels (i guess). Then you keep scrolling down and it's going on about "extras" for $5 but never explains what the hell that even means or what channels you actually get. Takes me back to the days I had cable TV. Not saying there aren't advantages (such as billing). But if it looks and quacks like a duck, it's a duck.
It's in Apple's best interest to regulate the ads because in the end if usability suffers or if privacy issues arise it reflects badly on their product. Same thing with Google. Intrusive ads eventually discourage people from going on the internet or using their devices. Things neither company wants.
I remember going through an old backpack and finding a shuffle and wondering why I hadn't used it in years. Then I remember, iTunes. And then I remember that iTunes is the main reason I don't buy any apple product.
I'm shocked so many slashdotters don't understand twitter. It's not that complicated. You didn't like twitter because your feed sucks. For other people, it's the fastest source of news and current information. For anyone in the public eye, it's the fastest most efficient way to communicate a message. It's perceived and used differently than other social media networks which is why it still has 328 million subscribers.
Netflix did a similar thing to their roku app, and it's horrible. What do these companies gain by doing this? The user experience is no different than an intrusive add. And if companies start paying to get their videos to autoplay, then it IS an add.
Is it really worth the effort and cost in archiving? To be honest, I don't see the value or the point other than for that feel good feeling of archiving something obscure for the future in the off chance that someone may find it and watch it. There's a lot of old content that just needs to die and be forgotten. If it's worth remembering, someone already digitized it.
Just because it is archived doesn't mean it won't be forgotten. And just because it is not archived doesn't mean it will never hold any significance in the entire future of the planet. Antiques aren't worth remembering until someone in the future decides it's worth remembering.
But the main point is that it's not like we're running out of harddrive space. What is the big deal? Why wouldn't we archive our stuff?
Seems many here don't quite understand the sheer volume of content released on VHS all the way into the 2000s. Not just home videos, but endless amounts of direct to video content, films, etc... Tons of which are not available on any other medium. Some of this got crowd "archived" just due to torrent sites and Youtube, but some VHS content hasn't been digitized to this day may be lost forever if not done soon.
However, the idea of tapes not lasting past 15 to 20 years I think is incorrect. It may depend more on the quality and conditions they were kept but I've had tapes well over 20+ years that played perfectly. There are still tons of old tapes from 80s and 90s you can purchase off Amazon or eBay which all play fine. Tapes in clamshell cases seem to be in the best shape leading me to believe not exposing the tape to the elements is the most important factor.
You say face to face is better, but don't say why. You say working from home is bad for productivity, but don't explain why. Anti work from home people consistently never seem to explain their point. Maybe face to face is only "good" for you, and bad for everyone else.
I like Opera because it's basically Chrome without google's addon restrictions. And it's clearly faster than Firefox on Linux. Or at least the last few times I checked.
"It starts with an email from a known contact, which says that the person has shared a Google Doc with you. You’re invited to click the link to open, which redirects you to a legitimate Google sign-in page. You’re prompted to select one of your Google accounts (remember: this is all using Google’s normal sign-in system), and then authorize a legit-looking app called “Google Docs” to manage your emails."
"That’s how the scam works: the app called “Google Docs,” which requests permission to read, send and delete emails, isn’t really a Google app. Rather, it’s an app controlled by the hackers. It seems that once it has permission to manage your email, it secretly sends out a bunch of emails to all your contacts, with the same phishing link."
"The company, parent company of NBCUniversal, is hoping the new service will lock in existing customers as well as attract new ones,"
Close, but this should read "The company, parent company of NBCUniversal, is hoping the new service will lock in existing customers as well as trap new ones,"
I thought it was fine, but there were a couple things I hated. The forced grouping of terminal windows in the task bar which basically breaks ALT-TAB, and breaking the ability to map ALT+F10 shortcut to maximize window. In the end, I doubt I'd enjoy using it for extended periods of time.
Stores are taxing gift cards now so maybe this is a way around that. And by the way, does anyone actually know why they tax gift cards in the first place? You pay double the tax for no reason.
Slashdot Mirror
I have an Amazon Moto G with lock-screen ads. They don' t bother me at all. It's probably the least annoying way to get an ad.
ATSC 3.0 will be delivered over-the-air, just like 1.0. The difference is the signal is based on "internet protocol" for reasons that make it easy for any device (tablet, phone) to receive the signals. Also, ATSC 3.0 is designed for two-way communication. What is interesting is how they plan on doing this. Turns out there may be plans to have what is called a "Dedicated Return Channel" (DRC), which is a separate frequency that the TV uses to transmit data to the broadcast station. DRC can be read about here: https://www.atsc.org/candidate... If this turns out to be true, it's essentially a "free" over-the-air quasi internet connection controlled and limited by the broadcast station. This is a pretty significant detail.
I remember one day buying a computer from Best Buy and while I was paying for it the employee proceeded to open the brand new box saying he was about to install some anti-virus software. I don't know if it was Kaspersky, but I said something along the lines of "Hell no" and put an end to that.
So nowadays antivirus software has moved on from not doing anything useful to spying on you while not doing anything useful.
After attempting to read through the 100 million lines of article I gave up around the point where they started talking about writing flowcharts to represent code. But they did mention this was connected to a Kickstarter project called Light Table (which apparently somehow inspired Apple's Swift??). So I watched the kickstarter video ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?... ) and the kickstarter page ( https://www.kickstarter.com/pr... ) and I still don't have a clue what it is, what is new about it, or how it makes programming unnecessary. Are we supposed to be spending writing tools that write programs instead of writing programs? Aren't we already doing that?
Maybe someone with an entire day of their time can read the article and decipher what it is they are talking about.
It sounds to me more like they are making code harder than it actually is.
Thanks for the detailed response! I am aware the point of an ad is to route the traffic differently in the name of the Benjamins. I used the word "directly" to describe the search result and not the ad, though who really knows. In the end, I'm not thinking much of any of this in practice. Just what is the quickest way to get to the web site I'm thinking about. Honestly, I trust google enough to believe that either click wouldn't end in me buying bitcoins to pay the Russians to recover my stash of golden retriever puppy pics that got held in ransom.
But it has a freaking kick stand!
When you search for a company or website on google there is an advertisement for it right above the search result taking you directly to the web site you were looking for. I always click on the search result because clicking on an ad is just weird to me, even though they both likely take me to the same spot. But what is the point of buying an ad like this if they are already trying to get to your site in the first place? Why convince someone to do something they are already doing? Are they afraid another company is going to buy the search ad and someone is going to randomly click on another website instead of the one they were specifically looking for?
I'd agree with you when it comes to Sling TV. It's just like a mini cable company without responsibility to maintain any delivery infrastructure. The website seems deliberately confusing (like cable companies). It's not immediately clear what you're getting and what it costs. The best I can decipher, it first seems that it's $45/month for most of the channels (i guess). Then you keep scrolling down and it's going on about "extras" for $5 but never explains what the hell that even means or what channels you actually get. Takes me back to the days I had cable TV. Not saying there aren't advantages (such as billing). But if it looks and quacks like a duck, it's a duck.
It's in Apple's best interest to regulate the ads because in the end if usability suffers or if privacy issues arise it reflects badly on their product. Same thing with Google. Intrusive ads eventually discourage people from going on the internet or using their devices. Things neither company wants.
Maybe a point could be made here, but ...
Humberto 2007
Gustav 2008
Dolly 2008
Ike 2008
Irene 2011
Sandy 2012
Author 2014
Matthew 2016
Is there anything that doesn't explode?
I remember going through an old backpack and finding a shuffle and wondering why I hadn't used it in years. Then I remember, iTunes. And then I remember that iTunes is the main reason I don't buy any apple product.
I'm shocked so many slashdotters don't understand twitter. It's not that complicated. You didn't like twitter because your feed sucks. For other people, it's the fastest source of news and current information. For anyone in the public eye, it's the fastest most efficient way to communicate a message. It's perceived and used differently than other social media networks which is why it still has 328 million subscribers.
Twitter isn't about tweets from family or friends. It's a news feed/live event forum.
Netflix did a similar thing to their roku app, and it's horrible. What do these companies gain by doing this? The user experience is no different than an intrusive add. And if companies start paying to get their videos to autoplay, then it IS an add.
It sounds like they are saying they forgot to properly fake the requirement that NTFS volumes must be used.
Is it really worth the effort and cost in archiving? To be honest, I don't see the value or the point other than for that feel good feeling of archiving something obscure for the future in the off chance that someone may find it and watch it. There's a lot of old content that just needs to die and be forgotten. If it's worth remembering, someone already digitized it.
Just because it is archived doesn't mean it won't be forgotten. And just because it is not archived doesn't mean it will never hold any significance in the entire future of the planet. Antiques aren't worth remembering until someone in the future decides it's worth remembering. But the main point is that it's not like we're running out of harddrive space. What is the big deal? Why wouldn't we archive our stuff?
Seems many here don't quite understand the sheer volume of content released on VHS all the way into the 2000s. Not just home videos, but endless amounts of direct to video content, films, etc... Tons of which are not available on any other medium. Some of this got crowd "archived" just due to torrent sites and Youtube, but some VHS content hasn't been digitized to this day may be lost forever if not done soon.
However, the idea of tapes not lasting past 15 to 20 years I think is incorrect. It may depend more on the quality and conditions they were kept but I've had tapes well over 20+ years that played perfectly. There are still tons of old tapes from 80s and 90s you can purchase off Amazon or eBay which all play fine. Tapes in clamshell cases seem to be in the best shape leading me to believe not exposing the tape to the elements is the most important factor.
You say face to face is better, but don't say why. You say working from home is bad for productivity, but don't explain why. Anti work from home people consistently never seem to explain their point. Maybe face to face is only "good" for you, and bad for everyone else.
I like Opera because it's basically Chrome without google's addon restrictions. And it's clearly faster than Firefox on Linux. Or at least the last few times I checked.
You mean a fix as in it is no longer detected?
Also with a gif of the attack.
http://bgr.com/2017/05/03/goog...
"It starts with an email from a known contact, which says that the person has shared a Google Doc with you. You’re invited to click the link to open, which redirects you to a legitimate Google sign-in page. You’re prompted to select one of your Google accounts (remember: this is all using Google’s normal sign-in system), and then authorize a legit-looking app called “Google Docs” to manage your emails."
"That’s how the scam works: the app called “Google Docs,” which requests permission to read, send and delete emails, isn’t really a Google app. Rather, it’s an app controlled by the hackers. It seems that once it has permission to manage your email, it secretly sends out a bunch of emails to all your contacts, with the same phishing link."
"The company, parent company of NBCUniversal, is hoping the new service will lock in existing customers as well as attract new ones,"
Close, but this should read "The company, parent company of NBCUniversal, is hoping the new service will lock in existing customers as well as trap new ones,"
I thought it was fine, but there were a couple things I hated. The forced grouping of terminal windows in the task bar which basically breaks ALT-TAB, and breaking the ability to map ALT+F10 shortcut to maximize window. In the end, I doubt I'd enjoy using it for extended periods of time.
Stores are taxing gift cards now so maybe this is a way around that. And by the way, does anyone actually know why they tax gift cards in the first place? You pay double the tax for no reason.