Virtual hosting means that URLs based on IP numbers cannot access many web pages. You can work around the issue by adding entries your you local hosts file. For example, if x.com and y.com are both hosted at 1.2.3.4, then http://1.2.3.4/ can only access at most one of those two domains. Often the pages you get with the numeric address will be different from any of the DNS-based URLs, or brokenness will ensue, like redirect loops.
I'm surprised this kind of thing hasn't been considered before; it has a huge potential to damage the viability of automated vehicles. This report is just about people being annoyed but you're going to have criminals targeting unmanned vehicles to steal them and/or their cargo. Automated vehicles will be seen as softer targets when they have no people aboard. I expect driverless taxis to suffer much the same issues that things like automated bike hire systems already do. "This is why we can't have nice things."
Obviously more stolen cars results in more car sales so, at the very least, manufacturers aren't as well motivated as they might be in this area. Probably the fix is for insurance companies to jack up the rates on cars with insecure fobs. You do compare the insurance rates when chosing between car models don't you?
This feature could be used to game the system. Slowly type in some question and leave it for a few seconds for them to digest. Then make a minor change that changes the sense of your question and quickly hit send. If they don’t notice the change, there’s now a chat log in your favour. Profit.
Wrong. When there are cases of limited bandwidth, like there is on mobile networks, throttling of certain types or classes of network traffic makes perfect sense to prevent ALL customers' traffic from coming to a crawl or experiencing issues.
I think it makes more sense to share the bandwidth equally amongst customers rather than trying to pick on any protocol. If some part of the network becomes constrained, throttle down to some bandwidth ceiling per end-user. This will naturally throttle high-bandwidth applications like video, even if they're over a VPN, without affecting customers using low bandwidth.
If there's heavy NATting going on then it may be a problem mapping connexions to customers at some points on the network. IPv6 for the win, not that this is a current practical solution.
The key trick they’re using is exposure stacking, i.e., aligning and adding together a sequence of images. While you could use this to achieve night vision, the price would be lag of a substantial fraction of a second, to collect the required number of images. Not what you want while driving. Worse, I bet the system will fail with fast-changing scenes because it won’t be able to align consecutive images. So there could be a market for a night vision device based on this approach, but it’s going to have to be plastered with warning stickers about not using it for things like driving where reaction time is critical for safety.
Never, ever, ever put working video files - original footage or working copies, on an external drive. It's just too slow, especially in these days of 4K and upwards. The only things I use external drives for are backups, and transferring copies to clients.
You do realise that some external drives are eSATA or, for fast external SSDs, you can use Thunderbolt. These aren't going to be slower than internal drives.
I said the issue was to find "money to maintain software and fix bugs" and you said "That's what support contracts are for." Call them "software maintenance" agreements if you prefer. The point is that allowing customers to buy your software, especially an OS, and run it indefinitely without software maintenance is not tenable. If the vendor provides patches for free forever, they're going to go broke. If the customer never updates, they're going to be hacked. And being hacked is not purely the customer's risk, just as not being vaccinated is a risk to the health of the whole community.
Support contracts are just the same as software subscriptions except that they’re optional. Do you really think it’s a good idea to allow people to opt out of security updates?
You buy a piece of software (I don't care if it's an OS or an application) it's yours and that's the way it should be.
The problem with this model is that it gives software vendors no money to maintain software and fix bugs. They’re forced to add new features constantly to entice people to buy new versions to maintain their cash flow. Even if they fix the last version’s bugs, they introduce new bugs with the new features. And because the new features are profit-driven they’re often pointless bling that are of minimal utility to anyone.
A subscription model at least gives the vendor a chance to maintain their products’ security and quality in the long term. I’m not saying that Microsoft is taking that chance.
This approach measures whether people (may) like the trailer, not whether they'll like the movie.
Came here to say this. Maybe the studios think that a good trailer will drive attendance even for a bad movie. For the opening day or two this is more likely to be true, especially if they can pay off enough reviewers who are our only alternate source of information. Sadly for the studios, internet reviews make word of mouth very fast; if they don't have simultaneous worldwide releases then many audiences know in advance to avoid a stinker, however alluring its trailers may be.
If that were the case, oxygen would also affect the devices given those atoms are slightly bigger,
Oxygen in the air is O2, i.e., two atoms stuck together in a molecule. Helium is just a single tiny atom. He has a radius of 31pm. O has a radius of 48nm but the bond length in O2 is 121pm. It's much harder for O2 to leak through gaps on other molecules than He.
Cloudflare is doing the right thing. They are neither handing over customer data on the request of copyright holders nor wasting time trying to protect customers from the law. They've required a judge to decide on the need to disclose customer's identities, so their customers can hardly complain.
Cake icing shops are free to censor their output. They're not free to choose their customers based on sexual preferences. Admitedly there is some cross-over, in that refusing to make a wedding cake showing two men holding hands amounts to discrimination, unless they also refuse to make such cakes with bride and groom toppers.
Having an estimate of when a service will be back up is valuable information. Just because contacting support won't immediately resolve an issue doesn't make doing so useless.
I still want to know why in the UK they say "in hospital" instead of "in the hospital".
Next you'll want to know how to get out of the debt.
And don't get me started with "math" vs "maths".
So in the US you study mathematic I suppose. If you're going to abbreviate a word like "carriages", should the result be "car" or "cars"? If you have two cars, why would you not study maths? Put another way, if you study math, then why would you not have two car?
The game in question was sealed and unopened, technically not "used," [...] Bethesda also took issue with the seller's use of the word "new" in selling the unwrapped game
How can it be both "sealed and unopened" and yet also "unwrapped"? Is there an argument about it or is this some distinction that's lost on non-gamers?
they are "shadow banning" members of a single political party, things don't add up.
"Shadow banning" is too strong a phrase to use.
Twitter is implying the effect is due to the behaviour of the accounts. Things would add up if the Republicans were recommending some kind of Twitter tactic to their candidates that's tripping Twitter's algorithms. Which doesn't seem at all unlikely.
I'm sure there's an option to run Chrome with these warnings disabled. Any corporate IT capable of running a HTTPS proxy, requiring them to load an extra trusted cert on all their Chrome installs, is going to be able to activate this option. If Chrome lacks such an option it's just going to force companies to choose some other browser.
So, yes, Google's move is good for personal and small business users who just run with all the defaults. But they have limited power to force changes on large businesses with the IT budget to lock down their environment.
Slashdot Mirror
Virtual hosting means that URLs based on IP numbers cannot access many web pages. You can work around the issue by adding entries your you local hosts file. For example, if x.com and y.com are both hosted at 1.2.3.4, then http://1.2.3.4/ can only access at most one of those two domains. Often the pages you get with the numeric address will be different from any of the DNS-based URLs, or brokenness will ensue, like redirect loops.
I'm surprised this kind of thing hasn't been considered before; it has a huge potential to damage the viability of automated vehicles. This report is just about people being annoyed but you're going to have criminals targeting unmanned vehicles to steal them and/or their cargo. Automated vehicles will be seen as softer targets when they have no people aboard. I expect driverless taxis to suffer much the same issues that things like automated bike hire systems already do. "This is why we can't have nice things."
Obviously more stolen cars results in more car sales so, at the very least, manufacturers aren't as well motivated as they might be in this area. Probably the fix is for insurance companies to jack up the rates on cars with insecure fobs. You do compare the insurance rates when chosing between car models don't you?
This feature could be used to game the system. Slowly type in some question and leave it for a few seconds for them to digest. Then make a minor change that changes the sense of your question and quickly hit send. If they don’t notice the change, there’s now a chat log in your favour. Profit.
Wrong. When there are cases of limited bandwidth, like there is on mobile networks, throttling of certain types or classes of network traffic makes perfect sense to prevent ALL customers' traffic from coming to a crawl or experiencing issues.
I think it makes more sense to share the bandwidth equally amongst customers rather than trying to pick on any protocol. If some part of the network becomes constrained, throttle down to some bandwidth ceiling per end-user. This will naturally throttle high-bandwidth applications like video, even if they're over a VPN, without affecting customers using low bandwidth.
If there's heavy NATting going on then it may be a problem mapping connexions to customers at some points on the network. IPv6 for the win, not that this is a current practical solution.
The key trick they’re using is exposure stacking, i.e., aligning and adding together a sequence of images. While you could use this to achieve night vision, the price would be lag of a substantial fraction of a second, to collect the required number of images. Not what you want while driving. Worse, I bet the system will fail with fast-changing scenes because it won’t be able to align consecutive images. So there could be a market for a night vision device based on this approach, but it’s going to have to be plastered with warning stickers about not using it for things like driving where reaction time is critical for safety.
Never, ever, ever put working video files - original footage or working copies, on an external drive. It's just too slow, especially in these days of 4K and upwards. The only things I use external drives for are backups, and transferring copies to clients.
You do realise that some external drives are eSATA or, for fast external SSDs, you can use Thunderbolt. These aren't going to be slower than internal drives.
I said the issue was to find "money to maintain software and fix bugs" and you said "That's what support contracts are for." Call them "software maintenance" agreements if you prefer. The point is that allowing customers to buy your software, especially an OS, and run it indefinitely without software maintenance is not tenable. If the vendor provides patches for free forever, they're going to go broke. If the customer never updates, they're going to be hacked. And being hacked is not purely the customer's risk, just as not being vaccinated is a risk to the health of the whole community.
Support contracts are just the same as software subscriptions except that they’re optional. Do you really think it’s a good idea to allow people to opt out of security updates?
You buy a piece of software (I don't care if it's an OS or an application) it's yours and that's the way it should be.
The problem with this model is that it gives software vendors no money to maintain software and fix bugs. They’re forced to add new features constantly to entice people to buy new versions to maintain their cash flow. Even if they fix the last version’s bugs, they introduce new bugs with the new features. And because the new features are profit-driven they’re often pointless bling that are of minimal utility to anyone.
A subscription model at least gives the vendor a chance to maintain their products’ security and quality in the long term. I’m not saying that Microsoft is taking that chance.
This approach measures whether people (may) like the trailer, not whether they'll like the movie.
Came here to say this. Maybe the studios think that a good trailer will drive attendance even for a bad movie. For the opening day or two this is more likely to be true, especially if they can pay off enough reviewers who are our only alternate source of information. Sadly for the studios, internet reviews make word of mouth very fast; if they don't have simultaneous worldwide releases then many audiences know in advance to avoid a stinker, however alluring its trailers may be.
If that were the case, oxygen would also affect the devices given those atoms are slightly bigger,
Oxygen in the air is O2, i.e., two atoms stuck together in a molecule. Helium is just a single tiny atom. He has a radius of 31pm. O has a radius of 48nm but the bond length in O2 is 121pm. It's much harder for O2 to leak through gaps on other molecules than He.
It's "without further adieu", you clown!
Try "without further ado," you clown!
Cloudflare is doing the right thing. They are neither handing over customer data on the request of copyright holders nor wasting time trying to protect customers from the law. They've required a judge to decide on the need to disclose customer's identities, so their customers can hardly complain.
Unless your printing press is a cake and icing.
Cake icing shops are free to censor their output. They're not free to choose their customers based on sexual preferences. Admitedly there is some cross-over, in that refusing to make a wedding cake showing two men holding hands amounts to discrimination, unless they also refuse to make such cakes with bride and groom toppers.
Unless you happen to belong to a protected group
And everybody does; at least everyone who has a race, sex, age, etc.
Having an estimate of when a service will be back up is valuable information. Just because contacting support won't immediately resolve an issue doesn't make doing so useless.
How can Microsoft deploy this microcode to customers without banning benchmarking under Windows? Are they just betting Intel isn't going to sue them?
Next thing you know they will be photo shopping those Victoria Secret models.
Which would matter if we were buying the models.
I still want to know why in the UK they say "in hospital" instead of "in the hospital".
Next you'll want to know how to get out of the debt.
And don't get me started with "math" vs "maths".
So in the US you study mathematic I suppose. If you're going to abbreviate a word like "carriages", should the result be "car" or "cars"? If you have two cars, why would you not study maths? Put another way, if you study math, then why would you not have two car?
The game in question was sealed and unopened, technically not "used," [...] Bethesda also took issue with the seller's use of the word "new" in selling the unwrapped game
How can it be both "sealed and unopened" and yet also "unwrapped"? Is there an argument about it or is this some distinction that's lost on non-gamers?
Also, what's with the promises? Why isn't this a law?
Why do you think Europe passed GDPR? I would assume the new similar California law would cover this too.
PS can't use 'less than' and 'greater than' symbols in my text? WTF slashdot.
You mean WTF HTML. < gives < and > gives >.
they are "shadow banning" members of a single political party, things don't add up.
"Shadow banning" is too strong a phrase to use.
Twitter is implying the effect is due to the behaviour of the accounts. Things would add up if the Republicans were recommending some kind of Twitter tactic to their candidates that's tripping Twitter's algorithms. Which doesn't seem at all unlikely.
I'm sure there's an option to run Chrome with these warnings disabled. Any corporate IT capable of running a HTTPS proxy, requiring them to load an extra trusted cert on all their Chrome installs, is going to be able to activate this option. If Chrome lacks such an option it's just going to force companies to choose some other browser.
So, yes, Google's move is good for personal and small business users who just run with all the defaults. But they have limited power to force changes on large businesses with the IT budget to lock down their environment.