Ah, I see, it's Chrome preventing it for everything, not Google preventing it for their site. Not using Chrome will mean that you won't have this problem.
Regen braking is a gimmick that is useless in real life situations
Regenerative breaking works in the same situations where engine breaking works on a conventional ICE. If you're not using engine breaking for most of your deceleration, then you're either typically driving in a computer game situation (motorway with small children that run across the road every 5 minutes), or you're not a very good driver and are spending a lot more on fuel than you need to.
That said, the number of people around here who accelerate towards traffic lights and then brake hard because, surprise surprise, it's still red when they get there is astonishing.
It's even better when you're on a touchscreen device where there isn't a mouseover event. Fortunately for Google, no one uses mobile touchscreen devices to browse the web.
Unfortunately, this also makes it quite easy to leak the browsing history to malicious sites. Even if you can't query the generated style for a link (some browsers now prevent this), you can use the canvas extension to render links to an image buffer and then just read back the colour values.
self-regulation is a fairy tale told by the ignorant.
Not so, it's a fairy tale told by the informed who have a vested interest in continuing to operate without regulation. Unfortunately, they've also now learned about regulator capture, so the choice is often between ineffective regulation and no regulation.
The ALIX boards have 256MB, which is ample for something like pfsense (even with its PHP web UI, which burns 20-40MB and was painful on 64MB). A lot of the MIPS routers have 32MB, which is a lot tighter. These also tend to have quite a long life - they're commonly in deployments that go 10 years or so between upgrades.
The AMD Geode systems are still on sale in some cheap boards (PC-Engines and Soekris), and they were on the list of processors Debian dropped support for last time. It doesn't look as if this release adds any new processors that are still used in the embedded space to the unsupported list.
The C3 Ezra (on their list) was introduced in June 2002 (and ran at 1GHz). Definitely not a Windows 95 era machine. It ended up in quite a lot of low-power Mini-ITX systems where, for reasons of form factor and cooling, upgrading the CPU is typically not an option.
They're also dropping support for VIA C3 Ezra cores. The newest of these was released in June 2002 and is therefore only almost 14 years old. This is the only one on the list that seems a bit of a shame. These are low-power cores and run at up to about 1GHz, so they're still likely to be in use for devices where performance is not a serious issue.
It looks as if they've already dropped support for some of the older AMD Geode CPUs, which are still on sale in low-end router boards.
Did you even RTFS? They've just removed a feature that is something that enterprise users want. Home users don't care about group policy controls, they're solely an enterprise feature and they've just removed it from the version of Windows 10 targeted at enterprise customers.
They do have targeted advertising, but it's targeted at the search term, not at some profile of you. They're the same sorts of ads Google used to show, back when I ever saw ads from Google that were vaguely relevant to something I wanted. They don't record information about you and they work to ensure that things like referrer headers aren't sent to other sites leaking information about your searches. They do use cookies if you modify settings, but the cookies only include your settings (you can inspect them and see that you get the same cookies from the same settings on different machines. Not sure if they still do, but they also used to define what the cookies mean so that you could construct your own if you wanted).
I've been using DDG as my primary search engine for a few years. If you stick !google or !bing into the search form, it will redirect you to them for the search, so if I don't find something then I try the other two. It's been at least two years since doing this actually found something useful. Yesterday I had the converse experience of a colleague complaining that something I'd suggested that he read (the Symbian kernel internals book, out of print but now available online) was hard to find - he'd searched using Google, which only had stale references to developer.symbian.com, which no longer exists. I'd found it as the second hit with DDG.
I stopped paying the license fee when the BBC launched iPlayer with DRM and vendor lock-in (in spite of broadcasting HD MPEG-2 streams uncompressed over the airwaves). I'd happily start again if they'd move to DRM-free downloads and would consider £140/year to be cheap.
4K makes a difference for some people, but it doesn't do much for me. When my local cinema went digital, I could see the pixelation, which I can't on a DVD at home. As to the screen size, it's not the size as much as the field of view that matters. A projector at home filling up the wall of the living room gets me the same amount of my field of view filled as a good seat in the cinema, and far more than a bad seat. Audio also seems to hit diminishing returns. Stereo was a big difference over mono. Dolby Digital 5.1 was a noticeable jump for a lot of action things. I can occasionally tell the difference between DD and DTS, but not usually. Beyond DTS, I just can't tell the difference.
To truly replicate the experience, you'd also need to tie it to a streaming service that doesn't allow pausing once the film has started, randomises the equaliser settings so that the audio sucks, and ensure that the delivery service wouldn't ring the doorbell until 10 minutes into the film.
There are several economic models for making TV shows:
In the first, you produce a pilot, give it away for free and then ask for funding to produce the first season. Fans then throw in some money and once you've raised enough to cover the costs and some profit you start making it. Once you've got the first few episodes out, you start asking for funds for the second season. You encourage wide distribution by fans, because the more people who see season 1, the more are likely to want to pay for season 2.
In the second, you make a pilot and then take it to a company that sells TV shows. They have a load of people paying them money because they want to see TV and so they might decide that they want to fund it. If they do, then they pay for it with money from the subscription service (or from direct sales of a copy of it). You're probably locked into an exclusive distribution contract with them for at least the first year, so if they decide not to renew it then there's a comparatively limited number of people who have seen it in time for your next round of funding.
In the third, you make a pilot and then take it to a company that sells advertising space. They have a limited number of advertising slots and need to fill up the space between them with the things that are most likely to bring eyeballs to the ads. They won't fund your show just because it will make a profit for them, it needs to bring in more viewers than anything else that they could put in the same slot. They'll happily cancel your show if they can find something that's 5% more popular to replace it with.
Of these, which do you think makes the most sense? My guess would be that it's not the third, yet that's how most TV is funded today.
I don't mind the trailers - if I'm in a cinema it's because I enjoy watching films, and getting a preview of the other things I might want to watch is fine. I started to hate the cinema experience when the 10 minutes of trailers became 15 minutes of ads followed by 15 minutes of trailers. And then became 15 minutes of trailers followed by 15 minutes of ads, so that you couldn't miss the ads by turning up 15 minutes before the film started. Meanwhile, projectors and decent 5.1 sound systems became cheap, and home movies moved from VHS to DVD.
If you're importing goods, then you probably need to pay an import tariff. You might be paying this already, as typically these things have to declare their contents and value on the side and, if it meets the threshold, have that paid before it can be released to the delivery company in the country. If it doesn't declare this, then it can be seized by customs agents.
The carriers controlled the software with an iron fist.
That's a particularly US problem. I got my first mobile phone in 1997 and a pre-pay SIM. The phone was locked to the carrier, but they would unlock it for £10. I never bothered getting them to do this, because I stayed with them until the phone was worthless. Every subsequent phone that I've bought has been bought independently of the carrier. None of them have come with carrier-installed crapware, including the first one.
You could download apps for all sorts of things, and you could write your own apps.
My next three phones all ran Symbian, which came with C++ and J2ME SDKs and allowed you to run third-party apps. I even had a port of Doom on my N70. When the iPhone was released, the lack of third-party apps was one of the big regressions. The others were the lack of Bluetooth sync (amusingly, I got much better integration with OS X from my N80 - iSync could sync the calendar and address book wirelessly and I could dial the phone directly from AddressBook.app and get an on-screen notification of the caller on the laptop), no 3G support, and no SIP client (Symbian had one built in and integrated with the normal phone software, so I could make cheap VoIP calls when I was near WiFi).
I might be wrong, but I believe that the earliest known examples of refrigeration are evaporation jars in the Indus Valley around 3000BC. The basic principle is the same as a modern refrigerator (coolant expands, cools), but without the closed loop so you needed to keep topping up the water to keep them chilled.
I understand them liking the iPhone, but it was nowhere near the first viable pocket computer. Not even the first good one.
Their rationale was that it was the first successful pocket computer (i.e. in the pockets of millions), but even that is somewhat debatable. A lot of the success of the iPhone came from launching it just at the time when the technology was ready. Capacitive touch screens made a huge difference to the UI (being able to use your fingers and not just a stylus). Screens big enough and processors fast enough that you could run a real web browser (not WAP crap) and have it actually be useful made a big difference (I had a Nokia N80 that had a real WebKit-powered web browser, but having to scroll around the page with a tiny screen meant that it wasn't that useful). Newer WiFi chipsets that meant that you could leave WiFi on all of the time meant that you could actually use the device as a computer even when data tariffs are insanely expensive. Cheap flash (and Apple gets some credit here by using the iPods to drive up the demand for flash enough to make it cheap) meant that you could store a reasonable amount of music on the device and use it to replace a separate music player.
The iPhone came out just one year after the N80, and at a similar price. The difference between the two was huge. The iPhone wasn't unique in that regard - several other manufacturers had similar devices out at around the same time - but the combination of technology from further up the supply chain made phones from that generation very different from earlier devices.
I wasn't sure if the OP meant 'fuck everyone who possesses a penis' or 'fuck everyone using a penis'. Either way, I don't think I have enough stamina, sorry.
There was an interesting survey in The Economist last January that looked asked people to estimate the size of the Muslim population in their country, for all of the countries in Europe, and then presented the results next to the actual percentage. The poll estimates were all at least double the actual numbers and in most cases around five times the real numbers. In a couple of places they were well over an order of magnitude out (estimating 7%, actual number 0.1%). It's quite interesting how the perception has been skewed by fearmongering from the media and politicians.
Slashdot Mirror
Ah, I see, it's Chrome preventing it for everything, not Google preventing it for their site. Not using Chrome will mean that you won't have this problem.
Regen braking is a gimmick that is useless in real life situations
Regenerative breaking works in the same situations where engine breaking works on a conventional ICE. If you're not using engine breaking for most of your deceleration, then you're either typically driving in a computer game situation (motorway with small children that run across the road every 5 minutes), or you're not a very good driver and are spending a lot more on fuel than you need to.
That said, the number of people around here who accelerate towards traffic lights and then brake hard because, surprise surprise, it's still red when they get there is astonishing.
How do they prevent it? User CSS files are applied after site-provided ones and can override them.
It's even better when you're on a touchscreen device where there isn't a mouseover event. Fortunately for Google, no one uses mobile touchscreen devices to browse the web.
Unfortunately, this also makes it quite easy to leak the browsing history to malicious sites. Even if you can't query the generated style for a link (some browsers now prevent this), you can use the canvas extension to render links to an image buffer and then just read back the colour values.
self-regulation is a fairy tale told by the ignorant.
Not so, it's a fairy tale told by the informed who have a vested interest in continuing to operate without regulation. Unfortunately, they've also now learned about regulator capture, so the choice is often between ineffective regulation and no regulation.
The ALIX boards have 256MB, which is ample for something like pfsense (even with its PHP web UI, which burns 20-40MB and was painful on 64MB). A lot of the MIPS routers have 32MB, which is a lot tighter. These also tend to have quite a long life - they're commonly in deployments that go 10 years or so between upgrades.
The AMD Geode systems are still on sale in some cheap boards (PC-Engines and Soekris), and they were on the list of processors Debian dropped support for last time. It doesn't look as if this release adds any new processors that are still used in the embedded space to the unsupported list.
The C3 Ezra (on their list) was introduced in June 2002 (and ran at 1GHz). Definitely not a Windows 95 era machine. It ended up in quite a lot of low-power Mini-ITX systems where, for reasons of form factor and cooling, upgrading the CPU is typically not an option.
They're also dropping support for VIA C3 Ezra cores. The newest of these was released in June 2002 and is therefore only almost 14 years old. This is the only one on the list that seems a bit of a shame. These are low-power cores and run at up to about 1GHz, so they're still likely to be in use for devices where performance is not a serious issue.
It looks as if they've already dropped support for some of the older AMD Geode CPUs, which are still on sale in low-end router boards.
Did you even RTFS? They've just removed a feature that is something that enterprise users want. Home users don't care about group policy controls, they're solely an enterprise feature and they've just removed it from the version of Windows 10 targeted at enterprise customers.
They do have targeted advertising, but it's targeted at the search term, not at some profile of you. They're the same sorts of ads Google used to show, back when I ever saw ads from Google that were vaguely relevant to something I wanted. They don't record information about you and they work to ensure that things like referrer headers aren't sent to other sites leaking information about your searches. They do use cookies if you modify settings, but the cookies only include your settings (you can inspect them and see that you get the same cookies from the same settings on different machines. Not sure if they still do, but they also used to define what the cookies mean so that you could construct your own if you wanted).
I've been using DDG as my primary search engine for a few years. If you stick !google or !bing into the search form, it will redirect you to them for the search, so if I don't find something then I try the other two. It's been at least two years since doing this actually found something useful. Yesterday I had the converse experience of a colleague complaining that something I'd suggested that he read (the Symbian kernel internals book, out of print but now available online) was hard to find - he'd searched using Google, which only had stale references to developer.symbian.com, which no longer exists. I'd found it as the second hit with DDG.
Do you use Facebook? If so, you're entrusting data to a system written by people who write code that a 10-year-old can compromise.
I stopped paying the license fee when the BBC launched iPlayer with DRM and vendor lock-in (in spite of broadcasting HD MPEG-2 streams uncompressed over the airwaves). I'd happily start again if they'd move to DRM-free downloads and would consider £140/year to be cheap.
4K makes a difference for some people, but it doesn't do much for me. When my local cinema went digital, I could see the pixelation, which I can't on a DVD at home. As to the screen size, it's not the size as much as the field of view that matters. A projector at home filling up the wall of the living room gets me the same amount of my field of view filled as a good seat in the cinema, and far more than a bad seat. Audio also seems to hit diminishing returns. Stereo was a big difference over mono. Dolby Digital 5.1 was a noticeable jump for a lot of action things. I can occasionally tell the difference between DD and DTS, but not usually. Beyond DTS, I just can't tell the difference.
To truly replicate the experience, you'd also need to tie it to a streaming service that doesn't allow pausing once the film has started, randomises the equaliser settings so that the audio sucks, and ensure that the delivery service wouldn't ring the doorbell until 10 minutes into the film.
In the first, you produce a pilot, give it away for free and then ask for funding to produce the first season. Fans then throw in some money and once you've raised enough to cover the costs and some profit you start making it. Once you've got the first few episodes out, you start asking for funds for the second season. You encourage wide distribution by fans, because the more people who see season 1, the more are likely to want to pay for season 2.
In the second, you make a pilot and then take it to a company that sells TV shows. They have a load of people paying them money because they want to see TV and so they might decide that they want to fund it. If they do, then they pay for it with money from the subscription service (or from direct sales of a copy of it). You're probably locked into an exclusive distribution contract with them for at least the first year, so if they decide not to renew it then there's a comparatively limited number of people who have seen it in time for your next round of funding.
In the third, you make a pilot and then take it to a company that sells advertising space. They have a limited number of advertising slots and need to fill up the space between them with the things that are most likely to bring eyeballs to the ads. They won't fund your show just because it will make a profit for them, it needs to bring in more viewers than anything else that they could put in the same slot. They'll happily cancel your show if they can find something that's 5% more popular to replace it with.
Of these, which do you think makes the most sense? My guess would be that it's not the third, yet that's how most TV is funded today.
I don't mind the trailers - if I'm in a cinema it's because I enjoy watching films, and getting a preview of the other things I might want to watch is fine. I started to hate the cinema experience when the 10 minutes of trailers became 15 minutes of ads followed by 15 minutes of trailers. And then became 15 minutes of trailers followed by 15 minutes of ads, so that you couldn't miss the ads by turning up 15 minutes before the film started. Meanwhile, projectors and decent 5.1 sound systems became cheap, and home movies moved from VHS to DVD.
If you're importing goods, then you probably need to pay an import tariff. You might be paying this already, as typically these things have to declare their contents and value on the side and, if it meets the threshold, have that paid before it can be released to the delivery company in the country. If it doesn't declare this, then it can be seized by customs agents.
The carriers controlled the software with an iron fist.
That's a particularly US problem. I got my first mobile phone in 1997 and a pre-pay SIM. The phone was locked to the carrier, but they would unlock it for £10. I never bothered getting them to do this, because I stayed with them until the phone was worthless. Every subsequent phone that I've bought has been bought independently of the carrier. None of them have come with carrier-installed crapware, including the first one.
You could download apps for all sorts of things, and you could write your own apps.
My next three phones all ran Symbian, which came with C++ and J2ME SDKs and allowed you to run third-party apps. I even had a port of Doom on my N70. When the iPhone was released, the lack of third-party apps was one of the big regressions. The others were the lack of Bluetooth sync (amusingly, I got much better integration with OS X from my N80 - iSync could sync the calendar and address book wirelessly and I could dial the phone directly from AddressBook.app and get an on-screen notification of the caller on the laptop), no 3G support, and no SIP client (Symbian had one built in and integrated with the normal phone software, so I could make cheap VoIP calls when I was near WiFi).
I might be wrong, but I believe that the earliest known examples of refrigeration are evaporation jars in the Indus Valley around 3000BC. The basic principle is the same as a modern refrigerator (coolant expands, cools), but without the closed loop so you needed to keep topping up the water to keep them chilled.
I understand them liking the iPhone, but it was nowhere near the first viable pocket computer. Not even the first good one.
Their rationale was that it was the first successful pocket computer (i.e. in the pockets of millions), but even that is somewhat debatable. A lot of the success of the iPhone came from launching it just at the time when the technology was ready. Capacitive touch screens made a huge difference to the UI (being able to use your fingers and not just a stylus). Screens big enough and processors fast enough that you could run a real web browser (not WAP crap) and have it actually be useful made a big difference (I had a Nokia N80 that had a real WebKit-powered web browser, but having to scroll around the page with a tiny screen meant that it wasn't that useful). Newer WiFi chipsets that meant that you could leave WiFi on all of the time meant that you could actually use the device as a computer even when data tariffs are insanely expensive. Cheap flash (and Apple gets some credit here by using the iPods to drive up the demand for flash enough to make it cheap) meant that you could store a reasonable amount of music on the device and use it to replace a separate music player.
The iPhone came out just one year after the N80, and at a similar price. The difference between the two was huge. The iPhone wasn't unique in that regard - several other manufacturers had similar devices out at around the same time - but the combination of technology from further up the supply chain made phones from that generation very different from earlier devices.
I wasn't sure if the OP meant 'fuck everyone who possesses a penis' or 'fuck everyone using a penis'. Either way, I don't think I have enough stamina, sorry.
There was an interesting survey in The Economist last January that looked asked people to estimate the size of the Muslim population in their country, for all of the countries in Europe, and then presented the results next to the actual percentage. The poll estimates were all at least double the actual numbers and in most cases around five times the real numbers. In a couple of places they were well over an order of magnitude out (estimating 7%, actual number 0.1%). It's quite interesting how the perception has been skewed by fearmongering from the media and politicians.