The reality is much less dramatic than that. Consider the humble ballot harvester thoughtfully assisting the voter to fill out his ballot and hand-carrying it to the precinct.
Have you seen some of the rubbish that wins Oscars? Not exactly a high bar so far as content is concerned.
I saw a few of this year's winners (Bohemian Rhapsody, Green Book, Black Panther) and didn't think they were rubbish, though I thought Black Panther was an odd nominee, as comic book superhero movies usually don't get much consideration). Which ones did you consider rubbish?
half the phones you see have at least one corner of them cracked and shattered
That feels like a gross overstatement. I've seen a lot of kids out and about with cracked iPhone screens. What I haven't noticed is a similar number of adults with cracked screens. Maybe they're more careful, or maybe they're better able to afford to get their phones repaired. Personally, I've never cracked a screen, and I've never dropped my phone outdoors. Guess I've just been lucky.
Apple patched the vulnerability in macOS 10.12.4 that was released in 2016, but the researchers say the more general scope of such attacks remains relevant.
Reading that literally, Apple patched a vulnerability discovered in 2018/9 in 2016?! What are they trying to say here?
I believe they're trying to say something along the lines of, "macOS 10.12.4, that was released in 2016, has been patched by Apple." Unfortunately, they're not very good at constructing sentences.
On the other hand I'm not looking forward to all the bank robbers and murderers getting let off the hook because we couldn't find 12 jurists who had firsthand experience with those crimes.
Juries weigh evidence presented during a trial. Having firsthand experience with a bank robbery or murder would undoubtedly result in a prospective juror being disqualified from sitting on a jury for an alleged bank robber's or murderer's trial.
By the way, you don't generally need 12 "jurists" for a trial. A judge, prosecutor and defense attorney are usually sufficient.
I'm not sure what good it does to offer absurdly high bandwidth to mobile devices while capping data plans to insignificant amounts. Exceeding a data cap even faster doesn't sound all that appealing.
I see this sort of comment quite frequently, and it really doesn't make sense to me. Please tell me what you're doing that you would do much more of if only your cap was removed. The only reason you would exceed your data cap faster is if you consume more content just because you can. Really now, how many cat videos and superhero movies can you watch before your brain turns to mush?
Disclaimer: I know my use case is not your use case. I just can't imagine what your use case really is.
Mach number is the ratio of the speed of an object thorough an air mass (aka, airspeed) to the speed of sound through the same air mass. The speed of sound you cite is the speed of sound in dry air at 20 C. Since the airliner was flying at 35,000 feet, or 10.7 km, we can assume (using the standard lapse rate of 6.5 C per kilometer) a much lower temperature of approximately -50 C, and thus a significantly lower speed of sound.
Having said all that, it is meaningless to speak of Mach in relation to ground speed. Note the quote from TFS: "The past record for the 787 is 776 mph set in January 2017 by a Norwegian 787-9 flying from JFK to London Gatwick. That flight set a record for the fastest subsonic transatlantic commercial airline flight -- 5 hours and 13 minutes, thanks to a 202 mph tailwind."
In Delhi they breathe that 24/7. Doubt that is the same as breathing it for a few hours.
The old "one cigarette isn't dangerous" fallacy?
Of course, one cigarette is dangerous. It's just not as dangerous as two packs a day, just as cooking a roast is not as dangerous as breathing the air in Delhi 24x7.
I can't tell if you are being sarcastic. When was the last time Hollywood had a movie with stories and/or quality acting?
My wife and I go out to see a movie regularly, and we've never seen a superhero movie. I've tried a few comic book movies on Netflix, and the only one I managed to sit all the way through was Wonder Woman (probably just because Gal Gadot). I find that my ability to suspend disbelief is no match for the sheer idiocy of most of those films.
There are a lot of excellent films being produced that feature stories and quality acting. Green Book, A Simple Favor, Throroughbreds, Game Night, Molly's Game, Darkest Hour, Hidden Figures, and Manchester by the Sea are a few examples that come to mind. I suspect that people who complain about the lack of 'quality movies' really just aren't trying very hard to find them.
Comic book based movies have the advantage in that there is often a decent background story (a story that became popular without relying on big name actors or special effects). Of course that does not mean that the story is actually used when the movie is made.
Um, what? How is a "decent background story" an advantage for a movie if it isn't actually used when the movie is made?>p>
Slashdot Mirror
The reality is much less dramatic than that. Consider the humble ballot harvester thoughtfully assisting the voter to fill out his ballot and hand-carrying it to the precinct.
People with brains might actually appreciate nerds showing off.
Yeah. I'll just leave this here.
Sure, the car may run for a bit, but the rest of society is still going to collapse around you. It's not going to make a difference in the end.
Right. Oh, wait -- a gasoline powered car without an ignition system won't run at all, CME or no CME.
When the power grid goes out, gasoline won't save you.
Well, it might if his car doesn't have an ignition system.
TFS is rather short on information. The original story mentioned that there's a pinhole so you can force a reset by inserting a paper clip.
Have you seen some of the rubbish that wins Oscars? Not exactly a high bar so far as content is concerned.
I saw a few of this year's winners (Bohemian Rhapsody, Green Book, Black Panther) and didn't think they were rubbish, though I thought Black Panther was an odd nominee, as comic book superhero movies usually don't get much consideration). Which ones did you consider rubbish?
Sorry to be the one to break it to you, but it isn't the elderly who are preventing their small children from being immunized.
half the phones you see have at least one corner of them cracked and shattered
That feels like a gross overstatement. I've seen a lot of kids out and about with cracked iPhone screens. What I haven't noticed is a similar number of adults with cracked screens. Maybe they're more careful, or maybe they're better able to afford to get their phones repaired. Personally, I've never cracked a screen, and I've never dropped my phone outdoors. Guess I've just been lucky.
I don't believe for a second that about 1 in 10 americans watch the Oscars
Who said anything about 1 in 10 Americans? The show is broadcast internationally. I guess you really are out of touch.
33 million people watched. Viewership is down significantly, but that's still a lot of eyeballs. Maybe you're a little out of touch with reality.
Because made-for-TV movies have been around for a long time and had been mostly crap for a long time.
If they're crap, no one would be worried about them "unfairly" winning Oscars. What am I missing here?
Over a long period of time, I have noticed that Volvo and Subaru (except for WRX) drivers are the most inattentive and slow drivers around
There must not be any Prius owners in your neck of the woods.
the International Space Station, which flies ... at tremendous speeds: about 10 times faster than a bullet.
I'm taking that to the fucking bank. That's priceless. Who writes this shit?
Obviously, written by a fan of comic books and stupid superhero movies. "Faster than a speeding bullet", right?
This can't be true. Everyone knows that no young people use Facebook anymore.
I guess my mistake was in reading TFS.
Call them what they are KILLER ROBOTS!
Please explain how "performing early warning tests, intelligence gathering, surveillance and reconnaissance" qualifies them as KILLER ROBOTS.
Apple patched the vulnerability in macOS 10.12.4 that was released in 2016, but the researchers say the more general scope of such attacks remains relevant.
Reading that literally, Apple patched a vulnerability discovered in 2018/9 in 2016?! What are they trying to say here?
I believe they're trying to say something along the lines of, "macOS 10.12.4, that was released in 2016, has been patched by Apple." Unfortunately, they're not very good at constructing sentences.
Linux does alliterative animal names. You couldn't come up with something more senseless than that.
No, Linux doesn't do that. Ubuntu does that.
On the other hand I'm not looking forward to all the bank robbers and murderers getting let off the hook because we couldn't find 12 jurists who had firsthand experience with those crimes.
Juries weigh evidence presented during a trial. Having firsthand experience with a bank robbery or murder would undoubtedly result in a prospective juror being disqualified from sitting on a jury for an alleged bank robber's or murderer's trial.
By the way, you don't generally need 12 "jurists" for a trial. A judge, prosecutor and defense attorney are usually sufficient.
I'm not sure what good it does to offer absurdly high bandwidth to mobile devices while capping data plans to insignificant amounts. Exceeding a data cap even faster doesn't sound all that appealing.
I see this sort of comment quite frequently, and it really doesn't make sense to me. Please tell me what you're doing that you would do much more of if only your cap was removed. The only reason you would exceed your data cap faster is if you consume more content just because you can. Really now, how many cat videos and superhero movies can you watch before your brain turns to mush?
Disclaimer: I know my use case is not your use case. I just can't imagine what your use case really is.
Mach number is the ratio of the speed of an object thorough an air mass (aka, airspeed) to the speed of sound through the same air mass. The speed of sound you cite is the speed of sound in dry air at 20 C. Since the airliner was flying at 35,000 feet, or 10.7 km, we can assume (using the standard lapse rate of 6.5 C per kilometer) a much lower temperature of approximately -50 C, and thus a significantly lower speed of sound.
Having said all that, it is meaningless to speak of Mach in relation to ground speed. Note the quote from TFS: "The past record for the 787 is 776 mph set in January 2017 by a Norwegian 787-9 flying from JFK to London Gatwick. That flight set a record for the fastest subsonic transatlantic commercial airline flight -- 5 hours and 13 minutes, thanks to a 202 mph tailwind."
Correction it's 12€ so about 10 bucks a month.
I think you need to check your math.
How does anyone?
The uniform is a pretty good discriminator.
In Delhi they breathe that 24/7. Doubt that is the same as breathing it for a few hours.
The old "one cigarette isn't dangerous" fallacy?
Of course, one cigarette is dangerous. It's just not as dangerous as two packs a day, just as cooking a roast is not as dangerous as breathing the air in Delhi 24x7.
I can't tell if you are being sarcastic. When was the last time Hollywood had a movie with stories and/or quality acting?
My wife and I go out to see a movie regularly, and we've never seen a superhero movie. I've tried a few comic book movies on Netflix, and the only one I managed to sit all the way through was Wonder Woman (probably just because Gal Gadot). I find that my ability to suspend disbelief is no match for the sheer idiocy of most of those films. There are a lot of excellent films being produced that feature stories and quality acting. Green Book, A Simple Favor, Throroughbreds, Game Night, Molly's Game, Darkest Hour, Hidden Figures, and Manchester by the Sea are a few examples that come to mind. I suspect that people who complain about the lack of 'quality movies' really just aren't trying very hard to find them.
Comic book based movies have the advantage in that there is often a decent background story (a story that became popular without relying on big name actors or special effects). Of course that does not mean that the story is actually used when the movie is made.
Um, what? How is a "decent background story" an advantage for a movie if it isn't actually used when the movie is made?>p>