Or lets take this to a reasonably similar comparison level. Let's say I have some physical papers & I put them in a safe. Nothing says I can't make that safe so secure that if you don't know EXACTLY how to open it than the papers will be destroyed. I'm not just talking about having a combination or something that could be guessed but rather you could make it that if 10 guesses were entered incorrectly than acid would leak out all over the papers to destroy them...take it to whatever level necessary to make it 'reasonably equivalent' to the security in the iPhone.
The thing is, it's wildly impractical to build a house in which all the contents will be destroyed when someone tries to break in, and even such safes are unlikely to be particularly popular because of extremely difficulty in building something like that, and the chance of losing everything due to a bug or user error.
It's really not a realistic comparison at all, as nobody in reality actually protects their physical belongings in such a way. And, I still believe that those possessions are way more private to me than my phone, and would be much more upset over it.
So, on the one side of the line is pencil and paper and math done in your head and one time pad keys written on magicians pre-soaked with accelerant paper for easiest quick destruction. Then you have the mobile phone. Please enlighten me as to what is on the other side of the line? What technologies has the government outlawed the production of in a similar manner? Nuclear Weapons? Hand Grenades? I love the fact that your attention is focused on threshold lines, I just think you are looking at the situation rather naively.
Maybe I am, because I don't understand what you're trying to say. I don't know what's on the "other side of the line", the line seems to have been crossed by the government wanting to see what's on a phone after getting a warrant to do so. My argument is that they can already get much more private information about me by breaking into my house, car, etc., and nobody is up in arms about it. I think that's exactly what Obama is talking about -- we've lived for a long time in this balance of mostly having privacy, except when a warrant says otherwise, and it's generally been ok with the vast majority of the people. However, the *phone* is something that absolutely must be off limits to the government? I don't understand why is the phone so special.
What technologies has the government outlawed the production of in a similar manner?
Because phones are becoming the Rosetta Stone of your life. If all of your information isn't there, then at least links to all of the information in your life is there. It's becoming a very neatly organized dossier of your life. Phone providers (Apple, Google) have an interest in it becoming an even larger part of your life so that you can't do without their services.
You're saying that I would learn more about you by looking at your phone than going through your stuff at your house? If that's true, then I can see your point. I don't think that's true for me, but at least it makes more sense.
If I write down some code in my ledger, even if it (potentially) indicates criminal activity, and even if the government find it in a search of my house with a warrant, they can't force me to tell them how to read it. It's the same as that.
The thing is, you can still go ahead and encrypt a ledger, even a digital one, and store it on your phone. You don't need an impenetrable locked-down fully encrypted phone in order to do that. The government could get your ledger and they won't be able to figure out what it means.
Locking down your phone so that they can't even get to the coded ledger is the equivalent of not letting them into your house in the first place.
When will they learn to stop following Apple's lead?
When replacing a battery becomes a real problem?
My kids are still playing games on my phones from years and years ago... maybe the battery doesn't last for days like it used to, but it lasts a full day without a problem. My nexus 6 is more likely to run out of juice on a fairly new battery.
I would venture a guess that for the vast majority of people, being able to replace the battery is not a feature they even think about.
Why is the phone a "do not cross" line? This is the one that is making people here on Slashdot compare the government to nazis? All this time we've been living in the world where the government can get a legal warrant to enter your house, look through your things, take pretty much anything they deem suspicious, get into your car, your workplace... This happens every single day.
But, unlocking your phone and looking at your data is a whole another level of intrusion that causes extreme amounts of anger and comparisons to one of the worst government regimes ever?
I don't get this. I mean, I don't see anybody protesting that if I lock my house, government can't come in, even with a warrant, and my house and its contents are way more private to me than my phone.
Could somebody please elaborate on why the phone is a special case here?
Why be limited by the manufacturer's battery, when there are so many options for external battery packs out there? You can get tiny ones, giant ones, and plug in not only your phone, but your friend's phone, your tablet, and any other device that charges through USB.
a 32-bit add is a 32-bit add on both native and emulated hardware, but probably have differing opcodes
That breaks down very quickly when you get to any memory operations, as well as all the various flavours of SIMDs...
It really doesn't make much sense that you can be more power efficient in your implementation of the behaviour and ordering of an exclusive store-release transaction using generic ops compared to hardware that was explicitly built and optimized for that instruction.
Yeah, maybe your integer and floating point units are better optimized (no real reason why they would be, though), but that's not where most of the power and performance comes from. Not in a CPU, anyway.
Punishing corporations (appropriately) would work fine. If corporations feel the pain of the punishment, the pain will be passed on the individuals that caused the pain.
However, if the punishment is so toothless as to encourage corporations to, in turn, encourage their employees to continue to break the rules, then you get what you have now. And in that kind of a setup, going after the employees that are doing what they are told is unfair. Fix the system by making the corporation feel the pain of doing bad things.
The days of being able to do neat engineering work just got less and less, and as you get older you quickly realise that nobody generally wants to create the 'next big thing'. They just want to do a bunch of small marketing driven improvements to maintain profits for as long as possible and sweat capital (just look at the iPhone/iPad).
It's funny that you use the iPhone/iPad as examples, since they were exactly products of somebody trying to build the 'next big thing' (and succeeding). I don't think you can blame them for just evolving those products, as they are obviously still trying to also go for the next big thing again (watch, tv, car, vr, whatever).
I'm not a fan of Apple, but to say that they are not trying to create new things is a really skewed way to look at it, IMO.
It seems his real talent is to convince people to go back to old ideas that didn't take off before. That's neither good nor bad, but stop overhyping them.
Why is that not good?
I don't think anyone's claiming that he invented an electric car, but he's certainly the first to make a viable company out of building them. So, he took an old idea that didn't work and made it work. That's not "neither good nor bad", that's simply good.
Just remember that a real neuron is nothing like the "neurons" in neural networks. Each one is really computing a fairly complex set of functions. A single real neuron would be best represented by a decent-sized recurrent neural network all by itself.
Which is, more-or-less, just a more complex neural network, no? There was a paper very recently on some setup like that, where each "neuron" is a small multi-layer network instead of a simple relu, and it performed very well. I couldn't find it through casual googling, unfortunately.
Armstrong said they only had a 50% chance of returning to Earth alive.
That was clearly an exaggeration. 9 manned missions got to the moon, 6 landed, and all 9 came back, with only one running into some problems.
If each had only 50% chance of survival, they had 0.2% chance of having no casualties in 9 flights. Even if you look at just 6 that landed, that's 1.6% chance of flying 6 times successfully.
I think their odds were likely quite a bit higher than 50%.
A bunch of fucking MBAs decided they didn't really need to pay a bunch of expensive chip designers to make chips, and that it would be a better idea financially to sell of the fab so their remaining development team could be isolated away from the fabrication process. Brilliant plan.
While, yes, AMD management totally did destroy the company, the bit about selling the fab happened later, after the Barcelona disaster, and after they threw away all their money on ATI.
The fab was not competitive (as GlobalFoundries performance showed for the next few years), and they absolutely had to get rid of it to survive. Not having the cost of maintaining that thing is the reason they are not bankrupt (yet).
If the camera supports RAW, USE IT! You can use it in conjunction with JPEG (the RAW+JPEG setting). Why? It's a lot easier to adjust image color, saturation, exposure, etc. after the fact in an image editing app (that also supports RAW, very important) with a RAW format image. Again, this gets important if you want to print the images or ever want to do any pro photography.
Another great reason is that you can go back to them many years later and "re-develop" them using improved RAW processing technologies, and by applying what you've learned since.
I've gone back to my 6 or 7 year old photos a few times and turned some "ok" photos into really nice portraits that way.
I don't know what photography class you took, but the aperture number of a lens has nothing to do with speed.
It is very common, at least in North America, and in North American English, to call a lens with a large aperture "fast". Since, as you said, large aperture allows more light in, so it takes less time to expose the sensor/film, therefore the lens is "fast".
I guess that means that you shouldn't go swimming in fresh water? Even a chlorinated pool could contain this parasite for 24 hours if there is that same film inside the pool's plumbing.
The pools are chlorinated to a much higher level, because you don't need to keep the water drinkable.
LibreOffice is available from the Ubuntu package manager. Skype is also available for Linux. There're also a plethora of text editors available for Linux, including but not limited to emacs, vi, nano and Sublime Sheeeesh!!!!
Not unless you have root access. If their admin didn't install these, they are stuck without them.
Re:systemd is one reason not to use Debian.
on
Kali Linux 2.0 Released
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
The poster was making a well-reasoned argument related to the fact that Kali Linux (like Devuan) does not include systemd in its default installation.
The poster's argument was quite irrelevant and off-topic, because Kali 2.0 does actually use systemd.
Slashdot Mirror
The thing is, it's wildly impractical to build a house in which all the contents will be destroyed when someone tries to break in, and even such safes are unlikely to be particularly popular because of extremely difficulty in building something like that, and the chance of losing everything due to a bug or user error.
It's really not a realistic comparison at all, as nobody in reality actually protects their physical belongings in such a way. And, I still believe that those possessions are way more private to me than my phone, and would be much more upset over it.
Maybe I am, because I don't understand what you're trying to say. I don't know what's on the "other side of the line", the line seems to have been crossed by the government wanting to see what's on a phone after getting a warrant to do so. My argument is that they can already get much more private information about me by breaking into my house, car, etc., and nobody is up in arms about it. I think that's exactly what Obama is talking about -- we've lived for a long time in this balance of mostly having privacy, except when a warrant says otherwise, and it's generally been ok with the vast majority of the people. However, the *phone* is something that absolutely must be off limits to the government? I don't understand why is the phone so special.
Are they about to outlaw encryption?
You're saying that I would learn more about you by looking at your phone than going through your stuff at your house? If that's true, then I can see your point. I don't think that's true for me, but at least it makes more sense.
The thing is, you can still go ahead and encrypt a ledger, even a digital one, and store it on your phone. You don't need an impenetrable locked-down fully encrypted phone in order to do that. The government could get your ledger and they won't be able to figure out what it means.
Locking down your phone so that they can't even get to the coded ledger is the equivalent of not letting them into your house in the first place.
When replacing a battery becomes a real problem?
My kids are still playing games on my phones from years and years ago... maybe the battery doesn't last for days like it used to, but it lasts a full day without a problem. My nexus 6 is more likely to run out of juice on a fairly new battery.
I would venture a guess that for the vast majority of people, being able to replace the battery is not a feature they even think about.
Why is the phone a "do not cross" line? This is the one that is making people here on Slashdot compare the government to nazis? All this time we've been living in the world where the government can get a legal warrant to enter your house, look through your things, take pretty much anything they deem suspicious, get into your car, your workplace... This happens every single day.
But, unlocking your phone and looking at your data is a whole another level of intrusion that causes extreme amounts of anger and comparisons to one of the worst government regimes ever?
I don't get this. I mean, I don't see anybody protesting that if I lock my house, government can't come in, even with a warrant, and my house and its contents are way more private to me than my phone.
Could somebody please elaborate on why the phone is a special case here?
Why be limited by the manufacturer's battery, when there are so many options for external battery packs out there? You can get tiny ones, giant ones, and plug in not only your phone, but your friend's phone, your tablet, and any other device that charges through USB.
You use your phone to make calls with? How quaint.
That breaks down very quickly when you get to any memory operations, as well as all the various flavours of SIMDs...
It really doesn't make much sense that you can be more power efficient in your implementation of the behaviour and ordering of an exclusive store-release transaction using generic ops compared to hardware that was explicitly built and optimized for that instruction.
Yeah, maybe your integer and floating point units are better optimized (no real reason why they would be, though), but that's not where most of the power and performance comes from. Not in a CPU, anyway.
Punishing corporations (appropriately) would work fine. If corporations feel the pain of the punishment, the pain will be passed on the individuals that caused the pain.
However, if the punishment is so toothless as to encourage corporations to, in turn, encourage their employees to continue to break the rules, then you get what you have now. And in that kind of a setup, going after the employees that are doing what they are told is unfair. Fix the system by making the corporation feel the pain of doing bad things.
Isn't that exactly what Uber and Lyft are doing?
It's funny that you use the iPhone/iPad as examples, since they were exactly products of somebody trying to build the 'next big thing' (and succeeding). I don't think you can blame them for just evolving those products, as they are obviously still trying to also go for the next big thing again (watch, tv, car, vr, whatever).
I'm not a fan of Apple, but to say that they are not trying to create new things is a really skewed way to look at it, IMO.
Why is that not good?
I don't think anyone's claiming that he invented an electric car, but he's certainly the first to make a viable company out of building them. So, he took an old idea that didn't work and made it work. That's not "neither good nor bad", that's simply good.
Which is, more-or-less, just a more complex neural network, no? There was a paper very recently on some setup like that, where each "neuron" is a small multi-layer network instead of a simple relu, and it performed very well. I couldn't find it through casual googling, unfortunately.
In addition, the very first Apollo mission resulted in loss of life, and they still pushed on - albeit with a delay. Hardly ruinous.
That was clearly an exaggeration. 9 manned missions got to the moon, 6 landed, and all 9 came back, with only one running into some problems.
If each had only 50% chance of survival, they had 0.2% chance of having no casualties in 9 flights. Even if you look at just 6 that landed, that's 1.6% chance of flying 6 times successfully.
I think their odds were likely quite a bit higher than 50%.
While, yes, AMD management totally did destroy the company, the bit about selling the fab happened later, after the Barcelona disaster, and after they threw away all their money on ATI.
The fab was not competitive (as GlobalFoundries performance showed for the next few years), and they absolutely had to get rid of it to survive. Not having the cost of maintaining that thing is the reason they are not bankrupt (yet).
I always wanted this feature on Android! What is it called, how do you turn it on?
Another great reason is that you can go back to them many years later and "re-develop" them using improved RAW processing technologies, and by applying what you've learned since.
I've gone back to my 6 or 7 year old photos a few times and turned some "ok" photos into really nice portraits that way.
It is very common, at least in North America, and in North American English, to call a lens with a large aperture "fast". Since, as you said, large aperture allows more light in, so it takes less time to expose the sensor/film, therefore the lens is "fast".
Googling "fast lens" will come up with many examples such as this one: http://digital-photography-school.com/what-is-a-fast-lens/
Maybe you're from another part of the world that doesn't use this expression?
The pools are chlorinated to a much higher level, because you don't need to keep the water drinkable.
Windows 8 is at 14%, but split between 8 and 8.1.
I know Window 8 adoption is bad, but it's not *that* bad.
LibreOffice is available from the Ubuntu package manager. Skype is also available for Linux. There're also a plethora of text editors available for Linux, including but not limited to emacs, vi, nano and Sublime Sheeeesh!!!!
Not unless you have root access. If their admin didn't install these, they are stuck without them.
The poster's argument was quite irrelevant and off-topic, because Kali 2.0 does actually use systemd.
What are the prerequisites for understanding that textbook? Would someone with an EE degree be able to get something out of it?
It sounds like an interesting read, but I hope that I wouldn't need a strong background in biology or chemistry to understand it, as I have neither. :)