Yes they are. The current "Premium" plan (4 screens, 4k, HDR) is being renamed to "Ultra" and having its price increased from $13.99 to $16.99.
They are then creating a new plan (2 screens, 4k, no HDR) calling it "Premium" and pricing it at $13.99....Well, at least in theory. They are testing this new pricing in a few select markets.
I mean, the same thing is true for VCs who invest in new/start up businesses. They are also the ones holding their dicks as they have no return on their investment.
Again...think of crowd funding like doing a VC investment, in terms of risk...It has a high-likelihood of failure.
However, unlike doing a VC investment...the rewards are often pretty low...you simply get the product you paid for. Not the large pay outs or ownership interest of a company that could be worth a lot of money.
I'm not the OP you were responding to, but I am currently anti-death penalty.
Currently, my only two issues with the death penalty are:
1) It must be done humanely. If there is a method of execution that is fast and completely painless. I currently believe that the only method of execution that satisfies this issue is Nitrogen gas. People who have survived high-nitrogen gas environments said they didn't feel any pain. Just blacked out and woke up later...maybe had a headache after waking. I don't know of any known instances of someone saying that it was a painful experience. I may be wrong on this though...I haven't fully researched it.
2) You must have 100% concrete evidence that this person actually committed the crime that they are accused of. I consider this to be even higher than the legal standard of proof in the US called "Beyond reasonable doubt". You need another legal standard of proof that I don't believe exists. I would call it "Beyond Possible Doubt". Basically this would mean that if the defense can come up with a possible explanation of the evidence presented that suggested he didn't do the crime, then it's up to the prosecution to prove that is explanation didn't happen...If you can prove the crime "beyond a reasonable doubt" then it's life in prison...if you can prove it "beyond possible doubt" then it's the death penalty.
I think there are very few situations that would actually satisfy my 2nd requirement...you would need multiple videos of the crime, at least one of them must completely clearly show the defendant's face, multiple independent video analysis services verify that the video wasn't altered/doctored/etc., the video shows DNA evidence of the defendant being left at the scene, the video continuously shows that the evidence wasn't tampered with, full video of the chain-of-custody from collection to analysis, and that DNA evidence is matched with an exceptionally high level of certainty (multiple independent labs, and the defense is entitled to their own testing).
And then assuming you can meet both of those criteria, you then start a 10-year waiting period where all evidence must be fully preserved. When there is 1-year left in that waiting period, the defendant is essentially entitled to an almost-second trial, using new/more sophisticated techniques and knowledge to refute the evidence that was present at the trial. Burden of proof on the prosecution isn't as high...you aren't re litigating the entire trial. Just the admissibility and reliability of the evidence. If new/better DNA and video analysis techniques can suggest that the evidence wasn't as reliable/irrefutable as originally thought, then the sentence is turned to life-in-prison. If the new techniques of analyzing the evidence suggests innocence (reasonable doubt), then you're entitled to a new trial.
I understand that this is an exceptionally high prosecutorial burden. It would have to be largely reserved for the most egregious of offenders. But, as others have said...if you kill someone, you can't make them whole....you can't even try to make them whole...You can never bring them back to life. If you simply send someone to prison you can attempt to make them whole (give them triple the average salary in their state, per year for each year they were in prison...put out full-page ads in the top 2 news papers in all locations in a 200-mile radius from their home and the top news paper in the top 20 markets in the US that proclaim their innocence...and a pension that is equal to the average salary in their home state.)
It's a basic principle of osmosis. Basically, osmosis means that if you have two different solutions (chemistry definition) that pass by each other with a semi-permeable membrane in between, that the parts of the solutions that can pass through the membrane will tend to equalize in concentration on both sides of the membrane.
When you breathe, there are two solutions (your blood and the air) that are separated by a semi-permeable membrane (your lungs). The air is mostly nitrogen (78%) and about about 21% oxygen in it. Your blood has oxygen and CO2 in it. The membrane in your lungs allows oxygen and CO2 to pass through it.
In the normal case, the amount of oxygen in your blood is less than the amount of oxygen in the air. The amount of CO2 in your blood is also higher than the amount of CO2 in the air. Your body takes the Oxygen out of your blood, converts it in to CO2 through metabolism, and puts the CO2 back in to your blood.
Since the concentration of oxygen in your blood is lower than the concentration of oxygen in your lungs, oxygen will move from the air in your lungs in to your blood until the two concentrations equalize. Same for CO2...The higher concentration of CO2 in your blood will move to the air in your lungs until the two concentrations equalize. Then you exhale the low-oxygen/high-CO2 air in your lungs and inhale fresh air...repeat.
In order for the above process to work, the membrane in your lungs has to be a two-way street. Oxygen needs to come in, CO2 needs to go out. The membrane is bidirectional.
The way a Nitrogen chamber works is that the gas in the nitrogen chamber is very close to 100% nitrogen. The percentage of both oxygen and CO2 in the air is nearly zero. You now breath this new solution in and osmosis works the same way. The oxygen and CO2 concentrations between the two solutions equalizes.
So you have blood returning to your lungs that has a high-concentration of CO2 and a low-concentration of Oxygen. The solution on the other side of the membrane in your lungs is pretty much 0% oxygen and 0% CO2. Since the concentrations want to equalize, this means that both CO2 AND oxygen from your blood is moving to the air in your lungs. Which you then exhale. This effectively causes oxygen to leave your body.
If the concentration of Oxygen in the blood returning to your lungs is at 16%, then when the oxygen in your blood equalizes with the 0% oxygen gas in your lungs, it causes you to now have 8% oxygen in your blood and 8% oxygen in your lungs. You now exhale causing that oxygen that was in your blood and now in your lungs to leave your body, inhaling a "fresh breath" of nearly 100% nitrogen...8% oxygen in your blood and 0% oxygen in your lungs will equalize at 4%...etc.
Holding your breath means the air in your lungs still has oxygen in it. 20% oxygen in your lungs (normal air), 16% oxygen in your blood. They will both equalize at 18%. Now when the blood comes around again, you've got 12% oxygen in your blood and 18% oxygen in your lungs...it equalizes at 15%...etc.
The rate at which the oxygen level in your blood lowers when you hold your breath is much less than the rate it lowers when you breath 100% nitrogen air.
Holding your breath does have the downside of also not exhaling the CO2 in your blood. It's the high concentrations of CO2 in your blood that cause the suffocation feeling. Holding your breath won't let the CO2 out of your lungs and blood. Breathing in Nitrogen causes the CO2 to respirate out of your body normally. This is why you don't feel like you're suffocating when you breath 100% nitrogen air. They say that your vision quickly fades, you shortly afterwards pass out, and then shortly after that die.
You can't make a contract that is contrary to law. Just because the contract says "if you tamper with it, it will void the warranty". The law specifically says that it's legal to repair/tamper and it won't void the warranty.
Let me provide another, more extreme example: You buy a car seat for your new born child. The car seat is wrapped in plastic with a sticker that says by opening the package you agree to the terms and conditions in the enclosed booklet. Inside that booklet it says that the car seat doesn't meet all of the current safety requirements, you agree that you're aware of this, and that you agree to not hold the company liable for any deaths/injuries in conjunction with using the car seat. 3 months later, you get in a minor accident, but because the car seat was defective the restrains broke your child was injured with life-long brain damage. You now have life-long medical expenses to care for your child.
The company can pull out the shrink wrap agreement, but that would quickly get thrown out as the regulations in place at the time the car seat was sold clearly required specific safety features be included in all car seats. In fact, the agreement in the box specifically states that your company KNEW that the car seats didn't comply. Now your company is responsible for negligence which will triple the damages.
Basically, if the law says that in order to do business you must do X, then you can't create a contract that says "you agree that we won't do X". If the law says that if you have a warranty, then you must allow people to use 3rd party repair shops and that those won't void the warranty, then you can't create a contract that says otherwise.
Contracts that are contrary to law aren't valid. This isn't legal advise, i'm not a lawyer, etc. etc.
All states (except Louisiana) have merchant-ability laws that override any in store policies. These state laws vary on the state, but the basics of each one are mostly the same: If a product is sold as being able to do X, then it must do X. If it doesn't do X, then the buyer is entitled to return the product, regardless of what the return policies are.
For example, let's say there is a store selling sheets. Their return policy says "no returns on sheets once they are used", which is pretty typical. Through the course of business, they say that if a set of sheets has been washed, then they are used (also typical). I buy a pair of king-sized sheets. I then take them out of the package and immediately launder them, as you are supposed to do. When I take them out, I find out they don't fit my bed and that they were queen-sized sheets sold in king-sized packaging. Despite the policies saying that there are no returns on sheets once they are used and that sheets are considered to be used if they have been washed, I would be legally entitled to return the sheets for a full refund regardless of what the store's policies are.
The exception to the above is when items are sold "as is". "As is" is very different than "All sales final". It also, required specific language be used to designate a sale of "as is" product. There are a handful of states that don't even allow for the merchantability exception for as-is sales either.
Before you talk about things you know nothing about, I suggest giving Apple's iOS Security Guide a proper reading and understanding: https://www.apple.com/business...
Not only are fully alpha numeric pass codes fully supported, Apple has taken steps to mitigate the "we've been forced to sign firmware" attack vector as well:
The passcode is entangled with the device’s UID, so brute-force attempts must be performed on the device under attack. A large iteration count is used to make each attempt slower. The iteration count is calibrated so that one attempt takes approximately 80 milliseconds. This means it would take more than five and a half years to try all combinations of a six-character alphanumeric passcode with lowercase letters and numbers.
Besides, this article is a non-story. Every version of Windows has always shipped with a few annoying default settings, go in and turn that crap off - problem solved.
RTFA. The point of the article is that you can't do exactly what you suggest people do. Per the article:
There is, technically, a way to disable this and stop Windows from installing these appsbut it’s only for Windows 10 Enterprise and Education users. Even if you spent $200 for a Windows 10 Professional license because you want to use your PC for business, Microsoft won’t let you stop the “Consumer Experience” on a professional PC.
The group policy or registry setting that disables this feature originally worked on Windows 10 Home and Professional in the November 2015 update when Microsoft originally added the Consumer Experience. But Microsoft went out of their way to make Home and Professional ignore this setting in the Anniversary Update. Now, only Enterprise and Education respect that preference.
So unless you buy the enterprise edition of Windows (Cost: $84 per PC, per year, minimum 5 licenses), or are attending a university that will enable you to obtain the Education edition on windows (Cost: averages about $9,970 per year) you can't even do what you suggest. Windows explicitly ignores the settings that turns this functionality off.
Pop-up ads in the traditional sense, where a new browser window "popped up" or opened in a new window, have been typically blocked in Chrome for a LONG time.
What is new to being blocked are exactly what you describe, in-window "pop up" ads that use absolute divs and covering the content...Often times with a hard-to-find "X" or other similar close option in a non-stard location or only appearing/enabled after a delay has passed.
Moreover, the only one having a standing regards the DMCA would be Apple, not the victim,
Not necessarily:
The DMCA says:
No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title. The prohibition contained in the preceding sentence shall take effect at the end of the 2-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this chapter.
(1) No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that— (A) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing protection afforded by a technological measure that effectively protects a right of a copyright owner under this title in a work or a portion thereof; (B) has only limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent protection afforded by a technological measure that effectively protects a right of a copyright owner under this title in a work or a portion thereof; or (C) is marketed by that person or another acting in concert with that person with that person’s knowledge for use in circumventing protection afforded by a technological measure that effectively protects a right of a copyright owner under this title in a work or a portion thereof.
The data on the phone itself are copyrighted by the individual who created it. If I took any photo, typed up any e-mail, etc. it's considered a copyrighted work the instant it's created. You, as the individual, could claim that they violated the DMCA by breaking your effective technological method for preventing the distribution of your copyrighted work.
There is the law enforcement exemption from the DMCA, but that seems to apply to law enforcement officers and government employees.
Have you actually read the terms of service that you agree to when you sign up for an e-mail account from Microsoft? Obviously not. Because if you did, you'd see that you agreed to let them look at pretty much anything that is sent/received/stored on any Microsoft service for the purposes of detecting and reporting: anything illegal, activity that exploits/harms/threatens to harm children, spam, anything that they (in their sole an infinite wisdom) determine to be inappropriate, engage in fraud, accessing Microsoft's or anyone else's services illegally, copyright infringement, and transmitting malware.
First off: Microsoft is not the government. They can search their own property (their servers) at any time for any reason. 4th amendment does not apply Second: Even if Microsoft was the government (*shudder*), you gave consent for them to search your communications when you signed up. If the police show up at your house and ask "can we search your house?", if you say yes, then anything they find can be used against you...warrant or not. Third: The indemnification you talk about only applies to copyright. Any other illegal activities that are perpetuated through their services they can be liable for if they are complacent in them happening on their services.
If you don't like Microsoft searching your e-mails for possible illegal content, don't use Microsoft's e-mail services. That is literally your only recourse. I agree with you in that i'd prefer that no one but me reads my e-mails. This is one of the many reasons why I run my own e-mail server. But Microsoft is within their rights to search your e-mails.
You still needed the USB->lightening cable that came with your phone to charge the phone using the normal USB port. It's the same cable, just with USB-C instead of plain USB.
As an owner of an iPhone 7 I can say that the claim that the adapter being output only is purely false. I have used the adapter with my existing headphones that have the mic, volume, and track controls without any problems.
how is it greed? The wired headphones are still included in the box. They include the adapter for normal headphones that you already own or wish to purchase in the future. They sell the adapter, should you lose it or want more than one, for $9.
The earpods are basically just fancy bluetooth headphones. Which you can also still connect to the phone.
Don't worry. Microsoft made this much easier by taking away the ability to pick and choose the updates you can install. Not only are updates now mandatory and WILL be installed, all updates to Windows are now rolled up together as one cumulative update. So while you can disable network access and other router tricks to stop windows update from installing updates, updates are STILL an all-or-nothing approach as starting as of this most recent rounds of updates, all updates are issued as roll ups that include all updates from the most recent round of updates and ALL previous updates that were issued.
Now if one of their minor updates is breaking the connection to your kindle, your only choice is to remove ALL updates that were installed the last time and not install any new updates until Microsoft fixes their shit.
Any drivers that were already installed at the time of the update got grandfathered in and would still run under the Anniversary update. You just can't install new drivers that are unsigned or install a new device with unsigned drivers.
Is it a Kindle Paperwhite or Voyage? Or a different model of Kindle? The summary explicitly calls out the Paperwhite and Voyage models as the ones Windows is having problems with.
So i'm not installing Windows 10 on my PS4... got it.
I'm pretty sure that was his point. He has to use Windows to play his Windows games. Because of this, he CAN'T choose Linux and still get the same functionality. Therefor, anything that negatively impacts Windows impacts him.
Most people won't ever want to move the SD card from their phone to the computer...but...Easy, just grab any open source windows EXT3 disk mounting utility for windows, reskin it, package it up in your own installer, include a GPL license with it and put it up on the "downloads" section of the support site. Then include an insert with the phone directing them to the web address on your website on where to download it.
Or the phone can just say "This SD card needs to be formatted for use with this phone. This will erase everything on this card. Are you sure?" for any non ext3 formatted cards.
If he's using a proper True Crypt volume, encrypted with AES-256, you're off by about 50 orders of magnitude. AES-256 will survive brute-force attacks until pretty much the heat death of the universe.
Slashdot Mirror
But they are not increasing the price of premium.
Yes they are. The current "Premium" plan (4 screens, 4k, HDR) is being renamed to "Ultra" and having its price increased from $13.99 to $16.99.
They are then creating a new plan (2 screens, 4k, no HDR) calling it "Premium" and pricing it at $13.99. ...Well, at least in theory. They are testing this new pricing in a few select markets.
Actually, that's exactly how lawsuits are won. https://www.law.cornell.edu/we...
I mean, the same thing is true for VCs who invest in new/start up businesses. They are also the ones holding their dicks as they have no return on their investment.
Again...think of crowd funding like doing a VC investment, in terms of risk...It has a high-likelihood of failure.
However, unlike doing a VC investment...the rewards are often pretty low...you simply get the product you paid for. Not the large pay outs or ownership interest of a company that could be worth a lot of money.
I'm not the OP you were responding to, but I am currently anti-death penalty.
Currently, my only two issues with the death penalty are:
1) It must be done humanely. If there is a method of execution that is fast and completely painless. I currently believe that the only method of execution that satisfies this issue is Nitrogen gas. People who have survived high-nitrogen gas environments said they didn't feel any pain. Just blacked out and woke up later...maybe had a headache after waking. I don't know of any known instances of someone saying that it was a painful experience. I may be wrong on this though...I haven't fully researched it.
2) You must have 100% concrete evidence that this person actually committed the crime that they are accused of. I consider this to be even higher than the legal standard of proof in the US called "Beyond reasonable doubt". You need another legal standard of proof that I don't believe exists. I would call it "Beyond Possible Doubt". Basically this would mean that if the defense can come up with a possible explanation of the evidence presented that suggested he didn't do the crime, then it's up to the prosecution to prove that is explanation didn't happen...If you can prove the crime "beyond a reasonable doubt" then it's life in prison...if you can prove it "beyond possible doubt" then it's the death penalty.
I think there are very few situations that would actually satisfy my 2nd requirement...you would need multiple videos of the crime, at least one of them must completely clearly show the defendant's face, multiple independent video analysis services verify that the video wasn't altered/doctored/etc., the video shows DNA evidence of the defendant being left at the scene, the video continuously shows that the evidence wasn't tampered with, full video of the chain-of-custody from collection to analysis, and that DNA evidence is matched with an exceptionally high level of certainty (multiple independent labs, and the defense is entitled to their own testing).
And then assuming you can meet both of those criteria, you then start a 10-year waiting period where all evidence must be fully preserved. When there is 1-year left in that waiting period, the defendant is essentially entitled to an almost-second trial, using new/more sophisticated techniques and knowledge to refute the evidence that was present at the trial. Burden of proof on the prosecution isn't as high...you aren't re litigating the entire trial. Just the admissibility and reliability of the evidence. If new/better DNA and video analysis techniques can suggest that the evidence wasn't as reliable/irrefutable as originally thought, then the sentence is turned to life-in-prison. If the new techniques of analyzing the evidence suggests innocence (reasonable doubt), then you're entitled to a new trial.
I understand that this is an exceptionally high prosecutorial burden. It would have to be largely reserved for the most egregious of offenders. But, as others have said...if you kill someone, you can't make them whole....you can't even try to make them whole...You can never bring them back to life. If you simply send someone to prison you can attempt to make them whole (give them triple the average salary in their state, per year for each year they were in prison...put out full-page ads in the top 2 news papers in all locations in a 200-mile radius from their home and the top news paper in the top 20 markets in the US that proclaim their innocence...and a pension that is equal to the average salary in their home state.)
It's a basic principle of osmosis. Basically, osmosis means that if you have two different solutions (chemistry definition) that pass by each other with a semi-permeable membrane in between, that the parts of the solutions that can pass through the membrane will tend to equalize in concentration on both sides of the membrane.
When you breathe, there are two solutions (your blood and the air) that are separated by a semi-permeable membrane (your lungs). The air is mostly nitrogen (78%) and about about 21% oxygen in it. Your blood has oxygen and CO2 in it. The membrane in your lungs allows oxygen and CO2 to pass through it.
In the normal case, the amount of oxygen in your blood is less than the amount of oxygen in the air. The amount of CO2 in your blood is also higher than the amount of CO2 in the air. Your body takes the Oxygen out of your blood, converts it in to CO2 through metabolism, and puts the CO2 back in to your blood.
Since the concentration of oxygen in your blood is lower than the concentration of oxygen in your lungs, oxygen will move from the air in your lungs in to your blood until the two concentrations equalize. Same for CO2...The higher concentration of CO2 in your blood will move to the air in your lungs until the two concentrations equalize. Then you exhale the low-oxygen/high-CO2 air in your lungs and inhale fresh air...repeat.
In order for the above process to work, the membrane in your lungs has to be a two-way street. Oxygen needs to come in, CO2 needs to go out. The membrane is bidirectional.
The way a Nitrogen chamber works is that the gas in the nitrogen chamber is very close to 100% nitrogen. The percentage of both oxygen and CO2 in the air is nearly zero. You now breath this new solution in and osmosis works the same way. The oxygen and CO2 concentrations between the two solutions equalizes.
So you have blood returning to your lungs that has a high-concentration of CO2 and a low-concentration of Oxygen. The solution on the other side of the membrane in your lungs is pretty much 0% oxygen and 0% CO2. Since the concentrations want to equalize, this means that both CO2 AND oxygen from your blood is moving to the air in your lungs. Which you then exhale. This effectively causes oxygen to leave your body.
If the concentration of Oxygen in the blood returning to your lungs is at 16%, then when the oxygen in your blood equalizes with the 0% oxygen gas in your lungs, it causes you to now have 8% oxygen in your blood and 8% oxygen in your lungs. You now exhale causing that oxygen that was in your blood and now in your lungs to leave your body, inhaling a "fresh breath" of nearly 100% nitrogen...8% oxygen in your blood and 0% oxygen in your lungs will equalize at 4%...etc.
Holding your breath means the air in your lungs still has oxygen in it. 20% oxygen in your lungs (normal air), 16% oxygen in your blood. They will both equalize at 18%. Now when the blood comes around again, you've got 12% oxygen in your blood and 18% oxygen in your lungs...it equalizes at 15%...etc.
The rate at which the oxygen level in your blood lowers when you hold your breath is much less than the rate it lowers when you breath 100% nitrogen air.
Holding your breath does have the downside of also not exhaling the CO2 in your blood. It's the high concentrations of CO2 in your blood that cause the suffocation feeling. Holding your breath won't let the CO2 out of your lungs and blood. Breathing in Nitrogen causes the CO2 to respirate out of your body normally. This is why you don't feel like you're suffocating when you breath 100% nitrogen air. They say that your vision quickly fades, you shortly afterwards pass out, and then shortly after that die.
You can't make a contract that is contrary to law. Just because the contract says "if you tamper with it, it will void the warranty". The law specifically says that it's legal to repair/tamper and it won't void the warranty.
Let me provide another, more extreme example: You buy a car seat for your new born child. The car seat is wrapped in plastic with a sticker that says by opening the package you agree to the terms and conditions in the enclosed booklet. Inside that booklet it says that the car seat doesn't meet all of the current safety requirements, you agree that you're aware of this, and that you agree to not hold the company liable for any deaths/injuries in conjunction with using the car seat. 3 months later, you get in a minor accident, but because the car seat was defective the restrains broke your child was injured with life-long brain damage. You now have life-long medical expenses to care for your child.
The company can pull out the shrink wrap agreement, but that would quickly get thrown out as the regulations in place at the time the car seat was sold clearly required specific safety features be included in all car seats. In fact, the agreement in the box specifically states that your company KNEW that the car seats didn't comply. Now your company is responsible for negligence which will triple the damages.
Basically, if the law says that in order to do business you must do X, then you can't create a contract that says "you agree that we won't do X". If the law says that if you have a warranty, then you must allow people to use 3rd party repair shops and that those won't void the warranty, then you can't create a contract that says otherwise.
Contracts that are contrary to law aren't valid. This isn't legal advise, i'm not a lawyer, etc. etc.
All states (except Louisiana) have merchant-ability laws that override any in store policies. These state laws vary on the state, but the basics of each one are mostly the same: If a product is sold as being able to do X, then it must do X. If it doesn't do X, then the buyer is entitled to return the product, regardless of what the return policies are.
For example, let's say there is a store selling sheets. Their return policy says "no returns on sheets once they are used", which is pretty typical. Through the course of business, they say that if a set of sheets has been washed, then they are used (also typical). I buy a pair of king-sized sheets. I then take them out of the package and immediately launder them, as you are supposed to do. When I take them out, I find out they don't fit my bed and that they were queen-sized sheets sold in king-sized packaging. Despite the policies saying that there are no returns on sheets once they are used and that sheets are considered to be used if they have been washed, I would be legally entitled to return the sheets for a full refund regardless of what the store's policies are.
The exception to the above is when items are sold "as is". "As is" is very different than "All sales final". It also, required specific language be used to designate a sale of "as is" product. There are a handful of states that don't even allow for the merchantability exception for as-is sales either.
Before you talk about things you know nothing about, I suggest giving Apple's iOS Security Guide a proper reading and understanding: https://www.apple.com/business...
Not only are fully alpha numeric pass codes fully supported, Apple has taken steps to mitigate the "we've been forced to sign firmware" attack vector as well:
The passcode is entangled with the device’s UID, so brute-force attempts must be performed on the device under attack. A large iteration count is used to make each attempt slower. The iteration count is calibrated so that one attempt takes approximately 80 milliseconds. This means it would take more than five and a half years to try all combinations of a six-character alphanumeric passcode with lowercase letters and numbers.
Besides, this article is a non-story. Every version of Windows has always shipped with a few annoying default settings, go in and turn that crap off - problem solved.
RTFA. The point of the article is that you can't do exactly what you suggest people do. Per the article:
There is, technically, a way to disable this and stop Windows from installing these appsbut it’s only for Windows 10 Enterprise and Education users. Even if you spent $200 for a Windows 10 Professional license because you want to use your PC for business, Microsoft won’t let you stop the “Consumer Experience” on a professional PC.
The group policy or registry setting that disables this feature originally worked on Windows 10 Home and Professional in the November 2015 update when Microsoft originally added the Consumer Experience. But Microsoft went out of their way to make Home and Professional ignore this setting in the Anniversary Update. Now, only Enterprise and Education respect that preference.
So unless you buy the enterprise edition of Windows (Cost: $84 per PC, per year, minimum 5 licenses), or are attending a university that will enable you to obtain the Education edition on windows (Cost: averages about $9,970 per year) you can't even do what you suggest. Windows explicitly ignores the settings that turns this functionality off.
Pop-up ads in the traditional sense, where a new browser window "popped up" or opened in a new window, have been typically blocked in Chrome for a LONG time.
What is new to being blocked are exactly what you describe, in-window "pop up" ads that use absolute divs and covering the content...Often times with a hard-to-find "X" or other similar close option in a non-stard location or only appearing/enabled after a delay has passed.
Moreover, the only one having a standing regards the DMCA would be Apple, not the victim,
Not necessarily:
The DMCA says:
No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title. The prohibition contained in the preceding sentence shall take effect at the end of the 2-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this chapter.
(1) No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that—
(A) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing protection afforded by a technological measure that effectively protects a right of a copyright owner under this title in a work or a portion thereof;
(B) has only limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent protection afforded by a technological measure that effectively protects a right of a copyright owner under this title in a work or a portion thereof; or
(C) is marketed by that person or another acting in concert with that person with that person’s knowledge for use in circumventing protection afforded by a technological measure that effectively protects a right of a copyright owner under this title in a work or a portion thereof.
The data on the phone itself are copyrighted by the individual who created it. If I took any photo, typed up any e-mail, etc. it's considered a copyrighted work the instant it's created. You, as the individual, could claim that they violated the DMCA by breaking your effective technological method for preventing the distribution of your copyrighted work.
There is the law enforcement exemption from the DMCA, but that seems to apply to law enforcement officers and government employees.
Have you actually read the terms of service that you agree to when you sign up for an e-mail account from Microsoft? Obviously not. Because if you did, you'd see that you agreed to let them look at pretty much anything that is sent/received/stored on any Microsoft service for the purposes of detecting and reporting: anything illegal, activity that exploits/harms/threatens to harm children, spam, anything that they (in their sole an infinite wisdom) determine to be inappropriate, engage in fraud, accessing Microsoft's or anyone else's services illegally, copyright infringement, and transmitting malware.
First off: Microsoft is not the government. They can search their own property (their servers) at any time for any reason. 4th amendment does not apply
Second: Even if Microsoft was the government (*shudder*), you gave consent for them to search your communications when you signed up. If the police show up at your house and ask "can we search your house?", if you say yes, then anything they find can be used against you...warrant or not.
Third: The indemnification you talk about only applies to copyright. Any other illegal activities that are perpetuated through their services they can be liable for if they are complacent in them happening on their services.
If you don't like Microsoft searching your e-mails for possible illegal content, don't use Microsoft's e-mail services. That is literally your only recourse. I agree with you in that i'd prefer that no one but me reads my e-mails. This is one of the many reasons why I run my own e-mail server. But Microsoft is within their rights to search your e-mails.
You still needed the USB->lightening cable that came with your phone to charge the phone using the normal USB port. It's the same cable, just with USB-C instead of plain USB.
No. You already did that with the TOS you agreed to when you bought the thing in the first place.
As an owner of an iPhone 7 I can say that the claim that the adapter being output only is purely false. I have used the adapter with my existing headphones that have the mic, volume, and track controls without any problems.
how is it greed? The wired headphones are still included in the box. They include the adapter for normal headphones that you already own or wish to purchase in the future. They sell the adapter, should you lose it or want more than one, for $9.
The earpods are basically just fancy bluetooth headphones. Which you can also still connect to the phone.
actually, they include the dongle with the phone. If you lose it, or want more than one, they are $9.
Don't worry. Microsoft made this much easier by taking away the ability to pick and choose the updates you can install. Not only are updates now mandatory and WILL be installed, all updates to Windows are now rolled up together as one cumulative update. So while you can disable network access and other router tricks to stop windows update from installing updates, updates are STILL an all-or-nothing approach as starting as of this most recent rounds of updates, all updates are issued as roll ups that include all updates from the most recent round of updates and ALL previous updates that were issued.
Now if one of their minor updates is breaking the connection to your kindle, your only choice is to remove ALL updates that were installed the last time and not install any new updates until Microsoft fixes their shit.
Any drivers that were already installed at the time of the update got grandfathered in and would still run under the Anniversary update. You just can't install new drivers that are unsigned or install a new device with unsigned drivers.
Is it a Kindle Paperwhite or Voyage? Or a different model of Kindle? The summary explicitly calls out the Paperwhite and Voyage models as the ones Windows is having problems with.
So i'm not installing Windows 10 on my PS4... got it.
I'm pretty sure that was his point. He has to use Windows to play his Windows games. Because of this, he CAN'T choose Linux and still get the same functionality. Therefor, anything that negatively impacts Windows impacts him.
Most people won't ever want to move the SD card from their phone to the computer...but...Easy, just grab any open source windows EXT3 disk mounting utility for windows, reskin it, package it up in your own installer, include a GPL license with it and put it up on the "downloads" section of the support site. Then include an insert with the phone directing them to the web address on your website on where to download it.
Or the phone can just say "This SD card needs to be formatted for use with this phone. This will erase everything on this card. Are you sure?" for any non ext3 formatted cards.
Game center is completely removed from iOS 10 altogether. http://toucharcade.com/2016/06...
If he's using a proper True Crypt volume, encrypted with AES-256, you're off by about 50 orders of magnitude. AES-256 will survive brute-force attacks until pretty much the heat death of the universe.