Given that this attack can use the speaker found in a lot of computers, the speaker needn't be very big, nor the battery very heavy. A piezo transducer and a small circuit powered by a 3032, or from the drone's own battery, could likely accomplish the task.
About the same as my malware infested iOS. Actually, both are clean as can be because neither are jailbroken or rooted, I don't sideload, and I only install applications from trusted developers. They could both be equally infested with shit, though, if I didn't follow those guidelines.
Go cash that Apple check so you can buy your meds.
They're either using $200+ cylinders with restricted keys (e.g. you can't just go to Home Depot and get them copied) or they're spending a lot on rekeying. In either case, they'd be better off with even a mid-90's punched keycard system.
Apparently, you're able to search Slashdot quite effectively yourself. Why do you need me to do it? It's no skin off my back if you wish to keep your head buried in the sand. Personally, I use an Android phone and an iPad, so I'm invested in both ecosystems; I just hold no illusions of one beign better, or safer, than the other.
You know, the last shitbox motel I stayed in, $49/night 9 years ago, was using keycards. What motels are using keys anymore? I don't think the handful of them really count for much.
Well, as long as the phone prompts for biometrics before unlocking the door or starting the car, as is done with payments -- and how it's done on Android -- it's reasonably safe.
NFC enabled locks don't really cost much more than your standard programmable keycard lock, so I'm not sure that argument rests on very solid ground. Over time, the NFC and Bluetooth locks end up cheaper as the require less hands-on maintenance and everything short of hardware failure can be handled from the front desk. Add to that, keycards are then only needed for guests who don't have phones, so fewer keycards need be purchased (and replaced) over time.
It's actually getting to the point where the more well-heeled hotels are the only ones who can not to implement these locks.
Yes, a rooted Android phone is susceptible to malware from 3rd-party sources, just like a jailbroken iPhone. As far as factory-configured devices, if you think the Apple store has had any less malware than the Play store, though, you're sadly mistaken.
Much of it has made the front page here, actually.
Because most businesses want to provide a consistent customer experience. That is, one that works for 100% of customers, not merely 85%. Especially when some monetary investment is required on their part.
NFC payments were actually a thing before Apple Pay. Basically, you only saw them at places that upgraded their card terminals after they became a thing, because it came as part of the terminal. Of course, back then, nobody was using NFC payments. Then again, now that we have Apple Pay and businesses have spent the money to upgrade their terminals (because now everyone can do it), still nobody uses it.
So, I think you were trying to say that things suddenly become popular just because Apple implements them? Was that your point? Because it hasn't quite worked out for... well... a lot of things. NFC payments: NOPE. Screen notches: despite a handful of experiments, NOPE, those models don't sell. No headphone jack: despite a handful of experiments, NOPE, those models don't sell. No SD card: debatable, but most people I know either own an iPhone or an Android with SD support.
And, since most people own Android phones, it's hard to say these things that don't do well in the Android ecosystem are "popular" by any legitimate definition of the word.
Yes, Math Women, the original women in tech. Women tried tech, they ruled tech at the start, then decided they didn't want to be in tech. Why do we keep trying to force them?
If a woman wants a tech job, good for her, if she's qualified I'll happily work alongside her. If she does not, or she's not qualified, I want her nowhere near my profession; the same applies to men, by the way, before anyone wants to scream "SEXISM!!!"
You seem to have missed the point, I was talking about more than just internet service. At any rate, you are absolutely right: "A private network company cannot just take its money and invest in a poor city that will never pay back for the work done.
Then commit to a government that it will look after and upgrade the network." Except that this requires that we ignore all of the times ISPs have made that very commitment to various governments; isn't the State of New York currently suing an ISP over this very issue?
So, I guess I was being somewhat generous when I said you're right, as they can and do make those commitments, even though we all know they are unsustainable. Of course, the contracts in which those commitments are made forbid local and state governments from implementing any form of municipal broadband, as well, so... While your little municipal broadband idea is sound, it isn't legally feasible in most poor neighborhoods because the city or state has already signed an agreement stating that they won't compete with [major ISP] in exchange for [.major ISP] building and maintaining a network serving all residents equally. What's missing is [major ISP] fulfilling their end of the bargain, but you had best believe they'll sue the city and win if the city, noting that [major ISP] is in violation of the agreement, takes any steps to remedy the situation. Spend 30 seconds on Google looking for references to Comcast and AT&T suing to stop muni broadband deployments, it happens all the fucking time and they win consistently despite the fact that the agreement that allows them to block it should be null and void due to their own noncompliance.
And by not investing in our poor communities, we ensure that they remain poor communities. Then, as those poor communities get overcrowded, they begin to sprawl, slowly engulfing the more affluent communities that, quite often, immediately border them. Suddenly, you stop seeing network upgrades because, though it was an affluent area when you moved there, you now live in a poor community. So, what do you do? Move elsewhere?
And in 20 years, when every affluent community has had its value driven down because the community next door became a "poor" community and brought with it an increase in crime, there will be no more affluent communities, just poor communities which don't see network upgrades.
Of course, that will be bullshit, nothing more than an excuse trumpeted by the network provider [SIC (and probably Comcast, as they seem to be buying everyone lately)], though the general decline of our society as a direct result of letting poor communities remain poor is very real.
Your point was that Steam Link had no purpose as people would either game natively on their device or sit at their PC to game
Thank you for confirming that you missed my point entirely. My point was, actually, that Steam Link wouldn't cut into iOS game sales because scenarios still (abundantly) exist in which people will wish to play games while Steam Link simply will not operate.
My point is that people buy Steam Link because they find the two options to which you want to constrain them to be too limiting.
Well, then, your point is entirely off base because people don't buy Steam Link. It's a free app. Yes, there is a piece of hardware with the same name, but that is not what is being discussed here.
Thus, you're talking shit and have failed miserably to address my core argument that people actually use Steam Link.
I don't need to address that point, as I never argued otherwise. You're the one who's talking shit here, since you apparently have no clue what is even being discussed. Come back once you've figured it out.
I didn't say that was the only use, I said that was the only scenario in which it actually works. Not the only scenario in which it works as in works for me, but the only one in which it works as in functions. This doesn't allow you to play your PC games while on the go, it literally requires you to be on the same LAN.
The fact that you think I'm wrong demonstrates that you don't know what Steam Link is. It's a low-latency remote desktop specialized to work better for gaming workloads, nothing more; if you're able to get low enough (sub-millisecond) latency for it to be able to work, you're able to be sitting in front of the PC that's actually running the games, simple as that.
I also never said I didn't have a use for it; I actually use similar functionality on a near daily basis.
Still qualifies as "rare", though. I never claimed it never happens.
That said, the phones lasting longer actually lowers the amortized monthly increase in TCOO, further strengthening the point I was making, so, thanks, I guess?
Think about it. Why would you settle for an iOS game when you could use your mobile to play a "real" game, using Steam Link?
Because Steam Link only works in scenarios where you could just as easily be sitting in front of your PC. When you're not in one of those scenarios, you "settle" for an iOS (or Android) game, because the PC games aren't an option. When you are in one of those scenarios, well... Think about it. Why would you settle for an iOS game when you could use your mobile to play a "real" game, sitting in front of your PC?
I see Steam Link decreasing game sales in the Apple platform.
Only because people who want it will have to leave iOS in favor of Android. If Apple allowed it on their platform, this wouldn't be an issue, for the reason stated above.
At first it doesn't seem as a competitor, but indirectly it is.
No, for the reason stated above, it really is not.
They actually occupy very different markets. Games that install and run as apps on your phone occupy the portable (as in they come with you, in your pocket, everywhere you go) gaming market while games that install and run on your PC and are streamed over the Steam Link app, which requires a high-speed and low-latency connection back to your PC (e.g. that you are on the same LAN) occupy the desktop gaming market.
I'm not buying games for my PC so that I can play them when I'm away from home, because that's simply not possible; to fulfill that purpose, I buy games on my phone. This is true regardless of the existence of Steam Link.
We can debate all day whether a PC game or a phone game is a better product, or I can cut to the chase and point out that a PC game that is useless to me, because my PC is at home and I'm somewhere else, can't possibly be a better product than a game installed on my phone, that I can play right now because I have my phone with me.
I suppose it comes down to how you define "better", but part of that definition should probably include the ability to actually use the product. Viewed in that light, even if we agree that PC games are better when we have access to them, we also must recognize the fact that there are countless scenarios in which we do not have access to them and phone games are better on that basis alone.
No, they do. Microsoft Remode Desktop, various VNC clients, AirDisplay, and a handful of others that you can find with a quick search of the App Store. The ones I explicitly listed are ones I've either used in the past or currently use on one or more iPads; they are all currently available in the App Store, many for free.
It is anti-competitive because Apple denied the app based on it competing with Apple's own functionality (though it does not). It doesn't get much more literal than that. Don't bother arguing with me, or anyone else here, on that point though; just wait and see whether the FTC investigates them over it. If they do, you were wrong. If they do not, you were right.
Slashdot Mirror
Given that this attack can use the speaker found in a lot of computers, the speaker needn't be very big, nor the battery very heavy. A piezo transducer and a small circuit powered by a 3032, or from the drone's own battery, could likely accomplish the task.
About the same as my malware infested iOS. Actually, both are clean as can be because neither are jailbroken or rooted, I don't sideload, and I only install applications from trusted developers. They could both be equally infested with shit, though, if I didn't follow those guidelines.
Go cash that Apple check so you can buy your meds.
I foresee an increase in jailbroken iPhones in Russia over the next few months.
One of the things Apple did arguably invent - for better or worse - is the "walled garden"
I think Nintendo has prior art on that, actually, though I don't believe they invented it, either.
They're either using $200+ cylinders with restricted keys (e.g. you can't just go to Home Depot and get them copied) or they're spending a lot on rekeying. In either case, they'd be better off with even a mid-90's punched keycard system.
Apparently, you're able to search Slashdot quite effectively yourself. Why do you need me to do it? It's no skin off my back if you wish to keep your head buried in the sand. Personally, I use an Android phone and an iPad, so I'm invested in both ecosystems; I just hold no illusions of one beign better, or safer, than the other.
You know, the last shitbox motel I stayed in, $49/night 9 years ago, was using keycards. What motels are using keys anymore? I don't think the handful of them really count for much.
Well, as long as the phone prompts for biometrics before unlocking the door or starting the car, as is done with payments -- and how it's done on Android -- it's reasonably safe.
NFC enabled locks don't really cost much more than your standard programmable keycard lock, so I'm not sure that argument rests on very solid ground. Over time, the NFC and Bluetooth locks end up cheaper as the require less hands-on maintenance and everything short of hardware failure can be handled from the front desk. Add to that, keycards are then only needed for guests who don't have phones, so fewer keycards need be purchased (and replaced) over time.
It's actually getting to the point where the more well-heeled hotels are the only ones who can not to implement these locks.
I tea what you did there.
Yes, a rooted Android phone is susceptible to malware from 3rd-party sources, just like a jailbroken iPhone. As far as factory-configured devices, if you think the Apple store has had any less malware than the Play store, though, you're sadly mistaken.
Much of it has made the front page here, actually.
Because most businesses want to provide a consistent customer experience. That is, one that works for 100% of customers, not merely 85%. Especially when some monetary investment is required on their part.
NFC payments were actually a thing before Apple Pay. Basically, you only saw them at places that upgraded their card terminals after they became a thing, because it came as part of the terminal. Of course, back then, nobody was using NFC payments. Then again, now that we have Apple Pay and businesses have spent the money to upgrade their terminals (because now everyone can do it), still nobody uses it.
So, I think you were trying to say that things suddenly become popular just because Apple implements them? Was that your point? Because it hasn't quite worked out for... well... a lot of things. NFC payments: NOPE. Screen notches: despite a handful of experiments, NOPE, those models don't sell. No headphone jack: despite a handful of experiments, NOPE, those models don't sell. No SD card: debatable, but most people I know either own an iPhone or an Android with SD support.
And, since most people own Android phones, it's hard to say these things that don't do well in the Android ecosystem are "popular" by any legitimate definition of the word.
Yes, Math Women, the original women in tech. Women tried tech, they ruled tech at the start, then decided they didn't want to be in tech. Why do we keep trying to force them?
If a woman wants a tech job, good for her, if she's qualified I'll happily work alongside her. If she does not, or she's not qualified, I want her nowhere near my profession; the same applies to men, by the way, before anyone wants to scream "SEXISM!!!"
Bracing for "Offtopic" mods.
You seem to have missed the point, I was talking about more than just internet service. At any rate, you are absolutely right: "A private network company cannot just take its money and invest in a poor city that will never pay back for the work done. Then commit to a government that it will look after and upgrade the network." Except that this requires that we ignore all of the times ISPs have made that very commitment to various governments; isn't the State of New York currently suing an ISP over this very issue?
So, I guess I was being somewhat generous when I said you're right, as they can and do make those commitments, even though we all know they are unsustainable. Of course, the contracts in which those commitments are made forbid local and state governments from implementing any form of municipal broadband, as well, so... While your little municipal broadband idea is sound, it isn't legally feasible in most poor neighborhoods because the city or state has already signed an agreement stating that they won't compete with [major ISP] in exchange for [.major ISP] building and maintaining a network serving all residents equally. What's missing is [major ISP] fulfilling their end of the bargain, but you had best believe they'll sue the city and win if the city, noting that [major ISP] is in violation of the agreement, takes any steps to remedy the situation. Spend 30 seconds on Google looking for references to Comcast and AT&T suing to stop muni broadband deployments, it happens all the fucking time and they win consistently despite the fact that the agreement that allows them to block it should be null and void due to their own noncompliance.
And by not investing in our poor communities, we ensure that they remain poor communities. Then, as those poor communities get overcrowded, they begin to sprawl, slowly engulfing the more affluent communities that, quite often, immediately border them. Suddenly, you stop seeing network upgrades because, though it was an affluent area when you moved there, you now live in a poor community. So, what do you do? Move elsewhere?
And in 20 years, when every affluent community has had its value driven down because the community next door became a "poor" community and brought with it an increase in crime, there will be no more affluent communities, just poor communities which don't see network upgrades.
Of course, that will be bullshit, nothing more than an excuse trumpeted by the network provider [SIC (and probably Comcast, as they seem to be buying everyone lately)], though the general decline of our society as a direct result of letting poor communities remain poor is very real.
You know, that is a distinct possibility.
Well, you're being obtuse and stupid now.
And you're being a pedantic prick.
Your point was that Steam Link had no purpose as people would either game natively on their device or sit at their PC to game
Thank you for confirming that you missed my point entirely. My point was, actually, that Steam Link wouldn't cut into iOS game sales because scenarios still (abundantly) exist in which people will wish to play games while Steam Link simply will not operate.
My point is that people buy Steam Link because they find the two options to which you want to constrain them to be too limiting.
Well, then, your point is entirely off base because people don't buy Steam Link. It's a free app. Yes, there is a piece of hardware with the same name, but that is not what is being discussed here.
Thus, you're talking shit and have failed miserably to address my core argument that people actually use Steam Link.
I don't need to address that point, as I never argued otherwise. You're the one who's talking shit here, since you apparently have no clue what is even being discussed. Come back once you've figured it out.
No, what it actually means is that you misunderstood what I was saying. That is, you are wrong. Get over it.
I didn't say that was the only use, I said that was the only scenario in which it actually works. Not the only scenario in which it works as in works for me, but the only one in which it works as in functions. This doesn't allow you to play your PC games while on the go, it literally requires you to be on the same LAN.
The fact that you think I'm wrong demonstrates that you don't know what Steam Link is. It's a low-latency remote desktop specialized to work better for gaming workloads, nothing more; if you're able to get low enough (sub-millisecond) latency for it to be able to work, you're able to be sitting in front of the PC that's actually running the games, simple as that.
I also never said I didn't have a use for it; I actually use similar functionality on a near daily basis.
Still qualifies as "rare", though. I never claimed it never happens.
That said, the phones lasting longer actually lowers the amortized monthly increase in TCOO, further strengthening the point I was making, so, thanks, I guess?
What is the Backslashdot site of which you speak?
Think about it. Why would you settle for an iOS game when you could use your mobile to play a "real" game, using Steam Link?
Because Steam Link only works in scenarios where you could just as easily be sitting in front of your PC. When you're not in one of those scenarios, you "settle" for an iOS (or Android) game, because the PC games aren't an option. When you are in one of those scenarios, well... Think about it. Why would you settle for an iOS game when you could use your mobile to play a "real" game, sitting in front of your PC?
I see Steam Link decreasing game sales in the Apple platform.
Only because people who want it will have to leave iOS in favor of Android. If Apple allowed it on their platform, this wouldn't be an issue, for the reason stated above.
At first it doesn't seem as a competitor, but indirectly it is.
No, for the reason stated above, it really is not.
They actually occupy very different markets. Games that install and run as apps on your phone occupy the portable (as in they come with you, in your pocket, everywhere you go) gaming market while games that install and run on your PC and are streamed over the Steam Link app, which requires a high-speed and low-latency connection back to your PC (e.g. that you are on the same LAN) occupy the desktop gaming market.
I'm not buying games for my PC so that I can play them when I'm away from home, because that's simply not possible; to fulfill that purpose, I buy games on my phone. This is true regardless of the existence of Steam Link.
We can debate all day whether a PC game or a phone game is a better product, or I can cut to the chase and point out that a PC game that is useless to me, because my PC is at home and I'm somewhere else, can't possibly be a better product than a game installed on my phone, that I can play right now because I have my phone with me.
I suppose it comes down to how you define "better", but part of that definition should probably include the ability to actually use the product. Viewed in that light, even if we agree that PC games are better when we have access to them, we also must recognize the fact that there are countless scenarios in which we do not have access to them and phone games are better on that basis alone.
No, they do. Microsoft Remode Desktop, various VNC clients, AirDisplay, and a handful of others that you can find with a quick search of the App Store. The ones I explicitly listed are ones I've either used in the past or currently use on one or more iPads; they are all currently available in the App Store, many for free.
It is anti-competitive because Apple denied the app based on it competing with Apple's own functionality (though it does not). It doesn't get much more literal than that. Don't bother arguing with me, or anyone else here, on that point though; just wait and see whether the FTC investigates them over it. If they do, you were wrong. If they do not, you were right.