You're missing the point of using NFC for those things the other radios do better. It's not that you actually use NFC for it, but that you use NFC to bootstrap the process of using those other radios (e.g. exchange configurations and credentials), then use those other radios just like iOS does.
One example: Parrot Zik Headphones. They use NFC to identify devices and automatically switch to the correct configuration and connect to the correct Bluetooth device. NFC isn't used for the actual audio transmission, in part because it's too slow, in part because the range is too short, but mostly because the people who designed it aren't idiots and already knew about the other two factors.
Incidentally, Samsung's NFC file transfer uses wi-fi or bluetooth for the actual file transfer. If both devices are on the same wi-fi network and can discover each other, that connection is used; if neither is connected to wi-fi, an ad-hoc wi-fi connection is used; if the devices are on different networks, only one is on wi-fi, or they're on the same network but can't discover each other, bluetooth is used as a fallback. What makes you think anyone in their right mind would develop a file transfer system that requires 2 people to hold their devices in contact and nearly completely still for the duration of a file transfer effectively capped at 300kbps after accounting for protocol overhead and radio interference?
From where I'm sitting, it sounds like you've seen more widespread implementation of NFC payment systems in Aus than we have here in the US. It's only just now got a chance of becoming widespread here because Apple has started doing the one think nobody else has done yet: marketing it.
All of which are in the US. Which was the point thegarbz was trying to make. His use of the word "nowhere", as a diametric opposite to the annoying all-caps "EVERYWHERE" he was countering, made it sound like he was trying to imply something else; he completely destroyed his own (factually correct) argument by being over-dramatic.
The difference with Apple Pay is that they can't use a stolen phone
Nope. They sure can't! We mostly agreed that this was a non-issue (aside from the fact that Apple claimed their fingerprint reader read *below* the surface, which this hack clearly shows to be false) because who would go through that much hassle to access your phone data? In reality, a large number of people would, but not your typical phone thief. Of course, your typical phone thief *will* go through that trouble to access your entire wallet.
It's quite possible that, by actually remaining active (both physically and mentally) and not eating a carb-heavy diet, one might not see their glucose levels rise high enough to require insulin. That is to say, the body may well be consistently burning glycogen and fat supplies to release more glucose, rather than utilizing insulin to remove it. Do that for long enough (coupled with not eating for 2-4hr before bed or after waking) and it's entirely possible that your body would not have produced any insulin in so long that it has either used up or dumped any reserves that may have been stored.
Also worth noting, I should probably have included starches alongside sugars. My diet is mostly meats and non-starch veggies and fruits, and the glucose in fruits and veggies comes in the form of fiber, which is not broken down like your average carbohydrate; the small amounts of bread and pasta I take in likely don't push my blood sugar too high, but I always feel sick after eating a big plate of pasta, or a burger alongside some other carbohydrate (because of the bun, most likely), unless I'm already on a sugar binge, in which case I've already made it past that stage.
My theory still stands as the only one I've heard that sufficiently explains that, or even attempts to. I would love an alternate explanation, as it may mean being able to actually enjoy the occasional sugary snack as a one-off, rather than having to keep at it until the discomfort subsides in order to gain any enjoyment from it.
So in other words, artificial sweeteners have no bearing on weight gain at all and eating high calorie foods does! I never would have thought!
Unless you output 0-calorie turds, your body isn't absorbing every calorie you put into it. Your body absorbs until it has what it needs; if your diet isn't balanced, that means it's absorbing a lot more of whatever you have an excess of in your diet before it gets enough of whatever's deficient. Balance has a much higher impact than caloric intake.
If only someone would do a study to prove that (or fund me, I'll put together a team since I know I'm, personally, not qualified).
Such studies might help to determine if promoting glucose intolerance is a function of artificiality, or a function of sweetness
It could also be a function of glucose starvation. Think about it, you avoid sugars for long enough and your body has to start making its own. Since you body is making only the glucose it needs, there's no longer any reason to make insulin (there's no excess glucose for the insulin to clean up), so your body stops making it and dumps any remaining insulin reserves as waste. Then, when you ingest sugars and your glucose levels shoot up, your body has no available insulin until your body starts producing insulin again.
I know it's just an anecdote and I'm not a doctor or dietician, but I always feel like shit if I haven't had any sugary snacks in a while and I suddenly eat one or two; and the more sugar I ingest in that initial intake, the worse I feel. Once I get past that, I can keep eating sugary snacks and feel just fine, until I take another several-day (or several-week, depending on just how much sugar I've had) break from sugary snacks. Thus far, my theory is the only one I've read that sufficiently explains that phenomenon.
You know, I'll be completely honest and say I didn't know that was possible. A bit of research later and I see that it's actually pretty easy. I'll gt in touch with our CDN provider and see if they support it, since it'll be quite useful for our next platform release.
I'm not sure about Amazon or eBay, but I know my company does it due to how DNS works. Our CDN wants control over the DNS for the domain we use for them, so they can serve static content from the closest possible location. That doesn't jive with our application, as we need control over DNS for the many domains we also host, so the solution was a dedicated domain for CDN use.
I'm not so wrong that you need to emphasize it like a jackass. In fact, in the context in which I was thinking, I was absolutely correct:
Diskettes use yet another "megabyte" equal to 1024×1000 bytes.
Footnote:
Microsoft (2003-05-06). "Determining Actual Disk Size: Why 1.44 MB Should Be 1.40 MB". Article ID: 121839. Microsoft. Retrieved 2007-07-07. "The 1.44-megabyte (MB) value associated with the 3.5-inch disk format does not represent the actual size or free space of these disks. Although its size has been popularly called 1.44 MB, the correct size is actually 1.40 MB."
It just so happens that I was *right* in the *wrong context*. Dick.
You do realize that both UPS and FedEx provide the shipper with a tracking number at the time the shipping label is created, right? Having a tracking number tells you a label has been created (not even necessarily printed) and nothing more; entering the tracking number into the tracking system can provide you more details, but the mere existence of a set of numbers does not convince me that anything has been shipped.
In fact, it was confirmed that iPhones started leaving ZhengZhou on 9-15, the day after I posted that comment. The first of those should be arriving Friday (today, for those who paid for expedited shipping). You seem to think you're good at finding this type of information, so I'll leave that as an exercise for you; for everyone else who reads this, I suggest starting with the search term so generously provided by the AC I'm replying to.
Just as likely is using the term "movie" to refer to the entire video content of one of the tapes. That's how I read it so as to be able to provide thoughtful consideration as to what, exactly, the OP was in need of help with. Upon seeing a large number of actually helpful posts already present in the thread, alongside a number of posts ridiculing the OP for even asking this question, I decided it might be helpful to advocate for the OP. Especially when I saw someone point out a flaw with the OP's methodology, without providing a solution, and do so in such a way as to discourage others from providing solutions. Not helpful, in the least.
Where did the OP say movies, as in feature films? He said "desk drawer's worth of VHS tapes", and his later use of the word "movies" doesn't seem to imply commercial feature films available to pirate from TPB. Since OP didn't specify, it is just as likely that these are training videos, home movies, or even security tapes. Yes, some places still use security tapes; and there are any number of reasons why a specific tape from the rotation may need to be archived for anywhere from a year to a decade.
You're absolutely right, it's just one album, no big deal. Until the next one. And the one after that. And the one after that. Then Metallica comes around and realizes that digital distribution is a good thing (and Apple offers them a few hundred million) and they give away their entire catalog. That's 12 albums most people probably won't want in their libraries (if they do, they already own them). Okay, so now there are 16 albums in your library that you didn't purchase and can't get rid of. True, you don't have to download them to your device, but why should you have to tip-toe around them?
For me, this U2 album comprises 50% of my iTunes music "purchases". That means, randomly clicking on a purchased album, there's a 50% chance I'm going to get this album that I don't want. Thanks, Apple.
I don't own an iPhone and I don't have automatic sync enabled on my Mac, Windows PC, or iPad, but this still annoys me, to say the least. Each iTunes user is now counted as a "sale" of this album, artificially pumping their sales stats. U2 doesn't deserve recognition for a double platinum album unless they actually sold it to 2 million people. Follow?
He's serious enough to open himself up to being ridiculed by jackasses like you by asking for help on Slashdot. I'd say that's less "not serious" and more "looking for direction". Since you brought up the possibility of losing all his data if his house burns down, how about providing a solution?
HTC devices not on AT&T's network (as they ask HTC to disable developer unlocking) suit that need just fine. The fact is that I need a phone, so my choices are carry 2 devices or make the phone do double duty. Carrying 2 devices means charging 2 devices and that doesn't work for me. Unless you're trying to tell me that what's been working for me for the past 4 years isn't a suitable solution, in which case I'd kindly ask you to bugger off.
Pre-orders opened 2 days ago, official sales don't begin for 3 more days. Well, 2 days and a few hours, but let's not nit-pick, you're still full of it. Your phone will ship when they officially go on sale, and not a moment sooner.
Slashdot Mirror
You're missing the point of using NFC for those things the other radios do better. It's not that you actually use NFC for it, but that you use NFC to bootstrap the process of using those other radios (e.g. exchange configurations and credentials), then use those other radios just like iOS does.
One example: Parrot Zik Headphones. They use NFC to identify devices and automatically switch to the correct configuration and connect to the correct Bluetooth device. NFC isn't used for the actual audio transmission, in part because it's too slow, in part because the range is too short, but mostly because the people who designed it aren't idiots and already knew about the other two factors.
Incidentally, Samsung's NFC file transfer uses wi-fi or bluetooth for the actual file transfer. If both devices are on the same wi-fi network and can discover each other, that connection is used; if neither is connected to wi-fi, an ad-hoc wi-fi connection is used; if the devices are on different networks, only one is on wi-fi, or they're on the same network but can't discover each other, bluetooth is used as a fallback. What makes you think anyone in their right mind would develop a file transfer system that requires 2 people to hold their devices in contact and nearly completely still for the duration of a file transfer effectively capped at 300kbps after accounting for protocol overhead and radio interference?
From where I'm sitting, it sounds like you've seen more widespread implementation of NFC payment systems in Aus than we have here in the US. It's only just now got a chance of becoming widespread here because Apple has started doing the one think nobody else has done yet: marketing it.
Or it was a typo, considering that he was talking about NFC, a 1-char difference.
All of which are in the US. Which was the point thegarbz was trying to make. His use of the word "nowhere", as a diametric opposite to the annoying all-caps "EVERYWHERE" he was countering, made it sound like he was trying to imply something else; he completely destroyed his own (factually correct) argument by being over-dramatic.
The difference with Apple Pay is that they can't use a stolen phone
Nope. They sure can't! We mostly agreed that this was a non-issue (aside from the fact that Apple claimed their fingerprint reader read *below* the surface, which this hack clearly shows to be false) because who would go through that much hassle to access your phone data? In reality, a large number of people would, but not your typical phone thief. Of course, your typical phone thief *will* go through that trouble to access your entire wallet.
It's quite possible that, by actually remaining active (both physically and mentally) and not eating a carb-heavy diet, one might not see their glucose levels rise high enough to require insulin. That is to say, the body may well be consistently burning glycogen and fat supplies to release more glucose, rather than utilizing insulin to remove it. Do that for long enough (coupled with not eating for 2-4hr before bed or after waking) and it's entirely possible that your body would not have produced any insulin in so long that it has either used up or dumped any reserves that may have been stored.
Also worth noting, I should probably have included starches alongside sugars. My diet is mostly meats and non-starch veggies and fruits, and the glucose in fruits and veggies comes in the form of fiber, which is not broken down like your average carbohydrate; the small amounts of bread and pasta I take in likely don't push my blood sugar too high, but I always feel sick after eating a big plate of pasta, or a burger alongside some other carbohydrate (because of the bun, most likely), unless I'm already on a sugar binge, in which case I've already made it past that stage.
My theory still stands as the only one I've heard that sufficiently explains that, or even attempts to. I would love an alternate explanation, as it may mean being able to actually enjoy the occasional sugary snack as a one-off, rather than having to keep at it until the discomfort subsides in order to gain any enjoyment from it.
So in other words, artificial sweeteners have no bearing on weight gain at all and eating high calorie foods does! I never would have thought!
Unless you output 0-calorie turds, your body isn't absorbing every calorie you put into it. Your body absorbs until it has what it needs; if your diet isn't balanced, that means it's absorbing a lot more of whatever you have an excess of in your diet before it gets enough of whatever's deficient. Balance has a much higher impact than caloric intake.
If only someone would do a study to prove that (or fund me, I'll put together a team since I know I'm, personally, not qualified).
Such studies might help to determine if promoting glucose intolerance is a function of artificiality, or a function of sweetness
It could also be a function of glucose starvation. Think about it, you avoid sugars for long enough and your body has to start making its own. Since you body is making only the glucose it needs, there's no longer any reason to make insulin (there's no excess glucose for the insulin to clean up), so your body stops making it and dumps any remaining insulin reserves as waste. Then, when you ingest sugars and your glucose levels shoot up, your body has no available insulin until your body starts producing insulin again.
I know it's just an anecdote and I'm not a doctor or dietician, but I always feel like shit if I haven't had any sugary snacks in a while and I suddenly eat one or two; and the more sugar I ingest in that initial intake, the worse I feel. Once I get past that, I can keep eating sugary snacks and feel just fine, until I take another several-day (or several-week, depending on just how much sugar I've had) break from sugary snacks. Thus far, my theory is the only one I've read that sufficiently explains that phenomenon.
You know, I'll be completely honest and say I didn't know that was possible. A bit of research later and I see that it's actually pretty easy. I'll gt in touch with our CDN provider and see if they support it, since it'll be quite useful for our next platform release.
Thanks for letting me know about that!
I'm not sure about Amazon or eBay, but I know my company does it due to how DNS works. Our CDN wants control over the DNS for the domain we use for them, so they can serve static content from the closest possible location. That doesn't jive with our application, as we need control over DNS for the many domains we also host, so the solution was a dedicated domain for CDN use.
Diskettes use yet another "megabyte" equal to 1024×1000 bytes.
Footnote:
Microsoft (2003-05-06). "Determining Actual Disk Size: Why 1.44 MB Should Be 1.40 MB". Article ID: 121839. Microsoft. Retrieved 2007-07-07. "The 1.44-megabyte (MB) value associated with the 3.5-inch disk format does not represent the actual size or free space of these disks. Although its size has been popularly called 1.44 MB, the correct size is actually 1.40 MB."
It just so happens that I was *right* in the *wrong context*. Dick.
You do realize that both UPS and FedEx provide the shipper with a tracking number at the time the shipping label is created, right? Having a tracking number tells you a label has been created (not even necessarily printed) and nothing more; entering the tracking number into the tracking system can provide you more details, but the mere existence of a set of numbers does not convince me that anything has been shipped.
In fact, it was confirmed that iPhones started leaving ZhengZhou on 9-15, the day after I posted that comment. The first of those should be arriving Friday (today, for those who paid for expedited shipping). You seem to think you're good at finding this type of information, so I'll leave that as an exercise for you; for everyone else who reads this, I suggest starting with the search term so generously provided by the AC I'm replying to.
You mean version 9?
And look! It caught you!
Just as likely is using the term "movie" to refer to the entire video content of one of the tapes. That's how I read it so as to be able to provide thoughtful consideration as to what, exactly, the OP was in need of help with. Upon seeing a large number of actually helpful posts already present in the thread, alongside a number of posts ridiculing the OP for even asking this question, I decided it might be helpful to advocate for the OP. Especially when I saw someone point out a flaw with the OP's methodology, without providing a solution, and do so in such a way as to discourage others from providing solutions. Not helpful, in the least.
Where did the OP say movies, as in feature films? He said "desk drawer's worth of VHS tapes", and his later use of the word "movies" doesn't seem to imply commercial feature films available to pirate from TPB. Since OP didn't specify, it is just as likely that these are training videos, home movies, or even security tapes. Yes, some places still use security tapes; and there are any number of reasons why a specific tape from the rotation may need to be archived for anywhere from a year to a decade.
Indeed, that's 10% of a lot of AT&T users' data allowances!
You're absolutely right, it's just one album, no big deal. Until the next one. And the one after that. And the one after that. Then Metallica comes around and realizes that digital distribution is a good thing (and Apple offers them a few hundred million) and they give away their entire catalog. That's 12 albums most people probably won't want in their libraries (if they do, they already own them). Okay, so now there are 16 albums in your library that you didn't purchase and can't get rid of. True, you don't have to download them to your device, but why should you have to tip-toe around them?
For me, this U2 album comprises 50% of my iTunes music "purchases". That means, randomly clicking on a purchased album, there's a 50% chance I'm going to get this album that I don't want. Thanks, Apple.
I don't own an iPhone and I don't have automatic sync enabled on my Mac, Windows PC, or iPad, but this still annoys me, to say the least. Each iTunes user is now counted as a "sale" of this album, artificially pumping their sales stats. U2 doesn't deserve recognition for a double platinum album unless they actually sold it to 2 million people. Follow?
He's serious enough to open himself up to being ridiculed by jackasses like you by asking for help on Slashdot. I'd say that's less "not serious" and more "looking for direction". Since you brought up the possibility of losing all his data if his house burns down, how about providing a solution?
HTC devices not on AT&T's network (as they ask HTC to disable developer unlocking) suit that need just fine. The fact is that I need a phone, so my choices are carry 2 devices or make the phone do double duty. Carrying 2 devices means charging 2 devices and that doesn't work for me. Unless you're trying to tell me that what's been working for me for the past 4 years isn't a suitable solution, in which case I'd kindly ask you to bugger off.
Pre-orders opened 2 days ago, official sales don't begin for 3 more days. Well, 2 days and a few hours, but let's not nit-pick, you're still full of it. Your phone will ship when they officially go on sale, and not a moment sooner.
Because that's what the AC tepples replied to was talking about?
1024.0
;)
Now STFU
GAH! TYPO! That first Kb should be KB.