0
stringlengths 9
22.1k
|
|---|
Perhaps 99% of people need to look up how their computer works before using it. And that includes smart phones.
And perhaps that same 99% of people need to realise: They are the people who make identity fraud and all the implications possible. Not to mention mass DDoS attacks do to bot nets. And the statement "I don't know how, because I'm not a nerd" is to the point that it should be considered admitting to criminal negligence to say that with meaning.
And I'm not saying an individual should know how to:
Change the GUI of the system
Modify registry values of windows
Edit the hosts file to access web pages held on the local network
Script the system to trigger certain events based on a laptops location or the SSID the system is connected to
Overclock a system's processor
I'm saying people should:
Understand the basics of how the internet works
Understand the basics of keeping a system in working condition
Be able to run basic troubleshooting to solve problems
Have a basic understanding of security on their system
Those 4 things represent the absolute basics for safe computing practices to be effective. They are not fool proof, but those 4 things prevent every script kid at the door. Brute forcing passwords that are constructed half decently? Takes centuries with todays home computer - and probably longer. Bypassing an up to date system usually requires active knowledge of 0 day exploits, or obscure exploits few individuals have the know how of how to find. And it saves individuals tones of money by being able to simply look up a problem and fix it on the spot themselves.
To put it simply, for the last few months when I lived at home, I ended up running wireshark because of an email sent by our ISP indicating that a bot net was likely running through our connection. So I isolated the system and tracked down what it was masquerading as - and it was not a fun thing to do. Reason it was even on the system? "I have a mac, they don't get virus'" - well turns out they do. |
Wow, actually have to give the NYT props for once.
Net neutrality is not just a meaningless term. It has a meaning and Google's concept of an "open internet" is in direct conflict with that meaning. |
Wow, a post on Reddit I actually have some valuable input on!
Let me first say that I agree with a lot of what this article has to say, on that note, I have "Social Media Coordinator" on my resume.
I'm currently a student of interactive arts and my first co-op term was at a large shipping company in my home city. The title of the job was Social Media Maven. Here's just some of the gems from the description.
>Website redevelopment with social media options developed
>Many internal stakeholder engagement projects where we want to test and adopt social media to drive the conversation
So basically I showed up at the interview thinking I was wasting my time on a job I had no formal training in.
Then they offered me the position.
I needed the experience money and reference so I went with it. Over the next four months I saw just how pointless the position was.
Don't get me wrong, I worked hard and tried to meet their expectations as best I could but really, the scope of what they wanted me to do was minuscule. After the first two weeks my position had devolved into reading articles about how other companies use social media and comparing x software provider against y software provider. That's not to say they stuck me with the lame jobs, for a co-op position I was given a lot of responsibility. I ended up advising the company on a few very major decisions (financially).
I even told them in my exit interview that I thought the position could have easily been scaled down and split amongst the communications team and possibly a single intern to compile research, of which there were plenty running around. |
In our digital world, uninhibited communications between people is an essential human right. Anything less, and we are not truly free. Governments and corporations have repeatedly demonstrated that they act in the interests of their owners and leaders, not the masses which they govern and to which they provide service. If we want to communicate freely, we must each be a part of the network which enables our interactions. |
Only two problems - the laws of physics and basic mathematics.
The maths first: Mesh networks can't scale. One of the papers linked to where n is the number of nodes in the network". Without backbones capable of carrying large amounts of traffic, every link must be massively over-provisioned to offer sufficient bandwidth to each user. Suffice it to say that no current or proposed wireless networking technology provides sufficient bandwidth for a usefully large mesh.
The physics: to get sufficient bandwidth via wireless, very high frequencies are necessary, which inevitably entail relatively short range. Routing inevitably entails some amount of latency, as at an absolute minimum the packet headers must be read. Multiply the 3ms or so inherent latency of a typical domestic router, multiply that by enough nodes to span a continent and you have what is technically known as "a fuckton of latency".
Assuming the absolute best case of what would be possible with current unlicensed bandwidth, you'd be looking at something worse than dialup. |
Edit: [Here's an article about them.](
Can someone link a description of what they aim to achieve/how they aim to achieve it? It seems there's already a group called [Darknet]( but doesn't look like they're related to this project. |
Yes, this.
First and foremost, a "darknet" would only be feasible for short-range communications, as others have said.
If the idea of the darknet is truely to stay anonymous from Big Brother, there are much better ways of doing so. E-Mail lists with strong encryption would be a place to start. Or perhaps a news node that requires a particular GPG key to access.
Essentially, I don't see the point of this. If you're going to create a network for communication (as that's all the bandwidth will allow) that will entirely circumvent the current infrastructure, it will be limited to local (up to semi-regional) use. This begs the question "why bother?"
Have you people never heard of simply getting together in person? I have a whole room in my house dedicated simply to the task of talking with other people. Oddly, it's called the LIVING ROOM , but it's function is pretty plain. Before the internet happened, we had conversations using speech. We had this other thing called the postal service, which we could use to send "letters" to one another. There was this other thing called a newspaper. As far as I know, those still exist to some extent. And even if SOPA passes, we still have freedom of the press and freedom of speech for written material.
Above all, however, we have this glorious thing called "Encryption." Yes, all encryption can be broken. But even basic encryption can be quite hard to break. So why not use it? Why drop out of an already-installed infrastructure when you can simply make it better for your own purposes through added security? Yes, we are still at risk of government shutdown due to corporate ownership of bandwidth (and, in a lot of cases, servers). But with a properly developed, secure, invite-only with keyed access network , these risks diminish significantly. |
For the lazy:
>Imagine that every time you mailed a letter to Santa, the post office would open it to make sure you weren't asking for any toys your parents said you couldn't have.
>Now lets say you really wanted a BB gun, but your parents said you couldn't have one. If you mailed your letter to santa, the postmen would read it, see that you asked for a bad present, and tell your parents (who would ground you differently depending on where you live).
>To prevent this, instead of mailing it, have everyone just give it to their next door neighbor until it gets to the north pole. This way, Santa gets the letter, but the postmen don't know about it. Additionally, you don't have to pay postage fees this way.
>After reading thie above explanation over I've decided it's only helpful if you already know what it is, so here's an addendum of ELI20: The Darknet Plan is a plan to link everyone's wireless routers together in a special way to make a worldwide network of computers that corporations and governments wouldn't be able to monitor or bill. This mega-network would function in the same way as the internet but would never require ISPs (Internet Service Providers, i.e. Comcast). It's a sort of "by the people, for the people" type solution.
> |
You.
Friggin.
IDIOTS!
I don't want to sound unsupportive or antagonistic, but the OP's title is clearly misleading. The original article is titled
Congress calls on Twitter to block Taliban
And the first sentence of the article is such:
>Senators want to stop feeds which boast of insurgent attacks on Nato forces in Afghanistan and the casualties they inflict.
and electronics-engineer is spinning this into something completely different - accusing congress of an attempt to silence domestic protests and propaganda - ensuring a continued circlejerk and misinforming fellow redditors. This article is about limiting Taliban propaganda which celebrates/exaggerates the deaths of NATO troops and updates their followers on real-time combat.
But here's the kicker: these comments would never have been posted, and people would never have been this misinformed... if people actually read the article, realized how much spin the title made, and consequently downvoted the article to prevent it from reaching the front page.
But no, I'm guessing since 95% of these comments - which amount to 72 as of 12:29 AM PST - don't even make a hint to the Taliban and actually reference Occupy Wall Street (which was not even mentioned in the article) that these 95%-ers never read the article. They trusted the title to be factual, and assumed this was referring to United States censoring domestic protests.
Those.
Fuggin'.
IDIOTS. |
I realize that you're simply trying to make the point that not necessarily all killing is evil, which is fair, so lets discuss it.
Well first, time-travel is a type 2 impossibility.
> Class II Impossibilities are “technologies that sit at the very edge of our understanding of the physical world," possibly taking thousands or millions of years to become available. - [Physics of the Impossible](
But while we don't currently understand the implications of time travel, we can still assume for the sake of argument that going back in time and changing history doesn't have terrible implication on the existence of the universe or anything else. For the sake of this argument, I'm also going to assume that destiny is a fallacy and that there is no such thing as "things are meant to happen" where if Hitler doesn't do it, somebody else will.
So if it was possible to do such a thing, you clearly have solid grounds to believe that terminating the life of a human being will greatly benefit society, considering the terrible things this individual has done. Considering that death-sentence is still practised, and enforced by the law in certain areas for much less than genocide; in that regard killing someone and avoiding a genocide would indeed be a relatively "good" thing. Not really good, but a lot better than what would of happened, so relative good. If such prevention could be achieved without the unnecessary death of individuals, it would be even better.
Another scenario involves knowing the future, and prevention of murders or terrible incidents which you might be interested in. That ethical debate is visited in [this movie]( which I think you would enjoy. |
I agree that it is not useful for production parts, and at the moment it is still mostly useful for prototyping. However, this technology has been decreasing in cost and increasing in capability over the years, so I think within ten years we may see this as a common household appliance within the range of expense of the refrigerator or washing machine.
The general use of this technology won't be for production parts, rather it will be for simple objects like custom coffee cups, bottle openers, toys, lunchboxes, tool handles, heck I've even seen a usable wrench made . The other part of it is the customization: names, phrases, images, hand grips, size and shape, material type, and of course prototyping by the average Joe. If you need a more hardy object, or one with a patented design, then you'll go the store like normal. But if a mom can just go online, find a design published for free private use, and then print off a new shoe-lace clip for her kid... there will be a huge market for a user-friendly version of this tech for such purposes. Once the possibility of this kind of everyday use becomes common knowledge, the demand will boom and we will see a huge leap forward beyond the expensive and specialized use of this technology we see today. |
I actually regret buying my WD TV Live Hub. If you do decide to get one, do not get the "Hub" version with the built in Terabyte drive.
I didn't research thoroughly enough before buying, but you can't run the hacked OS versions on the Live Hub, so I'm stuck with the WD firmware which is just horrible.
The worst thing of all is the terrible interface speed with the hard drive. They bundle the thing with Gigabit ethernet, but honestly, I don't know why. I can download a file faster on my 30Mbit internet connection than it can transfer to my WD TV hard drive.
In general I just feel the unit is too damn slow. There are plenty of other glitches that I won't get into, as well...
It was a nice experiment on streaming, but I'm building a full fledged media PC soon. The extra flexibility and speed is worth it, IMO. |
They are "free". You only pay if you want to get ahead faster. No "freemium" game do you actually have to pay, unless it is the "lite" version and you want to unlock the full version of the game.
Example 1: Tiny Tower. I play this game, it is a freemium game. In app purchases give you cash which allow you do things faster than normal. Like placing people in your tower automatically, painting your floors, special costumes, or trading it for gold so you can build faster. At no point in time do you ever need to buy it. You can earn some of cash just by playing the game. Not a lot compared to buying, but there are ways. It just takes more time.
Example 2: Jet Pack Joyride was another game I got for free. In app purchases only let you get more coins faster so you can unlock special features of the game, such as costumes, jetpacks, and rides. At no point in time do you have to buy extra coins, you only have to play the game. Buying in app purchases only speeds up the unlocking process.
There are tons of games like this. As a parent, you should at least take 10-15 minutes or so to check out what games you are giving your kids. Check to see if there are in app purchases, if there are decide if you still want to give it to the kid. Play the game for a bit and see where the in app purchases come from, like a special menu or location in the game. Explain to your child that this place is a off-limits/"no-no."
Sign out of the App store. (Settings->Store->Sign Out)
This prevents all attempts to purchase items. Without knowing a username and password, you can't even connect to the store to purchase. Even if you have an internet connection. This is the easiest way to safeguard your credit card, it's just annoying for you if you constantly have to sign in. Better safe than sorry right?
If you trust your child enough that you don't need to sign out of the Store, but you still want protection. Make sure your in-app purchases are restricted in your settings. (Settings->General-> Restrictions)
If your child breaks the rules or keeps complaining that they need it, take away/delete the game. Playing video games is a privilege, not a right.
Another alternative is only download games that can be played without internet, or that have no in-app purchases but note that the latter is far more rare.
No matter how you look at it, there are tons of ways to prevent this from happening. Parents like these, only look to blame others for being a shitty parent rather than themselves. |
The artists signed contracts. In those contracts, the percentage that would be given to the artist was outlined. It's not stealing, it's what was agreed upon.
Before you believe that, read two things:
The Problem with Music
[Courtney Love does the Math]( - by Courtney Love |
So a lot of people have a different opinion than yours we are "fucking retarded"?
God it almost pains me to be nice to you.
Lemme try to explain it to you. "Artist" is exactly the right word for it though, quotes and all because they aren't real artists. There are so many bands and singers who do make their own music and they are genuinely good, they don't use auto tune, they write their own music and they play their own instruments and they don't get recognized because they can't be sold to a large group of people. Maybe they aren't pretty enough, maybe they don't have the sound that would appeal to everyone and they wont be recognized for their real talent. And then we have a dumb blonde chick Lets name this girl Britney Spears, She dosn't write her own music, she doesn't play her own instruments, but hey! She has nice boobs and pretty hair and she gets a record deal and millions of fans.
Which one is a real artist in this situation? The person who the record companies made to appeal to everyone, or the person who has devoted his life to this but is getting ignored because they don't have the ability to be sold to a large mass of people.
Chances are you've never heard of people like, Walk the Moon, Boards of Canada, Cosmo Jarvis, Monster Cat, The Album Leaf, Nigel and The Dropout, Pendulum, or Travis. But you have heard of Katy Perry, Britney Spears, Justin Bieber, and Nicki Minaj. The difference? The former makes music the latter Just sing. When you don't write your own music it loses a level of personality, when you write a song you write it from experience and you sing along to fit it, but when you just sing and you call yourself a musical artist it's like a person calling themselves a painter when all they did was frame a painting.
The only thing I see happening when record companies go out, and I do say When there is no if in this situation, is us losing mass appeal artist. No more VMA's where the same ten artist wins six or seven awards for songs that are played on the radio too damn much, and no more playing the same damn song on every radio station fifty times for that matter, no more artist who have no real talent and are just there to be popular, no more Justin Bieber or Lady Gaga, we'll have more fresh talent and innovation that isn't "I wanna sex you" to a a catchy beat.
I'm gonna stop now because I really don't know what I'm talking about. |
I work in the music industry as an artist and mix engineer, and I just have to say that the money in the industry is still there. The people at the top are using scare tactics because, well, they are scared.
Imagine growing up in a world that operates a certain way and you have made your life in that world. Now, everything has changed with the internet, downloading, home recording, etc. That scares the successful older people who used to control this industry. Now, they are using their power to squeeze out as much money as they can before their careers are over and the younger generation takes over because they want to make a life for themselves. It's really aggravating being young in this business, but I made a decision long ago that music is my life blood. |
From
>Code division multiple access (CDMA) networks tend to use handset-based radiolocation technologies, which are technically more similar to radionavigation. GPS is one of those technologies. Alltel, Verizon Wireless, T-Mobile 3G, and Sprint PCS use Assisted GPS.[7]
and slightly before that
>AT&T Mobility initially advocated TDOA, but changed to embedded GPS in 2006 for every GSM or UMTS voice-capable device due to improved accuracy. |
The availability to purchase and download a movie instantly is great, but why are we being so greedy? Although I have similar frustrations I would like to point out a few things in defense of the studios in regards to changing technology and distribution:
In the past purchasing a DVD/VHS was kind of a pain. The store would not have a great selection, nor have much in stock. If you were in the mood for something older than a few years and it wasn't a gigantic blockbuster, then you could pretty much expect the store not to carry it. Not all titles are available, sure, but you could have your other classics in your lap in 24 hours from Amazon. Besides in the future we will see more titles become available as rights and content distribution is hammered out legally.
Now we have the availability to download thousands of titles instantly for nearly the same price. Before, if you wanted to bring some movies over to a friend's house to watch, you would need to figure out what to bring and lug them. But, what if the girl that you are with decides that, 'before she thought she would like to watch a Vince Vaughn movie, but she read somewhere that he hates cats so that is out of the picture.' well my friend, you are not getting laid tonight. Now my entire library can be at my finger tips. I don't need to pre-download any of the titles, as long as I purchased them I can stream them anywhere that has wifi, and I am sure in the future that will change too! SO, for the same price as a DVD the content providers are allowing you 24-hr access to all your movies via the cloud. You never lose them, you always take them with you (if you have SOME sort of multimedia device), they never get scratched because your sister did't put them back in the case, it's awesome!
Renting is now AWESOME! Sure, I can see how the price seems a bit high compared to Redbox at $1.29 a night. But, if you were to ask me what I wanted to do with my Friday night, either rent a movie for $5 right now in HD, or get in the car, go to a Redbox, argue with my girlfriend about how they never have any titles on Friday and we should have thought ahead, get into a fight, realize we are fighting in a Safeway, apologize, rent a crappy romantic comedy, have her fall asleep halfway through the movie anyway because we ended up getting ice cream and it always makes her sleepy. WELL, I can tell you that I would choose the $5 HD movie any day of the week. I get it, it sucks to be paying more for only a 24-hr rental, but have you ever rented a Redbox and not watched it in one night? You end up forgetting to take it back anyway and see it 10 days later sitting under your mail. Besides 10 years ago Blockbuster was charging almost $5 for a 3-day rental and we all felt fine about that.
Bonus features were never a thing. I remember The Matrix VHS had a few minutes at the end of the movie showing how they did a few of the scenes. No commentary, no behind the scenes just the movie and credits. Now, for a dollar rental we expect them to show us a DIY tutorial on how you can recreate the movie in your backyard with two packets of ketchup and a Flip Video? Come on! Buying the movie is for the nerds like me that want to exhaust the movies cinema value just so we can hear what the director thought of a particular scene.
A few years ago I went out and purchased The Matrix on DVD. It wasn't because I didn't own it, it was because I owned it on VHS and I didn't know anyone with a VHS player. Now if I want it in the cloud I will have to purchase it again, but that might be the last time. We are starting to enter an age where everything that we have will stay with us forever. Pictures, files, movies, they are all on the cloud, ready for us at anytime, anywhere. Although, in the future there will be legal issues with this, we may never have to re-spend on media that we already owned. Think about it this way, for the same price as a DVD you can always have access to that movie, anywhere. My parents have vinyls, 8-tracks, and cassettes that they won't throw away even though they have CD's and digital copies of the same album. Why? Because, vinyls produce a great sound? Sure, or maybe it is because we don't want to throw something away that we feel still has value. Audio-files aside, we upgraded because no one wants to go to a party where the host has to change the music every 3 minutes to a different LP. Likewise, no one wants to hang out with the kid that always brings the VHS tapes. No one really cares if their movie/music is outdated, they care because the media to play it on is outdated. Now we have the availability to purchase a movie for the last time, something that we can have for the rest of our lives, all for the same price as a DVD.
Yeah, the movie studios suck, but good luck ever getting The Hobbit made just though contributions on Kickstarter. The movie studios have tremendous capital to make these movies and they keep that capital because of the great movies they make. I know there are awesome things coming from the underground/self-produced scene, but I also want Micheal Bay style explosions every now and again.
Sorry that I rambled, but really in the future movies will come out sooner to rent and buy online as this technology progresses. Honestly, it is only a few years old and everyone is trying to figure out how it should all come together (and how to get their piece). The studios/providers want to get the content out there faster but these types of negotiations are very new. If you can't wait for a movie to come out, pirate it, get it from China, I don't care, but don't say that the system is flawed and is creating more pirates. It is better than it ever has been and I hope it will continue to get better. The movie/music industry is making content fast, affordable and everywhere. Pirate away! But don't tell me you do it because the industry is making you. |
They use aluminum to make plenty of products that are durable and don't scratch. It's one of the most well understood and widely used metals in the world. Plus, it has a great thermal conductivity (makes stainless look like an insulator) so it cools the device roughly 10 to 100 times better. Believe me, a lot of thought by some very smart people goes into optimizing these choices. It's likely that stainless steel performa worse in almost every way, in fact.
The problem wasn't that they used aluminum. Apple and partners apparently realized post production that large batch of iPhones was never properly anodized (permanent ceramic coating). A properly applied ceramic coating on a metal will perform better, scratch wise, than stainless.
What is anodized? You ever see those clip-keychains that come in different colors? That's anodized aluminum. It's a chemical process that, if I remember right, has to do with dipping the part in a special acid bath. After processing, it comes out with a nice colorful and much harder surface. |
I would really like to see this combined with procedural generation of the game environment based on info taken from the user's surroundings. It reminds me of all the opinions at one point that people would like to see a game with the wandering ability of Skyrim mixed with the world of Pokemon. With a headset providing you all visual and audio input you could wander outside and have everything you would normally see virtually mapped meshed and re-textured in different artistic styles. As well, additional meshes could be projected in and haptic feedback could be pursued for interaction with them. Select your game and step outside, maybe you view a wild west town, tumbleweeds rolling in the street guitar riffs playing and shots fired in the distance, maybe you view something a bit more cartoon-ish say jet set radio style art applied to everything, maybe tron? I really want this to happen in my lifetime, seeing everything I see through another person's imagination along with effects like the insanity meter of amnesia distorting the world or potentially offering some sense of synesthesia. |
Urine is energy-poor. Meaning not a fuel (in terms of getting positive net energy output under normal conditions).
HOWEVER, it is an electrolyte, nearly free and accessible anywhere. Unlike table salt, which is not easy or cheap to obtain away from civilization (or saltwater, salt mine etc.).
Working backwards from hydrogen production, this system seems to be a DIY night/calm energy storage (to be used together with solar and/or wind) . Note the lightbulb at the end of the circuit.
So, not BS - it is a very different but impressive achievement, just conveyed by rather clueless people.
EDIT: further guessing: Clean water is not exactly easy to get, too. Muck from the puddle will kill the electrodes. Boiled or filtered water - needs energy or work input. Urine is surprisingly the cleanest electrolyte-supplemented water you get for "free". Dryer (borax) solution probably can be put out in the sun to reduce water content and used again. So, urine turns out to be the only resource spent to get hydrogen during the day using solar or wind energy. Rather ingenious. |
With regards to impact, I think loss of life and cancer is going to be very low and hard to determine, even over 40+ years, due to the efforts of the Japanese government at quickly evacuating people and quarantining food supplies. There have been some official reports which claim the loss of life was likely greater from having to relocate medical patients and elderly in the Fukushima affected zones rather than letting them stay in place and deal with the radiation (using radiation models).
With regards to the "best" nuke plants today, first I think Fukushima shows you the extreme limits of Generation 2 light water reactors. When you take away all the safety and auxiliary systems, and are not prepared for the ensuing events, you saw the design limits of the plant. CANDU plants have a bit more time before they hit the same level of event, but really all gen 2 and most gen 3 plants will fail in this way if subjected to the same conditions. The only large nuclear plant designs which could have had a possibility of survival would be the AP1000 or ESBWR plant design. The AP1000 hasn't been finished being built yet (4 in china 4 in US), the ESBWR hasn't even been started anywhere yet. |
Whoa, just checked out 8pen. What a neat idea, it looks like it has an absurd and rather illogical learning curve, but if everybody took the time to learn it it could be the input method of the future.
Personally, I find Swype to be ideal, as it shares the existing QWERTY keyboard it's learning curve isn't nearly as steep. I'm significantly faster on Swype than I am on an iPhone virtual keyboard, T9, 9-key, and a physical pull-out keyboard. I just recently switched to iPhone from Android as I had never had one before and thought I would try it out, also their are some amazing iOS games that I had missed over the years and was (and am still) extremely disappointed with its input method.
One of the interesting things about Swype to me is that it does exactly what 8pen's concept attempts to achieve, the fluidity and excitement that goes along with handwritten text. |
I have to disagree with you on that. One of my m8's in my robotics class is a contracter/programmer. Of the 6 projects he has worked on in the past 4 months, 5 of them had previously been shipped overseas to programmers in India. After they messed up the jobs so much, the companies brought the project back to the US so someone could pick up the pieces and fix it. The 6 diff projects had no affiliations with each other. |
BTGuard is shit. I couldnt get their vpn to work with the built in windows 8 software and had to resort to their OpenVPN software and that was slow as shit. I get 100 megabits normally and with their VPN i got < 1 megabit. I filed a support ticket to help me and they closed it without replying. Then they canceled my account 4 days after I payed with Paypal, so I opened up a dispute on Paypal and they resolved it in my favor and I am waiting to get my money back. |
If you are familiar with money laundering, its kind of analogous to that. Except its legal (for now):
With money laundering, you take your illegally obtained money and funnel it through a ligitimate operation to obscure the source. This is kind of what a VPN service does for people who torrent, except it also has many legitimate purposes. Heres what happens when download a file from a VPN (someone feel free to correct me if i get any of the details wrong):
When you connect to the vpn server (usually based out of somewhere like sweeden, which has very relaxed piracy laws). The connection is encrypted end to end, so the chances of your ISP or the DMCA being able to tell what is being downloaded through that connection is pretty slim.Also, because many VPN services are based out of a different country, they rarely comply with US piracy law (e.g. by not keeping logs of any users or ip address'). on top of that, many of the services even change your public ip address on a time interval basis ( every 30 mins or so )... this kind of seems over the top though, since there isn't any logs that could identify users in the first place |
Should be a |
This is not my comment. I got this from another redditor.
>Stop freaking the fuck out for no reason, internet. Reddit looks like a goddamn Tea Party rally right now. Seriously, it's like watching a thousand clones of Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly typographically blow each other.
>[Read]( [all]( [of]( [these.](
>He was a lobbyist for cable TV and wireless when they were the little guys. He was fostering competition by going after the big networks and telcos that ran everything. He lobbied for things like increased wireless spectrum, and against cell phones being banned from public use because some people who didn't understand how radiation works were freaking the fuck out back then. The guy doesn't sound bad at all. He actually sounds really good from what is being reported on sites that aren't just freaking the fuck out over the word 'lobbyist', or the ones that are just spinning it that way because that headline gets them more hits and advertising dollars.
> |
Other then not a lot of charge stations and the time to charge I have one more complaint that Consumer Reports doesn't cover.
What about my sound system! All the batteries in the car are dedicated to the car's systems. They can run for about six hours on those batteries. However, I have a 1000 watt amplifier hooked up. That requires 80AH battery to run for about 45 minutes off battery power. My AMP would kill this car in about two hours of driving if I was lucky.
edit OK I guessed. So damn fucking sorry people. The math is below. |
No i'm not a windows fanboy. Are you a linux fanboy then? I just use the tech that i find more useful for myself. I'm using all three mentioned systems every day and they all have their pros and cons. I think the rest of this text is just biased opinions so i can't really comment on that.
I've used all three systems too, and I can't tell you what the "pro" is of Windows other than compatibility and network effect. Windows has a lot of cons though.
It's worse to develop in than both OS X and Linux, its desktop applications have no central update mechanism so you're constantly getting notice about updates to whatever you installed (if you're so lucky) or getting vulnerabilities. It has the worst stock browser of any OS I've ever used...same goes for the other stock applications on it. Installing new applications means hunting around the Internet and looking for an installer (while avoiding the fourteen checkboxes in every installer that try to completely hi-jack your computer).
The stock preferences even make it difficult to even know what type of files files are because they aren't reliant on metadata (like OS X) but rather extension (like Linux) but the extension isn't even exposed without drilling into fifteen menus. The filesystem / stuff beyond the most superficial parts of the OS are completely unintelligible to any non-nerd user (WTF is a C drive?). Its desktop environment is riddled with distractions that make it very difficult to work (restart now? or 10 seconds from now?) and its compatibility with everything (plug and pray) makes it more likely that poor quality applications, hardware drivers, hardware devices, etc. will be installed even by novice users in order to augment the original (lacking) feature set of the standard OS...leading to security and stability problems.
Now about security:
UAC is a complete joke security wise, and every Windows machine I ever touched had to be riddled with confirmation after confirmation to do basic tasks because it obviously suspects the user of its OS to be a moron. "Want to start an application ON THE INTERNET!? check this box and this box and hit okay three times...then yes...then yes again...". It's clearly tacked on and ineffective (people will just click yes anyway and install the virus). Novice users are usually given instruction sets that lead them out of their comfort zone and down malware lane. Some novices wind up feeling completely paralyzed (they accidentally installed something on their computer by opening a website at one time, and now they are basically just scared of their own computer).
I'd recommend desktop Linux for actual novices that don't mind staying that way (that don't care about getting into the intermediate level and just want to than check email, web surfing, etc) because it's the cheapest option and if you know a nerd you can get them to configure it for you and get it working and stable. OS X for everyone in the middle that wants to fiddle around and install applications without destroying their computer, and Linux for experts. (Though they likely don't need the rec and have been using Linux for years). I fail to see who would ever prefer Windows except sadomasochists, gamers and Microsoft employees.
I'm waiting for another reason to give Windows another shot and I'm coming up empty. I've already been so exposed to I feel like I have radiation poisoning. Is there something I'm really missing here that's a key feature? Metro?
My background: I was a Windows fanatic from 95 - XP until the growing security concerns and licensing restrictions made me seek safer ground. I installed Ubuntu once on a spare computer just to try it out and I wound up prefering it so much that it's now installed on everything in my house that doesn't have a specific compatibility concern. I worked for a few months exclusively on a Macbook Pro and found the user experience to be vastly superior to any Windows version I've ever used and overall pretty pleasant. I have used Macs in various incarnations throughout their lifespan (even the dreaded days before OS X). I can say I'm fully a "Windows expert" if there ever were a thing up to Windows 7 and I've spent countless hours installing drivers and supporting other people's Windows installations. |
If Apple wants to make it more difficult (non-standard) to use their products, then so be it. Besides making it more convenient, I don't see any legitimate reason to create legislature for this. If you don't like Apple, then don't buy their products. If having a universal charger is that big a flaw that will lose them money, I'm sure they will adapt. |
Yep.
I was traveling for work last night, long drive to some city I'd never been to before. As per usual, I was using my phone as GPS and audio player for the entire drive. Little did I know, the microUSB charger which was absolutely plugged directly into my phone had apparently wiggled into some odd angle where it lost the connection. The battery died just as the long stretch of highway was ending and the part with lots of twists and turns down streets in the city began. Phone battery was so dead now that plugging it back in to the car charger turned it to show me the charging icon then died again from the screen usage, power cycled, and did that over and over again. I was lost in a really shitty neighborhood and forced to drive around from place to place trying to pick up an unsecuried wifi signal so I could use my tablet pc to get the remaining directions. Took me an extra hour to get to my hotel and I'm lucky I didn't get robbed. |
They considered and rejected that idea since the USB connector is a poor design.
The Lightning cable is a superior connector (purely considering physical aspects and electronic/protocol aspects), but the downside is that it's proprietary.
Apple are all over the map with connectors - sometimes they do it right, like designing a superior connector to DisplayPort (the Minidisplayport connector, that is also used for Thunderbolt) and making it free and open to all, and sometimes they do it wrong, like the Lightning port which is totally superior to mini/micro USB, but is locked up behind a proprietary wall. |
This is the problem with lawmakers that have too much time on their hands. Legislature does not exist to tell us what kind of cable we must use. It exists to ensure protection of our rights.
If said lawmakers forget their cable and cannot use another cable to charge their phone, then maybe they will remember their cable next time.
Also, you only dispose of a cable when you don't use it anymore. Apple products all use the same cable for years (decades even). Every phone you buy creates another cable that will eventually be thrown away anyway. If they really only cared about the waste, they would require all phones to be made of recyclable parts and ignore the cables. I have yet to throw away an Apple cable, but I know I've throw away a LOT of micro-USB cables.
This is a move to charge Apple (and anyone with a non-standard cable) for being different. Plain and simple. Laziness should not require legislation (unless you're going to reform welfare, but that's another topic). |
I won't say 'better'. That's way to subjective a word.
I will say that yes, there is a huge difference in performance. My sister has a Galaxy S4, it's a nice phone. However, when I mess around with it, I notice that it still suffers from occasional GUI lag. This is a flagship device. This issue is also pretty common among Android devices.
I've used several different WP devices over the years. My first was an HTC HD7 running WP7. It was significantly smoother than any other phone OS that was out at that time, and that hasn't changed. WP is just a very fluid OS, even on the lowest end devices. It doesn't crash or slow down when you have a bunch of apps open in the background. I had that issue with my GS3. It got old.
If you are looking at WP, I can only suggest you look no farther than Nokia. No other manufacturer comes close to designing devices of their caliber. The build quality is literally legendary. The cameras are at the top of their class, and Nokia's exclusive apps are very well made.
Android is, as I'm sure you are aware, very customizable, it being an open OS. This is something I enjoyed quite a bit, for quite a while. I eventually did get bored with tinkering with my phone, and just wanted a solid one that did everything I wanted with as little problems as possible.
Considering that I do not personally like Apple's 'you buy it, we own it' unofficial policy, I turned towards WP, and I really am happy with my choice. I have a 920, and it is solid. I mean really solid. Like, I can punch the damned thing hard and all it does is hurt my knuckles solid. |
My view:
I don't own a multimillion dollar corporation but damage control should not only replace it free of charge with no shady legal contracts, but if it was my company, I would throw it one of my top of the line tablets.
It might cost the company about $1500 (phone and tablet), but the good PR would more than make up for it.
Back to reality as a VZW S4 owner, I'd feel a bit better about trusting Samsung if they made right. As it stands, I feel utterly fucked if my Samsung device decides to do anything outside of the norm, because there will be a two page waiver to get my warranty.
My next phone will not be a Samsung unless they can show they actually take care of their customers, regardless of the minute chances that anything would happen to mine.
I would just rather the piece of mind, and at this point, what I said is the only way Samsung could not only make this right (replacing the phone), but make up for this stupid shit they pulled in response (galaxy tab). |
I think it’s fair to say that once again Nokia has set basically set the bar for the rest of the smartphone imaging world – in terms of both hardware and software features. It's a step forwards from the PureView 808, and from the Lumia 920 / 925 / 928. Of course, the ultimate question is whether consumers are going to appreciate all of it and be willing to pay the premium for the Lumia 1020 over the Lumia 925 / 928 or another smartphone entirely. Although imaging quality is a big emphasis for smartphone shoppers, it isn’t the only one, and the Windows Phone 8 pill is still a big one for me and many others to swallow.
> |
WP8 has some glaring deficiencies when it comes to tier 1 apps and especially for Google apps that are available on other platforms.
The WP8 apps, on the other hand, are awesome. The People hub, the Music and Gaming hubs, I prefer them to what is available on Android and iOS. The integration is cleaner and deeper.
There are some amazing 3'rd party apps though, and there are many developers who have worked hard and offer brilliant alternatives. But, due to the nature of API's and legalese/licensing et al, there are usually deficiencies.
Nest comes to mind as one of the big ones. I never had an issue with Nest on iOS, and I don't now on Android. The best I had on WP8 were 3'rd party apps that had a fraction of the functionality :(
So, |
Please, reread what you wrote. Go and ask yourself if your boss would like what you've written, and if it reflects well upon the brand you represent. Ask yourself if you're showing a respectful view of your customers, too. Do remember, they're always right. When they're maybe, actually unright, there's proper channelsvfor that, too. |
at my previous place I bought a used modem from amazon, the reviews said it is compatible with Comcast, but also that this particular modem was cheap and breaks frequently. Of course after a week, it started having problems connecting, and eventually wouldnt connect anymore. Tech came out, determined it was shot, they put one of their modems in, and they took my broken modem without me knowing. I tried for weeks to get my modem back from Comcast so that I could get a refund from amazon. but they couldnt locate it. They eventually gave me a 30 dollar credit (price of modem) and let me rent their modem for free. Now that I moved, they added the fee back on. i need to find a new modem again now. |
These other companies make way more money though. Google is getting a boost because they keep increasing how much they are making at a good percentage 3 billion profit a quarter turns to 4 billion. Most importantly everyone feels their core business is not only on pretty dominate standing, but also they feel confident in their future.
Nobody is sure of Apple's, Steve passed over two years ago and there haven't been any major moves since he has gone, people aren't sure if Apple still has it.
Microsoft has a steady base, but everyone isn't sure they are going anywhere so they are staying the same.
Both these companies also keep making more and make way more, but because of the outlook people have of them, their stocks aren't going to grow. So because Google is growing their profit and has all this new stuff people "in the know" love, like Google Glass, the Driverless cars, and more recently Nest, their stocks are going to go up. |
Hosting provider is far different than an internet provider so your analogy is terrible.
It's not my analogy but rather your comprehension that is terrible. I neither said nor meant hosting provider.
I thought it was pretty clear but I meant Internet provider.
CogentCo provides Netflix's bandwidth. Verizon must pay money to CogentCo in order to ensure good quality service for its customers who use Netflix, and it pays per megabyte just like you are bitching about them making you do. Seems like a double standard to me - they have to pay per megabyte but you don't? That's what you are calling "neutral?"
> On top of that what you fail to realize is say Netflix bought into this terrible idea that they will pay to be sponsored.
Pay to be sponsored?
Not sure what that's supposed to mean. Isn't sponsored content always paid for?
> Two things are going to happen:
You left one thing out - Netflix becoming its own ISP. Because unless they do that, none of what you discussed makes any sense.
Netflix may pay but it will not be for bandwidth - it will be for colocation, so that Verizon customers are guaranteed a fast experience.
Which is something they should do anyway, and that is the real sign of Verizon's greed that you should be looking at - other ISPs do this for Netflix for free so they can save money on the peering agreements and keep Netflix traffic in network.
> |
Hosting provider is far different than an internet provider so your analogy is terrible. On top of that what you fail to realize is say Netflix bought into this terrible idea that they will pay to be sponsored. Two things are going to happen:
All other companies in that market are going to have to do the same just to compete and many won't be able to afford to which is unfair to what would be mainly small or start up businesses.
Your ass ends up paying double for the same shitty internet access. How do you ask? Well Netflix isn't just going to eat that cost, they will surely pass it along to their users in a service fair hike meaning that you pay twice as much and gained nothing, yay! |
Try it and find out. Rich people call the offices of politicians and government officials all the time and get results w/o spending a dime and get their voices heard.
I work in the public sector and the most aggravating thing is holding public meetings where only well paid white collar workers (doctors, lawyers, attorneys, programmers, accountants, engineers, some retirees but they tend to have retired from the aforementioned fields) are the only individuals that voluntarily take the time to show up. The rest at the meetings are usually direct stakeholders like union members or contractors. So the only viewpoints my managers hear are from the professional class.
When we go to where our customers use our service to directly get their input, almost no one will talk to us. A common refrain is "you've already decided what you're going to do and nothing I say is going to make a difference". So I end up with nothing to bring back to my superiors.
Rich people have a sense that their opinions matter, even in areas outside their expertise, so the aren't afraid to take their concerns to policy makers and thus they influence policy. Poor people are convinced they are powerless so they don't bother to participate in civic life, and they wonder why politicians don't seem care about their interests.
Look at it another way: The Tea Party started protesting, then they started registering to vote, then they started putting up candidates for office, then they started winning, and now any Republican has to take the Tea Party into consideration when voting or drafting legislation.
Occupy started protesting, the cops kicked them out of parks, Occupy declares that the system is rigged and goes home. They tried nothing and were all out of ideas. Is it any wonder that not even Elizabeth Warren will endorse Thomas Piketty's policy proposals to reduce wealth inequality? |
The STOCK Act? Despite the exaggerated headlines, the STOCK Act did not make insider trading illegal for Congress.
Insider trading is illegal for everyone. Period. There is no provision anywhere that grants Congress immunity from insider trading laws. The STOCK Act clarified that Congress was not exempt, but it did not change any existing exemptions (because there weren't any). The law changes brought about by the STOCK Act related to how Congress (and some other government employees) would be required to disclose their finances to the public.
You can find the White House statement [here]( It has the exaggerated headline, but if you read the actual details, you'll see that insider trading was already illegal. The STOCK Act clarified the law, created additional consequences for breaking that law, and required additional disclosure that would make such law-breaking easier to spot. |
If you consider 2 days generous
$0 if you report the loss or theft of the card immediately and the card has not been used
up to $50 if you notify the bank within two business days after you realize the card is missing
up to $500 if you fail to notify the bank within two business days after you realize the card is missing, but do notify the bank within 60 days after your bank statement is mailed to you listing the unauthorized withdrawals, or
unlimited if you fail to notify the bank within 60 days after your bank statement is mailed to you listing the unauthorized withdrawals.
Also, retailers can place a "hold" on your money and lock up your account, making your debit card unusable until the hold expires up to a week later. Example: you check into a hotel for $99/night for 3 nights but they put a $1000 hold on your account in case of damages. Or you fill up at a truck stop and they put a $400 hold on your account (to make sure truckers can afford to fill up before they start pumping) and it takes days to clear. If you are on vacation and have all your funds locked up, I hope you like washing dishes. |
The hype of Apple Pay at least benefits everyone using NFC payments. Apple partnered up with a lot of retailers to make Apple Pay happen in their stores, which adds more NFC payment places, and Apple "hyping" something your phone has done for years only makes NFC payments as a whole more popular. |
Some actual data
>According to FICO, France implemented technology 12 years ago that makes it much harder to steal credit card information. The reward for Gallic diligence: Criminals in France now concentrate on identity theft.
In the US you are very likely to get your cards skimmed, the devices used to be clunky and a diligent consumer could check for them, but today they have advanced and shrunk to be completely impossible to detect unless you are tearing the machine apart each time you fill up with gas And when I say "very likely" I mean it probably has already been stolen multiple times this year, Home Depot, Target etc. Then small fry criminals can join in the fun with a very low barrier of entry, A waiter with a square reader on his cell, a guy inserting a cheap bluetooth skimmer at your gas station, etc. Very low risk, hundreds or thousands of stripes.
One clone and they are walking around with an exact copy of your card data, good until you or your bank closes your account. While a chip changes every time, you need to lose your physical card to lose the keys to your credit. |
That may be true, but you're short whatever they took for the duration of the investigation.
I had my identity stolen while in Paris; both my credit and debit card were compromised. There were two charges on each a few weeks after I returned. One, a test to see if the card numbers worked, was for around a dollar. The next was for $4,900.
My credit card company called me immediately and asked me if it was legit. I told them it wasn't, and they cancelled the card and sent me a new one within a few days.
My bank never called, even though the charge overdrew my account by ~$3,000. I checked immediately after the CC company called me and found identical charges, so I called the bank to block it. They told me they couldn't, and that I would have to transfer money into the account or be penalized for the overdraw. They told me they would then investigate the charge and, if it was found to be fraudulent, restore the money. Until that time the money was gone.
That investigation took a month. I don't know about you, but losing access to $5,000 for a month would be catastrophic for a lot of people. Especially if you're not guaranteed to get it back. |
Banks are by their nature secure. A bank exists as a way to place large sums of money in a secure location with the benefit of insurance for security. Whether or not they are actually secure depends on a number of things, but let's talk best case scenario and say they're pretty good.
A retailer is not secure. They exist to sell things to us, the consumer. They do not exist to protect private information or money or property that isn't their own. Best case scenario is that this group is creating a new division to do security for this information. Given that these groups have had problems with leaking secure information in the past (when it was "just" credit card numbers), I wouldn't trust them with more information that could lead to large scale identity theft. |
When you pay with NFC you are just transmitting payment information over a different medium, it's not a different card/account. You're just sending payment information with a 13.56Mhz radio over a few inches, versus by reading a magnetic stripe on your card. The actual information you send when you use NFC payment is slightly different, but without diving in to too much detail, it is significantly more secure (think the wireless version of chip and pin). |
Yes and No.
A store is not obligated to accept all payment types. They can say cash only, no checks, no Discover, no Amex, Visa only. Those stores gain and lose business by those decisions. (I never shopped at Costco because I didn't have an AMEX when I lived near one.)
What people are calling foul over is that the merchants are making a decision about the technology processing of the payment. If they accept Amex, there should be no difference if I pay with an AMEX physical card or an NFC AMEX transaction. There is no cost difference to the merchant and no different risk to the merchant.
The only pain the merchant will feel is that if this is successful, their homegrown solution will likely not be as successful. Instead of using this as a call to action to improve their product to make it more competitive with NFC transactions so consumers want to use it, they are degrading the customer experience to lower the bar to their product's level.
What they are doing though is purposely making a transaction more difficult, less convenient and less secure for the customer. They are permitted to do this just as consumers are permitted to not patronize businesses that see this as the proper way to do business and treat their customers.
EDIT: grammar
EDIT added |
They do if the traffic is encrypted. Unless they've found a way to break SSL encryption (which I highly, highly doubt), they do need physical access to the server.
Hasn't it been a recurring theme that encryption only protects you from casual hackers but not from large, well funded, government security agencies?
I'm actually asking that, its not a rhetorical question =).
edit:
[Here's a pretty neat blog post about a dude who got caught up in the System a bit]( |
I'd like to think that it would be that simple. It was an existing service area (no equipment/new runs)
I've had nothing but good service (I was playing an MMO at like 2am on a Sat night when the service dropped, I called and they told me they could have someone there in about 45m. I declined citing I didn't want my wife killing me, the Comcast guy, or both, and they scheduled for 9am Sunday am, and showed up on time)
It makes sense on both sides; if you can't offer me service, waive the fee, but I also agreed to an ETF to lock in lower pricing and a contract-lifetime static IP discount, so I wouldn't bitch if they pressed the issue.
I dislike the way Comcast has been caught behaving lately, but remember that there are just normal damn people that work there too and can be just as helpful as you let them be. (That is not to be interpreted as condoning the ones who act like first class fuckwits.) |
Maybe research it properly before moving? That's a start. Business Class in my area mostly requires a pre-install site survey, which would need to be performed before services can be transferred. Someone would visit the place before they can tell the customer anything about what their install costs would be - MANY businesses require construction to be serviced, and the entire property can change between customers at the same address, needing construction again.
It's pretty clear THIS guy is moving from a house in a residential neighborhood to another of the same, which makes it less likely that if Comcast isn't already there, that they can even build there. Homeowners' Associations, property developers, builders, and all sorts of other middle-deal-folk can do exclusive deals with other providers (satellite in apartments is common), or just plain keep certain providers out, and finally, a WHY to the whole cable company deal with no two providers in one city:
Most cities are NOT built for an "any number of companies that want to compete here" amount of separate infrastructure. Many cities were never planned for TWO, but already have a twisted-pair distribution (like AT&T, Verizon), a coax distribution (Comcast, Time-Warner), and various other communications in the ground or on the poles. Every new, separate service in those easements increases the costs for everybody sharing the easement, but dramatically increases initial build-out cost. That's why it's better for them to buy a system and replace almost everything in it than to build alongside and truly compete. Power companies are somewhat affected by this, but on the flip side, much of the communications infrastructure's space is either shared by or based on where power is already, in one facet or another.
Linked article states they waived the fee once they were made aware of it, and people with more intimate knowledge in this thread have said over and over that they don't charge ETF fees for moving out of area. It's like this guy finally had a problem arise after being happy for quite some time, and consulted reddit and then his local news before calling his business rep assigned to do exactly this. |
The laws are at least in some way based on reality. The reality is that cable companies don't collude with competitors for the sake of not building over one another. They don't need to. It's given , based on the places you're talking about them servicing. Every additional service on the poles or in an easement increases operating costs for all parties involved, and dramatically increases initial build costs. Many cities were only ever designed for one telecom provider - AT&T - in mind, if any at all. On top of that, many places only ever allow a certain number of providers, and no related entity can really make them allow more. On top of that, they're looking at a smaller share of total penetration (snicker) than in new construction or existing systems. That's why they don't build over one another - they actually can't in some places, and even where they can, the costs to do so would break their business model. They are there to make money, after all. |
Because Sandstorm was the first real trancey EDM that hit the radio... All of the cool "party kids" came to hate it instantly when it did. For this was the beginning of the end of the underground scene. The music hit mainstream, and now everybody and their dog started coming to the parties, drunk usually and ruined the entire scene. Within a year, all the barstars started coming out in droves to the parties and all the real parties stopped because of them. |
Net neutrality means that telecoms have to treat all data as the same thing. There can be no fast lanes and slow lanes. They can charge you X amount of dollars for Y amount of data, but they can't charge X amount of dollars for Y amount of data from source A, and Z amount of dollars for Y amount of data from source B.
If net neutrality wasn't upheld in the U.S., telecoms would use access to their customers as a bargaining chip against internet companies. Basically, the telecom would tell a company like netflix that if netflix wants customers on the telecoms network to be able to stream movies at any reasonable speed then netflix is going to have to shell out big bucks to the telecom. If netflix refused, the telecom could begin to throttle their customers access to JUST netflix. The telecom customers would be none the wiser, they would just find that the netflix got more and more unwatchable.
Worse, a telecom could decide they want in on netflixes niche and slow their customers access to netflix to an unusable rate, and offer up a shittier alternative to their customers that their customers would be forced to take. Verizoflix if you will. |
Ya but proving coercion is hard. People have admitted to crimes they couldn't possibly have committed then forced to falsely confess. There was a frontline documentary about false confessions, the worst one was where a guy was tortured into confessing to a murder committed during the time he was at work, at a convenience store on film. Somehow his conviction stuck years after the tape was released. Police knew entire time. |
You shouldn't be getting downvoted. Coal-burning powerplants emit more radiation to the surrounding environment than nuclear plants do. Coal plants also have particle emissions, CO2, and other more dangerous compounds. The mining of coal also contributes greatly to environmental damage and greenhousegas emissions.
Nuclear does put out thermal pollution when the cooling circuit is fairly directly tied into an aquatic ecosystem though, and then there is the part about waste prodcuts. New reactors will be able to use the old reactors waste as fuel though. |
Nah. Your math just seemed off so I checked it. Then I thought I didn't understand your wording. So I took that into account. Still off. Then I thought it was that I didn't understand the metric system. Nope. Then I multiples by days, months, weeks. Still couldn't get 5200. It drove me temporarily insane. |
Some fear issues, as /u/jay212127 said, but also some legitimate ones. Current reactors still have very radioactive spent fuel. Some spit out plutonium that can be refined into weapons. There are many solutions proposed, but we need more time and money invested to realize them completely.
Fukushima scared many people, because it was a very modern plant in a very advanced nation. A lot of people look at Fukushima and say, "Don't build nuclear power plants where they can get hit by tsunamis". That is fine, but we need to include all natural disasters there. Hurricanes are very damaging, so can't go anywhere in the American Southeast. Earthquakes suck, so California is out. Landslides, sinkholes, tornadoes, heavy snow, etc. We start to realize that there are natural disasters pretty much everywhere, you just need to pick your poison and design to it.
All said and done, I think there are some very promising ideas out there that can help combat these issues. One of my favorites is one Bill Gates was backing (the design has the reactor 'going critical' constantly, so it is designed to withstand meltdown conditions), but there are many others with a lot of promise. |
There is plutonium produced in a traditional reactor, but what many people (frustratingly) don't understand is that its absolutely not as simple as: Run reactor ---> "We have plutonium. Oh no hide it quick!" These are different isotopes we are talking about here. This video .
The Fukushima Daaichi disaster hype makes me sad because it was actually quite poorly designed and managed. Its certainly not a "very modern plant" as you say. In fact I just looked up that construction of the plant began on July 25th 1967!
Agree with the |
Sounds like it, but what the voters want and what's actually good for the country are two entirely different things. Democracy would be great if we could trust the average person to acknowledge the need for short-term pain to ensure long-term prosperity, but sadly as a species we lack the ability to focus on anything more than our immediate selfish desires. |
Someone has to say it so I will, Apple will become uncool within 5 years of Steve Jobs entry to the pearly gates, and we will be stuck with some asshat who will fuck it up and will make an iPhone with an SD card, multitasking, 2 cameras, open marketplace and android compatibility and we'll lament on how great the iPhone/iPad was. |
What the fuck?
You just went on a women-tangent : but the same effect would come through if we simply doubled the amount of men in the population. |
In a situation like that, I don't think it could be either considered borrowing, nor can it be considered theft. Depending on how you view it, the producer made their money from my legitimate PURCHASE of a product, which did not work, therefore I am entitled to a working copy as per the reason for the monetary transaction, or the studio has made money from my legitimate PURCHASE of a license to view their product, which I was denied due to whatever reason on their disc, therefore as I have paid for my license to view it, I damn well better be able to. |
Different, learning curve, scary, faster/better.
could be a biased |
To haters of the missing start button and the power button being tricky to find. (The UI is not the issue. They say don't blame the machine, blame the user.)
I have practically NEVER used the start button for actually launching a program. I pin my favorites to the taskbar and then lesser used ones go on the desktop. As for Word, Excel, etc., I usually launch them through clicking on a file in Windows Explorer.
If I do use the start menu for something it is searching for a setting or program. I hit the windows key and start typing since the cursor defaults to the search bar and last I checked, hitting he windows key and typing does the same in Windows 8, only it uses the entire screen to show results allowing me to see different versions of files I am looking for (like finance spreadsheets) or programs that do similar things.
As far as the power button goes who has time to even click on start and then click on shut down or the other options? Your computer has a power button and mostly likely a reset button. Use windows to program them to either hibernate, shutdown, or restart your computer. Once you do this you will NEVER click on "shut down" again. |
The outstanding issue I have with Windows 8 is that it's an entry point for the growing Microsoft ecosystem. Like Apple, Android, and others, Microsoft is attempting to build an entire ecosystem wherein one consumes content exclusively from Microsoft.
Yet, I don't begrudge Microsoft for this move. In terms of market security, it's the smart move to make. Unfortunately, it creates a very divisive consumer market, where an end-user is locked into one ecosystem, unable to try out something neat in a different ecosystem (without investing in that different ecosystem).
With an Android phone and tablet, I've begun investing in Google's ecosystem. Considering the transition to a different ecosystem, even at this early juncture, is a daunting thought. I see things outside of Google's ecosystem that would be nice to own, but the lack of interoperability that is the hallmark of these individual ecosystems makes doing so nigh on impossible. |
The iPhone's markup/margins are topical to discussing margins within the smartphone industry, which is key to the point of this thread. |
Although Google has officially sold out, people may cancel their orders throughout the days following the launch. When someone cancelled their order, stock very briefly opens up and lets someone reclaim that device. I know this because after constantly refreshing the page, the sold out icon changed to a button to add to cart. As of a few minutes ago, my Nexus 4 8GB is on it's way. If you really want one, do not give up! Keep refreshing the page, and make sure your Google wallet is set up with your payment method and correct shipping address. |
I don't mean to sound like an elitist jerk, so I appologize if I do - If so leave a note and I will certainly be willing to read it over and edit it (though I may end up editing it anyways, because I would rather not sound like an asshole - for that is not the intent)
>To clarify, I think what you mean is a document meant to be published/printed. Adobe InDesign would be overkill for me sending a' 5-page design proposal to my boss, for example.
No I mean professional documents as in, something that the creator has taken the time to consider the fine details of the document. For example, the kerning, leading font face, the font case. A document in which the creator takes a bit of time to consider how to bring emphasis without overusing bold letters or italics.
I'm not saying Word CAN'T do a good job. It can - All I am saying is, Desktop publishing suites tend to have more and better tools for creating the same document in less time or better with a touch of effort; As a result of tools that make redundant tasks faster. Or put certain bits of formatting in front of your face from the get go.
For some people - they will, as I do prefer desktop publishing software. Other people will prefer the simple tools of word. It's apples and oranges at the end of the day, for the finished product is all that matters. |
Thank you for sharing. This is one hell of a story. I don't know about the downvotes, |
I understand what you're saying. But it's about displacement. If you pirate a song you wouldn't have bought, the satisfaction you get from it, i.e. the utility, displaces something else, most likely another song, you would have legally purchased. So yes, you may not have bought song (a) but in pirating it, you've displaced your need to purchase another song (b) because the time you spent listening to (a) filled the gap. |
You are missing a zero in there. $700 is roughly a third of $2200. The bill was $22,000. $700 would have been roughly 1/30th. |
While we can all agree that 22k is stupid for any bit of this story. Does anyone else think maybe an 11 year old kid doesn't need to be alone in a hotel room in Mexico with an iPhone doing anything he wants? Especially after the parents neglect to realize that solar radiation burns and they should take precautions to prevent their sun from getting burned. |
Funny you should say that because something quite like that may happen on Monday.
[See here:](
> Judge Wright's order suggested that he is very concerned with Pietz' allegations about Prenda Law. In fact, he invited Pietz to submit a brief and to appear at the March 11, 2013 hearing on this OSC. In the order, Judge Wright suggested that he was concerned with (1) lack of adequate investigation of infringement before bringing suit for infringement, (2) lack of adequate investigation of the true identity of infringers, and (3) alleged violation of his orders restricting efforts to discover the subscribers of IP addresses. These, so far, are not atypical subjects of Rule 11 motions — they are allegations (not yet adjudicated, bear in mind) that someone filed suit without adequate investigation or violated a court's order. But more ominously, Judge Wright said the following:
>> Upon review of papers filed by attorney Morgan E. Pietz, the Court perceives that Plaintiff may have defrauded the Court. (ECF No. 23.)4 At the center of this issue is the identity of a person named Alan Cooper and the validity of the underlying copyright assignments.5 If it is true that Alan Cooper’s identity was misappropriated and the underlying copyright assignments were improperly executed using his identity, then Plaintiff faces a few problems.
>> First, with an invalid assignment, Plaintiff has no standing in these cases. Second, by bringing these cases, Plaintiff’s conduct can be considered vexatious, as these cases were filed for a facially improper purpose. And third, the Court will not idle while Plaintiff defrauds this institution.
> Judge Wright concluded as follows:
>> Based on the evidence presented at the March 11, 2013 hearing, the Court will consider whether sanctions are appropriate, and if so, determine the proper punishment. This may include a monetary fine, incarceration , or other sanctions sufficient to deter future misconduct. Failure by Mr. Gibbs to appear will result in the automatic imposition of sanctions along with the immediate issuance of a bench warrant for contempt.
> [Emphasis added, pants-shitting terror in the original.]
And just the other day the Judge basically said [" Everyone , my office, now ."]( |
Because there isnt anything grand about this idea. We have had skimming technology for years decades centuries even. It isnt new. The only thing this does is probably utilize new materials (which I DOUBT the kid has studied to understand the tolerances and expectancy) and draw some pretty pictures. It doesnt address the greatest issue which is cost. Who is going to pay for this? |
In my experience (I have a stepkid with celiac) it is fairly rare for a high-protien animal-product substitute to be formulated without use of gluten-containing ingredients. |
The media can trash them, opposing politicians during election time can trash them, even the people can trash them. Politics in the US isn't about being truthful about the issues, it's a popularity game. If your opponent has painted you to be a bad picture, you aren't going to win another election.
The public you hear about against the act is a loud minority. Anyone who actually understands the implications of the patriot act and all of the stuff coming to light now are obviously against it, but the majority of Americans are complacent. Nothing has happened that directly impacts their day to day life, so why do anything about it? The politicians that support these affronts to the constitution know that there will be three groups of people:
Those who don't care about politics and have no idea what the politician is doing
Those who agree with the policies and are willing to give up liberties for "safety"
Those who vehemently disagree with the policies and will do everything in their power to fight them
Unfortunately, as stated before, the first two make up most of the population, so there's no one for the politicians to have to answer to. Even if the majority of the public was against the patriot act, no politician will change their opinion on it. They are so entrenched in these beliefs that they will keep voting for terrible policies up until they are removed from office, either by the end of their term or forcibly by public unrest.
Unfortunately AGAIN, legislators do not have term limits and the US public is too apathetic to actually protest anything. Those who aren't apathetic are usually too busy because of our overworked society. |
I can appreciate your point, and certainly I can appreciate your thoughtful commentary, but I still must disagree; further, the quote I posted uses the term fascist very directly. Whether you find it to be the right term or not is irrelevant, because that is part of what makes the original post so laughable.
In the context of the larger (and slightly off topic) subject of the (re-)definition of words like fascist, I would encourage you, if you know the difference and the proper usage and definition of the term, to use it accurately and as its meant to be used. Such uses serve to educate people, even if indirectly, that don't know what the word actually means. Not doing so really jus results in platitudes (and, what's the opposite of a platitude?) and ignorant statements such as the snipped I quoted, that devolve otherwise meaningful discussions into talking points that become devoid of substance and thoughtful communication through the degradation of the actual meaning of words such as fascist. |
wtf
i said it is possible backdoors could exist. i did not say it was fact. the mother fucker was skeptical that any backdoor could be injected into truecrypt because Open Source. i provided possible ways by showing that the source code is not "openly" audited (there are no commit logs, no one knows who committed what, including bits from the NSA), i also showed that even though there are tons of eyeballs on the code, it is possible for a vulnerability or flaw to slip through, lastly i showed that the binary may not match the source, thus you have no way to tell if the binaries are NOT compromised. all you are saying is ZOMGWTFSHOW ME THE FUCKING SOURCE OTHERWISE I WON'T BELIEVE YOU. well guess what, i could give two shits if you believe me or not.. i just countered one man's skepticism with anothers.
EDIT: the binaries have not been verified against the source, unless you compile the source yourself and verify the checksums (and even that is dubious because they could have built it with different -O, -f compiler flags) but even then, you are not looking through the source code yourself and you are assuming others have. others may do the same, ad infinitium until you have only a few people looking at the source code |
Oh it's open source, so that makes it perfectly oK. for someone that is very skeptical I can invalidate your claim:
They submitted a patch early on in the truecrypt days and have been actively maintaining it. Because it was "grandfathered in" before truecrypt became the tool that it is today, no one suspects it.
Considering that it's open source, I am very skeptical there has ever been a thorough code review. Can you substantiate your claim? hmmm? |
If I was American and my choice was between a charismatic leader figure that at least had the decency to pretend being pro transparency and civil rights, or vote for some halfbrained dingbat like Romney (or worse the election before that) I think my vote would go to Obama too.
The error is in assuming that the halfbrained dingbat option would actually be "worse" than what you have now. It may have been worse, and it may have been better! You don't know. I'm not in the USA, but from here it really does look like you really just have a two-faction single party system.
If you had realized that the D-vs-R choice was between "bad" and "also bad", would you have been more likely to vote for "possibly less bad" in the form of that Jill lady or that Gary guy? |
I agree that there should be a greater push to protect an individual's right to digital privacy and online communications.
From what I understand of electronic communications and privacy, law enforcement officials have used the "third party doctrine" , you can lose your right or expectation to privacy. This is especially true for communications sent from within an employer's communications network (see ["4. Electronic Mail, Voice Mail and Postal Mail"](
Technically, once an email reaches the age of [180 days, the feds can use a subpoena instead of a warrant to access email](
As it stands, it seems that the laws governing electronic communications have been crafted in such a manner that sees privacy as a threat to security as opposed to a vital component of individual liberty. Added to this is the complicated issue surrounding consumer profiling and targeted marketing which some have attributed to actually reducing the costs of providing free content on the web. |
So essentially,
Taxpayer money went into building the structure in which the data is housed.
Taxpayer money goes to the government, which in turn gives it to our very own phone companies. |
I scanned this thread and I can't seem to find anyone else making this connection. Everyone is very upset about the NSA being able to "tap anyone, any time, without restrictions, unmonitored, direct access blah blah blah...". Doesn't this article state exactly the opposite? That they are running these wiretaps through the phone company and email/chat logs from the software companies?
I understand the anger behind the NSA being able to watch people's communications but doesn't it appear that much of the rage is over something that actually doesn't exist? |
I keep hearing "PCs are dead" from dark corners of the internet and I assume it is because PCs are an open platform that give lots of options. As a population, we would be much easier to lead into public opinion through a more controlled platform, like a tablet. This looks like an attempt to get people to envision tightly controlled platforms when we think "computer". |
Apple's profit margin is 21%, Samsung's PM is 11% - but wait, Samsung also manufactures washing machines, LED lightbulbs, and other household industry items that typically have a slim PM, so it's not an apt comparison.
What about software then? Google's PM is 21% - but that's not quite right either, because they're classified as an information service provider, not electronics manufacturer. Google also doesn't directly profit off of the open-sourced android OS either.
That leaves market share comparisons being the best in comparing smart phone performance, but also more important, in evaluating the number of users. Since cell phone software generates ecosystems and app marketplaces, software providers will gravitate towards the OS software with the largest user base - i.e. market share. |
I'm not really disagreeing with your overall point about competition, I just think your perception of the industry is a little... I'm not sure the right word unfair? pessimistic? optimistic? unrealistic? Pessimistic because you think things are so bad now, optimistic because you think they can be so much better.
Google has been fighting the OEM thing, because it makes them look bad too. They've also been fighting the price thing. The Nexus 4 was $300 a year ago, half of what flagship smartphones go for, for somewhat comparable quality. Then on sale for $200 a few months ago. If you look at the cost of the components in a phone, these are extremely good prices. I can almost guarantee you that MS and Google are not recouping their engineering costs on those devices. Google has also been fighting the cellular lock-in, by releasing unlocked phones that work on many carriers.
Microsoft is fighting hard to take their share of the mobile market with price and Nokia's quality, but at this point, I don't think they really bring much new to the table. I do think they'll help because they have the deep pockets to fight iOS and Android in ways smaller players cannot, but I'd be more excited if Tizen or Jolla gained significant marketshare. For me, more so Jolla than Tizen...
As for battery life... these devices get extremely good battery life too. They're actually incredibly efficient if you know how difficult it is to keep mA draw low with all of the hardware involved in mobile devices. I can tell you that cellphones are putting every piece of hardware they can to sleep at every chance they get. Mobile devices have chips (PMICs) dedicated to steadily controlling power draw and that can even do crazy things like turn off the CPU completely and interrupt it awake when a touch occurs.
The biggest trouble spot is the cellular chip, which all manufacturers are going to have difficulty with. The problem is that those chips run their own OS that is closed and a black box. This post My guess is that NVIDIA is an exception to this, their TEGRA drivers are probably pretty good. |
But the parts that are open are shrinking, more and more are pushed into abandonware.
The article you linked only showed the case of apps being deprecated in favor of google services. No part of Android is changing from open source to proprietary. Furthermore, the number of 3rd party apps that replicate the functionality of those deprecated apps has grown. Early on with Android there were only 2 email apps(AOSP Mail and GMail), now there are countless ones, take your pick.
>I do like the feeling of being the customer, though, rather than the product
Then why are you not bitching about Reddit or Arstechnica. These are both sites which get most of their money from ad revenue. You can't expect a service to be provided for free and not get money somehow. |
Damn. I'm not as special as I thought.
I like the pre3 very much. The app supply sucks, especially in comparision to iOS or Android. Everything else is pretty cool. I am not sure what to say without giving away obvious information (it has a physical keyboard, etc.). Generally, it works very well and very fluent. But all the features that made the pre-series special (notifications, multi-tasking, etc.) are all supported by the other OSes by now. |
Forget the law; push forward with encryption. Google can make it happen.
If you send e-mail to other Gmail users it is automatically public-key encrypted. Initially, Google can host your private key for you, and everything will appear exactly the same, except now the e-mail is encrypted at rest. Courts will still be able to subpoena Google for your private key, but at least we're starting.
Next, other web-mail providers can join the PGP e-mail system; sending e-mail between web-mail providers are automatically also public key encrypted
Outgoing emails can include the sender's public key as a header extension. Clients such as Outlook and Thunderbird, automatically recognize this X-PGP-Public-Key header, and automatically and transparently send mail encrypted to that contact.
Now we can opt-in to the extra security. Your private key will be encrypted on Google's servers. It will only be decrypted on the client using Javascript public-key implementations. The upside is that now Google can't even recover your encrypted mail. The downside is that now Google can't recover your encrypted mail if you forget your password.
Finally, Gmail offers the ability to use completely client-side encryption. The private key is generated on the client, and only the public-key is sent to the server. |
Nothing is safe... unless you can build your own chip.
From a linked Article in the first paragraph.
"Take, for example, when they intercept shipping deliveries. If a target person, agency or company orders a new computer or related accessories, for example, [TAO]( can divert the shipping delivery to its own secret workshops. The NSA calls this method interdiction. At these so-called "load stations," agents carefully open the package in order to load malware onto the electronics, or even install hardware components that can provide backdoor access for the intelligence agencies. All subsequent steps can then be conducted from the comfort of a remote computer. "
Your going to have to go to the manufacture and watch them engineer your specific piece of hardware, and even then have the knowledge to know if its been tampered with. Which would be near impossible for all practical purposes.
IMHO - this is the ultimate digital [Panopticon]( |
Thank GAWD! I bought a top-of-the-line $2200 VAIO from Sony in 2007 and that thing was a piece of shit. Within one year, pieces were falling off, keyboard was coming off, and there was a static electricity issue with the touchpad that required a restart very frequently. When it was taken back to Sony for repair, it came back almost new, but then broke again in less than 8 months in all the same places. Good riddance Sony from the computer manufacturing industry, you were not very good at it. |
Alright, time to write my review. It seems all of the internet is throughly unimpressed. Which I don't really understand.
You didn't get your metal body. Good, plastic is cheaper.
You didn't get a 2k screen. Good, I value my battery life.
Let's look at what you did get. A larger battery, a screen that can be read outside and still go dim enough to be seen late at night when you go to check the time and get blinded. Let's be real. That's nice. The camera upgrade sounds nice, but I question low light performance. The fast focus and QHD video recording is great. Overall it's a more refined s4. And that's what I was looking for.
Oh what's the other thing I'm forgetting. IT"S FUCKING WATER RESISTANT. This feature alone makes me want to go run out release day and buy one. It's the s4 and galaxy active came together and had a baby. A super adorable one.
Design: dimples, meh, dust collectors. I'm sure I can just find another back, someone's bound to make one if I really hate it that much. Gonna need a different back if I put a super high capacity battery in anyway.
Overall. 9/10. It's what I was looking for in a phone and providing it's not insanely expensive I'll buy it on launch day. |
I think the S4 hit the sweet spot for me
Upgrades from S3 to S4
1080p display (over 720) biggest upgrade IMO
Processor, graphics and RAM upgrade (not sure how they compare to the S3 performance though)
Air Gesture (I actually use it)
Universal Remote control
Not so big upgrades
Bigger screen (I think any bigger is just too big for me)
Camera (without any upgrade to the light sensor iirc)
Eye/head tracking (way to buggy to be useful)
Case (I really like the subtle detail)
Upgrades from S4 to S5
Ability to use both wifi and cell data simultaneously (coooooooool)
IPv 67 certified (very nice)
Fingerprint scanner (I expect is to be too buggy to be useful)
Heart rate monitor ( nice feature but I think the only thing that makes this better than the flash/camera alternative is the ability to tie it in to the samsung fitness apps)
Not so big Upgrades
Processor and graphics (S4 is good enough IMO)
Battery life (<8% upgrade... nice but nothing to write home about)
Camera (Worse than useless unless they upgraded the light sensor)
Bigger screen (if I want a bigger screen I'll just get the Note)
Case (ugly as shit IMO. Literally any concept from google images would have been better)
I own an S4 and enjoyed talking shit about apple but I'm going to have to shut my mouth after this release. That being said I'll still pic samsung over apple because of the expandable memory and removable battery. Those are always deal breakers for me. |
This is bullshit. Basically what happened is the Verizon oversubscribed their network and now they're paying the price (capacity). They're making us pay the price (financial) to pay for the upgrades.
Just who else do you think is going to pay for upgrades? Costs of doing business are passed onto consumers.
So the choice is either everyone pays or they attempt to proportion cost increases on those who cause them.
Theoretically, there is nothing at all wrong with charging people for using a lot of data. It does cost money, and not just in bandwidth cost. It clogs up their local network which then requires upgrades. Someone downloading 1080p pron torrents constantly from 4pm-10pm, maxing their connection, is using a significant portion of the shared network. It's totally fair game to charge them accordingly.
HOWEVER: in practice a lot of these companies aren't fairly charging. They just cap and throttling. Or they have outrageous extra fees which are meant to force you into stop using your connection so much. That is bullshit.
The high usage fees should reflect the cost of upgrades to keep the network going plus some profit. It shouldn't be a penalty designed to stop you. This way, the networks can be upgraded and it gives the ISP an incentive to give you a fast connection. The more you are able to use it, the more money they make.
A pure unlimited, flat fee system incentives the ISP to discourage your use. Paying for high usage will make them want you to use it more.
So even the highest users should only be paying an extra 15-20 bucks a month. It should not be treated like going over your minutes on a cellphone plan where you rack up 500 dollar bills. That is insane.
And of course, they shouldn't be able to call it unlimited unless it is.
And to address the obvious argument people will make against this "I pay for 50mbit, I should be able to use 50mbit all month long!" No, you aren't paying for a 50mbit dedicated connection. You are paying for a shared connection that is limited to 50mbit at max. You cannot afford a 50 mbit dedicated line. It's extremely expensive. |
Firefox, now with more chrome!
When Chrome came out, mozilla had a hissy fit.
I forwarded them the twenty or so emails I've sent to them in the last five or six years asking them what are you doing?! with a list of message board links to patches I'd put forward and had been jeered at (just small stuff, but important).
This is what you get - Mozilla, half a decade of doing nothing, then a few years of doing four things:
trying to copy Apple's n% cut of sales for browser plugins... fail
trying to copy chrome's look and feel, but providing 1080p videos to explain why, half fail - you've only just made the tabs higher and more streamlined - since making that 13 LoC change would have been two obvious all in one go...
Trying to play catchup with chrome's javascript speed. After many, many.... many emails I wrote to you about permissions issues with javascript and privacy - fail - areWeFast(Enough)Yet?com noYoureAboutSevenYearsTooSlow.com.ThanksForNothing.net.au
Making synching profiles that have been around for 11 years already, but renouncing them as something new as you tank.
Firefox is now redundant, it's the 'other browser' you support. It's like Opera, but that you don't actually care if it gets more adoption (unlike Opera, which is nice)
Mozilla wasted 0.3 BILLION dollars on FIFTY-SEVEN vaporware projects rather than leading the field in browser design .
SURE, I just realized that I still had hyperlink-auditing enabled in my chrome browser after upgrading macbook, but I just fixed that (hyperlink auditing - the raison d'etre for chrome existing in the first place!)
However, chrome is also annoying and filled with approximately 31 anal and shitty developers who are the kind of people who become moderators, ops, or want to have 'elevated privileges' on wikipedia. They're deletionist and overall have given chrome 18-24 months of a lag time in 2012-2013 (but things might be getting better). It was so bad at one point that, looking at the commits and the bickering I thought there must be some poisoning of the well going on... eugh.
So.... errr... |
Subsets and Splits
No saved queries yet
Save your SQL queries to embed, download, and access them later. Queries will appear here once saved.